American Gospel Panel on Dr. Michael Brown: My Response
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 бер 2024
- Dr. Michael Brown withdrew from the third "documentary" on the American Gospel last year, citing opposition to the way some charismatics were being depicted in the film. Following his withdrawal, a panel of cessationists did a video discussing Dr. Brown and the reasoning behind his decision. The panel consisted of producer Brandon Kimber, Justin Peters, Chris Rosebrough, Richard Moore, Steven Kozar, and Jesse Westwood. In this video I offer my thoughts regarding their comments in their panel discussion.
Source video - • AG3 Post-Episode Discu...
My video on Dr. Brown pulling out of American Gospel 3 - • Dr. Brown Pulls Out Of...
www.piratechristian.com/berea...
tfc.org/zion/jimmy-evans
tfc.org/about-us/our-leadership
gatewaypeople.com/about/history
gatewaypeople.com/staff
gatewaypeople.com/about/state...
ag.org/Beliefs/Position-Paper...
I'm Rod Saunders, founder of Jew and Greek. I’m a musician, web developer, and a student of philosophy and economics. I recently published my first book on Amazon entitled Defending the Faith: Word of Faith Apologetics. It’s a response to the numerous charges against and misrepresentations of the Word of Faith movement and theology. I also have a CD of original music on CD Baby entitled Gates of Pearl. “Jew and Greek” is a good name because the two civilizations that influenced Western civilization the most were those of the Judeo-Christian and Greek worlds. From the Jews we received our values and a monotheistic theology, and from the Greeks we got philosophy which brought us science, sports, the arts, democracy, and economics. As a result I discuss all of the above in this blog and in my videos.
***************************
My PayPal Account (for one time donations) - rodsaunders@yahoo.com
My Patreon Account (for monthly donations) - / jewandgreek
My Blog - jewandgreek.com
My Twitter Account - / jewandgreek
My Facebook Page - JewAndGreek
My Book on Word of Faith Apologetics - www.amazon.com/Defending-Fait...
/ @jewandgreek
/ jewandgreek - Розваги
The first to present his case is right until someone comes to cross-examine him... Thanks Brother Rod ❤
Thank you Rod for your accurate summary in clarifying the truth. It is truly sad that others misinterpret the truth and criticize fellow believers.
Cessationalists are a funny bunch.
Apparently the gifts have stopped, yet they are discerning spirits.
Most of them are Calvinists, yet according to their view of God’s sovereignty no false teaching is going to affect the salvation of any of “the elect.”
They claim the Bible as the final authority, yet they don’t believe half of it applies to us.
They claim that we value experience over what the Bible says, yet when they don’t have miracles in their own lives (their experience) they say that what the Bible says isn’t really what it says.
They are the modern day Saducees.
I pray for healing and for the holy spirt to reveal himself to Justin Peters, so the deception he is in will be revealed
A road to Emmaus encounter
@@John-Christchurch-NZ totally mate
Certainly no joy there (and I wonder about the other parts of the fruit of the Spirit: Galatians 5:22-24)
@@leenieledejo6849
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.
Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you. Ephesians 4:30
Just because they don't brawl doesn’t excuse them.
Panel of Pharisees
Be gracious
Good stuff as always, brother Rod. Seems like this is retribution of retaliation for Dr. Brown dropping out of the new American Gospel film. Those guys saying they don’t misrepresent Pentecostals would be hilarious if it wasn’t so ridiculous.
LOL, I mark and avoid Calvinists and Cessationists. Anyway, thanks for the video Rod. 😄
Justin Peters says he and his Calvanist brethren NEVER misrepresent charismatics. LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!😂😂😂😂😂
That's what you call a Chronic Blind Spot, as I see JP often commit non-sequitir conclusions based on his misunderstanding of statements that Charismatics make. He really should take a remedial reading/listening comprehension course.
They need to misrepresent them to get get views and subscribers for their youtube channel.
He said he didn’t misrepresent the charismatics discussed in the film. Also, the panel is not all Calvinists.
Always a grounded view. I believe Justin Peters is obsessed with Benny Hinn
Like Justin Peters, I have a disability. I also lost my only child due to cancer related to a rare medical condition; well meaning individuals prophesied that my son was healed. I share Justin's sentiments. We should get rid of these rotten apples from the body of Christ. They hurt people...the most vulnerable ones. They hurt people badly!
@@mirandamay301 is it bad to believe, and even declare over your children healing and wholeness? In the name of Jesus? To bring hope? To speak life into every situation??? Did Jesus not command us to do as He did? To follow Him? In James it’s says “if any among you are sick, let them bring them to the elders of the church, anoint them with oil, and the prayer of faith will make them well.” How about we are all still growing up into Him, and maybe we miss it from time to time, but are charging forward and shinning as lights in the midst of a dark, perverse and faithless generation. Rejoice in every trial, for it produces a stronger you.
Justin Peters makes good money attacking the charismatic brethren. It has become so lucrative that he grabs every sentence and every sneeze and yells HERESY!!!
He lacks confusion.
Peters is an agent of Satan --not a brother in Christ.
Are you sure you wrote that right ?
Rod--one of your best!!! You saved the best for last in noting the brother as most likely a Calvinist. Calvinists are usually the fly in the ointment. The humdinger of the panel was JP saying that he represents Charismatics fairly!!!! Yes, commenters, make sure you go to Rod's playlist on Justin Peters and you'll realize that JPs statement is false. I appreciated the contrast of Dr Brown's time to Chris Rosebrough. I'm glad Dr Brown stood his ground and pulled out of American Gospel 3.
If we spent as much time spreading the good news of Jesus bringing salvation to a sinfull world as we do tearing down each other down we would be doing what we are called for.
I'm always fascinated how much respect Calvinists have for Paul and yet ignore that he specifically declares he speaks in tongues more than anyone. And his comprehensive instruction on the different applications of this multi-faceted gift. If these gifts were to cease, why did Paul instruct us to seek after and desire to receive them? It's interesting I can't find any record of when, how, or what the circumstances were when Paul began speaking in tongues. But his references to it specifically were very laudable. If it ended when John died on Patmos, I guess someone in Corinth was probably praying in the spirit and must have choked on their own tongue when John passed away🤔
Phariseism has always been in the Church 😢. But Jesus is our example of yielding to the Father, no matter the opposition.
Everyone in that panel infuriates me. They are allowed to condemn and misrepresent people but when they are called out, they are the victims. Bunch of hypocrites. Whoever called them the cessationist mafia is correct.
That, or, rather, they generally believe that their own criticism is based on “discernment” that any other biblical arguments is a perceived, or assumes that the other side is “lacking theological doctrine.” If that’s how they view biblical discernment, then God help us.
@@chasebrady1511 Exactly.
Spot on. They are all Calvinists which breeds judgementalism. Not sure why they get so wound up because according to their beliefs God has ordained all things as so. Perhaps it’s because they have nothing interesting to say so they get likes from slagging off others.
They strongly think they're actually intellectual or somehow have better theology.
@@IamGodSon Yup. They are also narcissists.
Nice response video! This crowd don't seem to get it that not all Charismatics and Pentecostals agree with or identify with NAR. Also liked the way you defended definitions of continuationist and restorationist.
Thanks for the great video, you must put in a LOT of work. God bless you in your music, may you get many bookings.
and they are division causers
Chris Rosebrough posted a video yesterday on the American Gospel UA-camnchannel responding to Michael Brown's comments regarding Martin Luther's advocacy of killing peasants and Jews. The video proves that Mr. Rosebrough has no place in a pulpit.
Rosebrough is annoying.
He has attacked my church Gateway on numerous occasions.
Rod , thanks for doing this important work!
LOL LOL oh Justin you are so decieved
Im glad someone took the time to respond to this
Great video, I appreciate what you do.
spot on
Paul (when he was Saul) thought he was serving God by killing christians. It is strange how certain people have built entire ministries on fighting other believers in the name of fighting false teaching. it just reveals how blind they truly are, that is why its usually very religious pharisee.. people who do this most.
Rod thank you for all the work of responding to these people who believe that the best way to build the kingdom of God is to attack other believers. I would find what you do in listening to these folks too difficult, and would be tempted to be unkind over some of the foolishness that they produce. Thanks again.
I don’t understand how any Christian worth their salt that loves Jesus, will spend their time researching on how to tear down and destroy other Christian brothers. That is not of God. That is of the devil and it is evil in the sight of God and God he hates this thing that they are doing. I pray God opens their eyes and that they repent of their evil works trying to create discord and Disinformation and lies among the brethren of Christ
You hit the mark bro.
Well done! God bless!
Can you imagine leaders of the Charismatic movement broadcasted a round table meeting like attacking JMac, JP ect ?….do you think they spend as much time as these guys do watching their messages ?
Nope. Check out Justin Peters, he watches more Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hin and Joyce Myer, than any charismatic I know. I'm not sure people on their own staff watch their messages as much as Justin Peters. He probably knows more about Benny Hinn than he does about his own kids!
(The last point might be hyperbole. Might. )
@@tpw7250 yeah that was my point
@@mick9371 Yes. I was vigorously agreeing with you!
Ya, the restorationist view is a bit strange for these guys to oppose, in particular, since they themselves are "reformed," which was clearly a restorationist move of God. The reformation was a retrieving of the lost or hidden doctrines of grace, faith, sola scriptura, etc. I don't think anybody would believe that grace and faith ever disappeared entirely. They were, as the presenter of this video says, both continuationist and restorationist.
They're professional misunderstanders.
His nose just grew when Peter's said the open
I agree with Dr. Brown. Many of these guys believe in Calvin's theology of Cessation. The gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased? Which is NOT A DOCTRINE NECESSARY FOR SALVATION, and isn't even a definitely proven Biblical Doctrine.
Peters seems so pious and so concerned. SEE: Servus Christi
As someone not from the States, is Pigsbutt Minesota a real place? I would normally ask, but Americans do have some strange place names!
No. It was just a reference to a small town that nobody has ever heard of.
@JewandGreek Well there goes a fun fact that I had for the next week! On a serious note, I'm glad you mad3 the point that these full time youtube heresy hunters expect a little too much of a guy that is busy building the kingdom l.
These folks make me sick. I'd not waste my time ever giving such people an audience. I'd rather do rebuttals from a distance. Pharisees in the making.
So what if there is a so called 900 page book that they all have. And????
What is interesting is that the people in the panel critique using the very words that these people use in the NAR and then they are told that they are misrepresenting them. Apparently people don’t like it when you call them out on their own beliefs. Time and time again people in this movement attempt to soften or change the language used. Often times taking down content that is too damning for others to see. They are manipulative and dangerous. This video is misinformed and ignorant.
Hello brother ! Could you made debunking video on John Collin’s accusations against Pentecostalism , Healing Revival and especially about William Branham , because Collins says about widely supported racism and Ku klus klan by him and their adherents.. thank you !
I might do that at some point, but for now I don't really want to mess with John. Suffice it to say that I think it's pretty obvious that he's going out of his way to tie the error and extremism of Branham to the entire Pentecostal/Neo-Pentecostal world.
I think the criticism of Dr Brown’s refusal to acknowledge NAR is 100% valid. Dr Brown seems to hide from or at least dance around a few issues with the charismatic movement…. He knows good and Dadgum well what the NAR is and what people generally mean when they say it.
The whole NAR thing sounds more of a conspiratorial construct than any actual guide book that those devious heinous charismatics are actually using.
The real conspiracy here is how proud and controlling one group can be that they need such constructs to villify their enemies.
Dr Brown is quite aware of the NAR terminology, ala Peter Wagner. He is also aware of negative things that can happen if taken too far in his books. But that is true even of Reformed theology - but Charismatics typically don't make a career of exposing Calvin's statements like "God is the author of evil." Let Calvinists them learn to correct themselves.
Mu
After watching that round table with brown storms Peter’s and I can’t remember the other guys name no offense intended, when I heard the accusations made, then saw they were true on camera on video I kinda lost all hope for charismatic leaders. When the more Scholarly elders of the movement are either deceived so clearly by one another Storms and Bickle or are unwilling to look/admit what’s going on Brown and Sid Roth, how can we trust them to discern anything?
Brown will say this is a statement about their salvation, and that’s not it at all for me. I can’t trust them to help me see the truth and be sanctified from trustworthy elders if they’re so blind/deceived.
I’m a continuationist and I have some serious issues with reformed Calvinists when it comes to soteriology and there understanding of God but I’m grateful they did the work to expose what’s going on.
Lastly they proved one thing for sure and that charismatics need massive reform asap.
I’m not a cessationist 😉
Do you believe that tongues, interpretation of tongues, prophecy, word of knowledge ... etc are still in operation today?
@@JewandGreek sure as long as the tongues are practiced, as Paul describes them to be practiced, no more than two or three at one time, every tongue must have an interpretation, it must be an authentic language that someone can speak supernaturally that they did not know previously, and it must be done in order, not in chaos. I've seen it practiced in this way, and I'm very grateful for those brothers who do it that way. And certainly prophecy as Paul described must be tested; every single one. But this movement never tests prophecy ever. So, I'm opposed to that. Prophecy is quite typically practiced in this movement in that way almost without exception If you can provide evidence of a prophecy being tested in this movement I would be all ears. And a "word of knowledge" is the gift that someone who can understand and speak forth biblical truth in such a way as to skillfully apply it to life situations with great discernment. It involves understanding truth with an insight that only comes by the power of the Spirit. Those with the gift of knowledge understand the deep things of God and have a keen ability to explain the mysteries of His Word. I do NOT believe that the "word of knowledge" is the ability to see through a television screen for instance that someone has hemorrhoids, or can tell what street you live on, or can speak to a loved one who has passed away, or some other thing like that (i.e. Shawn Bolz). That is cold reading psychic, fortune telling and the work of mediums which is condemned throughout the Bible. There is no NT precedent for such practice as the current practice of "receiving a word of knowledge."
”I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.“
Romans 16:17-18 ESV
And the false teachers I was referring to certainly disrupt salvation by faith alone, in Christ alone through Grace alone. They add works and don’t preach the true gospel. So, yes Romans 16:17 refers to anyone who would “oppose sound doctrine” it doesn’t just have to be a Judaizer
Hello Richard. Romans 16:17 doesn't say "sound doctrine". It says "the doctrine you have been taught". Sound doctrine is a very subjective expression that left to interpretation would basically pit all believers against one another as we all have different views on what constitutes sound doctrine. By saying "the doctrine you have been taught" (ESV) he was basically referring back to the theme of justification by faith he laid out in chapter 1. He even stated in chapter 14 that we shouldn't divide or judge people over secondary issues. As for "false teachers" who add works, who does that? To my knowledge nobody in "NAR" teaches a works-based soteriology, certainly no more than that of John MacArthur's "Lordship Salvation". As for the "true gospel", one could argue that the true gospel is available to everybody, not just those who were preselected. And again, who among "NAR" preaches a gospel other than the consensus view of the evangelical world that we're all condemned by our sin nature, there's no salvation apart from Jesus, and if we believe that God raised Him from the dead and confess Him as Lord we'll be saved?
@JewandGreek Sorry, you are correct. I was thinking about the qualifications for an elder as laid out in Titus 1:9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. So yes, Paul says qualifications for pastoral leadership, or to rebuke those who contradict sound doctrine. and in Acts 20:29 he charges the elders there to watch out for wolves..."I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish everyone with tears." but you are not pitting yourself against us??? even though you have never sat down with me to "hear my heart" you are guilty of the same thing you have charged us with...so? and you have called me a cessationist even though you have never bothered to find out my view.
@@richardm23 No, I'm not pitting myself against you. I have never called anybody a heretic or false teacher because they're Reformed or cessationist, but I will respond when I disagree with the commentary on issues that I feel are relevant to what I do. There's a long history of debate in the church age. No need for it to be contentious. I asked on your other comment if you believe in the modern operation of the gifts in 1 Cor. 12:8-10?
I don’t claim that NAR leaders claim to be equal with the 12. That’s a strawman.
You bring up Jimmy Evans and Robert Morris and try to paint Evans as merely a church planter, not a NAR Apostle. You literally ignored what we said in the discussion- that both Evans and Morris endorsed Che Ahn’s definition of “Modern Day Apostles” (in that book), which defines their movement as The “New Apostolic Reformation” in that very book.
You purposefully remove/ignore the context to make yourself seem honest, when the opposite is true. Your own judgements against us condemns your own work.
I didn't say that you claim that. I said that what Dr. Brown was referring to was the false perception of what NAR is. You guys said that he says it doesn't exist which was demonstrably false. He acknowledged that the Peter Wagner version exists, but the Holly Pivec version doesn't. I've read her book and it's full of leaps in logic and exaggerations like that. She said that 369 million people worldwide and nearly 36 million Americans attend a NAR church. LOL
As for Jimmy Evans, my point was his designation as apostle isn't due to "NAR" teaching that churches have to have apostles, but rather it was due to the circumstances unique to his relationship with Gateway. As Dr. Brown stated, many charismatics believe in the fivefold ministry, but that doesn't mean that we believe that the church is to be governed by apostles and prophets which is part of the hysteria that Pivec is spreading.
I don't know what your understanding of Che Ahn's conception of an apostle is, but my understanding is that apostles are first of all servants, which pretty much describes the role that Jimmy Evans has played concerning Robert Morris and Gateway.
@@JewandGreek Brown claims that the NAR as critics define it doesn’t exist. He also claims the worldwide movement doesn’t exist. Bethel alone, despite denying it, could be that movement by itself. Yes, Che affirms “servant leadership” to downplay concerns about abuse of power, but the rest of teaching on what apostles are able to do negates that. Just read the chapter tiles and then the book. (Bill Johnson wrote the foreword, Morris and Evans endorsed). Dr. Brown admits that Che is probably closet to NAR because he’s a direct to disciple of Wagner.
@@JewandGreek Rod, you took my own words out of context, when I said that Brown doesn’t think that NAR exists. From 56:22-58:08 in my video, I explain that Brown doesn’t deny that NAR exists in some form (the Wagner version), but that he rejects the critics’ definition of NAR and concludes that it doesn’t exist:
“Let me explain a little bit of how I understand Dr. Brown’s argument. So when he says the NAR doesn’t exist or is a conspiracy theory, he’s not denying that there are people that believe in modern day apostles. He will look at some of our definition- just the way it’s described… and the way it’s described sometimes is like this: So the NAR would be the belief in modern day governing offices of apostles and prophets. With that (that’s kind of like the core, main thing)… and with that would come new revelation, strategies that essential for the Great Commission. You know, “apostles have extraordinary authority,” there’s spiritual warfare stuff connected to it. There’s Dominionism involved… As we go down that list, I would say, not everyone agrees with all these different smaller points of theology. There’s going to be some variation.
So what Brown does is he’ll look at that (which we’re calling a “loose-knit movement” where not everyone agrees) and they’ll say, “Well nobody that I know fits all of these categories… checks all of these boxes, therefore it doesn’t exist.” And I think it’s unfair because none of us are saying that all of these secondary points of doctrine are always part of everyone involved in apostolic governing offices. So that’s just how I’ve seen him argue that point.” -BK
But you ignored this to try to make your point that we’re misrepresenting Brown’s view of NAR. No, you misrepresented my own view presented in the video to try to discredit me as being unfair. Again, you’re guilty of the some tactics you accuse me of.
@@AmericanGospel At 3:10 in my video you said that Dr. Brown doesn't believe that NAR exists and then repeated that claim half a minute later, which prompted a chorus of dismissive and derisive comments from members of the panel including a book on NAR theology. This is a common narrative in the discernment camp, that Dr. Brown says it doesn't exist. I've heard it repeatedly. I don't think your attempt to walk back that narrative was sufficient with the "doesn't check all the boxes" line because you still accused him of saying "therefore it doesn't exist" toward the end of your quote. That's why I played a clip of Dr. Brown's view rather than your rendition of his view.
You quoted my statement of faith. But you got one thing wrong The theology of “Total Depravity” is Augustinian, not from Calvin. Do you believe that man is able or capable of bringing himself out of his state of sin? Is man able to save himself? And my argument that Dann Farrely claims the people throughout history were apostles, is confirmed by his own words which you graciously showed. It’s not a strawman. All the people he mentioned would’ve rejected and did reject apostolic succession, and the term apostle to be applied to themselves.
As we all know Calvin was influenced by Augustine, so same difference. We all know that Paul taught justification by faith, and yet we credit Luther with popularizing the concept.
I believe that man is incapable of bringing himself out of his state of sin, which is why God sent His Son into the world to provide salvation for all who believe. (John 3:16) I do not believe that He only enables the predestined elect to have saving faith.
Dan Farrelly was saying that leaders throughout church history have fit the description of apostle even if they didn't have a word for "sent ones", builders, planters ... etc and even if they didn't use the word "apostle" because they had long since abandoned its use. He was not suggesting that Luther and Calvin et al weren't familiar with the word "apostle" or the Greek _apostolos_ as you suggested. So yeah, I think there was a bit of straw manning going on there like I said in the video.
@@JewandGreek so you're not Augustinian? Are you Pelagian? Because that was condemned as a heresy. Luther didn't popularize the concept of justification by faith, he rediscovered it because it was covered underneath the works salvation, preached by the Catholic Church. So according to your own description, you are Augustinian. You believe that man is incapable of bringing himself out of his state of sin. Which is what my statement of faith says. So when Paul describes the elect, who is he talking about? And does he enable others who are not saved? If a person is saved, they are saved by God he does the work. I think and hope we could agree on that.
I think you're not understanding my critique of Dann. Dann applies the "Apostolic" moniker to people who would have rejected it. And if you listen to the whole thing Dann does indicate that they did not know that they could call themselves or use that word, "Apostle." So yes my critique is that Dann is bartering in revisionism. Because all those men would have never allowed themselves to be called apostles! The early church fathers on throughout church history have rejected the term, apostle. Only until the introduction of it by Cecessionists (New Order of the Latter Rain) who believed that the Apostolic gifts and Office had ceased, did they "restore" it. To be a restorationist you must be a cessationist. So the NOLR were cessationists who sought to restore the gifts.
@@richardm23 Augustinian vs Pelagian is a false dichotomy. I believe the Bible. The Spirit draws all men to Jesus and whosoever believes (the implication being that all have the ability to do so) will be saved. Those are the elect that Paul was talking about.
Obviously Dan defines "apostle" differently from the Reformers because he doesn't have a bug up his backside like the Reformers did.
@@JewandGreek Wayne Grudem, a Charismatic, teaches the theology of Total Depravity..."In Our Natures We Totally Lack Spiritual Good Before God: It is not just that some parts of us are sinful and others are pure. Rather, every part of our being is affected by sin-our intellects, our emotions and desires, our hearts (the center of our desires and decision-making processes), our goals and motives, and even our physical bodies. Paul says, “I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh” (Rom. 7:18), and, “to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure; their very minds and consciences are corrupted” (Titus 1:15). Moreover, Jeremiah tells us that “the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9). In these passages Scripture is not denying that unbelievers can do good in human society in some senses. But it is denying that they can do any spiritual good or be good in terms of a relationship with God. Apart from the work of Christ in our lives, we are like all other unbelievers who are “darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart” (Eph. 4:18).13
b. In Our Actions We Are Totally Unable to Do Spiritual Good Before God: This idea is related to the previous one. Not only do we as sinners lack any spiritual good in ourselves, but we also lack the ability to do anything that will in itself please God and the ability to come to God in our own strength. Paul says that “those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:8). Moreover, in terms of bearing fruit for God’s kingdom and doing what pleases him, Jesus says, “Apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). In fact, unbelievers are not pleasing to God, if for no other reason, simply because their actions do not proceed from faith in God or from love to him, and “without faith it is impossible to please him” (Heb. 11:6). When Paul’s readers were unbelievers, he tells them, “You were dead through the trespasses and sins in which you once walked” (Eph. 2:1-2). Unbelievers are in a state of bondage or enslavement to sin, because “every one who commits sin is a slave to sin” (John 8:34). Though from a human standpoint people might be able to do much good, Isaiah affirms that “all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment” (Isa. 64:6; cf. Rom. 3:9-20). Unbelievers are not even able to understand the things of God correctly, for the “natural man does not receive the gifts [lit. “things’] of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14 RSV mg.). Nor can we come to God in our own power, for Jesus says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44).
But if we have a total inability to do any spiritual good in God’s sight, then do we still have any freedom of choice? Certainly, those who are outside of Christ do still make voluntary choices-that is, they decide what they want to do, then they do it. In this sense there is still a kind of “freedom” in the choices that people make.14 Yet because of their inability to do good and to escape from their fundamental rebellion against God and their fundamental preference for sin, unbelievers do not have freedom in the most important sense of freedom-that is, the freedom to do right, and to do what is pleasing to God.
The application to our lives is quite evident: if God gives anyone a desire to repent and trust in Christ, he or she should not delay and should not harden his or her heart (cf. Heb. 3:7-8; 12:17). This ability to repent and desire to trust in God is not naturally ours but is given by the prompting of the Holy Spirit, and it will not last forever. “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Heb. 3:15). (This quote is indexed in Grudem's Systematic Theology Volume under "Total Depravity" page 497).
Your response once again demonstrates that you ignore the main issues and nitpick small things, and then deflect to Calvinism.
You claimed that we’re creating divisions over “secondary issues” when the focus of our discussion surrounded primary issues like “what is Biblical repentance?” Or, “Should the repentance, the wrath of God, or hell be mentioned in evangelism?” We were critiquing Darren Wilson’s own admission that those things don’t appear in his movies. You’re the guy who defends Joel Osteen, who denies the exclusivity of Christ in salvation. But you ignore this and claim we’re only focused on secondary issues.
Within Richard’s comments on biblical repentance, you ignored what he was responding to and decided to take a jab at Calvinism’s view of total depravity (also a Lutheran position, etc.). 🤦♂️
Joel Osteen does not deny the exclusivity of Christ in salvation. He issued a clarification after his Larry King interview that emphasized that point and even Al Mohler acknowledged it. albertmohler.com/2005/06/25/joel-osteen-issues-apology/ You're condemning people based on misinformation and misconceptions, which has been my point all along with AG.
How many times did Osteen appear on TV and when he could have shared the Gospel and answer accordingly, he didn't. He downplayed abortion, gay marriage and sin period.
@@JewandGreek after this apology he went on Glenn Beck and basically denied the exclusivity of Christ again. This is all discussed and shown in the recent roundtable with Storms and Brown. Wolves hide behind giving right answers and orthodox statements of faith, but the real measure is what they practice: Joel never preaches on sin or the gospel (Sam Storms and Michael Brown agree), aside from a last min. unbiblical sinner’s prayer at the end of each sermon.
😂😂😂 as a former charismatic, I'm very thankful for the ministry of Chris Roseborough, Steven Koza, and Justin Peters. You really don't understand where they are coming from. Please look into Chris Roseborough's fighting for the Faith channel more.
I'm very familiar with all of these "ministries". JP is either an incompetent researcher or a pathological liar. As I said in the video I have a playlist of JP rebuttals that show how much he misrepresents facts and the teachings of charismatic ministers. Chris and Steven aren't much better.
Yeah...no. I'm listening to your argument and use of Scriptures, however you have no understanding of the Scriptures, but you are doing a very good job of convincing your followers that you do, and giving them what they would like to hear more of.
@@christiansocialenterprise1488prove your point by scripture miss well being
Stop lying justin peters