How to be a Berean - Biblical Exegesis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 июл 2024
- Previously Warren McGrew of Idol Killer debated @roguecalvinist on the topic of Total Depravity over on @StandingForTruthMinistries In that debate, Rogue claimed Warren was unregenerate and could not rightly understand spiritual truths, dismissing Warren's argumentation as either lying or denying the objective truth of Rogue's isolated prooftexts.
Since then Rogue went into what can only be called a meltdown, as he stated he wished Warren would burn in hell along with those who disagreed with him, called Warren a liar and claimed Warren said Rogue mistreated his children - all of which is demonstrably false. While Rogue removed some of the more offending content, he has since produced several short videos in which he either misunderstands Warren's argumentation and criticism or intentionally misrepresents it. Moreover, Rogue continues to put forward wild claims absent Biblical support.
This video will engage with and respond to Rogue's more recent attempts to salvage his position subsequent to that debate.
PSA: Beware cloaked figures bearing tulips.
To see the full debate: ruclips.net/user/livejTjjkHxO...
#Calvinism #Fatalism #gnosticism #debate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
💡 About:
Idol Killer is committed to spreading the Gospel and making disciples of Christ. We are dedicated to promoting classic orthodox Christian doctrine (pre-Augustinian) and in doing so exposing extra-Biblical corrupt philosophies and presuppositions.
📈 Support Idol Killer
Patreon: / idolkiller
PaylPal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/theid...
GiveSendGo: www.givesendgo.com/IdolKiller
⚠️ DISCLAIMER:
Any view expressed by a guest is not necessarily reflective of the views of the host and visa versa.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAIR USE NOTICE
Any use of works in our videos is de minimis, transformative, and constitutes fair use under the Copyright laws of the United States. They are used for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Any improper attempts to takedown or claim our videos may be subject to 17 U.S.C. 512(f) claim for bad faith under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. If you want to discuss any content in our videos, please contact us at idolkiller.com before initiating any takedown requests. Failure to do so may constitute bad faith. 
Развлечения
Rogue's spiritual journey is evidence against Calvinism. He was converted to gnosticism by Calvinist pastors and books. And now he is teaching gnosticism in the name of Calvinism, and drawing an audience of mostly Calvinists.
I accidentally stepped in something onetime that looked and smelled like Calvinism.
False doctrines are the fruits not the roots. If you ever believed one, you had deeper problems that will just lead you out of one, and into another.
@@Dizerner
Rubbish,
Bad fruit comes from bad doctrines.
Stop saying what your saying.
@@DizernerWrong. Just like the doctrine "Once saved, always saved" is false, so is "Once deceived, always deceived".
Over and over again, people got delivered from error in the Bible, and God continues to deliver people today!
@@markshaneh Bad doctrines ARE bad fruit. Not rubbish at all.
@@Drspeiser Please check your Bible today, the majority of people went back to deception. I never said God can't deliver. so misrepresentating what I said can seem like dishonesty.
We have to be careful when building doctrine from the Psalms. These are David’s thoughts and prayers, and not necessarily hard doctrine, it’s poetry.
Rogue: Selfless love is not a spiritual truth
1 John: God is love
Rogue, please, stop what you’re doing immediately.
Wait what? He said that where?
@@trebmaster In a debate with Matt Slick, Warren was asked for a "spiritual truth" from Matt. Warren responded that "selfless love" would be an example of a spiritual truth that a carnal mind cannot understand. Rogue commented on this clip and said the "selfless love" is not a spiritual truth.
A spirit of error doesn't permit people to read God's word and rightly understand it
Vodie asserted that babies are evil. It is part of Calvinism.
Vipers in diapers
I’ll always be grateful to Vodie for his expressed views of infants, because it was the initial shock
I needed to quickly run from the TULIP cult. When I came back to Christianity via a “Bible church” my pastor gave me a list of Calvinist thought-leaders to check out and I was quickly drawn to Mr. Baucham, but then he started talking about Vipers in Diapers, and I was able to learn for the first time of Calvinism’s existence and that I needed to stay far from it. Glory to You oh Lord!
I've been with the Lord for about 14 years now.
When I first came to faith, I spent the first 3 years going full on Inquisitor of my own world views and interrogating my own belief systems, studying Scripture, historical studies, and then eventually apologetics.
Going straight for a teaching or Pastor role was not even on the end of my list.
Rogue is absolutely not qualified.
Like someone else mentioned "the ideology has him, he does not have the ideas."
Hey Warren- love all you do to clarify the truth of scripture and untangle the words of God from Calvanism’s web.
On a personal note -i sympathize with your position with family rejecting you for choosing to reject the false idol of Calvinism.
My relationshp had been rocky since its inception over 38 years ago -but we survived. But calvinsm took over a couold years ago and now every day I walk on eggshells wondering if divorce will be the only way out. I can take the arrows for myself but having my sons brainwashed and encouaged to ”call me out” as hereticial for being a sinful unsubmissive wife - just for voicing objections to their erroneous understanding of scripture- is more than I can bear at times.
I pray God will continue to grant you the strength and wisdom to survive whatever is in store for you and that your children will glean from the example you are setting every day for them.
I believe miracles can happen and will be praying for you all . 🙏
Rogue's hubris, ignorance, and arrogance are palpable (not literally palpable, Mr. Rogue.) =)
I appreciate you helping Mr. RC out, you know how much trouble Calvinists have distinguishing between literal and figurative when it comes to their proof texts. 👏🏻👍🏻
Some highlights for me were as follows:
1). Due to its inherent inconsistencies and presuppositions, the “T” in Calvinism’s TULIP denies the incarnation.
2). The point by point review format, comparing what scripture actually says and means IN CONTEXT versus what the Calvinist says, is a battle axe in the hands of the Living God.
3). The Gnostic and Docetic aspects of Augustinian Calvinism are asinine.
4). Rogue Calvinist is a narcissistic fraud, hiding under a cloak of self righteous anonymity, refusing to come into the Light lest his deeds be exposed.
5). Scott Chason is a rank heretic, that unfortunately due to his belief system, does not exhibit the Spirit of Christ.
☦️🙏🏼✝️
@@st.christopher1155 Scott needs Christ
When Calvinist tell me “natural man cannot receive the things of God because of 1 Corinthians 2:14.” I wonder if their understanding is consistent with verse 12 where Paul says:
we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
Is “The spirit of God” not one of the “things of God” unable to be received?
It's painfully obvious that Rogue should not be on this platform teaching anyone. He's either extremely ignorant of what he's talking about or dishonest, which would be worse. He's been built up by his supporters to a place of arrogance and pride that will not allow him to see this though. It's a compounding problem. When he should really be sitting and studying and being discipled he's instead taken the teaching position and is only embarrassing himself to no end AND leading others astray who would listen to him as an authority. It's dangerous and it's why you should continue to bring rebuke. Not for Rogue, he's probably too far gone, but for those on the fence who can still be influenced to move away from such bad theology. Rogue, like many, is in teaching mode when he should be in learning mode, and unfortunately the platform and those who praise him only worsens the problem.
What Rogue is doing is beyond the Calvinism vs Non-Calvinism debate. Lots of Calvinists can present cogent arguments even though we disagree with them. Rogue simply is showing he has no business teaching others anything. It’s beyond sad how poorly he handles the scriptures and basic logic.
Am I uncharitable if I believe we shouldn’t have people who struggle to understand the nuances of interpersonal communication being teachers and exegetes of what the Bible is trying to tell us?
Im thinking particularly in regards to Matt Slick and Rogue Calvinist who have admitted to having mental disabilities (Aspergers and Autism) that would impede their ability to properly understand communication in anything but a literal concept.
Indeed. I'm "on the spectrum" myself, but unlike Slick or RC I have the self-awareness to realize that I can only realistically comment and debate in typed form. Unlike streaming or in-person interactions, this gives me a chance to verbally get my emotional reactions out of my system while I'm entirely by myself and only I can hear my outburst. That cools me down to where I can type a carefully thought out response that doesn't say anything I shouldn't say, will regret, and cannot unsay afterward. If I tried to argue in real time interactions, I would act like an anti-Calvinist version of Slick or RC and be an ideal target for Calvinists to point to and try to paint all Calvinists as...
Rogue is not a contextual theologian. He is a prooftextual theofauxgian.
He's a gnostic, a false teacher, a tree lacking any fruit of the Spirit, has been warned multiple times, and should be ignored until he repents.
Rogue - "THERE IS NO PSALM 139!"
Rogue - (speaking on Jesus' words in John 8:32) "That's a nice slogan."
Nothing to do with the actual content, but an interesting verse is Psalm 58:4 that describes the adder/cobra as having ears. Snake ears are completely internal and cannot be seen externally. God knew this and David knew this but man did NOT know this until 2012. May God bless you and work in your circumstances, brother Warren!
I think that a skeptic could rightly say that ancient peoples saw snakes react to sound, and this assumed that they had ears.
I know that months ago that rogue had put himself in a very dangerous position. He created an echo chamber and surrounded himself with numerous rogue bots that filled his head full of garbage. Any time someone speaks real truth to him the rogue bots with descend to counteract that truth and pump him up in his confidence and error.
I do not hold Mr. twitchy Jerry Duckworth to be any different. Oh he is very cordial and respectful when he converses with you, but then he will run right back to rogue and he is very different.. I have addressed Jerry through the RUclips comment section at least once or twice about this. I have reached out to him, pleading with him if he cares anything at all about rogue then he should be a good brother to him and push back at those points at which rogue has obviously gone off the rails. The response that I have gotten from Jerry to date is best summed up in the RUclips handle of one of rogues most ardent rogue bots: seven crickets.
He needs to humble himself and study the early Church Fathers. He also needs to work on his Christology and recognize that soteriology flows from Christology not vice versa.
I'm concerned for RCs children.
Rogue Calvinist is a poster child of the fanatical, relatively new Calvinist convert who mirrors the fanatical, relatively new proselyte of the scribes and Pharisees, whom Jesus rebuked thus: " “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of Hades as yourselves." (Matthew 23:15)
Rogue Calvinist is acting as a "son of Hades" because he has the arrogant fanaticism of a fairly new convert to a system that was created by a narcissist for narcissists. Pray for him to be guided to the light and see his ways for what they are, so that he can confront what he is and hopefully repent of it, much as Saul of Tarsus, who was a "son of Hades" prior to his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus, who ultimately repented and became a force for good.
I think Rogue has comprehension issues. There were times in the debate that he seemed genuinely incapable of processing new information at conversational speed. I think there is childhood pain related to being regarded as stupid and he compensates with memorization and brash assurance of anything he asserts as true. He is trying to be the smartest man in the room and that makes him incapable of receiving correction especially from someone he disagrees with.
I don't know what you should do in response but I don't think he is being consciously dishonest, he's reacting like someone who was stabbed, it's an irrational trauma response. Still sinful but maybe more deserving of patience.
That’s kind of you to say but he is consciously dishonest. Giving him that excuse isn’t going to help him. He later said quote “I hope they burn in hell,” “I hope they burn on earth first.” The fruit hasn’t been looking good for a long time.
@@JohnK557 It's not meant to be an excuse. Evil doesn't mean consciously dishonest. Hitler believed in the superiority of his race. Rogue's behavior is outright evil. I don't think he's dishonest I think he's reacting to pain. He compared it to being bullied in school. If someone connects current action to past pain I generally believe them. Most people can't fake that.
@@JohnK557It's not kind and it's not an excuse. It's a response to Warren saying Rogue is stupid or a liar. I read people, I'm very good at it and I believe Rogue is neither, he's irrational.
Being consciously dishonest is actually very rare for evil people. The people that act out the greatest evil usually believe their story.
@@michaelnewswanger2409 Time stamp on Warren saying RC is stupid please?
It’s a fact that RC is a liar.
I don’t think you are as good at reading people as you say you are.
Have you had any conversations with RC? If yes did you challenge his beliefs? I’ve had many conversations with him.
@@JohnK557 Warren said RC is either ignorant/ not comprehending the argument (which I abbreviated as stupid) or he is lying. I don't feel like searching for a timecode, He said it multiple times. If it's really important to you I can find one.
I am very good at reading people, if you want I can explain exactly why I read Rogue the way I do.
Yes I have interacted with RC no I haven't changed his mind( not that I understand why that would matter to the point).
Being good at reading people doesn't mean I can magically change minds it means I can accurately anticipate their actions.
Our disagreement stems from the consciously dishonest part. If you want to continue arguing please substantiate why you believe he is lying and he knows it.
Rogue is sure Rogue!
Rogue:
“a dishonest or unprincipled person.”
🤷🤷🤷
Narcissistic behavior comes to mind when listening to Rogue....
It's a nice slogan? Really!!! He doesn't seem to know his Savior who said it! Unbelievable!!! Is he aware of what God communicates in James 2:1, "Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, know that as such we shall incur a stricter judgment." I have taught the word for 42 years and I am always aware of this Scripture. When I was in charge of small group ministry in my church, everyone who came forward wanting to "teach" was asked to read that verse and pray about it and see if God lets them know that this is the ministry for them. And, I won't go into all the stumbling verses, but to stumble a brother is a great offense because it affects the lives of others.
Rogue has some maturing to do, both socially and spiritually.
What I’d like to know, is if Rogue is off the deep end even as far as what other Calvinists believe (other than his yes-amen-men in his corner), then where are the Gavin Ortlunds’ and other “level-headed” Calvinist apologists (or the ones click-clacking in the live chat saying “Warren you’re off-base this isn’t what we believe😢!”) reaching out to reign in and correct Rogue rather than Warren? Or is Rogue actually in line with what people like Gavin believe. It feels like it would be the duty of a figure like that to put a check on a newbie like Rogue that was misguiding people even by Calvinist standards…
I have a hard time, given Gavin's methdologies, and the amount of effort Gavin puts into making his videos presentable and easily digestible, that RC and Gavin believe the same things.
RC's understanding of Calvinism is essentially just gnosticism with its denial of flesh, special gnosis, and utter hatred for the idea of choice.
@@Narikku I hear you. Ultimately I don’t know that my comment really made a lot of sense, I guess I’m just mostly saying it would be cool if someone like him would encounter RC and decide to speak up about it. But that’s a big ask, I get it.
@@ThePolarbearparty I really do wish that our Reformed brothers would do a better job at rebuking teachers like Rogue Calvinist. If RC criticized Reformed Theology because it said the same things RC said, they would be up in arms, explaining why he is wrong.
Sometimes, I think all people hear are the simplest terms, "Reformed Theology good" and "Reformed Theology bad."
The nuance and meaning is lost in translation.
@@NarikkuGavin defends his perception if orthodoxy with a heap of salt. He has a very merciful view of the implications of various positions, and is thus not terribly critical of other calvinists, but is also fairly forgiving of others outside his views as well.
It was quite surreal listening to Rogue give his eisegesis of biblical texts. He believes his has received some special revelation from God as he previously said “otherwise how would I have these words.” His arrogance and pride are taking him down a dangerous path and he is currently deceiving and deceived. 2 Timothy 3:13 (NASB95): But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.
Hey Warren. Appreciate the channel 👍 Question: when you spoke in this video of Jesus recapitulating human nature, what do you specifically mean by that? I’m aware of Irenaeus’ and TF Torrance’s teaching on this. Torrance seemed to teach that all of humanity was objectively reconstituted and regenerated via Jesus’ resurrection, and thus that salvation is more of a subjective accepting of what’s already objectively true. Or that salvation is more of receiving the Holy Spirit and not a fundamental change of human and/or spiritual nature. Again, and basically, what’s your nuanced or specific meaning when you affirm recapitulation. And I’m typing this while doing other things so I hope this makes sense. Thanks! And I’m not looking for an argument. Just genuinely inquiring.
Rc should drop the teaching until he has sought the Lord and is mature in the Lord but his livelihood is tied to false teaching so his kids won't eat unless he continues.
I did ask Fisher if there are any necessary future events in the mind of God with human beings as their objects? He seemed to obfuscate if I remember rightly. Perhaps I can repeat the question here and see what responses I get, if any. Can any Bereans here explain the journey of Saul to search for his donkeys up to his safe return with his donkeys, if determinism is impossible? Could Sisera have walked in the opposite direction to Jael's tent in the aftermath of the battle? He had lfw or not? Did God determine that Jael would drive a tent peg through his skull before it happened?
What makes you think we could possibly know the answers to any of those questions? God can make things happen a certain way if he wants to, or he can have multiple options depending on what happens, or he could keep nudging people in the directions he wants; and from our perspective it would all look the same.
God could have fully determined that specific event and it wouldn't prove determinism. Determinism requires that ALL things are determined. God could determine 90% of all events and determinism would still be false given the remaining 10% that was not determined.
I’m not convinced he is earnest. I think it is very possible he is a troll. Like Barely Baptist, Merely Molinist, etc…
He's said before that his presentation, as "Rogue" is meant to troll people, but he seems to mean that if they fixate on the title/symbols instead of substance than they "fell for it" and he thinks this is funny... according to his live dialog on Idol Killer before the debate.
But I think his own understanding of why this is trolling, and how he was calm at the start of the dialog, but by the end he was making qeird arguments as he became more tired... no i think it's not an act. His more irrational aspects seem more apparent when he's had no chance to prepare, but he seens more "with it" in short form, meaning "the act" is him being reasonable, the reality is when he rants and makes gnostic claims.
This is of course just my impression, i have no access to his inner mind nor do I have proof. But if I was compelled to make a wager I'd say his position is more or less sincere.
Thanks
@@donaldbryce1939 thank you!
Rouge is the avatar of an ideology. The idea has him he does not have ideas.
It should break our hearts.
@joshcarz It does, but also understanding that some must hit the end of their rope and bounce to see the light of Christ and simplicity of the Gospel. Speaking as one that hit the end of his rope and bounced myself...
Ouch, that is a solid assessment.
Praying Rogue sees that he is held captive by an ideology and gets to the moment when he is courageous enough to question it.
@@AlexanderosD Possessed by an ideology...
I need ya on Spotify bro
Does God have any knowledge of anyone before they become a personal being in dynamic omnisience or open theism? Or does he see what nature brings forth after the fact but not before? I guess the creation of personality has to be a supernatural event or not? Is there any purpose of God in it because he has a plan or design of us before our creation? I guess in open theism or dynamic omniscience he can't see or know the humans he has created until they reach a certain stage of development. This seems to contradict some scriptures.
It’s more like Molinism. God sees/knows every possible future path. The difference is in Molinism there is one path out of the infinites that God knows Is certain to happen. Whereas in Dynamic Omniscience no one path is certain. Though this does allow God to determine any event He desires. How? He can in His omnipotence block any and all paths as He chooses or allow creatures to behave in ways that also limit future related path. Thus He has always known (of) us and every other possible and actual person.
You just told me in another thread that you were quote “I’m an open theist.” Was that a lie?
@@user-wj2fr1qf1h "How? He can in His omnipotence block any and all paths as He chooses or allow creatures to behave in ways that also limit future related path. " I don't see how this differs fundamentally from calvinistic determinism but I'm open to learn the difference.
@@JohnK557 "You just told me in another thread that you were quote “I’m an open theist.” I can't find that quote. Surprise surprise, or not? Everybody is in your box or the calvinist box it seems. That makes it unpleasant to discuss with you to be honest. Either your opponent is a devil or a saint.
@@paulanchor867I already went back and found it. You said: “I’m an open theist Calvinist.” Then I explained to you how there is no such thing and you didn’t respond. Were you lying then or now? I’ll go get your entire comment and post it since you can’t find it yourself.
Wow He is an actual Gnostic heretic
I'd probably push back a bit on how you responded to Jesus being born of a virgin. I wouldn't consider RC correct in his reasoning, but I think your explanation undercuts the significance too much.
@@darthnocturnis3941 Scripture tells us it was a sign He was Messiah. Scripture tells us He shared in all the things the offspring of Abraham have in common.
@@IdolKiller I'm not discounting that aspect, but I think that there is a greater significance.
Think of this, though: Being born of a virgin means that he doesn't share in the biological DNA of a human father. I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that sin is biologically passed on, but I would express that it means there is another aspect of "what is shared" needs to be considered carefully.
Seems like Rogue is more inspired by the ideas of Calvinism (whichever that version may be) verse the truth to drive his ideas!
It’s whatever version you didn’t just criticize. James White and every Calvinist in Dr Flowers’ chat falls back on that: “that’s not what Calvinists believe.”
@@JasonJrake🎯 It’s all the same. That’s one way sound minded people can discern the difference between truth and lies. Lies are designed to be confusing and impossible to understand. They are meant to deceive people not be understood.
at 24:50 it's only an attack in your 'god given faculties' if it's incorrect right, otherwise it's just an accurate assessment of the situation.
at 1:42:00 it doesn't make sense to say that he gained experiential knowledge of good and evil when adam had already experienced god unless god is not good, or somehow when it said good and evil it really only meant evil because he already knew god, plus eve had already experienced evil when the serpent deceived her.
19:58 For as much as RC calls people liars (for having different opinions, etc as you mention here), he sure does actually lie about himself. When I confronted him about his claim that he doesn't use his mind to understand the Bible or spiritual truths rather he receives the truth, he called me a liar. Made me laugh when I posted the timestamps to the debate where he did just that. Of course after that point he just deleted the thread rather than address it.
@peterfox7663 he deletes a LOT of folks pointing out his errors... suppressing the truth.
7:02 I am a Christian voice and light in the race car engineering industry 😌
2:06:30 fake AI quotes? Are real AI quotes ok then?
You are building a lot of doctrine on a verse in Hebrews pulled out of its context.
@@waberens not at all. Perhaps this will help
www.esv.org/resources/esv-global-study-bible/introduction-to-hebrews/#:~:text=Hebrews%20has%20two%20primary%20purposes,%2C%20love%2C%20and%20sound%20doctrine.
No he’s combating a lot of false doctrine built on a few out of context proof texts.
Pelagianism vs. Calvinistic Gnosticism is a false dichotomy. Neither are sound Biblical exegesis. It's like listening to a Mormon and a Jehovah's Witness argue who is right about the Gospel.
I’d love to hear this walked out a little more. It seems most of us are stuck in this dichotomy.
The vast majority of non-Calvinist Christians aren’t actually Palagian (or even Semi-Palagian).
Palagianism allegedly has about fourteen known doctrines that were falsely attributed to Palagius, but there are very few non-Calvinists who buy into these.
The point is, it’s not a dichotomy of Palagianism vs Gnosticism. It’s Biblical faith vs Gnosticism.
@@andrewkrape3570 Most non-Calvinists have a doctrine of depravity (not Calvinist Total depravity) that is not Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian. Pelagians are a vast minority, and in is a modern trend for non-Calvinists to move that direction. I have noted that most that are shifting their stance to Pelagianism are coming from Pentecostal backgrounds. This I draw from the people I have known to move in that direction, but that is a small sample.
@@GhostBearCommander We come to the historical definition of Pelagianism, and the modern use of the term. One can get specific in the historical use, while today, it tends to describe any "gospel" that needs man's works to save himself by merely having a better education (knowledge), making the right decision to 'turn over another leaf' and save themselves by pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. When it is Pelagianism vs. _______, it matters what Pelagianism is the basis for the argument.
@@jeffpaton9667 Choosing to believe the Gospel wouldn’t (and couldn’t) count as a “work.”
If I decide to accept a freely offered gift, that doesn’t make me responsible for paying any portion of the price the giver paid in order to procure it.
Same goes for Salvation. “Synergism” is a straw-man.
How to be a good Berean:
Assume that when Jesus says "no one is good," what he ACTUALLY means, is that millions and millions of people are actually good.
@Dizerner Let's look at what Jesus was saying in context this time.
Mark 10:18 KJV
[18] And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
Jesus is clearly pointing to Himself as God. Go ahead call Jesus good, but realize you are identifying Him as God.
So, if you see this as a statement on people, you may be part of an Agastinian death cult that worships the power of sin and believes sin is more powerful than the work of Christ. Also, while believing the sin is like kryptonite to God, and He can not freely forgive it or look at it like He does all through scripture. The Agastinian starts with sin worship through total depravity where sin is so powerful no one can partake in the things God has given freely to all men. You must be special, like a morman spirit baby, before you were even born. Being this morman spirit baby, you don't need grace or the gospel because you were picked before any of that took place before the foundation of the world...
When he said that, was he talking about total inability? 😊
@BigGuy86ed
As a Muslim I find that Christians READ into the Text what is NOT there. No where in that Text does it imply that Jesus is saying quote;
"Jesus is clearly pointing to Himself as God."
He could have said that He WAS God in a number of ways, BUT he chose Not to. In fact if you read it properly then you would know that.
@@chrispedayo rather, what difference does it make if He even says anything at all, since any response doesn't originate with the responder, but with God's decree in eternity past?
Except....Jesus actually was good, because according to Calvinism, Jesus didn't have a sin nature and He wasn't "conceived dead." So either we have a contradiction in God's word(which we dont) or Calvinisms T, fails the test of the Word. They need to put every single belief they have and weigh it against the whole counsel of God.
Jesus wasn't saying that He wasn't good, He is setting an example for man to follow. Every man, needs to remember his place and God's place in their lives. God is good, man is not.
You can say shit Warren.