Pastor Wolfmueller made the point before, and I think it’s a pretty accurate way to look at things…if you’re drawing a circle, Calvinism wants the circle to be neatly closed, while Lutheranism is content to leave the circle unfinished/missing a piece. Just in anecdotal experience (including here on RUclips), Calvinism seems to lend itself to a very brainy and formulaic (almost professorial) approach. Personally, I like many of these folks, though I may differ in some of their emphases. While Lutheranism seems more open to mystery; a humble stance, if I may say so…given our innate human limitations. What drew me away from a Calvinist interpretation of election (and limited atonement) is…the Bible! So many passages indicating that salvation is really meant for all. Truly, all. I could artfully interpret those passages to mean something other than “all”, but the interpretation always felt forced, and a bit of a stretch. Anyway, good video, pastors!
Do Calvinist really believe in double predestination or actual election and predestination of the elect? In other words all are sinners and therefore deserve damnation, but God in his grace chooses many for salvation from all who deserve damnation? I know there are some Calvinist who would affirm double predestination but I know that not all do.
I'm in the process of joining the lcms and also am coming from a reformed background. The thing I wrestle with is Romans 9:20-22. Election gives me great comfort but it seems that there are vessels prepared for wrath. Thanks for doing these q&a videos. They have been a tremendous blessing and give me lots to talk about with my reformed friends when the friendly banter inevitably comes up.
If you read Romans 9 honestly, I don't see how you come out of that not holding the doctrine of election. And then our a bunch of other strong texts with it from all over the scriptures and once you see it, you can't unsee it, and you fall down in thankful worship. It also doesn't negate responsibility as Calvinists have always said... Because both are in Scripture in the strongest possible terms without apology.
As a former Roman Catholic turned vaguely Arminian (Baptist) Protestant, I started with the Smaller Catechism and then the Augsburg Confession and got hooked.
Self-refuting skepticism... Like saying: Catholics: This is the answer. Protestants: No this is the answer. Agnostics: We have no answers, but we know that you're both wrong. So is knowing they're both wrong an answer? How would you know they're both wrong unless you're standing in a transgender position outside of the issue? They may both be wrong, or one may be right and the other wrong, but you saying that you know they're both wrong is the most arrogant position of all. Go back to Luther on this one, not Melanchthon and after. Worst part of this is the misrepresentation of the views. Straw men are easily defeated.
I usually recommend the Large Catechism after the Small because it cover the same six, chief parts and then the epitome because it demonstrates a path toward Concord through true and clear confession. After that, I figure most people will be hooked and explore however they want.
Hey Pastor! Could you do a video explaining temptation v the sin of concupiscence? After listening to your podcasts with the girls of “Let’s Talk About It” on the Sacraments, this question came up when discussing justification and original sin cleansed by Baptism. Would love your thoughts!
The Lutheran Confessions are theologically more consistent and deferent to Scripture over reason. Both Confessionally and in practice, Reformed seem to solidly place reason on as high a pedestal as Scripture in their reading and extrapolation of it. Scripture must always preceed reason, and while reason is a precious gift from our Creator within its proper use, the Holy Spirit is the greater interpreter, and this the Lutheran Confessions proclaim faithfully. One only concludes double predestination is true if they infuse their reading of Scripture with their own fallen reason, and this is a most HUMAN thing to want to do. We desire more than anything to know all things, so we apply our reason where we shouldn't to derive a faulty hermeneutic.
@@jmh7977 it’s not logic chopping. Romans 9:22 has to be interpreted. And coming to a different interpretation than you is not placing reason above scripture.
@dylanwagoner9768 Salty salty. I think you may be reading your ego into the text, which is a natural result of placing one's reason on a pedestal equal in stature to or greater than Scripture plainly read. You've done nothing except vindicate the original point further.
God's election is based on: a) His gracious will to save, b) the merit of Christ, and c) faith which receives Christ's merit. The Lutheran dogmaticians rejected the Calvinistic notion of an absolute decree.
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
As a Lutheran myself I am deeply disheartened by the doctrine of election, or lack thereof. Walther and Chemnitz both say that the elect will persevere and will not fall away. Okay. The confessions affirm monergism, but also resistible grace. So if the Spirit is resistible, than how can anyone be regenerated ? Conversion would then need to be irresistible, or else we are not monergists. If we can not choose God, but God chooses us, and the elect persevere, then conversion would need to be irresistible. If initial conversion is resistible, then no one is saved. After then, why is the Spirit resistible after the irristible conversion?
If God grants us faith, we are made alive. You can fall away but that's from on going lack of repentance and sin. Before you're granted faith we are dead. We can choose at that point to go back to death. Although we (being dead) had nothing to do with the initial gift of faith
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Do you have any advice for talking to a non-Christian about this? A friend of mine has asked what happens to people who weren't able to hear about Jesus, for example native Americans before Europeans arrived. A simple way to explain it or a parable of sorts would be better as he's not an academic so he doesn't have the patience for a complicated/theoretical explanation
Mat 11:27: ²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
The way people play games with the meaning of words is interesting. To elect means to choose one thing over another. Have you noticed, as science discovers more and more the complexity of life, more and more they are making evolution into a defacto mind, choosing one outcome over another. And that by natural forces, which makes certain a certain outcome. They avoid trying to admit that the choosing is a mind, and if a mind, a person. Yet universally, humanity understands It does not go well for the non-elect. It is certain that the wrong choice along the path of time is ultimate destruction, though the choice is being made by irrevocable force(s). "Will the thing made say to the one who made it, 'why did you make me this way?'". When Paul wrote that, he was anticipating people telling him his doctrine was unfair. Everyone agrees that is what Paul was anticipating when he penned that. What had Paul written that he was anticipating an objection to? God sovereign over all things, including the choices of men. How could we assess that election is unjust? Consider systematic theology - "God and his infinite perfections are one". That means we do not measure God by way of some ruler of justice we have in our head, our psyche, holding God up to that and assessing whether or not God measures up... to our standard. Thus making ourselves the measure of right and wrong. We are not, thus God remains God - the measure of right and wrong, of justice, and all things. God is the measure. To have all power, is to elect all things, to be almighty. "Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “ 'Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty,' who was, and is, and is to come.” The God of the Bible ain't play'in The only response to these things is worship, worship of self, or worship of Christ. Choose this day whom you will serve. ------------------- Neuroscientists studying the biology behind behavior, like Dr. Robert Saplowski at Stanford, have come to believe in a biological determinism, no free will. Yet he knows there is a morality humans choose to go against. I like the idea of being elected. You?
Mat 11:27: ²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. Election is beautiful for the elected but not for the non-elected. God bless
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
4:27 What’s wrong with these three maxims is #2. In #2 the speaker says that this maxim is that Grace Alone means salvation is by Grace alone. Salvation isn’t a thing. We use this made up term of “salvation” to boil a multi-step process into a one word conclusion. It’s not “saving”, it’s God creating, man sinning, God judging, Jesus coming in flesh and dying, God accepting and satisfying his judgment, God giving Grace, man surrendering and having faith (or not), and God granting eternal life. The forgiveness of sins is by Grace alone, and it is ALL the work and deserves all the glory. Man’ surrendering to God is still necessary, but it’s the abandonment of self/surrender, not the boasting of self/work, so there’s no glory in it. All glory goes to God.
@@caman171 I honestly don’t. I don’t line up with the particular details of any of those three. Or Pelagian-ism or anything else. I’m new. Of course, none of us actually profess those categories as the primary, primarily we’re all Christians. Those categories help with understanding where someone might be coming from when they answer certain related questions. I don’t fall into any of those categories.
@@TheRomans9Guy I understand where youre coming from. However, as much as I dont like labels, you kinda have to have one or youll spend your whole life explaining, rather than using the shortcut to a conversation lol. Sounds like youd like Kevin Thompsons videos on election and predestination. he refuses any label. However, I am happy with the label of "Provisionist" and I agree with Kevin whole heartedly. Many doctrines of calvinism I find to be heretical, especially when it comes to the doctrine of evanescent grace and saying that God actually hates most of humanity
@@caman171 Well my views align more with Arminianism and Provisionist than anything else, probably. But I’m actually very much against any shortcuts in discussion. I actually want to not have those shortcuts. I want people to have to engage with the ideas and, more importantly, the text because what I’m going to offer them in conversation is very different than what they’ve learned about any systematic from both the proponents of that systematic and its opposition. Kevin is great. My first video I’ve ever had put out in RUclips was the interview I did with him on Galatians 4 being the Rosetta stone of Romans 9. A bit long, but it came off way better than I had hoped. And you’re right. The Doctrine of Election that undergirds Calvinism and classic Arminianism is heretical. It’s unbiblical and evil. Leighton is a good guy. He lives near me and we’ve met once in person. I bought him lunch to talk through these issues a bunch of years ago. But he still gets Romans 9 a little wrong and still deals with election a little wrong. His focus on God’s provision is spot on but some of the nuances he keeps I disagree with.
@@TheRomans9Guy gotcha and I agree with you to a certain extent. The only reason I use a label is because when I am discussing something OTHER than election or salvation, it lets people know where I am coming from, because my view about those things may affect the topic we discuss, but I dont need to go bacl and start from the beginning if you get my drift. What type of church do you attend, Baptists or otherwise?
The Lutheran position on election is the equivalent of theologically sticking one's head in the sand regarding the implications of one's belief. Lutherans: "God elects those who are saved to be saved. Only God can do it, humans can do nothing to even ask God for His grace." Also Lutherans: "Not all are saved." Anyone who can do basic logic: "So God elects some to be damned." Lutherans: "No the Bible doesn't explicitly say that, so it must be their choice." I don't believe double predestination is correct either, but the Lutheran position clearly yields double predestination and then they just say "No it doesn't, we can't apply logic to God," which is nonsense.
Mat 11:27: ²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. God bless
How would you answer the objection that if God wants all to be saved, they would be because of Ephesians 1:11. He works all things according to the counsel of His will. All things include salvation.
@@br.m Lutherans don't confess to irresistable grace. If God chooses you but you don't want Him, you're welcome to walk your way back into the clutches of sin, death, and the devil. But also, before salvation NONE of us want to be saved. "No-one does right, no-one seeks after God." We're all born dead in trespasses and sins, and dead people can't desire salvation.
@@ShonkySquad If can be confusing.. Because nobody can come to Jesus unless the Father drags them. So God will drag people to Jesus, but he won't drag them in to everlasting life?
Well, in Ephesians 1:11 Paul is destroying the Jews’ doctrine of election by teaching that the Jews we were chosen, but the Gentiles were ALSO chosen. Everyone is chosen. And 1:11 is the key verse there.
As a Evangelical leaning towards Reformed, I find your understanding of Calvinism lacking. Why would the comfort of God's providence guiding us through life towards the cross be anything but comfort? The double predestination is simply implied, as we read in John 3:18-20 all who have not been born again remain in a state of condemnation.
Mat 11:27: ²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65: ³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. ³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. … ⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. … ⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. ⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
@@andrewpacker2592 Not sure I'm understanding the point you're making. Did not the video critique double predestination? And did I not address this in my comment?
@@SojournerDidimus- Your statement acts as if God’s providence is something we don’t find comfort in. Then add in that double predestination is implied by that Providence but that implication does not necessarily follow.
Has it occurred to you Lutheran pastors that, much like the Catholics, you are in a bit of an echo chamber. I find the writings and sermons of Tim Keller very helpful. He has Calvinist leanings and finds the doctrine of election very comforting since as it also says in Romans “nothing can separate you from the love of God” As to whether you are among the elect or not, he would say that if you find yourself drawn to Jesus and have a desire to hear and study his words, then you probably are.
Has it occurred to you, that I read very widely - in fact I am finishing a Keller book right now (Generous Justice). And that as a former Calvinist I have read a ton of Calvinist writings - including even outlining the entirety of Calvin's Institutes. I would argue that many Calvinists are not consistent when it comes to how this plays out with assurance. And that's fine. I think that's the way to go.
the Bible teaches that we must believe in order to be saved. The Bible says “those who believe” in Jesus have been given “the right to become children of God” (John 1:12)
Mat 11:27: ²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
How is there comfort in leaving the doctrines of grace, including reprobation, and then turning around and accepting and insecure salvation - a salvation men can lose, is not a secure salvation, it's not a completed work of Christ. The only way to find comfort in that, It seems, is to lie to yourself about your depravity not being as bad as you think it is?
Doctrines of "Grace"? The doctrines of limited Grace for a few selected? A horror vision of God chose you for hell...you can't do ANYTHING about it and it's your fault? Logically wrong...morally wrong and not biblical. Are you sure YOU are elect???? Do you find war murder grape and genocide good? Cause God wills it and it is for his glory according to Calvin. No....my God....the Christian God....hates evil and wants ALL men to come to repentance
Salvation is not insecure in Christ. There is comfort in Christ not in a man made system forced upon the text. The Calvinist doctrine of predestination does not bring comfort.
Your first premise is incorrect therefore your conclusion is false. You don't own anything except a will to do evil. "Salvation belongs to the Lord," but you can toss it aside according to your evil will. Your sinful inclination does not change until the Resurrection.
Calvinism also teaches "evenescent grace" in which God deceieves some into thinking they are saved, only to find in the end, they are reprobate. It also teaches you must "persevere" til the end to prove your election. thee is no more security or assurance in calvinism as there is in arminianism or Lutheranism. Theres only one position which teaches security and assurance, its called Provisionism
Don’t be upset with me for showing the logical conclusion of your own system for the person who is despairing or struggling with serious doubts. You can’t point that person to Gospel promises in the Bible if you believe there are people to whom those verses can never apply.
I suppose the short answer is that we do believe that God's promises are for everyone (John 1:29), but promises only benefit people who believe them. But pointing people to the promises in the Gospel is exactly what we should do because hearing the Word of God gives saving faith ( Romans 1:16-17). Hearing the Word is how we're called, and then if we believe and cling to Christ and his promises to the end, we're predestined. That's just my understanding as a layman, but I hope it's helpful. Pastor Wolfmueller has an older video on the topic that explains in more depth. God's peace
@@andrewpacker2592 It’s really interesting that you’re happy to do the “logical conclusion” thing when it comes to Calvinism, but not with your own system. Why can’t the Calvinist “pull a Lutheran” and state what they believe, and then say “Hitherto but no further. It’s all a mystery.”
@@dylanwagoner9768 You cannot because you insist on putting reason above Scripture rather than letting Scripture speak for itself. There cannot be mystery in the current Calvinist system. Lutherans can allow seeming paradoxes and tension to exist because we are willing to stop where the Bible stops. Which is why I don't understand why some of you are so upset by what I said. If someone believes they are reprobate and are despairing, there is no where to find comfort in the Calvinist system - no one can come and say, Jesus died FOR YOU. Jesus died for YOUR sins. Jesus rose again for YOU. (yes, I know all the ways to try to say this without the FOR YOU, but that's my point...)
@@andrewpacker2592 In John 10:28 when Jesus says, “they shall never perish”, is that a promise you can enjoy right now about the future? Can you have assurance right now that you will never fall away? I know you can’t. So where’s the comfort of assurance?
@@TheMendenhallen you said "if we believe and cling to Christ and his promises to the end, we're predestined." Seems that youre saying you cannot know for sure that your saved until death. if we must hold on in order to be saved, we are all lost. It is Christ that holds on to us, and those found "in Him" are predestined. election to salvation is corporate, not individual, except for the election to gifts and service, which is individual. In other words, God predestined the Yankees to win the world series, yet anyone may believe and join the team. God has already elected what your position on the team will be, and yet the results are not dependent on how well you play, because God is calling the shots of the game and will ensure that the enemy will fail. In fact, his election of our position may mean he chooses the most unqualified for that position, in order to show His glory. Salvation is open to ANYONE who believes
Pastor Packer, appreciate you, but you are wrong Calvinism. I don’t know a Calvinist theologian who would say “you can’t look to the cross bc maybe Jesus didn’t die for you.” You’re being wrong doesn’t make Calvinism right, but if you’re going to critique a position you should try and represent it accurately. Seems like many Lutherans do this, and I don’t understand it
@@philliprice1640 Notice, that has nothing to do with what I said. Any Calvinist, regardless of how they view Limited atonement, would say that Christ died for all who believe. You can discern your election by faith in Christ.
If you are despairing and think you are reprobate, then you cannot find comfort in the cross. Just because many Calvinists are not consistent in their own minds when it comes to this doesn’t make what I said any less true.
@@dylanwagoner9768 the problem is, Calvinism is too "fragile". Any possible critique is always a "strawman". If a religion can't handle blunt criticisms leveled at its foundation, then it's only being held up by imagination. Ideally, what we should want in a religion is the ability to still be pretty much true, even if it's presented in a somewhat distorted manner
Pastor Wolfmueller, does God try and save the unevangelised? How exactly does his universal grace extend to them without the Word of God? I thought the Holy Spirit ONLY works WITH the Word, not apart from the Word? How then, do Lutherans insist, that UNIVERSAL grace is extended to ALL without distinction?
I think we have a glimpse of an answer in Romans 1:20, where Paul talks about how God uses creation as a testimony of His power before people are even evangelized. We, Christians, are used as testimonies for the grace and glory of Jesus Christ, but as Jesus Himself said in Luke 19:40, even the stones will cry out in praise of Him.
@@anjarahari2232 thanks for your comment. While I am primarily interested in what Pastor Wolfmueller has to say, I will quickly respond to your comment noting that Romans 1:20 concerns the witness of creation about God's eternal power and Godhead, the glory of the uncorruptible God (v23), and the judgment of God, that they which commit sins are worthy of death (v32). This is not Gospel as it has no promises of salvation in its witness. Instead, the power and holiness of God is asserted and his judgement. This is law, not Gospel. In other words, it is not grace in the sense that it does not reveal God's favourable disposition to the sinner. It reveals God's power and man's condemnation. That the stones would cry out IF the disciples were to hold their peace in Luke 19:40 is true. However, the disciples did not hold their peace, praise God. And, in a manner, they continue to speak, as it were, through the Holy Scriptures. As such, no stone will cry out. Consider this instead: Isaiah 55 11 so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. Romans 10 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Someone called "Steadfast-Lutheran" commented the following: "Grace is "universal" in the sense that Jesus' atonement was for the sins of all people. However, it's limited in scope inasmuch as only those who hear and believe the Gospel actually receive such grace." To which my reply was: "So your God intends to save all but cannot send his Word to all? A frustrated and impotent God that is not mighty to save." I can no longer see his comment. But I have preserved his comment in my own for context.
@@egger-f7m Sorry I was not clear enough, In Luke 19:40 Jesus said that even stones will cry out in praise of Him. So even if there is no one to proclaim his name, “Creation” will do that. So yes God send his Word to all, even if we think there is nothing to do it.
You both claim that Calvinists do not have much to find comfort, claiming that neither baptism nor the cross can comfort us and that our pitiful comfort is in our own performance. You both lie. First, it is the Lord Jesus Christ who declares in Matthew 11:28 and John 7:37 to come to him IF you are weary and thirsty. Here he links all the Gospel promises to those who feel the true condemnation of the law (spiritual not carnal). And if you do come to him, it is precisely because HE is the one who already carried the cross for you, giving you the living water so that you believe and have eternal rest. The promise applies to those who believe. If you believe these things, you have comfort. This is not about your performance. This is about WHAT you believe. WHAT you believe gives you comfort. Second, whoever feels the condemnation of the Law, is wearied and burdened by them, and then believes the promises of the Gospel has comfort because God cannot lie. His promise is true and will not fail. But you both lie and fail to present Calvinism properly. It might be acceptable for untrained people to do so but you both ought to know better.
The issue is for one who is despairing or believes they might be reprobate. That’s the issue I discussed. And there is no comfort in the Calvinist system if you are in that place - especially if you really understand and believe what Calvinists say.
@@andrewpacker2592 I already showed that there is comfort for the Calvinist in the sure promises of God. Your strawman does not require endless repeating. Such a tactic will not make it true, try as you might.
@@andrewpacker2592 you are engaging in the deceitful practice of shifting the goalposts. My comment specifically addresses the comforts that Calvinists have. Their comfort is the sure promise of God. Do you deny that the sure promises of God are a Calvinist's comfort?
@@egger-f7m- I didn’t move the goal posts an inch. Double predestination cuts the legs out from underneath the proclamation and the assurance of the Gospel. You won’t deal with the logical conclusions of your own system. I am not saying Calvinists cannot find comfort in the promises of God. I am saying that it’s often logically inconsistent with their own system to do so.
Pastor Wolfmueller made the point before, and I think it’s a pretty accurate way to look at things…if you’re drawing a circle, Calvinism wants the circle to be neatly closed, while Lutheranism is content to leave the circle unfinished/missing a piece. Just in anecdotal experience (including here on RUclips), Calvinism seems to lend itself to a very brainy and formulaic (almost professorial) approach. Personally, I like many of these folks, though I may differ in some of their emphases. While Lutheranism seems more open to mystery; a humble stance, if I may say so…given our innate human limitations. What drew me away from a Calvinist interpretation of election (and limited atonement) is…the Bible! So many passages indicating that salvation is really meant for all. Truly, all. I could artfully interpret those passages to mean something other than “all”, but the interpretation always felt forced, and a bit of a stretch. Anyway, good video, pastors!
@@Groszify That’s convenient. But if the Bible gives you the piece, you can affirm it and still say it’s a mystery.
@@dylanwagoner9768snarkiness isnt very productive or virtuous, brother.
Do Calvinist really believe in double predestination or actual election and predestination of the elect? In other words all are sinners and therefore deserve damnation, but God in his grace chooses many for salvation from all who deserve damnation? I know there are some Calvinist who would affirm double predestination but I know that not all do.
I'm in the process of joining the lcms and also am coming from a reformed background. The thing I wrestle with is Romans 9:20-22. Election gives me great comfort but it seems that there are vessels prepared for wrath. Thanks for doing these q&a videos. They have been a tremendous blessing and give me lots to talk about with my reformed friends when the friendly banter inevitably comes up.
If you read Romans 9 honestly, I don't see how you come out of that not holding the doctrine of election.
And then our a bunch of other strong texts with it from all over the scriptures and once you see it, you can't unsee it, and you fall down in thankful worship.
It also doesn't negate responsibility as Calvinists have always said... Because both are in Scripture in the strongest possible terms without apology.
As a former Roman Catholic turned vaguely Arminian (Baptist) Protestant, I started with the Smaller Catechism and then the Augsburg Confession and got hooked.
Concord 11 is super! Thanks for your work guys.
/ Greetings from Sweden
Arminians: “this is the answer”
Calvinists: “no, this is the answer”
Lutherans: “we have no answers, but we know you’re both wrong.”
Me: I have the answer.
Self-refuting skepticism...
Like saying:
Catholics: This is the answer.
Protestants: No this is the answer.
Agnostics: We have no answers, but we know that you're both wrong.
So is knowing they're both wrong an answer? How would you know they're both wrong unless you're standing in a transgender position outside of the issue? They may both be wrong, or one may be right and the other wrong, but you saying that you know they're both wrong is the most arrogant position of all.
Go back to Luther on this one, not Melanchthon and after.
Worst part of this is the misrepresentation of the views. Straw men are easily defeated.
@@jrizzle59 Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. Atleast the arrogance part
Buddhism seems more reasonable now.
@@jrizzle59 and i believe your last comment was arrogant. Am i wrong?
Hello from the plains of Northeast Colorado...
Good job guys! I hope you will make more of these short, summary videos of our Lutheran beliefs.
I usually recommend the Large Catechism after the Small because it cover the same six, chief parts and then the epitome because it demonstrates a path toward Concord through true and clear confession. After that, I figure most people will be hooked and explore however they want.
I sent in a question when I was in need.
Large Catechism is so good!
Hey Pastor! Could you do a video explaining temptation v the sin of concupiscence? After listening to your podcasts with the girls of “Let’s Talk About It” on the Sacraments, this question came up when discussing justification and original sin cleansed by Baptism. Would love your thoughts!
The Lutheran Confessions are theologically more consistent and deferent to Scripture over reason. Both Confessionally and in practice, Reformed seem to solidly place reason on as high a pedestal as Scripture in their reading and extrapolation of it. Scripture must always preceed reason, and while reason is a precious gift from our Creator within its proper use, the Holy Spirit is the greater interpreter, and this the Lutheran Confessions proclaim faithfully. One only concludes double predestination is true if they infuse their reading of Scripture with their own fallen reason, and this is a most HUMAN thing to want to do. We desire more than anything to know all things, so we apply our reason where we shouldn't to derive a faulty hermeneutic.
@@jmh7977 it’s not logic chopping. Romans 9:22 has to be interpreted. And coming to a different interpretation than you is not placing reason above scripture.
@dylanwagoner9768 It's been said that while the Reformed interpret, the Lutherans read, and I think you've just given credence to my original point.
@@jmh7977 Haha okay….and this sounds like something an ELCA pastor would say. Good luck with it though. God bless
@dylanwagoner9768 Salty salty. I think you may be reading your ego into the text, which is a natural result of placing one's reason on a pedestal equal in stature to or greater than Scripture plainly read. You've done nothing except vindicate the original point further.
@@jmh7977 “What if God willing to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath fitted for destruction.”
Lutheran squat man. Pulling buses to remember. :)
God's election is based on: a) His gracious will to save, b) the merit of Christ, and c) faith which receives Christ's merit. The Lutheran dogmaticians rejected the Calvinistic notion of an absolute decree.
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
My Book of Concord was published by the ELCA - is it a valid edition or should I go shopping at CPH?
Anything that's published by apostates I would be wary of 😅
As a Lutheran myself I am deeply disheartened by the doctrine of election, or lack thereof. Walther and Chemnitz both say that the elect will persevere and will not fall away. Okay. The confessions affirm monergism, but also resistible grace. So if the Spirit is resistible, than how can anyone be regenerated ? Conversion would then need to be irresistible, or else we are not monergists. If we can not choose God, but God chooses us, and the elect persevere, then conversion would need to be irresistible. If initial conversion is resistible, then no one is saved. After then, why is the Spirit resistible after the irristible conversion?
If God grants us faith, we are made alive. You can fall away but that's from on going lack of repentance and sin. Before you're granted faith we are dead. We can choose at that point to go back to death. Although we (being dead) had nothing to do with the initial gift of faith
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Because of our old nature !
Answer to your last question
Do you have any advice for talking to a non-Christian about this? A friend of mine has asked what happens to people who weren't able to hear about Jesus, for example native Americans before Europeans arrived. A simple way to explain it or a parable of sorts would be better as he's not an academic so he doesn't have the patience for a complicated/theoretical explanation
Mat 11:27:
²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
The way people play games with the meaning of words is interesting. To elect means to choose one thing over another. Have you noticed, as science discovers more and more the complexity of life, more and more they are making evolution into a defacto mind, choosing one outcome over another. And that by natural forces, which makes certain a certain outcome. They avoid trying to admit that the choosing is a mind, and if a mind, a person. Yet universally, humanity understands It does not go well for the non-elect.
It is certain that the wrong choice along the path of time is ultimate destruction, though the choice is being made by irrevocable force(s). "Will the thing made say to the one who made it, 'why did you make me this way?'". When Paul wrote that, he was anticipating people telling him his doctrine was unfair. Everyone agrees that is what Paul was anticipating when he penned that. What had Paul written that he was anticipating an objection to? God sovereign over all things, including the choices of men.
How could we assess that election is unjust? Consider systematic theology - "God and his infinite perfections are one".
That means we do not measure God by way of some ruler of justice we have in our head, our psyche, holding God up to that and assessing whether or not God measures up... to our standard. Thus making ourselves the measure of right and wrong.
We are not, thus God remains God - the measure of right and wrong, of justice, and all things. God is the measure.
To have all power, is to elect all things, to be almighty.
"Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “
'Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty,'
who was, and is, and is to come.”
The God of the Bible ain't play'in
The only response to these things is worship, worship of self, or worship of Christ. Choose this day whom you will serve.
-------------------
Neuroscientists studying the biology behind behavior, like Dr. Robert Saplowski at Stanford, have come to believe in a biological determinism, no free will. Yet he knows there is a morality humans choose to go against.
I like the idea of being elected. You?
Mat 11:27:
²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Election is beautiful for the elected but not for the non-elected.
God bless
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Why is comfort relevant to how one interprets scripture?
Romans 15:4, the Scriptures are written to give comfort.
4:27 What’s wrong with these three maxims is #2. In #2 the speaker says that this maxim is that Grace Alone means salvation is by Grace alone. Salvation isn’t a thing. We use this made up term of “salvation” to boil a multi-step process into a one word conclusion. It’s not “saving”, it’s God creating, man sinning, God judging, Jesus coming in flesh and dying, God accepting and satisfying his judgment, God giving Grace, man surrendering and having faith (or not), and God granting eternal life. The forgiveness of sins is by Grace alone, and it is ALL the work and deserves all the glory. Man’ surrendering to God is still necessary, but it’s the abandonment of self/surrender, not the boasting of self/work, so there’s no glory in it. All glory goes to God.
so what do you call yourself? Calvinist, arminian, provisionist???
@@caman171 I honestly don’t. I don’t line up with the particular details of any of those three. Or Pelagian-ism or anything else. I’m new. Of course, none of us actually profess those categories as the primary, primarily we’re all Christians. Those categories help with understanding where someone might be coming from when they answer certain related questions. I don’t fall into any of those categories.
@@TheRomans9Guy I understand where youre coming from. However, as much as I dont like labels, you kinda have to have one or youll spend your whole life explaining, rather than using the shortcut to a conversation lol. Sounds like youd like Kevin Thompsons videos on election and predestination. he refuses any label. However, I am happy with the label of "Provisionist" and I agree with Kevin whole heartedly. Many doctrines of calvinism I find to be heretical, especially when it comes to the doctrine of evanescent grace and saying that God actually hates most of humanity
@@caman171 Well my views align more with Arminianism and Provisionist than anything else, probably. But I’m actually very much against any shortcuts in discussion. I actually want to not have those shortcuts. I want people to have to engage with the ideas and, more importantly, the text because what I’m going to offer them in conversation is very different than what they’ve learned about any systematic from both the proponents of that systematic and its opposition.
Kevin is great. My first video I’ve ever had put out in RUclips was the interview I did with him on Galatians 4 being the Rosetta stone of Romans 9. A bit long, but it came off way better than I had hoped.
And you’re right. The Doctrine of Election that undergirds Calvinism and classic Arminianism is heretical. It’s unbiblical and evil. Leighton is a good guy. He lives near me and we’ve met once in person. I bought him lunch to talk through these issues a bunch of years ago. But he still gets Romans 9 a little wrong and still deals with election a little wrong. His focus on God’s provision is spot on but some of the nuances he keeps I disagree with.
@@TheRomans9Guy gotcha and I agree with you to a certain extent. The only reason I use a label is because when I am discussing something OTHER than election or salvation, it lets people know where I am coming from, because my view about those things may affect the topic we discuss, but I dont need to go bacl and start from the beginning if you get my drift. What type of church do you attend, Baptists or otherwise?
The Lutheran position on election is the equivalent of theologically sticking one's head in the sand regarding the implications of one's belief.
Lutherans: "God elects those who are saved to be saved. Only God can do it, humans can do nothing to even ask God for His grace."
Also Lutherans: "Not all are saved."
Anyone who can do basic logic: "So God elects some to be damned."
Lutherans: "No the Bible doesn't explicitly say that, so it must be their choice."
I don't believe double predestination is correct either, but the Lutheran position clearly yields double predestination and then they just say "No it doesn't, we can't apply logic to God," which is nonsense.
Mat 11:27:
²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
God bless
How would you answer the objection that if God wants all to be saved, they would be because of Ephesians 1:11. He works all things according to the counsel of His will. All things include salvation.
Would God force people to be saved even if they don't want to be saved? That seems rude.
@@br.m Lutherans don't confess to irresistable grace. If God chooses you but you don't want Him, you're welcome to walk your way back into the clutches of sin, death, and the devil. But also, before salvation NONE of us want to be saved. "No-one does right, no-one seeks after God." We're all born dead in trespasses and sins, and dead people can't desire salvation.
@@ShonkySquad If can be confusing.. Because nobody can come to Jesus unless the Father drags them.
So God will drag people to Jesus, but he won't drag them in to everlasting life?
Well, in Ephesians 1:11 Paul is destroying the Jews’ doctrine of election by teaching that the Jews we were chosen, but the Gentiles were ALSO chosen. Everyone is chosen. And 1:11 is the key verse there.
@@br.mthe issue is none want to be saved apart from God working on them . None seek God no not one
As a Evangelical leaning towards Reformed, I find your understanding of Calvinism lacking. Why would the comfort of God's providence guiding us through life towards the cross be anything but comfort? The double predestination is simply implied, as we read in John 3:18-20 all who have not been born again remain in a state of condemnation.
Mat 11:27:
²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
John 6:36-37,44-45,63-65:
³⁶ But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
³⁷ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
…
⁴⁴ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
…
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
You moved the goalposts. Lutherans believe in God's providence. That wasn't what was under discussion.
@@andrewpacker2592 Not sure I'm understanding the point you're making. Did not the video critique double predestination? And did I not address this in my comment?
@@SojournerDidimus- Your statement acts as if God’s providence is something we don’t find comfort in. Then add in that double predestination is implied by that Providence but that implication does not necessarily follow.
Has it occurred to you Lutheran pastors that, much like the Catholics, you are in a bit of an echo chamber. I find the writings and sermons of Tim Keller very helpful. He has Calvinist leanings and finds the doctrine of election very comforting since as it also says in Romans “nothing can separate you from the love of God” As to whether you are among the elect or not, he would say that if you find yourself drawn to Jesus and have a desire to hear and study his words, then you probably are.
Has it occurred to you, that I read very widely - in fact I am finishing a Keller book right now (Generous Justice). And that as a former Calvinist I have read a ton of Calvinist writings - including even outlining the entirety of Calvin's Institutes. I would argue that many Calvinists are not consistent when it comes to how this plays out with assurance. And that's fine. I think that's the way to go.
the Bible teaches that we must believe in order to be saved. The Bible says “those who believe” in Jesus have been given “the right to become children of God” (John 1:12)
Mat 11:27:
²⁷ All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
How is there comfort in leaving the doctrines of grace, including reprobation, and then turning around and accepting and insecure salvation - a salvation men can lose, is not a secure salvation, it's not a completed work of Christ.
The only way to find comfort in that, It seems, is to lie to yourself about your depravity not being as bad as you think it is?
Doctrines of "Grace"? The doctrines of limited Grace for a few selected? A horror vision of God chose you for hell...you can't do ANYTHING about it and it's your fault? Logically wrong...morally wrong and not biblical. Are you sure YOU are elect???? Do you find war murder grape and genocide good? Cause God wills it and it is for his glory according to Calvin. No....my God....the Christian God....hates evil and wants ALL men to come to repentance
Salvation is not insecure in Christ. There is comfort in Christ not in a man made system forced upon the text. The Calvinist doctrine of predestination does not bring comfort.
Your first premise is incorrect therefore your conclusion is false. You don't own anything except a will to do evil. "Salvation belongs to the Lord," but you can toss it aside according to your evil will. Your sinful inclination does not change until the Resurrection.
@@sidneyloggins2487- you should actually read what we recommended in the video.
Calvinism also teaches "evenescent grace" in which God deceieves some into thinking they are saved, only to find in the end, they are reprobate. It also teaches you must "persevere" til the end to prove your election. thee is no more security or assurance in calvinism as there is in arminianism or Lutheranism. Theres only one position which teaches security and assurance, its called Provisionism
Don’t be upset with me for showing the logical conclusion of your own system for the person who is despairing or struggling with serious doubts. You can’t point that person to Gospel promises in the Bible if you believe there are people to whom those verses can never apply.
I suppose the short answer is that we do believe that God's promises are for everyone (John 1:29), but promises only benefit people who believe them.
But pointing people to the promises in the Gospel is exactly what we should do because hearing the Word of God gives saving faith ( Romans 1:16-17). Hearing the Word is how we're called, and then if we believe and cling to Christ and his promises to the end, we're predestined.
That's just my understanding as a layman, but I hope it's helpful. Pastor Wolfmueller has an older video on the topic that explains in more depth.
God's peace
@@andrewpacker2592 It’s really interesting that you’re happy to do the “logical conclusion” thing when it comes to Calvinism, but not with your own system. Why can’t the Calvinist “pull a Lutheran” and state what they believe, and then say “Hitherto but no further. It’s all a mystery.”
@@dylanwagoner9768 You cannot because you insist on putting reason above Scripture rather than letting Scripture speak for itself. There cannot be mystery in the current Calvinist system.
Lutherans can allow seeming paradoxes and tension to exist because we are willing to stop where the Bible stops.
Which is why I don't understand why some of you are so upset by what I said. If someone believes they are reprobate and are despairing, there is no where to find comfort in the Calvinist system - no one can come and say, Jesus died FOR YOU. Jesus died for YOUR sins. Jesus rose again for YOU. (yes, I know all the ways to try to say this without the FOR YOU, but that's my point...)
@@andrewpacker2592 In John 10:28 when Jesus says, “they shall never perish”, is that a promise you can enjoy right now about the future? Can you have assurance right now that you will never fall away? I know you can’t. So where’s the comfort of assurance?
@@TheMendenhallen you said "if we believe and cling to Christ and his promises to the end, we're predestined." Seems that youre saying you cannot know for sure that your saved until death. if we must hold on in order to be saved, we are all lost. It is Christ that holds on to us, and those found "in Him" are predestined. election to salvation is corporate, not individual, except for the election to gifts and service, which is individual. In other words, God predestined the Yankees to win the world series, yet anyone may believe and join the team. God has already elected what your position on the team will be, and yet the results are not dependent on how well you play, because God is calling the shots of the game and will ensure that the enemy will fail. In fact, his election of our position may mean he chooses the most unqualified for that position, in order to show His glory. Salvation is open to ANYONE who believes
Pastor Packer, appreciate you, but you are wrong Calvinism. I don’t know a Calvinist theologian who would say “you can’t look to the cross bc maybe Jesus didn’t die for you.” You’re being wrong doesn’t make Calvinism right, but if you’re going to critique a position you should try and represent it accurately. Seems like many Lutherans do this, and I don’t understand it
They can’t honestly say that “Christ died for you.” They don’t know, they confess this openly.
@@philliprice1640 Notice, that has nothing to do with what I said. Any Calvinist, regardless of how they view Limited atonement, would say that Christ died for all who believe. You can discern your election by faith in Christ.
@@dylanwagoner9768but how you know you believe is basically affirmed by evidences of works and desires no?
If you are despairing and think you are reprobate, then you cannot find comfort in the cross. Just because many Calvinists are not consistent in their own minds when it comes to this doesn’t make what I said any less true.
@@dylanwagoner9768 the problem is, Calvinism is too "fragile". Any possible critique is always a "strawman". If a religion can't handle blunt criticisms leveled at its foundation, then it's only being held up by imagination. Ideally, what we should want in a religion is the ability to still be pretty much true, even if it's presented in a somewhat distorted manner
Pastor Wolfmueller, does God try and save the unevangelised? How exactly does his universal grace extend to them without the Word of God? I thought the Holy Spirit ONLY works WITH the Word, not apart from the Word? How then, do Lutherans insist, that UNIVERSAL grace is extended to ALL without distinction?
@@egger-f7m I imagine that this is another mystery
I think we have a glimpse of an answer in Romans 1:20, where Paul talks about how God uses creation as a testimony of His power before people are even evangelized. We, Christians, are used as testimonies for the grace and glory of Jesus Christ, but as Jesus Himself said in Luke 19:40, even the stones will cry out in praise of Him.
@@anjarahari2232 thanks for your comment. While I am primarily interested in what Pastor Wolfmueller has to say, I will quickly respond to your comment noting that Romans 1:20 concerns the witness of creation about God's eternal power and Godhead, the glory of the uncorruptible God (v23), and the judgment of God, that they which commit sins are worthy of death (v32). This is not Gospel as it has no promises of salvation in its witness. Instead, the power and holiness of God is asserted and his judgement. This is law, not Gospel. In other words, it is not grace in the sense that it does not reveal God's favourable disposition to the sinner. It reveals God's power and man's condemnation.
That the stones would cry out IF the disciples were to hold their peace in Luke 19:40 is true. However, the disciples did not hold their peace, praise God. And, in a manner, they continue to speak, as it were, through the Holy Scriptures. As such, no stone will cry out.
Consider this instead:
Isaiah 55
11 so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
Romans 10
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Someone called "Steadfast-Lutheran" commented the following:
"Grace is "universal" in the sense that Jesus' atonement was for the sins of all people. However, it's limited in scope inasmuch as only those who hear and believe the Gospel actually receive such grace."
To which my reply was:
"So your God intends to save all but cannot send his Word to all? A frustrated and impotent God that is not mighty to save."
I can no longer see his comment. But I have preserved his comment in my own for context.
@@egger-f7m Sorry I was not clear enough, In Luke 19:40 Jesus said that even stones will cry out in praise of Him. So even if there is no one to proclaim his name, “Creation” will do that.
So yes God send his Word to all, even if we think there is nothing to do it.
You both claim that Calvinists do not have much to find comfort, claiming that neither baptism nor the cross can comfort us and that our pitiful comfort is in our own performance. You both lie.
First, it is the Lord Jesus Christ who declares in Matthew 11:28 and John 7:37 to come to him IF you are weary and thirsty. Here he links all the Gospel promises to those who feel the true condemnation of the law (spiritual not carnal). And if you do come to him, it is precisely because HE is the one who already carried the cross for you, giving you the living water so that you believe and have eternal rest. The promise applies to those who believe. If you believe these things, you have comfort. This is not about your performance. This is about WHAT you believe. WHAT you believe gives you comfort.
Second, whoever feels the condemnation of the Law, is wearied and burdened by them, and then believes the promises of the Gospel has comfort because God cannot lie. His promise is true and will not fail. But you both lie and fail to present Calvinism properly. It might be acceptable for untrained people to do so but you both ought to know better.
The issue is for one who is despairing or believes they might be reprobate. That’s the issue I discussed. And there is no comfort in the Calvinist system if you are in that place - especially if you really understand and believe what Calvinists say.
@@andrewpacker2592 I already showed that there is comfort for the Calvinist in the sure promises of God. Your strawman does not require endless repeating. Such a tactic will not make it true, try as you might.
@@egger-f7m- Do you believe that someone who claimed to be a Christian and then abandons the faith was actually a true Christian?
@@andrewpacker2592 you are engaging in the deceitful practice of shifting the goalposts. My comment specifically addresses the comforts that Calvinists have. Their comfort is the sure promise of God. Do you deny that the sure promises of God are a Calvinist's comfort?
@@egger-f7m- I didn’t move the goal posts an inch. Double predestination cuts the legs out from underneath the proclamation and the assurance of the Gospel. You won’t deal with the logical conclusions of your own system. I am not saying Calvinists cannot find comfort in the promises of God. I am saying that it’s often logically inconsistent with their own system to do so.