A Response to Soteriology 101: With Joel Webbon
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 сер 2024
- In June of 2020, our new friend Joel Webbon came on the show to discuss the 5 points of Calvinism. Soon following that discussion, our friend Leighton Flowers from soteriology 101 did a response to Joel's teaching on our channel (linked below).
Well as a result, of this back and forth Remnant Radio will be hosting a live debate between Leighton and Joel September 21st. Before the debate, we thought it only fair to allow Joel to respond to Leighton's critique of Joel's presentation of Calvinism.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Joel's First Remnant Video:
• Five points of Calvini...
Leightons Response:
• TULIP rests on the T
____________________________________________________________________________________
Help Support The Channel through a one time gift or a monthly contribution.
www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Even When: by StoneBridge Worship
• Even When - Live Acous...
Even When Spotify Link
open.spotify.com/track/0V2UX6...
I really appreciate the general demeanor of Joel Webbon. However, if his arguments represent the best Calvinism has to offer, provisionists have nothing to worry about. It is painfully obvious that his interpretations are being driven by the demands of his system - against the plain meaning of the text.
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
@@AllforOne_OneforAll1689amen Christ provided atonement for all men who would come to him.
@@jdj2022 So everyone gets saved?
@@jdj2022
John 3:4-8 NKJV
Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
John 10:24-30 NKJV
Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, “How long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.”
My salvation experience is so different from what the Calvinist is explaining that it's hard to even acknowlege that it has any truth in it at all. I didn't believe that God was real. An acquaintance of mine invited me to church. I went to his church. An altar call was given to come to the front of the church to meet God. When the altar call was given I said to myself, what kind of fool would go to the front of the church to meet God? Instantaneously, I heard a voice say to me that only Jesus freaks do something like that. I agreed with that voice. All of a sudden, I heard another voice. This voice was kind and said to me if I went to the front to the altar to meet God I would never regret it. I am now totally freaked out. I didn't believe that God was real and now I'm hearing two voices. I told both the voices to "shut up. I need it to think for myself". I made a decision to follow the advice of the 2nd voice. I went to the altar and was set free through repentance and faith. I was instantaneously set free from my desire for drugs. My conversion was so radical, everybody was talking about the changes on the coast guard ship I was stationed on at the time. If Calvinism was true in my experience, I would have never been granted The Choice to go to the front of the alter of that church. Yes, I know this is anecdotal. On the other hand, the radical change certainly wasn't.
So basically, you saved yourself, since you made a choice which voice to listen to and to go up front. Your experience does not change what the Bible teaches.
@@ChristWillConquerAllNations11
No, I accepted the free gift that was given to me. I did not give the free gift to myself.. The apostles preached repentance and faith, and people responded. Simple Bible
@Randal
With all due respect, your personal experience is not the standard, God's word is the standard. No one (at least no I) is wanting to deny that you have received salvation or that you had a real experience. Nothing of what you have shared regarding your experience contradicts what is taught and understood through a calvinist soteriology (biblical soteriology). The only thing that contradicts the sovereign grace that you were shown is your interpretation of it, probably fuel by tradition and bad teaching. This may offend but because my hope and desire is not to offend but instead to stand on the truth then I'm ok if you are offended. God has saved you not because you made a great decision but because He chose to pour His love on you. It is all His doing and therefore it is all His glory. May the Lord Jesus increase and we decrease.
@@nando7522 With all due respect, my experience is one more example of New Covenant Biblical salvation. Sorry. May His Word be the final authority!
Amen. I'm glad to hear how God saved you. We do have to repent and put our trust in Jesus in order to be saved just as the Bible teaches. Yet, of course, we still acknowledge that God was the one who saved us and not ourselves. We couldn't earn the gift of salvation. He gives it to us according to his own grace and we receive it by faith.
Leighton did smoke this young man . With the truth .
Really, really like Joel. I do still believe he is missing the "we need Bible" portion. Calvinists, in my opinion, tend to read these "proof" texts for total inability as if they bolster the doctrine of total inability, but I am still waiting for the one that *establishes* it. You can read passages about slavery and deadness and enemies and sin until you are blue in the face, but unless you can find something relevant to the idea that we are born incapable of responding positively to God's gracious appeal to be reconciled, TI will remain a massive theological liberty that far too many have helped themselves to.
Ethan Strunk What about Romans 3, Ethan?
@Ethan Strunk The context of Romans 3 is not speaking about total inability at all, it's a collection of passages Paul uses when responding to his interlocutor about if the Jews are any better than the Gentiles. Paul uses these passages to back up his claim that no, the Jews are just as sinful as the gentiles. Psalm 14, which is where the "no one seeks after God" is taken from starts off by talking about "the fool saying in his heart "there is no God" and then later on it says that "the Lord is with the generation of the righteous". How can there be a righteous generation that the Lord says he will be with if earlier the passage says that no one seeks after God? Because David isn't talking about all of man kind, he's talking about the fools who say there is no God. None of these passages are talking about the ontological nature of all man kind. Lastly, if you're going to take the "no one seeks God" as 100% literal and ontologically true about all man kind, then you also must be willing to say that their throats are literally open graves, that they literally have poison under their lips, and that all of them are literally looking for bloodshed.
@@TKK0812 well said , also there are passages about men seeking truth .
@Ethan Strunk Roman's 3 says nothing about inability to come to CHRIST upon hearing the truth about CHRIST . The gospel
Read all of 1 Corinthians 2.
“But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.”
I Corinthians 2:10-11 NKJV
I love you brothers and your hearts toward all the different views that are held in the scriptures in the body of Christ.thank you for manifesting the Spirit of Christ to the rest of us even when it is not your personal view that is being shared. Anyway, the both of you have been such an encouragement to many of us. Blessings my brothers on you and your ministries from the church in Atlanta.
Amen. Totally agree.
Joel talks about proper hermeneutics and how we interpret scripture that's not so clear by that which is clear and then ironically doesn't mention Romans 6 which talks about us as Christians being dead to sin. If we were to interpret "dead" in scripture to me dead like Lazarus it wouldn't make any sense in the context of Romans 6. This is the constant inconsistency I see with every Calvinist I have ever read or heard speak.
Looking forward to the live debate! I highly respect a nice polite debate on the topic of Soteriology.
How does a Calvinist explain the parable of the sower?
Andrew Stone they don’t. Same with the OSAS perspective
I actually grew up in a Reformed Baptist Church, and the pastor preached through the parable of the sower. Just preached like a normal sermon on it, no Calvinism or anything. Some Calvinists hold to God's sovereignty and man's responsibility as being two sides of the same coin. Both are true, but it's a mystery as to how.
This was great. I loved the pushbacks here, it gets me to sharpen my articulation of the doctrines of grace. I do think however, Josh was having a hard time at distinguishing faith and what faith trusts in. He was describing the later as the gift but kept saying faith is a gift. Whereas the Calvanist sees the very TRUSTING in the later as a gift.
Elite CAOs UK: yes. Your not wrong. It’s our definitions that differ. I think, Faith and repentance are both fruit of grace. When grace is not resisted it produces faith and repentance. That’s a Lutheran articulation of soteriology that maintains faith as a monergistic work of God. It maintains that Faith is a gift of God while explaining how it can still be resisted. We did a follow up video where I tried to explain this better. It’s called “Regeneration and the Nature of Grace”
Elite CAOs UK: yes. Your not wrong. It’s our definitions that differ. I think, Faith and repentance are both fruit of grace. When grace is not resisted it produces faith and repentance. That’s a Lutheran articulation of soteriology that maintains faith as a monergistic work of God. It maintains that Faith is a gift of God while explaining how it can still be resisted. We did a follow up video where I tried to explain this better. It’s called “Regeneration and the Nature of Grace”
Would you be a five pointer? Just curious.
The Remnant Radio interesting. So are you both Lutheran?
“For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,”
Philippians 1:29 NKJV
I'm only 50 min in the video... but my biggest rub with Calvinism is the is this belief that a portion of people are destine to not be called, (or are unable to respond to the call because they are destined not to) by God and therefore condemned no matter what. a belief that flies in the face of 1 Timothy 2:4 which says God wants all to be saved. maybe you cover this. if so can some one point me to that section of the video?
2 Corinthians 7:10
Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death.
A person's repentance is necessary for regeneration
(2 Timothy 2:24 NASB) The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged,
(2 Timothy 2:25 NASB) with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps *God may grant them repentance*
leading to the knowledge of the truth,
@@greatanswers410
God uses" our" repentance as a guide to judge our faith and belief
REPENTANCE
the action of repenting; sincere regret or remorse.
"each person who turns to God in genuine repentance and faith will be saved
John 3:5
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of """water """and the Spirit.
The water is represented of a true repentance with great sorrow and great remorse creating ""tears ""of LIVING WATER
Revelation 7:17
For the Lamb at the center of the throne
will be their shepherd;
‘he will lead them to springs of LIVING WATER.’
‘And God will wipe away every TEAR from their eyes.’
The shortest verse in The Bible is ""Jesus WEPT""
2 Timothy 2:25
The key word ......"IF"
If god approves our Faith he will grant or repentance to salvation
A person can’t repent if he has not first been regenerated!
Great discussion! I really appreciate your approach to this debate - it produces a lot more light than heat.
Great content, but you guys need a sound guy.
Jebadebbis yeah. We are trying to normalize that. It’s been the most difficult thing since we have started.
Finishing this up now and just wanted to take a final moment to say that I think Joel did an OUTSTANDING job of REALLY driving home the distinction the Calvinist's Compatibility Freedom and others Libertarian Freedom. I think he made it as clear as clear can be and as understandable as can be.
I was initially tempted to ask then why Joel holds to such an impotent god who is unable and incapable of being heard and seen by the "spiritually-dead" according to the Compatibilist but I immediately realized the answer is either their Irresistible Grace or Regeneration before Faith. Of the two the former is the only logical one. So I think Joel in doing the outstanding job he did also falsified his own argument from a Scriptural POV.
However, either way they both leave the Calvinists with an indisputable and irrefutable fact. Their theology makes God one who willingly put a plan together and will cause it to be flawlessly completed that would see 97-98% (in my estimation based on what I've seen but the VAST majority nonetheless) of all Mankind being put on the WIDE & Easy road to perdition to which the end thereof is eternal torment of the lake of fire.
That may be Reformed but it simply does NOT represent the God that I see in Scripture nor The One that I know not only commanded me to believe, confess, and repent but that continues to command me to do so to this very day AND forgives me when I do. Sometimes even spanking me to teach me that He means business and that it's for my own good to do so because He loves me.
Exactly 💯!!! Calvinism corruptly portrays GOD and HIS righteousness and accuses CHRIST of hypocrisy.
Live debate-so cool!
GREAT question at the 14min mark! Joel gives a GREAT answer in that how one exegetes a text goes back to Hermeneutics. At first I thought he was contradicting himself because he brought in Luther's writings but then he did bring out from that a Hermeneutic 101 principle. Interpret the unclear thru the clear. TOTALLY agree.
That said, I am bewildered then by why he would see the Lazarus story being more clear than the Prodigal Son parable when he previously admitted that the Lazarus story was NOT a Soteriological passage but the Prodigal Son one is.
Also, I find it a bit odd that Joel then goes to Eph. 2:1-3. While it certainly is one of, if not the, best passages on the spiritual deadness of man there's just nothing in the passage that we can extract the meaning of dead from except for the FACT that these DEAD people are out walking about all around us! SO, again, which one of the two passages better describes "dead" there? Lazarus who was NOT out walking about or the prodigal son who was?
And here's a tidbit that might be of extreme importance. Did Joel, Leighton, or anyone else even bother to look at the Greek words used for "dead" in the three passages? How significant is it that the "dead" in Luke 15 with the prodigal son and those "dead" in Eph. 2:1-3 have the SAME Greek word used whereas the "dead" in Jn. 11:14? I'm not enough of a Greek scholar to know. From what I can find they are different words but both can mean either literal or figurative death. So is this just because there are different authors involved? With Luke & Paul using "nekros" (G3498) and John using "apothnēskō" (G599) Each is used over 100x so it would take some time to look at all the uses but perhaps something notable could be derived from that.
Notwithstanding, I'd say just a common sense reading of the three passages leaves on with the understanding that the prodigal son passage equates more directly to Eph. 2:1-3 than Lazarus does. I'd say the problem with Joel's reading and understanding of the Scripture goes back to just what he said with his being of and holding to the Reformed TRADITION!! How about Sola Scriptura, Joel?
I would love if you guys invite a arminian scholar or pastor to the show to talk soteriology.
Alejandro Alvarez any suggestions?
You mean a true Arminian like Roger Olson? One who believes in prevenient grace / partial pre-faith regeneration?
The Remnant Radio David Allen
@@TheRemnantRadio Ben Werthington III
I constantly see this same mistake all the time from "reformers' and Calvinists, and that is conflating works with faith or the mere choice to accept what God has to offer as works. It's so ironic given the fact that Paul clearly CONTRASTS works and faith. The only way anyone would come away with such an unbiblical understanding of what "works" is meant by Paul would be to come to scripture with a presupposition that was preloaded into your mind from a Calvinist.
@Ethan Strunk All due respect, you can't isolate verses of scripture and make it say more than it actually says. The cults do that all the time. Besides you have a glaring problem with your conclusion about that verse of scripture... You totally ignore the last part of Chapter 9, verses 30 through 32 where Paul, ONCE AGAIN, clearly shows the antithesis of "works" is "faith". Ironically, you also ignore the other parts of Romans where Paul CONTRASTS "works" with "faith". It's demonstrably clear that "Works" and "Faith" are not the same.
@Ethan Strunk So, you accuse me of disrespecting you all because I criticized your comments? Dude, you are way too sensitive. If you don't like push back then I suggest staying off of public forums like this.
By the way, you haven't given a cogent response to what I just laid out for you. Paul's speaking of "will" in the context he says it doesn't at all negate what I previously laid out for you. You want to continue to make it say MORE than it does.
I think the words of Jesus are the lynchpin for my theology. You can’t get around the words, “you do not hear because you are not my sheep.” “No one can come to me unless it is granted to them by the Father.” “Of all the Father gives me I will lose none.” I get where you’re coming from because I used to despise this doctrine. I was once offended by God’s sovereignty just like you
@@quinnpeterson2716 Actually, you can't get around the CONTEXT of those words. The first two lines you quote don't in anyway refute anything I said and is no reason to believe in the Calvinist view of salvation. As for the the last line you quote I believe you are quoting John and in context is not saying what you think it is saying.
Lastly, I don't have a problem at all with God's sovereignty. For you too assume what I believe about sovereignty reveals your bias on the subject. In fact no non-calvinist has a problem with Go'ds sovereignty. That's the typical strawman nonsnese you Calvinists like to spew.
“For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,”
Philippians 1:29 NKJV
“And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.”
II Timothy 2:24-26 NKJV
“Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.”
Acts 16:14 NKJV
Wasnt there meant to be a debate? Or am I mistaken
Where is the accent from?
Based on what Joel said around 1:32:00, I wonder if he would say the Cornelius was pleasing to God? :)
Joel misinterprets the verse that uses the word "appointed" it's not at all what he "presupposes" it to be. He misunderstands the context of how that word is being used.
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
Thanks to the Lord and to men like Dr Flowers, I can see so clear now that no calvinist theologian would fool me. I'd confess that they put doubts in my mind about if one can respond to God's appeal thru the message of the gospel or if God has to make me believe irresistibly.
Anybody has the capacity to believe or to reject the gospel, and that's why God makes unbelievers responsible for their unbelieve.
For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
1 Corinthians:1:21
“For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,”
Philippians 1:29 NKJV
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
“He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”
Matthew 16:15-17 NKJV
Was Jesus born totally depraved? What must I do to be saved? He reads Eph 2:8,9 and cannot see what it clearly says. I didn't see regeneration before salvation. For God so loved the _______? World or elect? Election is service not salvation.
This is a totally unrelated comment to this video, but I really want them to get John Walton on here, and also have a debate with Hugh Ross and Ken Ham on YEC/OEC
Yep!!!
It seems to me that so many Calvinists like Joel have been in their own echo chambers for far too long and need to carefully read and listen to the best of Non-Calvinists.
any suggestions? I have skimmed Dr. David Allen's book on the atonement and found that he was dealing with the text in a very atomized fashion. It was difficult to construct more than a page or so worth of material on Romans eight, even by going to the scripture index and looking at all the places the important texts occur. I also had to read a book called "Whosoever will" for school against the 5 points, my primary problem with that book is that each article was against a single point, and each by a different author. But reformed theology does not teach the 5 points as 5 individual tennants, but rather, as one unified system of thought. Almost every article misunderstood how one of the other 4 points affected the teaching of the point they were responding to.
@@landonsmith348 Are you a Calvinist?
Or if they just read the text of scripture and let it speak, they will remain Calvinists..
We [as Reformed] try to listen and read Non-Calvinists all the time.
What we don't often see, however, is synergistic groups actually dealing with the arguments we have made. Synergists often cannot stick to a topic without running off to some other topic when they feel trapped by the biblical truths the Reformed are promulgating.
It's frustrating, but it happens all the time; especially with folks like Leighton Flowers. He ducks the real issues. He won't actually tell his listeners what he is really saying...with clarity.
Leighton Flowers has nonsensical definitions from which part of his arguments come; and, unfortunately, many are following his ambiguity and nonsense.
Eg. Leighton Flowers gave a definition of "choice" from Merriam-Websters Dictionary (not the best source on the subject, by the way) at the "Free Will" debate:
Choice ---" the act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities".
Then, Leighton declared, as if victory were somehow his, "THAT'S FREE WILL!".
Um, no. Most synergists would define human free will as: the power of contrary choice, or, the equal ability to choose between two or more incompatible options under the same circumstances.
Leighton made choice and free will SYNONYMOUS TERMS! He conflated the two terms.
Not only this, but if choice and free will are synonyms (which Leighton affirmed, though I doubt he even knew that he did so), then he CANNOT use the words 'choice' or 'choose' in the definition of 'free will'; otherwise, he would be giving NOT a definition, but a Tautology (using different words to say the same thing), and this is circular reasoning (logical fallacy).
Leighton doesn't know the meaning of the words he uses; most importantly, he doesn't know the correct meaning of the words/concept of:
"choice," "human free will," and "responsibility".
Leighton absolutely biffs it on the definition of "responsibility" all the time. His "definition" is nothing of the kind...it's nonsensical.
So, yes, we read and study what our opponents are saying; we Calvinists are interested in God's truth; if we are following errors, we want to be corrected. But when we hear nonsense (like that of Leighton Flowers, for example) we cannot abide in that.
Hope this helps.
Questions?
Let me know.
*Soli Deo Gloria*
@@discjockeydoll9643 Not without their presuppositions.
Calvinist....always want to refer to reformers or other works and not the bible. The Calvinist can say John 6 all day, but if you show him John 12 where Jesus says 'if I be lifted up I will draw all men to me" they simply argue what the word all means. Calvinism is a heresy clear and simple we should all fight against a lie that has hurt so many.
Well said . We can't stay silent . Error and false teachings of Calvinist MUST BE EXPOSED
They asked if there is a verse that explicitly says that we are incapable of responding to God’s general calling. Jesus literally says, “you do not hear because you are not of my sheep.” He didn’t say you aren’t my sheep because you aren’t responding properly.
I'm really surprised of Leighton Flowers ignorance on the "Redemptive History" view on Ephesians 2 and other passages about "being dead in your sins" ..I would have thought any theologian would have been familiar with Biblical theology of Paul... I think a pastor in a church might be excused.
My point is that the debate over "dead" being metaphor is completely moot. The redemptive history interpretation just says "we were made alive with Christ" as in 2000 years ago...so when he died we died.when he rose we rose.
The Calvinist debate then is centred upon limited atonement...as in were all people made alive with Christ or were just the "elect" .. the debate isn't about the meaning of dead.
Leighton Flowers defends his position better if he was more informed. I hope he see this comment
@The Insufferable Tool ua-cam.com/video/JR5PJ-8Lri0/v-deo.html
From this show you 'll see from an Wesleyan Arminian perspective total depravity isn't the issue. It's irresistible grace.
Leighton Flowers view is inconsistent because he believes in eternal security... which if grace is resistible it's always possible to fall away. Scripture that promise eternal security are that, ""promises" that need to be believed .. they aren't automatic
If dead means completely unable to respond to the thing your dead to. Then why can we respond to sin as christians? we are told to consider ourselves dead to sin so that means we should never be able to sin, but we know even tho we are dead to sin it's still totally possible to sin. So like wise it seems that even tho sinners are dead to God it's possible they can respond to God.
Read all of 1 Corinthians 2.
“But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.”
I Corinthians 2:10-12 NKJV
“Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.”
John 10:25-27 NKJV
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
John 7:37-38 (KJV)
37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
It seems to me that word has gone out into the earth.
What about Cornelius? "At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, 2 a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. 3 About the ninth hour of the day[a] he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God come in and say to him, “Cornelius.” 4 And he stared at him in terror and said, “What is it, Lord?” And he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. 5 And now send men to Joppa and bring one Simon who is called Peter. 6 He is lodging with one Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea.” 7 When the angel who spoke to him had departed, he called two of his servants and a devout soldier from among those who attended him, 8 and having related everything to them, he sent them to Joppa."
Right… Must’ve been a work of God.
@@ryandawson2877 not sure what you are saying in response to my comment. It's been a while so I can't quite remember what I was reacting to... lol
William Phelps it happens. I don’t remember either. LOL great awesome discussions though.
Why isn't it simply that regeneration comes after faith, and faith comes after revelation? That would leave the whole chain of causes dependent on God, and yet make more sense of the grace coming subsequent to faith. Revelation would be more of the drawing in John 6, which in the passage corresponds to, "they will be taught by God." Since being taught seems to me closer to revelation than to regeneration, then I think the drawing would also be revelation, not regeneration. This would still be consistent with the view that those who God draws will come, and those who he doesn't draw will not come.
which comes first the chicken or the egg? Have faith in Jesus Christ! He shed his blood for our sin, was raised to life by glory to God! And sits on the right hand of the Father
Using the Lazerus story like the Calvinist do makes no sense to me. It had nothing to do with Lazerus. Rather it was a display of what Christ could do and who Christ is. Lazerus was just fine being physically dead because he already had a spiritual connection with God. In fact being brought back from the dead merely brought him back to a physical body of death and he would have to ex perience physical death all over again at some future point in time. Wish we could all just stop reading stuff into passages that simply aren't there.
Amen. Praise God.
@Chad Andersoh once we're dead it is deterministic as to where we end up, but the choices we make matter. We aren't robots. A relationship takes more than one person, even with God.
@Chad Andersoh One major part we play is to believe. But I don't see God's part as casual unless you consider becoming flesh to suffer, die and be rejected casual. Always remember God does have skin in the game.
@Chad Andersoh I think some (like John the Baptist and the Apostle Paul) have bigger positions to fill, but ultimately not for their own self glorification. Rather as a service for all of us who will believe unto salvation.
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
“Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.”
John 10:25-27 NKJV
“But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.” But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.”
I Corinthians 2:9-11 NKJV
Awesome stuff.
Read the book "The Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism" by Ken Wilson, if you want to understand why Augustine invented the doctrine to explain infant baptism. Since the child had not come to faith, it must be based on the will of another. It could have nothing to do with the will of the child.
If you will read the following text from Acts chapter 2, you will find out Peter was not acting as a "Calvinist" on the Day of Pentecost. When the crowd asked him what they should do, Peter told them to do something. He told them to "repent".
Peter did not say to them... "You are dead in your sin, and therefore not capable of doing anything."
On that day one of the greatest altar calls in history occurred when about 3,000 Israelites repented and accepted the New Covenant of Christ.
Pastor Charles Spurgeon spoke of the "Oft-Repeated Invitation" in sermon number 2685.
Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Act 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
.
Augustine did not invent calvinism. It's what scripture clearly teaches. Go read John 6.
“For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,”
Philippians 1:29 NKJV
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
@@AllforOne_OneforAll1689 You are completely ignoring why Augustine came up with the idea. Augustine was trying to get infants into an Old Covenant relationship with God, based on water baptism. He believed the children of Christians were automatically the elect.
A person must be baptized to be saved, but it has nothing to do with water. The proof is found below.
Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit)
Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then received the Holy Spirit from heaven. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church?
The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again)
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
(A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.)
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment)
============
Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says?
What did Peter say below?
Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text.
Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage?
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13)
“baptize” KJV
Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.)
Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5)
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant)
How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist?
Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ?
Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant
(CSB) They are physical regulations and only deal with food, drink, and various washings imposed until the time of the new order.
(ESV) but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(ESV+) but deal only with R5food and drink and R6various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(Geneva) Which only stood in meates and drinkes, and diuers washings, and carnal rites, which were inioyned, vntill the time of reformation.
(GW) These gifts and sacrifices were meant to be food, drink, and items used in various purification ceremonies. These ceremonies were required for the body until God would establish a new way of doing things.
(KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
(KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357
(NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
(NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established.
(YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them .
1:11:10 So How is "turning" with faith and repentance not a work??? Contradiction ??? This is not coherent. I'm confused with this explanation and how it squares with everything else that is said...
What is your definition of "work"? Let's start there.
I agree, I would like to hear (from both sides) a working definition of Paul’s understanding and use of the term “works.” It seems people talk past each other too often on this point. General question, what does Paul mean by “works?”
@@gk.4102 I was merely pointing to the fact that he emphasized that being dead means there is no ability to participate, and then says you have to turn. The real issue I think is the differences in Ordo salutis. And ultimately whether strict deterministic philosophy is driving the systematic.
William Phelps that’s a good observation. I hear the contradiction, too. It sure seems that the systematic is driving the conclusions in his worldview.
I’m excited to hear Flower’s dialogue with this guy.
How convenient That when reading John 6 he skips over Verse 40..... Which is the clarifying scripture in the passage. It expresses exactly the Father's "Will". " For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” and once again in response to the Jews who didn't believe Jesus was the son of God, They claimed Joseph was his true father, "47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Gospel being preached is Jesus revealed so you can "look upon Him" Now you have to believe or not, exercise faith or not.
Another great episode. God Bless you guy.
WE have a hope in Jesus if it was up to us that hope would be in us. the power is the Lord's not ours, Jesus is the saver we can not save .
God did the work when the Word became flesh and shed His blood to establish the new covenant.
HeavenGuy agreed.
Let Joel talk!😃
Dr. Flowers did his response on his personal UA-cam channel, I don't think it's appropriate for Webbon to make a ¨response to a response¨ on someone else´s channel.
I´m looking foward for the debate though.
Juan Luis Montejo Gómez: why is it not appropriate? I guess I don’t understand
Leighton and Joel both agreed that this was fine. There was nothing underhanded 🙂
@@VeryBasicBible You´re right. So far it´s been a cordial conversation, I just don´t want another ¨James White vs Dr Flowers¨ type of drama brought into this channel
@@TheRemnantRadio I mean, the video was fine, it wasn´t innapropriate. I just don´t want another ¨James White vs Dr Flowers¨ type of conflict brought into your channel guys. BTW I´m a big fan of your channel
Making a "choice" of responding to the gospel by exercising Faith is NOT a "work"!!! Faith is (always) opposed to works in biblical usage.
Then it's not of grace under that understanding.
Why filter a first century text through a sixteenth century bible teacher?
The prodigal son was lost and dead, right?
Was it because the father kicked him out or was it because the son despised his inheritance?
If he was kicked out then that would help the Calvinist but since it is the latter it is a liberitarian causaition.
How was it that the prodigal son's father put it in the son to come back to him, Calvin?
Or was it that the prodigal son was HUMBLED that he saw he sinned against his father and sought mercy and to be reconciled back to him?
I personally believe that God humbles a man before he is able to HEAR the Gospel and believe and when He believes, this is when God shares His Spirit enabling him to live by faith.
If my people, who are called by my name will humble themselves.
I will humble them that are exalted and exalt them that are humbled.
When Calvinists asks, "why did one person make a decision to accept Christ and someone else didn't?", do they assume all humans are homogeneous and should make the same decisions under the same circumstances? I mean, why do you not use heavy drugs like meth, cocaine etc and someone else does? According to Calvinists, it would have to be due to the decree of God, I guess. But, I just think we make decisions. Because we don't fully understand the complete process of the human mind doesn't mean it isn't at work.
Also, I don't understand why Calvinists like to drum up the boast worthy charge, when in their view God selected you and not the other person. Wouldn't that be a reason to boast? God loves me salvifically and not you. Calvinists believe they are chosen unconditionally of anything about them, but they surely do not believe God doesn't have a reason to select them. So God selected you for reason(s) only He knows and rejected the other person. Wouldn't that be boast worthy?
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 3:27
Verse Concepts
Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith.
If salvation does not humble the man, then is God seen as Holy Holy Holy? Don’t get caught up in Calvin or Arminian. Read the scripture and ask yourself what if it’s the sinners decision to spark faith, then the sinner can do good and would have a reason to boast. If God gives the spark then there is nothing to boast in our salvation. A main question is does the scripture say you can lose your salvation? If God gives salvation then it’s permanent. If our decision granted us salvation then we can change our minds and lose it.
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
Calvinists believe you have the ability to make choices. You just won’t make the choice to follow God.
Dr Flowers' just having a hard time rescuing God's morality and fairness. He focused on the Lazarus narrative and insists that Calvinists use that for total depravity. It's just an illustration, Dr Flowers. He also forgot the Ephesians 2 passage, which clearly says that we are dead in our sin.
One thing I notice is that Joel does is tend to talk very quickly so it’s harder to take in what he is saying while Leighton talks at a normal speed so it’s easier to understand what he is saying.So Joel is more talking at people while Leighton is talking to people.
I think a key passage to illustrate the coming to life act by God that then allows belief in Acts 2:37-38. Spiritually dead audience 3000 were cut to the heart and asked "What shall we do to be saved," Those people are the 3K who received Peter's preaching. Also, I do not understand why Jn 3:3-8 solves this perspective. The Holy Spirit makes someone born again. When asked "How can this be?" Jesus said that the Holy Spirit is like the wind - it comes and goes and you have no idea how. Jesus could have said, well the smarter ones, will get it and believe, but he didn't, The Spirit is the cause and life is the effect.
Amen...
Joel has an affect to his voice that sounds like he is constantly out of breath. That, or he’s is trying to imitate John Piper.
A person who comes to the conclusion that love is the purpose of life and at the same time realizes that without God enduing love with a unique, eternal, unchanging and absolute nature, rendering love an illusion and life purposeless in a universe where we live 80 to 100 years, die and go to oblivion, who actively visits churches, religious organizations and inquires what is the evidence or proof of God’s existence would take issue at the idea that no one can actively seek God because it’s only true for people who haven’t quested after the existence of God.
We have inherited fallen nature from Adam and Eve’s motives and process that led to man being manipulated by Satan and evil angels and evil people’s influence who have transmigrated into the spirit world that cooperates with our corporeal universe. However we still retain a conscience, though not able to rise above the level at which Adam fell (involving the fulfillment of the Parents Right and Lord’s/king’s Right). This is why Jesus was the second Adam in the sense that he was born through a process in which God could separate Jesus from the lineal consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin and Jesus could have the same status as Adam in the sense that he was not born from parents or antecedents with a record of sin, exposing them (Adam and Jesus) to satanic accusation because of the fallen nature received through immature parents who engaged in a relationship with an errant angel and he could elevate us over the circumstances leading to Adam and Eve’s mortification through indescribable grace.
Our fallen natures can be listed as:
1. Failure to take God’s viewpoint
2. Leaving proper position
3. Reversing dominion
4. Multiplying evil.
These fallen natures result in the sins of
1. Falsehood, disbelief and rebellion
2. Adultery
3. Murder
4. Theft.
Respectively
Not being created as robots, we obviously have a part of our original nature intact though it is often squashed by our satanic culture, just as the genius of children is often crushed instead of being given the proper technical training for them to shine.
God doesn’t ask people to do things that are impossible. This is why when He spoke to the prophets about the promise of finding Him when we employ our whole heart He wasn’t lying. Furthermore if the prophet admonished us to improve our conduct, this reasonable request implies this instruction is in the realm of possibility.
terrible.... God raises an unbelieving sinner to eternal life to make them believe? No.
This is how silly calvinism is. He quotes every single verse about an unbeliever being dead but then contends that God makes an unbeliever alive so that they can believe. That is exactly backwards from the Gospel. We are raised to life BY OUR FAITH. Colossians 2:12
This man is the one that said JESUS is not much help . He was talking about proving calvinism is true . Of course CHRIST is no help at all proving a lie because HE does not lie .
“Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,”
II Timothy 1:8-9 NKJV
@Allforone_Oneforall30
Well he was obviously ashamed of it wasn't he .
@@cecilspurlockjr.9421 Study that passage and accept for what it plainly says.
@Allforone_Oneforall30 I have but I believe youve obviously made it mean what you want it to believe by your response .
@@cecilspurlockjr.9421 I have accepted the passage for what it says and I hope you do the same.
This gentleman used some very basic calvanist arguments .
When do we hear the text which relays to us that we are regenerated first and then faith comes? Seems to me God speaks, which is God's provided means for faith, faith comes by hearing and hearing comes by the word of Christ Jesus. So we believe in God and his word and then we receive. Right at 41:15-41:27 he says twice upon hearing the gospel and believing, which is confusioning from his position. From his position the person has to be made alive first to even hear the gospel and to respond in faith, were as it seems we hear, faith is the act of the hearer believing seen in the response to the word. Why is Joel aware of the question and not giving scripture to answer? Following a traditional reading of any scripture like the one spoken of out of Acts with the gentile receiving eternal life and believing, still doesn't answer the question.
Ye must be born again to see the kingdom of God
People aren't born naturally with a living faith... We're born dead in sins and trespasses.......... Faith and repentance are deposited within the new heart, which comes first.... 1Cor2:14 says that the natural man "cannot" understand the things of God.......... If a natural man "cannot" understand the things of God then in order for a person to understand they have to first cease being merely a natural man... They need to become a spiritual man and that only comes through the new birth.........
Would be better to have a pastor with more of an educated outlook and depth of personal experience as a pastor answer this. Joel needs more years under his belt to better articulate the doctrine of depravity or total inability.
Would Josh be an Armenian? Traditionalist? Where would you be?
We either receive mercy, justice, or non-justice.
Mark 2:1-12
God is merciful. God does not have to be merciful and forgive if a debt is paid.
Penal Substitution is the very foundation of the Reformation belief in having our sins imputed to innocent sinless Christ and Christ's righteousness imputed to sinful us.
This is unjust because,
"Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent- the Lord detests them both!"
Proverbs. 17:15
Jesus is truly God and truly man, but ONLY ONE PERSON!
No Bible verse says GOD, the First Person of the Trinity pours out His wrath, damns, cuts off, and CURSES GOD His Son, and imputes or transfers our sins to The Second Person of the Trinity while on the cross making Jesus a sinner to pay a debt.
This separates the Persons of Eternal Trinity and so tears apart the very being of God into tri-theism.
Ontologically
"God is love!" 1 John 4:8
"No one speaking by the Spirit of God can say, "Jesus is accursed!"
1 Corinthians 12:3
Jesus says,
"I am in the Father and the Father is in me!"
John 14:11
The Eastern Orthodox belief for 2000 years,
God willingly (John 10:17-18) and in love (1 John 4:8) became a man in the person of Jesus Christ, lived a sinless life, fulfilled the law, and died on our behalf on a cross to go into Hades to set the captives free (1 Peter 3:18-20), and rose bodily from the grave
(1 Corinthians 15:17) thereby defeating and conquering death, sin, and the devil. (Hebrews 2:14-15; 1 John 3:8)
"Since the children have flesh and blood, Jesus too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death-that is, the devil- and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death!"
Hebrews 2:14-15
"You murdered Jesus the Creator of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. . . . But this is how God fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets, saying that his Messiah would suffer.
REPENT, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord!"
Acts 3:15, 18-19
"Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will GRANT them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will!"
2 Timothy 2:25-26
When we REPENT,
by turning from sin and receiving Jesus Christ, we are forgiven and cleansed of sin and are credited as righteous because we are made righteous by being in union with Christ and receive the Holy Spirit!
(Romans 4:5, 7; Galatians 2:20)
An alien mere legal declaration of righteousness by imputation without transformation is a legal fiction.
If Jesus was made a sinner to pay a debt then Jesus should be in hell!
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness!"
1 John 1:9
So we are made righteous!
If a debt is paid, there is no need for forgiveness!
"God was IN Christ reconciling the world to himself!"
2 Corinthians 5:19
God was not pouring out wrath on His Son!
JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN!
JESUS CHRIST CONQUERS!
IC XC NIKA
Reading Dr. Flower's website, the thing that strikes me is that he comes to every argument with the PRESUPPOSITION of "God wouldn't be like that". So you can hand-waive every verse that seems to argue against your position, but it's all done not based on the narrative and tota scriptura of scripture, it's done based on the presupposition that he has built for himself and is now forcing onto every one of these verses.
The face value reading of "No one comes to God" is exactly what it says, and the context of tota scriptura does a beautiful job of supporting that. It's his presupposition that causes him to inject into the scripture the narrative of "No one comes to God, but--"
Like Joel said, he may not be a fantastic debater, (although he's better than me) he has the enormous advantage of having the correct position, and he doesn't have to do the extra work that is crafting his own narrative to impose on the scripture, and can instead just read it and put the puzzle pieces together.
That's not to say that the Calvinist position perfectly explains soteriology (yet), just that what we have so far does seem to be correct.
That's fine if you think that is Dr. Flower's presupposition, but you would still need to deal with the arguments he makes. "I think he has a wrong presup" is fine to point out but it's not dealing with what he has actually written.
Re: "No one comes to God", but you're simply wrong about Scripture supporting the Reformed position on his passage. Sot101 has copious amounts of literature and video on this subject...why don't you deal with a single thing he's said on the subject?
The Bible says, "No one CAN come to God..." You left out the key word "can"
@@gk.4102 Man, that sure is an important "...", I wonder what you left out there?
@@TheProvisionistPerspective No sure what you're getting at, but if you want the full verse, here it is, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."
@@gk.4102 Oh! So no one can come unless they're drawn, so there is a condition to being able to come, and then Jesus says "I will draw all people to myself".
Again no man can come says it all.
1:06:48 Calvinist logic:
Step 1. Conclude you're smarter than everyone who isn't a Christian.
Step 2. Try to figure out the reason (that you think sounds humble) that you're smarter than all the non Christians who have ever lived.
Step 3. Assume the reason that you're smarter is because God made you smarter, then claim that you can't help it if God made you smarter than all non Christians, it's just the way God wants it.
Step 4. Call all other Christians (who don't assume they're smarter than ever everyone) man-centered and self-righteous for not coming to your humble position of realization that God has made you smarter than all non Christians who have ever lived.
This is sad. It's like the homeless guy at the soup kitchen going through the line and saying wow look how smart I am. It's so cringey.
If Jesus didn't rise from the dead, then we're the fools. All our hopes are bound up in him. It's called trust/faith (like a child). And faith rules out boasting according to Paul.
Out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks.
Faith is a work?!? Wow.
Totally agree. Faith and works our contrasted and Ephesians 2. It makes no sense that he would say that. Obviously I’m talking about dead works but anyway… I love Calvinists, but it’s like some of them have to say that faith is a work to maintain their system.
“For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,”
Philippians 1:29 NKJV
This calvinist doctrine is so wrong of you guys. It's not calvinist who wrote the Bible its John Paul and others whom wrote the Bible and are teaching what calvinist and others see clearly without twisting what....no one can come or those who where appointed to salvation will be saved.
In the gospels no one was regenerated, no one was born of God, yet with those who believed in the Christ, the old woman and bleeding, the centurion, and others came to the Christ, because they believed in him, was there not a drawing to him simply by the nature of things,
if someone condemns you or someone loves you which one are you going to be drawn to the one who condemns you or the one who loves you, there is a natural drawing or a repelling of someone, depending on what they have suffered at the hands of another, yet regeneration is something completely different,
Paul is chosen by Christ, that is, Saul who became Paul, yet there were those who choose the Christ, at least wise 120 who is there at the end with the disciples, yet none of them were regenerated,
we are dead within ourselves because of the sinful nature, we are spiritually dead, we do not possess true life, but the one who is born of light, possess true life, you are baptised by water and you are baptized by the Holy Spirit, one is with you the other is within you.
“He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”
Matthew 16:15-17 NKJV
You can’t confuse healing with salvation. Jesus also told his disciples you have not chosen me but I have chosen you.
So God picks and chooses..... Saved, saved, saved, damned, damned, damned, saved, damned......... That just is not part of the narrative, ever. This got ugly really quickly. Does Joel realize that this is what he is expressing?
Sorry for treating the comments section like the live chat.... lol
William Phelps no need to apologize it was preordained your just carrying out Gods will with your comments.
No that’s not what Calvinist believe. We believe we were all damned to hell by our own choice but God intervened for those who are saved for His own glory.
@@williamwagoner7857 that's a difference without a distinction. Ultimately, in this system, God would be making seemingly arbitrary selections, some for salvation and others for damnation.
@@williamphelps4552 Everyone in the Bible who was saved, were saved because God chose them. God chose Abraham, God chose Jacob, God chose David. Jesus chose his disciples and Paul.
Already off to a bad start. What’s distinctive to Calvinism is not total depravity since Reformed Arminians and Lutherans believe in total depravity.
Exactly. What's distinctive is their view of election. Lutherans and Arminians have two different views of election, and among Arminians there's also technically like 2/3 (corporate, middle knowledge, individual)