Infant damnation is part and parcel of Augustine's INVENTED doctrine of Original Sin which is the basis of "Total Depravity." Augustine is the theological source from which Reformed Teaching arose. On what basis is one immature being who cannot understand salvation SAVED and another undeveloped being who does not have moral consciousness DAMNED? Zwingli was RIGHT about this while Calvin and Luther were abysmally WRONG.
Warren, I know you said you have thick skin, but I want to thank you for being willing to take the hits here. You are doing good work, and it is making a difference! This video is yet another great example! Thank you!
I thought they didnt identify with the term 'Calvinist' especially when I show them this quote by St. Jerome. "We ought to remain in that Church which was founded by the Apostles and continues to this day. If ever you hear of any that are called Christians taking their name not from the Lord Jesus Christ, but from some other, for instance, *Marcionites, Valentinians, Men of the mountain or the plain (or LUTHER-ANS, CALVIN-ISTS etc),* you may be sure that you have there not the Church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist. For the fact that they took their rise after the foundation of the Church is proof that they are those whose coming the Apostle foretold. And let them not flatter themselves if they think they have Scripture authority for their assertions, since the devil himself quoted Scripture, and the essence of the Scriptures is not the letter, but the meaning. Otherwise, if we follow the letter, we too can concoct a new dogma and assert that such persons as wear shoes and have two coats must not be received into the Church."
@@paulbeahm3891 Do you want to give the bad news to Jesus that He's wrong? 😂 Luke 12:51-53 King James Version Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you nay, but rather division
Christ Jesus said: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. For it is my Father's will that all who see his Son and believe in him should have eternal life. I will raise them up at the last day.
Maybe we can carry on this debate with Dr. White over at his channel. Oh wait, he turned off comments a couple years ago. Very telling about the assurance he has on any of his opinions.
@@kevinevans5921 His statement is disgusting and actually dehumanising . Of course he was simply repeating what other Calvinists had taught before him.
I am certainly not an admirer of MacArthur but in fairness to MacArthur at least MacArthur believes in the salvation of all infants and the mentally impaired .
Well done. Pray for James White to be honest with his followers, and for parents who have lost a young one, to know they are with the creator, not with Satan in hell.
The more "Calvinistic" a person is, the deeper darkness they proclaim. It appears that Dr. James White can not stand anyone questioning him, regardless of what he teaches. Every Bible teacher should be open to criticism because truth, not ego, is the purpose of teaching.
This is a good point, and something I’ve been struggling with a lot recently as I look at all the scholars and teachers on UA-cam who call each other heretics and leave me in an utter state of confusion and doubt regarding the what’s and why’s of my faith
@@majorcajun5524 C.S. Lewis wrote about a prominent professor in The Four Loves and talked about how the guy was really beloved by his students to the point that even after they graduated they would still come back to him and even visit his home to learn new things. He said then once a former student came to his house and DISAGREED with him on an issue that from that point on he would never be welcomed back. James White is like that.
The reason why james goes to infant baptism is because this is the exact context in which Augustine frames it. When speaking of predestination Augustine talks about two infants, one who happens to be baptized before death, and one who isn’t baptized and dies. Augustine used this framing to think about sovereignty. That god knew who would get to baptism before death and thus be saved .... and those who wouldn’t. This is why in the Middle Ages when it became obvious that the baby and mother would die in delivery, some mothers elected to have a baptismal c section done in order to baptize the baby to ensure they go to heaven ... James could at least provide the comfort of infant baptism as a way of knowing who is elect ... but he won’t because although Calvinist thought has some roots in Augustine but calvin out Augustined Augustine and the modern reformed theologians out-calvin, calvin.
Or that, despite desiring the effectual salvation of non-elect infants, He values His own glory more, so then He does not will their salvation. They often distinguish between _desires_ and _wills._
As the children's song is sung in church . . . "Jesus loves elected children All elected children of the world And to Hell he sends the rest No one loves them it's the best Jesus loves elected children of the world."
@IdolKiller true., not all... I just listen to James and the other few" big" guys, and they ooz narcissism. When I was a kid, John MacArthur kicked me out of his church. You know.. GRACE :-) In any case, I love your videos. Keep up the great work!
@@roddyk2655 The Calvinian god is not worthy of free-will worship, so their god must make a few people "saved" and force them to admire him as if he were worthy of worship.
@@roddyk2655exactly! Just the little Hitlers' planning to grow their little mustaches out. Don't you know they are planning cruelty on humanity as they are swimming in their mothers' amniotic fluid.
DW: Yes! When it comes to the components of divine evil which are actually the most critical components of the doctrine - Calvinist's go bonkers. The art of playing shell-games with words. And the art of semantic tap-dance routines is the only strategy they have. Telling the truth would be fatal - and they know it.
Consistent Calvinism believes in infant damnation. They were predestined to hell before they were born and it has nothing to do with what they do in life (good or bad). That’s why James White affirms it - BUT HERE’S THE KICKER: It shows that they believe ALL people who go to hell go there NOT because of any sins or anything they do in life. It’s all decided before anyone was born and before anyone did anything good or bad. In Calvinism, God is making beings just to send them to eternal torment/hell and it has nothing to do with anything they ever do in life, good or bad.
They seemingly haven't read Revelation 4, where it says that everything was created for his pleasure, nor Ezekiel chapters 18 and 33, which says, he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that they turn from their evil ways Imani live. Just those 2 verses alone, one should come away with the notion, that Gid did not choose a select few to go to heaven, and the rest to go to hell. Lets not forget to mentioned, Jesus said, everlasting fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, and Isaiah says, hell hath enlarged herself to accommodate men. Why does hell have to enlarge herself, if men were specifically made to go there? I ask them that question, and present these verses, and they will still argue for the system. Revelation 4:11 King James Version 11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Ezekiel 18:23 King James Version 23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? Ezekiel 33:11 King James Version 11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Matthew 25:41 King James Version 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: Isaiah 5:14 King James Version 14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
You have to ask Calvinists: If infants go to hell for Adam's sin, does that mean Adam's sin was not paid for? Since if it was paid, how is it possible for it to be paid again? A sin is paid for again and again? The blood of Christ erases sins "Partially"? Among other arguments that you can present to them. The level of inconsistency that Calvinists have breaks every logical matrix that there may be.
@@Ken-do4oy Oh really. What is this, that Jesus said. Matthew 25:41 King James Version 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
You have revealed the truth about JW, Warren. You have hit the target right in the center and are taking flack from those who are unwilling to look without bias. Hang tough; you are exposing rot and many will react to the smell without indignation. Narcissists cannot be wrong; they will not repent. God must humble them in His mercy and it is my experience that He does not do that very often.
I've seen God do exactly that and completely change narcissists into thoughtful, gentle, loving and humble people. I can know I'm not being deceived because I'm very closely related to them. It's truly miraculous.
@@chaddonal4331 Who knows? My experience is that He did not. Clay (comment below) has had experience that is different. We certainly should pray for God to bring JW to repentance since he has such a loyal following. How glorious would it be to God to see it!
The irony (which is not lost on him I'm sure) of James not wanting to debate this subject is that his comments about it being a terrible and vile thing to debate would only be true as presented by his side.
I can't believe what I just heard. Dr. White said, "we all need to learn to think presuppositionally." Every person who is attempting to exegete passages in Scripture has to work incredibly hard to not interpret the Scriptures without presuppositions because it leads to eisegesis....reading into the text something that isn't there. So now I know for a certainty that this is what Calvinists are actually doing and how they are taught. This leads to what I had previously believed that Calvinists begin their doctrine with the belief in philosophy....determinism. In their case, divine determinism and with that lens then interpret Scripture. It is a system of belief based upon philosophy. To discover whether or not you believe that a philosophy is true or not you have to push it out to it's most logical conclusions. When we do this we arrive at the place where we are as shown in this video. Well done my brother! As an added note, why are Calvinist presuppositions the correct presuppositions to have? Jehovah's Witnesses have their presuppositions, so why are they wrong? Oh, I know because the Calvinist has correct presuppositions. Also, Dr. White, as many Calvinists do, appeal to a creed as if that were biblical evidence in support of their beliefs. They run to a man-made creed rather than to Scripture. In the end of this video you played Dr. White and he defined perseverance of the saints that "God ensures his elect cannot reject him or fall away they will continue to believe in him to the end unless they're the VICTIMS OF EVANESCENT GRACE" (all caps for emphasis, not shouting) I thought there were no victims in Calvinism? Maybe I'm wrong. Why would God deliberately victimize people....make them victims? Why would God deliberately fool people to think they're saved? Calvinists do not have any security and I'd be wondering the whole of my life if God gave me the kind of grace that doesn't save me at all....that maybe a season of doubt or despair or incredible sorrow means that I'm not saved. What if Calvin actually was only given evanescent grace and then he interpreted the Scriptures? Would that mean that maybe he was wrong? How could one ever be sure?
My problem with the calvanist doctrine is that it makes Jesus out to be a liar or a deceiver. So when God says he died for the entire world and wants all to come to the knowledge of the truth. He doesn’t mean that, it’s only the elect really. So when the new believer reads that, they are like see Jesus wants the whole world to be saved but secretly he is being deceived by the word. How does it not register to calvanist they are making Jesus into something he is not. If Jesus is not the author of confusion then calvanist may want to rethink this.
To be fair, the scriptures refer both to Jesus dying for “many”, “his own”, etc, and for “all”, “the sick” (implying all). So, Calvinists lean on the verses that indicate that some or many are redeemed (atoned for). These are to them the elect. And verses that seemingly refer to “all” they see as all kinds; I.e. leaders and slaves, men and women, particularly Jews and Gentiles. So, some from all groups. I don’t think they are trying to misrepresent the Scriptures. They just see this to be consistent with verses that speak of God choosing people and of people being spiritually dead and there being none who seek after God on their own. So, they are honestly trying to put all the data together consistently. Leighton and Provisionists have a different way of putting the data together. As do Arminians, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and Eastern Orthodox. Seemingly 7 different ways of putting it all together. Not all views can be right. All could be still wrong. Each has proponents who love Jesus and seek to interpret the Scriptures faithfully. All our brothers in Christ if their faith is in Him. Let’s be charitable.
@@chaddonal4331 thank you for your perspective, I can see where you are coming from. But if we stick to 1 cor 4:6 and 2pe 1:20. Not going beyond what is written and stick to what the text says and do not try to incorporate preconceived assumptions and come up with a private interpretation. Then when we see God says that I desire all to be saved. And that God wishes for none to perish and for them to turn and live, that he means what the text says. Hopefully you can see what I mean as well.
@@interrupts165 Yes, I don’t think Calvinists can appropriately account for 1 Peter 2. Everyone has primary verses to shape their view, and then fit more difficult verses in around. Presuppositions and initial commitments make a big impact on what is considered basic and clear. Doing theology well is challenging!
@@chaddonal4331 right but Jesus dying for his own does not mean, if we are using good hermeneutics, that he ONLY died for his own. This is the point of reading in context. If I wrote in my diary that I “loved my family” that doesn’t mean I ONLY love my family. Paul said “Jesus loved me and gave his life for me” but that doesn’t mean Jesus ONLY loved Paul and ONLY gave His life for Paul. This is very simple to understand. But then the real confirmation is that Jesus died for the WHOLE WORLD. And his atonement was a propitiation not just for “our sins” but the sins of the WHOLE WORLD. There is no way this can be twisted to mean that most of the world is hopeless without any way of salvation. WHEN THE BIBLE ALSO SAYS the *GOSPEL* is to be gone out to the ends of the earth and proclaimed to every person.
Imo, one of the pros of #baalgate is that it is to a large scale publicly exposing to the light of Truth what has been long hidden in the dark dungeons of Calvinism's lies.
Do the members of Apologia Church know that their tithing money this month went towards getting James acting lessons for his appeal to emotion, narcissistic, victim reversal move.
James White and the other infant damnation believers should be shaking in their boots. The implications are utterly terrifying. Accepting that predestining infants to hell IS evil, is the utter destruction of at least 4 of the 5 pillars of TULIP (all except possibly I). Warren, dont stop, never stop. Praying for your good health and holiness.
Just imagining waving down with a smile on your face to your mother who is burning eternally in darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Thinking, “wow this is wonderful I’m so glad she is there”
I imagine that a baby is born and then dies at one month old from a heart defect. They're immediately standing before God in "judgment" and then spend eternity in hell. Yep, that'd be a "just" God. Calvinism is absolutely sickening.
Amen. Their far more recognized by the church to be brothers in Christ than Mormons, but are in reality WAY worse. I don’t think theirs a group of Christ followers that have a more abhorrent set of beliefs and doctrine than a Calvinist, it’s shocking how deceived people can be.
@@buddy_132woah let’s pause for a minute - Mormons dont even worship the triune God, don’t have the correct view on salvation, and have all sorts of heretical additions to the bible. James and Calvinists are wrong on this issue of course but let’s not forget what Mormonism is
you call it sickening, if it does happen that way then God would call it justice. As the potter has the right to make a vessel unto honor or dishonor. God said his way are not or ways and you make God into mans image by labeling your belief. Will there be babies in heaven or will they be adults? If the baby is an adult in heaven he would be singing Gods praises. It the baby goes to hell he would be an adult cursing God. To say that Calvinism is absolutely sickening shows you do not understand the teaching. I am not saying you have to agree with it, just understand what it teaches and don't put your definition on it. Just say you disagree. If we make the choice to choose Jesus, how does a baby make that choice? Or are they sin free and have a get out of jail card free. So thee are two ways to heaven...Just some thoughts....
@@greydogmusic So God can send the baby that died in the womb to hell even though the child never sinned? You said “if the baby goes to hell he would be an adult cursing God.” Though the child should never have been in hell to begin with since they have committed no sin; common sense tells us that is horribly unjust. Imagine if you turn out to be not of the elect, that in reality God from the beginning of time wanted you to burn in hell for nothing else but for his vain glory and no matter what you did this is your unchangeable fate, you wouldn’t see that as fair at all.
Was it “fair” to kick Adam out when it was his wife deceived? Was it fair to drown the world. Is it fair to choose Abraham only. You put a human judgement on Gods actions where Paul did tell us the potter can make a vessel to honor or dishonor. I don’t judge if Gid is “fair”. I read what He does. Was it “fair” to bypass the angels for salvation and impart it on humanity. If all babies go to heaven, and I hope they do, is it fair that I have to live long enough and just can’t fathom to choose God as my friends laugh at me. Or am I too stupid to make the choice. Or I want to do it tomorrow…. I’m gonna do it. When I’m ready and I die…. Is that fair. Fair is not a word for theological discussion as it is not a word Gid uses. We do. Grace. We should all go to hell if for nothing else because of Adam’s sin. That my friend is what would condemn a baby ….. if God does it that way. Where in scripture do you see all baby’s are saved. Were they all saved in the flood? All those around the world before Israel proclaimed the message of the true God. Babies don’t hear the message. If they all go to heaven, and I sincerely hope they do. They were elect. As I said, I can’t prove it through scripture. I just know I serve a saving God and if there are some babies who are not going to heaven, they will not be proclaiming, it wasn’t fair.
This whole issue of infant baptism goes back to Augustine himself…and his view of total depravity and determinism was fully rejected by the church during his time. It’s disgusting to believe that God chooses that even some babies will go to Hell. Unbelievable.
In as Christian a manner as I can muster, I honestly pray this beef continues. This is simply too good to stop. You may have stumbled upon the Calvin killer. You are quietly and calmly burning James white to the ground, leaving nothing but ashes. He has no where to run and hide and is lashing out like a cornered rat. His only responses are the logical fallacy of every defeated foe, the ad hominem. I do not know why any debate between a Calvinist and Provisionist should not begin with the provisionist asking the Calvinist, "Do you affirm Infant Damnation - The belief that some infants who die will suffer eternal damnation in hell?". If they say no, they are giving up calvinist predestination and if they say yes, the debate is over. No one in their right mind can go along with such a horrendous doctrine.
You know some christians will clutch there pearls and say" how can you say this we dont want any beef to continue christians need to stick together" but you are 100 percent correct qith this comment
Underrated comment. Debating Calvinists philosophically is the only way to go. You cannot debate these people scripturally because the Calvinsit is totally incapable of removing their Calvinsit lenses in order to see other interpretations of scripture, let alone entertaining the idea that those interpretations might possibly be true. They are as dogmatically hardened as any Pharisee. But nothing, and I mean nothing, gets their blood boiling more than having to defend positions like this. I only wish they didn't lack the self introspection to ask themsevels why that is.
@@TheAhull15This is very accurate. Their foundation is that God wills and predetermines EVERYTHING including all evil, sin, and deception. They can’t debate scripture without pretending like their own foundation is false. They have no way of discerning the difference between truth and deception. God decrees both……….
I'm sorry for the people that attack you. Calvinism is as sick as you portray it. You do it with satire,which drives the point home even more!!!!! I appreciate your videos. Thank you.
I appreciated him once. Then I read "Chosen By God." Then I watched his atonement theory videos. Then I listened to his other stuff. He's a waste of time to read and makes me sick.
I'm an ex-Reformed Baptist and I'm surprised James White did not just quote from his rule book, the 1689 Reformed Baptist Confession of Faith, "Chapter 10, entitled “Of Effectual Calling.” Matching the Westminster Confession of Faith almost verbatim, it reads, “Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.” So un-elect infants will go to hell according to their confession of faith. Please check this out!
🤣 That "Geneva Baby"! This is such a BAD look for Calvinists. If there's any Calvinist doctrine that you should NOT be trying to stand for, infant damnation is like....the last thing any Calvinist should defend, or even be cool with. And yet, we're seeing these guys planting their flags on that hill. 😅
They are fine with preaching that Jesus Christ only died for some people and that God predetermines all evil, sin, and deception. This is small potatoes for them……..
Ik that this is bold, but the god of Calvinism is not the God of the Bible. I’m a former Calvinist and I thank God above that He pulled me out of it. I’ve studied and studied and I can tell you that the god of Calvinism is a cosmological dictator who doesn’t love everyone.
I struggle with that idea, @@KJBChristian . There are times when it sure seems like Calvinists are worshipping a false deity -- especially when you look at how poorly the exegete. They're notorious for eisegeting their ideas, concepts, and philosophies into the biblical Text.
@@michaellawlor5625 BINGO!!!! Yes!! In Calvinism - the reason FALSE PERCEPTIONS of scripture come to pass within the Jehovah's Witness mind - or the Mormon's mind, or the Atheist's mind - is simply because those are the PERCEPTIONS established at the foundation of the world - by a decree which grants NO ALTERNATIVE from that which is decreed. But what is to prevent Calvin's god from decreeing FALSE PERCEPTIONS of scripture come to pass within the Calvinist mind? The typical Calvinist answer to that question is - he is ELECT and Calvin's god would not decree FALSE PERCEPTIONS to come to pass within the ELECT. But that answer utterly collapses because the Calvinist has no way of knowing if his PERCEPTION of ELECTION is not an infallibly decreed FALSE PERCEPTION. So under scrutiny it becomes obvious - Calvin's god is *NOT REALLY* the sovereign one The Calvinist is! :-]
Wow just wow, he questioned if you are born again or not, simply because you disagree with him on this subject, and challenged him to a debate for him to explain biblically why he thinks infants go to hell..😮 which he cannot do.
Honestly Warren, I don’t think that the mindset of Calvinists can be honestly compared the mindsets of pagans who commit child sacrifice ... the pagans gave their children in hopes of obtaining the favor of their gods ... Calvinists believe that God can not be pleased or influenced and that the damnation or salvation of your child is entirely out of their hands. However, the response to the challenge to debate the topic is amazing. The horrific implications of their theology is what they are horrified at.
@@Tilbillygirl who are you, oh woman, to talk back to God about the SWEATER. Does the Stylist not have the right to dress one lump for honor and another like a color blind grandmother? Will the theologian say, “why have you dressed me so?”
8:26 James White saying you should get born again? did James just admit we can choose to get saved? free will confirmed? this always bugs me how Calvinist say we have no free will or choice then turn right around and act like we do have free will and a choice in instances like this. everyone subconsciously knows and believes free will exist and any Calvinist in the comments that tries to convince me otherwise is also assuming i have free will that they are able to change my mind and believe what they are trying to tell me and are just hypocrites
How can James White attack anyone when according to his own doctrine, they are doing and believing what God has ordained them to do and believe? How can he suggest to someone that they need to get born again if they are incapable of doing so? So many inconsistencies. Seems to me he's actually attacking God.
If calvinists continue their current run of taking their beliefs to their ultimate congruent conclusions, expect calvinists to stop evangelizing and praying sometime soon.
Please pray for me everyone. When I hear White speak my soul is so distressed, my blood pressure elevates, seething anger fires up within me. And I intimate expression toward him that must be repented of…I think. Either that or this verse applies: Matt 23: 13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.
I used to watch the dividing line and wonder why they shut off the comments. Now I know lol, people like warren would’ve shredded his arguments ages ago.
@@chaddonal4331The basis that Jesus says so. You know that He’s kind of “sovereign” over who goes to heaven right? ”But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”“ Matthew 19:14
@@JohnK557 So, Jesus’ words to his disciples who were hindering young children from coming to Jesus (presuming that He was too busy and should spend His time with mature adults), Jesus said to not hinder them. And used them as a model for describing the kingdom of God (I.e. perhaps -we enter without sophistication, with childlike trust, and with the most simple faith). But by Jesus welcoming their bringing children to him, he isn’t necessarily saying anything about eternal destiny for all children, right? What are viable application points? - Parents, introduce your children to Jesus when they are young. Don’t wait. - Churches, invest in children’s ministry to root young kids in their faith - Sophisticated adults: quit making the gospel too complex. The pathway is simple enough to be entered by a trusting child. I’m sure there are more. But where is there any direct line from “do not hinder the little children from coming to me” to “all babies who die prematurely will go to heaven.” This is beautiful sentiment. But is it not mere speculation? Or who can draw a firm link?
JW: This is a pastoral issue, and not one for public debate/discourse, because the Bible is not exhaustive or definitive on the matter. JW: Those who disagree with me on this simply don't believe the Bible. He needs to decide which of these statements he wants to hold to.
Warren, I just want to say thank you. Thank you for taking this away from mere rhetoric and also addressing the pastoral element in all of this. And not doing it behind closed doors. As a father of a wonderful young boy, I still carry the hurt and pain over the two children my wife and I lost before they came to term... Your words provide some measure of comfort and healing. Please do not stop, not only standing up for God's character, but also, providing a voice of healing for those who may be watching your videos. God bless you and yours. Amen.
Calvinists are sometimes logically consistent. But about 96% of the time, they argue AS IF there was no "immutable decree", by simply ignoring it & blameshifting sin to man.
Giving up idols is not easy. I hope by not letting them grow in cognitive dissonance by not letting them pretend that calvinism does not require they believe in infant damnation, they will come to their senses and it will help them to want to repent of that which is keeping them in darkness.
@Loves2HugItOut -- Logic is a God- given tool designed to help sinners with a WILLINGNESS to do what is right, find their way back to God. "For I know that NOTHING GOOD dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the WILLING is present in me, but the working out of the good is not." Even having a WILL to do "what is right" is defined as "Nothing good". Unfortunately, some are hardened with their fallacious viewpoints & erroneous presuppositions, causing them tk REJECT such tools.
@@primeobjective5469 ya if someone is UNWILLING to be logical there is not a lot we can do. Similar to how those in the woke have abandoned logic so what can we possibly do to reason with them? I think giving up logic is something you have to willfully choose to do. Similar I think to Roman’s 1 where people willfully “did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” I honestly think that these Calvinists who have been confronted with the doctrine but WILL NOT accept that it is flawed “do not like to retain God in their knowledge” and are actively pushing the gospel away because for some reason they do not want to believe in such good news about a Savior for the whole world (???) Willful deception is powerful.
@Loves2HugItOut -- Calvinists have adopted the god of fate and assigned Christianity towards him. Fatalistic gods have been around for thousands of years. Fortune & Destiny were false gods of the Old Testament & God warned about worshipping them in Isaiah 65:11, "But you who forsake the LORD, who forget my holy mountain, who set a table for FORTUNE and fill cups of mixed wine for DESTINY, I will destine you to the sword, and all of you shall bow down to the slaughter, because, when I called, you did not answer; when I spoke, you did not listen, but you did what was evil in my eyes and CHOSE what I did not DELIGHT in.” Calvinists choose every day to deceive the hearts & minds of the naive with their rejection of the Word of God.
@@primeobjective5469 yes and I also think that many of these Calvinists think they are saved because they started “taking God seriously” so they equate that to being saved. But a lot of Jews “take God seriously” and a lot of Mormons “take God seriously” and Muslims who “take God seriously” but just because you take the Bible, a particular faith, or religion seriously does not mean you actually are following God. Even if you had some kind of “irresistible grace” feeling/experience at some time, that again doesn’t mean you are born again because almost every person (including unbelievers) have felt tangibly Gods grace and presence since God is drawing all people to Himself and revealing Himself to each person. I know I am preaching to the choir since your not a Calvinist but just wanted to share what I think is going on with some who are locked into this. The question is will you follow not just “have you experienced”. Calvinists think that ONLY “the elect” ever taste and see that the Lord is good. Scripture says otherwise and I know in my personal life I felt Gods drawing and nearness a handful of different times between the ages of 4 and 17 before I started following Him and was saved. Even one time at 11 years old I was so deeply and even fearfully convicted by Him (which makes sense bc scripture says the Holy Spirit is convicting the WHOLE WORLD of sin, righteousness, and the judgement) I do think there are some Calvinists who are saved and are super ignorant and inconsistent and even if they don’t repent right away, God is still walking them through and away from calvinism, but I really fear so many Calvinists just think they are saved because they take God “seriously” and like to talk theology and philosophize and read ABOUT God which is a sign they must be “one of the Elect” and so they are trusting they must be one of the ones Jesus died on the cross for since their feelings demonstrate “elect type behavior”.
The ones that do allow comments will usually block you if you challenge them. They will often lie and say you’re behaving badly when all you are doing is asking them about their own beliefs.
Along with the DARVO tactic, all we need to do when confronted by a malignant narcissist is to picture them looking in a mirror as they attack us because they are actually speaking about themselves. It's a valuable coping skill to apply so the narc doesn't get into our minds and cause damage. Let their words bounce off the mirror they are looking at💌
Good point. I always remind myself that their foundational belief is that God willed and predetermined everything including what they attack. When they attack something or pretend like something shouldn’t be the way it is they are actually refuting their own position. All you ever have to do is state their own claims back at them and watch them tear them down.
Warren, I think this reaction by Calvinists shows that they are indeed ideologically possessed by Calvinism/Augustinianism (as Kevin Thompson at BTF describes them). Criticizing the ideology means criticizing their very identity
Absolutely... the thing is to protect the "ism" AT ALL COST... truth doesn't matter, logic doesn't matter, nothing matter but 'protect the Calvinism' it matter how much much they have lie, ad hoc rationalize on the spot or how much those ad hoc rationalizations contradict themselves, other Calvinists or John Calvin himself, they obfuscate and lie some more cover-up and logic, sense and Truth be damned...
The only logical stance a Calvinist can take is that only infants who are elect are saved. Did God elect all infants? Who knows? According to Calvinism, God elects before born and it is not based on any human quality or future action. The same would hold true of infants.
I'm a Reformed Baptist, but may I attempt to speak to this issue neutrally? (Not that the comment section ever persuaded anyone, but I can still speak my mind.) For starters, let me say thank you for this video, Warren. Your source citations in the editing are helping me go back to original sources, view them in context, and examine this controversy for myself. Secondly, while I'm not certain the Provisionists' handling of this issue has been fair or with pure motives, I also see plain as day that Dr. White's exasperation gets the better of him and adds fuel to the fire. Regardless of the truth of either perspective, neither side looks pretty. From the Provisionist perspective, I can see how the teaching - or even the implication - that any infant is damned is appalling and shocking. And on the surface is definitely a "winning issue." I thought the historical Reformed position was that all infants who die are elect (as was Spurgeon's belief, carried on by John MacArthur and John Piper, etc.), but seeing Dr. White's position and the citation from St. Augustine calls into question which side is the "historical" one. Lastly, if I put myself in Dr. White's shoes, he probably feels like he's not being treated fairly, so why would he debate an issue of biblical silence with his enemies, regardless of if it's a winning issue?
Most Calvinists behave like the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector in the temple since they tend to think they are the only one who are selected by God.
And the members of the Sanhedrin who interrogated the blind man Jesus healed in John 9, were confounded by the man's simple faith and surprising wisdom, and ultimately spouted the most Calvinist sounding words in the entire Bible: "They answered and said to him, 'You were completely born in sins, and are you teaching us?' And they cast him out." (John 9:34) Doesn't that sound exactly like James White and most internet Calvinists?
If Calvinistic soteriology for infants is correct, then God and PP ultimately share the same attitude. "My sovereignty, my choice!" - James White's God
This whole debate shows that infant damnation might be the best argument against Calvinism. Because there really is no difference between an infant being elect to hell and an adult being elect to hell. Don’t they say the elect are in Christ from eternity past? Or at the very least, they’ve been in Christ before the foundation of the world? So what difference does it make if we have knowledge of God or not? The decision has been made. That is the ENTIRE point of predestination: you have been destined for heaven or hell. An unelect adult has the same chance as an unelect infant. So it certainly is the consistent position to believe that a good number of infants go to hell on Calvinism, but infant damnation is so obviously a moral absurdity. I don’t think I can imagine a more immoral situation. And most people would agree. It’s a disgusting view to hold, but it is the most consistent view on Calvinism. Thus, Calvinism is a morally absurd doctrine.
Bro you need to clip the infamous "Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument" quip from one of White's many debates and slot it into any of your videos featuring him
Emerson: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." . ...I always wondered, Didn't Emerson mean inconsistency ? Then I learned of consistent Calvinists.
--- 1) How does someone pay for the sin of another? How was Adam's sin paid for on the cross and is paid for again by babies in hell? Was paid or not? Was it then "partially" paid? --- 2) How does one REPENT for a sin they did not commit? How is that? --- 3) When specifically was Adam's judged if he was paid for again and again by babies? In the last baby that existed? Logical problems for White everywhere. --- 4) Calvinists say, "if babies are not guilty, why do they die"? As if it were that if I fornicate and my son is born with AIDS and when I am forgiven for my fornication, the AIDS automatically goes away. Is the baby guilty of my sin of fornication? No. Do you suffer the consequences? Yes. When my sin is forgiven, will AIDS cease to be in it? No. Likewise, the "Consequence-sin" implication is false. One can suffer (and we do) the physical and spiritual consequences of Adam's fall, but not be guilty of it. Jesus himself had to sweat to eat and that was a consequence of Adam's curse and he was not guilty of Adam's sin. The atonement does not eliminate the fallen nature in the offspring but no one is guilty of a sin they did not commit. Logical problems everywhere.
4. I'd add that, access to the tree of life is cut off as a consequence of the fall. It seems more appropriate to think immortality was conditional at the very beginning of man's creation. If we cannot access the tree of life anymore, why should we expect that even a mortal person would live forever? Unless we think of the garden's fruit as some metaphor or reference to something not literal.
James White: How dare you ask me to defend a position I profess to hold, the very idea is disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself Me- But who are you to question what God preordained me to question
Warren McGrew needs to change his name to the killer of Calvinism. He keeps slaying the dragon called Calvinism. Keep your sword -sharp Idol Killer. God is using you!
No Calvinist should complain about what Warren said. The doctrine of infant damnation is clearly stated by John Calvin in Institutes Book 4, Ch 15, Par 10, Calvinism supports infant damnation.
What an absolutely reprehensible statement by Sproul!! But,thats the kind of spirit that Calvinism causes one to develop! Sounds like his namesake: Calvin!
1:53 blasphemous? How is what you said blasphemous? Seems to me that saying God would cast a baby let alone a one that died in the womb to hell is absolutely blasphemous of God character…
Blasphemy can’t even exist in determinism. If God decreed that a person who blasphemes has no choice but to blaspheme. It should just be called Gods decree not blasphemy.
Thanks so much for standing up for Truth and exposing Calvinist Leaders who creep in and take over churches and seminaries with their divisive double talk and anti gospel message . God bless you and may your efforts inspire others to shine the light of Christ on the darkness hiding within these Calvanist/Reformed doctrines.
Calvin in teaching that hell is copiously populated by infants not more than a cubit in diameter reminds us that among certain views of grace and predestination the difference between worshipping God as opposed to the devil is at most a matter of prudence. - David Bentley Hart
So James White believes his view of infant damnation is “disgusting and vile”, yes James we agree!
Infant damnation is part and parcel of Augustine's INVENTED doctrine of Original Sin which is the basis of "Total Depravity." Augustine is the theological source from which Reformed Teaching arose. On what basis is one immature being who cannot understand salvation SAVED and another undeveloped being who does not have moral consciousness DAMNED? Zwingli was RIGHT about this while Calvin and Luther were abysmally WRONG.
Warren, I know you said you have thick skin, but I want to thank you for being willing to take the hits here. You are doing good work, and it is making a difference! This video is yet another great example! Thank you!
You are so welcome.
Keep it up. Calvinists are the Democrats of Christendom. Expose it.
I add my applause for your courage, integrity and grace under fire. And not in a "praise of man" way, but worship of the Lord you obviously serve.
When you piss off every internet Calvinist you know that you’re on the right track in your Biblical understanding haha
I thought they didnt identify with the term 'Calvinist' especially when I show them this quote by St. Jerome.
"We ought to remain in that Church which was founded by the Apostles and continues to this day. If ever you hear of any that are called Christians taking their name not from the Lord Jesus Christ, but from some other, for instance, *Marcionites, Valentinians, Men of the mountain or the plain (or LUTHER-ANS, CALVIN-ISTS etc),* you may be sure that you have there not the Church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist. For the fact that they took their rise after the foundation of the Church is proof that they are those whose coming the Apostle foretold. And let them not flatter themselves if they think they have Scripture authority for their assertions, since the devil himself quoted Scripture, and the essence of the Scriptures is not the letter, but the meaning. Otherwise, if we follow the letter, we too can concoct a new dogma and assert that such persons as wear shoes and have two coats must not be received into the Church."
I dont think an increasing degree of created contention is a biblically sound hermeneutical motivation.
@@paulbeahm3891 Do you want to give the bad news to Jesus that He's wrong? 😂
Luke 12:51-53
King James Version
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you nay, but rather division
Christ Jesus said: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
For it is my Father's will that all who see his Son and believe in him should have eternal life. I will raise them up at the last day.
@@AiluraMelas What are you trying to prove by quoting that verse?
Maybe we can carry on this debate with Dr. White over at his channel. Oh wait, he turned off comments a couple years ago. Very telling about the assurance he has on any of his opinions.
Exactly. No one can defend Calvinism not even James White and he obviously knows that.
It's clearly a stop-gap tactic to try to maintain viewership as high as possible for a long as possible.
Yep
JSW (James Strawman White) is so sure of himself and fond of himself, its unlikely that even Jesus could refute his belief system.
As king David said about his child's passing, he cannot come back to me, but I can go to him. A little child, David knew would be in Heaven.
What a wicked and completely unbiblical statement by RC Sproul at 4:48 min…..John MacArthur’s hero in the faith. Lord have mercy!
Just listened to that (Sproul) unbelievable
@@kevinevans5921 His statement is disgusting and actually dehumanising . Of course he was simply repeating what other Calvinists had taught before him.
I am certainly not an admirer of MacArthur but in fairness to MacArthur at least MacArthur believes in the salvation of all infants and the mentally impaired .
Keep fighting the good fight warren! God is not a moral monster. God is love and in him there is no darkness
Well done.
Pray for James White to be honest with his followers, and for parents who have lost a young one, to know they are with the creator, not with Satan in hell.
The more "Calvinistic" a person is, the deeper darkness they proclaim. It appears that Dr. James White can not stand anyone questioning him, regardless of what he teaches. Every Bible teacher should be open to criticism because truth, not ego, is the purpose of teaching.
Amen!
This is a good point, and something I’ve been struggling with a lot recently as I look at all the scholars and teachers on UA-cam who call each other heretics and leave me in an utter state of confusion and doubt regarding the what’s and why’s of my faith
@@majorcajun5524 C.S. Lewis wrote about a prominent professor in The Four Loves and talked about how the guy was really beloved by his students to the point that even after they graduated they would still come back to him and even visit his home to learn new things. He said then once a former student came to his house and DISAGREED with him on an issue that from that point on he would never be welcomed back. James White is like that.
" The more Calvinistic, the deeper the darkness they proclaim "... a terrifying, but accurate statement!
The reason why james goes to infant baptism is because this is the exact context in which Augustine frames it. When speaking of predestination Augustine talks about two infants, one who happens to be baptized before death, and one who isn’t baptized and dies. Augustine used this framing to think about sovereignty. That god knew who would get to baptism before death and thus be saved .... and those who wouldn’t.
This is why in the Middle Ages when it became obvious that the baby and mother would die in delivery, some mothers elected to have a baptismal c section done in order to baptize the baby to ensure they go to heaven ...
James could at least provide the comfort of infant baptism as a way of knowing who is elect ... but he won’t because although Calvinist thought has some roots in Augustine but calvin out Augustined Augustine and the modern reformed theologians out-calvin, calvin.
The Calvinist version of Jesus loves the little children is Jesus only loves the elected little children.
Or that, despite desiring the effectual salvation of non-elect infants, He values His own glory more, so then He does not will their salvation. They often distinguish between _desires_ and _wills._
he loves watching them burn 🤮
As the children's song is sung in church . . .
"Jesus loves elected children
All elected children of the world
And to Hell he sends the rest
No one loves them it's the best
Jesus loves elected children of the world."
@@AndrewKeifer oh my gosh the desires and the wills 🤦♀️ the levels they go to not repent….
@@sethmcmullen2332 goes along with the song, there's a new name written down in pencil and it's mine, and it's mine.
Your editing skills are fabulous. You made my day.
Wow, thank you!
Calvinism is a cistern that holds no living water 🙏
I think you mean a septic tank. And we all know what goes in there.
Calvanists are Narcissist. That clip you added was perfect! Great job!
Some Calvinists... not all. I think MOST are just good every day Christians not even remotely familiar with the nuances and implications
@IdolKiller true., not all... I just listen to James and the other few" big" guys, and they ooz narcissism.
When I was a kid, John MacArthur kicked me out of his church. You know.. GRACE :-)
In any case, I love your videos. Keep up the great work!
"Babies aren't _ALL_ damned, they're only _MOSTLY_ damned." -James White, in "Miracle Max" voice (From the Princess Bride)
Bruh.. just the vipers in diapers are damned... 😂
@@roddyk2655 I thought all babies are born vipers in diapers.
So is it some are not. Or some are Elect and In Christ AND vid?
@@roddyk2655 The Calvinian god is not worthy of free-will worship, so their god must make a few people "saved" and force them to admire him as if he were worthy of worship.
@@roddyk2655exactly! Just the little Hitlers' planning to grow their little mustaches out. Don't you know they are planning cruelty on humanity as they are swimming in their mothers' amniotic fluid.
Thank you for dismantling the diabolical doctrine of devils of calvinism
White is such a drama princess .
Yes, but he's drawing out the sheer, selfish evil of Calvinism -- and the clip of the late and still malignant R C Sproul did as well.
@@20july1944 yep
DW: Yes! When it comes to the components of divine evil which are actually the most critical components of the doctrine - Calvinist's go bonkers. The art of playing shell-games with words. And the art of semantic tap-dance routines is the only strategy they have. Telling the truth would be fatal - and they know it.
Consistent Calvinism believes in infant damnation. They were predestined to hell before they were born and it has nothing to do with what they do in life (good or bad).
That’s why James White affirms it - BUT HERE’S THE KICKER:
It shows that they believe ALL people who go to hell go there NOT because of any sins or anything they do in life. It’s all decided before anyone was born and before anyone did anything good or bad.
In Calvinism, God is making beings just to send them to eternal torment/hell and it has nothing to do with anything they ever do in life, good or bad.
They seemingly haven't read Revelation 4, where it says that everything was created for his pleasure, nor Ezekiel chapters 18 and 33, which says, he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that they turn from their evil ways Imani live. Just those 2 verses alone, one should come away with the notion, that Gid did not choose a select few to go to heaven, and the rest to go to hell. Lets not forget to mentioned, Jesus said, everlasting fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, and Isaiah says, hell hath enlarged herself to accommodate men. Why does hell have to enlarge herself, if men were specifically made to go there? I ask them that question, and present these verses, and they will still argue for the system.
Revelation 4:11
King James Version
11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
Ezekiel 18:23
King James Version
23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
Ezekiel 33:11
King James Version
11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
Matthew 25:41
King James Version
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Isaiah 5:14
King James Version
14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
Exactly! What a God! So glad I know I don't have to believe that to be intellectually honest with the Bible.
You have to ask Calvinists: If infants go to hell for Adam's sin, does that mean Adam's sin was not paid for? Since if it was paid, how is it possible for it to be paid again? A sin is paid for again and again? The blood of Christ erases sins "Partially"? Among other arguments that you can present to them. The level of inconsistency that Calvinists have breaks every logical matrix that there may be.
@livingforjesus8551 "everlasting" is nowhere to be found in the old or new Testament.
@@Ken-do4oy
Oh really. What is this, that Jesus said.
Matthew 25:41
King James Version
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
The calviboys like JW don't like that we believe God saves those whom Jesus calls "such is the kingdom of heaven" and that we must "become as" them.
was just thinking about them in comparison to the jws. One of the jw leaders said babies were little enemies of God
Of such is the kingdom of heaven
The emphasis is on.of such
Not meaning all!
The kingdom of heaven is not Heaven. The kingdom of heaven it the thousand year rule of Christ on earyh. @angloaust1575
JW theology is just reformed theology after too many energy drinks.
thank you Warren. there are cracks forming. and I pray that through those cracks His love breaks through.
Nothing is more inconsistent than consistent Calvinism.
Consistent Islam ftw
sounds profound.... but I disagree. Where am I inconsistent ?? Point it out and I will see that it is corrected.
You have revealed the truth about JW, Warren. You have hit the target right in the center and are taking flack from those who are unwilling to look without bias. Hang tough; you are exposing rot and many will react to the smell without indignation.
Narcissists cannot be wrong; they will not repent. God must humble them in His mercy and it is my experience that He does not do that very often.
Has God decreed that narcissists necessarily will not repent?
I've seen God do exactly that and completely change narcissists into thoughtful, gentle, loving and humble people. I can know I'm not being deceived because I'm very closely related to them. It's truly miraculous.
@@chaddonal4331 Who knows? My experience is that He did not. Clay (comment below) has had experience that is different. We certainly should pray for God to bring JW to repentance since he has such a loyal following. How glorious would it be to God to see it!
Praying for these calvinists to open their eyes
AMEN!
The irony (which is not lost on him I'm sure) of James not wanting to debate this subject is that his comments about it being a terrible and vile thing to debate would only be true as presented by his side.
Ding ding ding... he's lost the debate before it began. 😂
@@IdolKiller Exactly, he may be a fool, but he's not an idiot.
I can't believe what I just heard. Dr. White said, "we all need to learn to think presuppositionally." Every person who is attempting to exegete passages in Scripture has to work incredibly hard to not interpret the Scriptures without presuppositions because it leads to eisegesis....reading into the text something that isn't there. So now I know for a certainty that this is what Calvinists are actually doing and how they are taught. This leads to what I had previously believed that Calvinists begin their doctrine with the belief in philosophy....determinism. In their case, divine determinism and with that lens then interpret Scripture. It is a system of belief based upon philosophy. To discover whether or not you believe that a philosophy is true or not you have to push it out to it's most logical conclusions. When we do this we arrive at the place where we are as shown in this video. Well done my brother!
As an added note, why are Calvinist presuppositions the correct presuppositions to have? Jehovah's Witnesses have their presuppositions, so why are they wrong? Oh, I know because the Calvinist has correct presuppositions. Also, Dr. White, as many Calvinists do, appeal to a creed as if that were biblical evidence in support of their beliefs. They run to a man-made creed rather than to Scripture. In the end of this video you played Dr. White and he defined perseverance of the saints that "God ensures his elect cannot reject him or fall away they will continue to believe in him to the end unless they're the VICTIMS OF EVANESCENT GRACE" (all caps for emphasis, not shouting) I thought there were no victims in Calvinism? Maybe I'm wrong. Why would God deliberately victimize people....make them victims? Why would God deliberately fool people to think they're saved? Calvinists do not have any security and I'd be wondering the whole of my life if God gave me the kind of grace that doesn't save me at all....that maybe a season of doubt or despair or incredible sorrow means that I'm not saved. What if Calvin actually was only given evanescent grace and then he interpreted the Scriptures? Would that mean that maybe he was wrong? How could one ever be sure?
You can only eisegete what James agrees with
My problem with the calvanist doctrine is that it makes Jesus out to be a liar or a deceiver. So when God says he died for the entire world and wants all to come to the knowledge of the truth. He doesn’t mean that, it’s only the elect really. So when the new believer reads that, they are like see Jesus wants the whole world to be saved but secretly he is being deceived by the word. How does it not register to calvanist they are making Jesus into something he is not. If Jesus is not the author of confusion then calvanist may want to rethink this.
To be fair, the scriptures refer both to Jesus dying for “many”, “his own”, etc, and for “all”, “the sick” (implying all).
So, Calvinists lean on the verses that indicate that some or many are redeemed (atoned for). These are to them the elect. And verses that seemingly refer to “all” they see as all kinds; I.e. leaders and slaves, men and women, particularly Jews and Gentiles. So, some from all groups.
I don’t think they are trying to misrepresent the Scriptures. They just see this to be consistent with verses that speak of God choosing people and of people being spiritually dead and there being none who seek after God on their own. So, they are honestly trying to put all the data together consistently.
Leighton and Provisionists have a different way of putting the data together. As do Arminians, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and Eastern Orthodox. Seemingly 7 different ways of putting it all together. Not all views can be right. All could be still wrong. Each has proponents who love Jesus and seek to interpret the Scriptures faithfully. All our brothers in Christ if their faith is in Him. Let’s be charitable.
@@chaddonal4331 thank you for your perspective, I can see where you are coming from. But if we stick to 1 cor 4:6 and 2pe 1:20. Not going beyond what is written and stick to what the text says and do not try to incorporate preconceived assumptions and come up with a private interpretation. Then when we see God says that I desire all to be saved. And that God wishes for none to perish and for them to turn and live, that he means what the text says. Hopefully you can see what I mean as well.
@@interrupts165 Yes, I don’t think Calvinists can appropriately account for 1 Peter 2.
Everyone has primary verses to shape their view, and then fit more difficult verses in around. Presuppositions and initial commitments make a big impact on what is considered basic and clear. Doing theology well is challenging!
@@chaddonal4331 right but Jesus dying for his own does not mean, if we are using good hermeneutics, that he ONLY died for his own. This is the point of reading in context. If I wrote in my diary that I “loved my family” that doesn’t mean I ONLY love my family. Paul said “Jesus loved me and gave his life for me” but that doesn’t mean Jesus ONLY loved Paul and ONLY gave His life for Paul.
This is very simple to understand.
But then the real confirmation is that Jesus died for the WHOLE WORLD. And his atonement was a propitiation not just for “our sins” but the sins of the WHOLE WORLD.
There is no way this can be twisted to mean that most of the world is hopeless without any way of salvation. WHEN THE BIBLE ALSO SAYS the *GOSPEL* is to be gone out to the ends of the earth and proclaimed to every person.
@@Loves2HugItOut I agree with you. (I also understood how the Calvinists emphasize different verses).
Imo, one of the pros of #baalgate is that it is to a large scale publicly exposing to the light of Truth what has been long hidden in the dark dungeons of Calvinism's lies.
"behind closed doors..." hmmm. No. I have witnessed that tactic used by many leaders through the years...
Do the members of Apologia Church know that their tithing money this month went towards getting James acting lessons for his appeal to emotion, narcissistic, victim reversal move.
as always thank you. this teaching is abhorrent, simply horrible and not of God. I stand with you
James White and the other infant damnation believers should be shaking in their boots. The implications are utterly terrifying.
Accepting that predestining infants to hell IS evil, is the utter destruction of at least 4 of the 5 pillars of TULIP (all except possibly I).
Warren, dont stop, never stop. Praying for your good health and holiness.
The RC Sproul clip 😳
Just imagining waving down with a smile on your face to your mother who is burning eternally in darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Thinking, “wow this is wonderful I’m so glad she is there”
We do not go to heaven until after the first resurrection of eternal life.
No reward has been given as of yet.
@@majorcajun5524 so you think there will be tears and sorrow in heaven?
@@greydogmusic no I don’t, I don’t think we will be concerned about anything from our earthly lives
@@majorcajun5524 I don’t think you understand what RC Sproul is saying in that clip
I imagine that a baby is born and then dies at one month old from a heart defect. They're immediately standing before God in "judgment" and then spend eternity in hell. Yep, that'd be a "just" God. Calvinism is absolutely sickening.
Amen. Their far more recognized by the church to be brothers in Christ than Mormons, but are in reality WAY worse. I don’t think theirs a group of Christ followers that have a more abhorrent set of beliefs and doctrine than a Calvinist, it’s shocking how deceived people can be.
@@buddy_132woah let’s pause for a minute - Mormons dont even worship the triune God, don’t have the correct view on salvation, and have all sorts of heretical additions to the bible. James and Calvinists are wrong on this issue of course but let’s not forget what Mormonism is
you call it sickening, if it does happen that way then God would call it justice. As the potter has the right to make a vessel unto honor or dishonor. God said his way are not or ways and you make God into mans image by labeling your belief. Will there be babies in heaven or will they be adults? If the baby is an adult in heaven he would be singing Gods praises. It the baby goes to hell he would be an adult cursing God. To say that Calvinism is absolutely sickening shows you do not understand the teaching. I am not saying you have to agree with it, just understand what it teaches and don't put your definition on it. Just say you disagree. If we make the choice to choose Jesus, how does a baby make that choice? Or are they sin free and have a get out of jail card free. So thee are two ways to heaven...Just some thoughts....
@@greydogmusic
So God can send the baby that died in the womb to hell even though the child never sinned? You said “if the baby goes to hell he would be an adult cursing God.” Though the child should never have been in hell to begin with since they have committed no sin; common sense tells us that is horribly unjust.
Imagine if you turn out to be not of the elect, that in reality God from the beginning of time wanted you to burn in hell for nothing else but for his vain glory and no matter what you did this is your unchangeable fate, you wouldn’t see that as fair at all.
Was it “fair” to kick Adam out when it was his wife deceived? Was it fair to drown the world. Is it fair to choose Abraham only.
You put a human judgement on Gods actions where Paul did tell us the potter can make a vessel to honor or dishonor. I don’t judge if Gid is “fair”. I read what He does. Was it “fair” to bypass the angels for salvation and impart it on humanity.
If all babies go to heaven, and I hope they do, is it fair that I have to live long enough and just can’t fathom to choose God as my friends laugh at me. Or am I too stupid to make the choice. Or I want to do it tomorrow…. I’m gonna do it. When I’m ready and I die…. Is that fair.
Fair is not a word for theological discussion as it is not a word Gid uses. We do. Grace. We should all go to hell if for nothing else because of Adam’s sin. That my friend is what would condemn a baby ….. if God does it that way. Where in scripture do you see all baby’s are saved. Were they all saved in the flood? All those around the world before Israel proclaimed the message of the true God.
Babies don’t hear the message. If they all go to heaven, and I sincerely hope they do. They were elect. As I said, I can’t prove it through scripture. I just know I serve a saving God and if there are some babies who are not going to heaven, they will not be proclaiming, it wasn’t fair.
This whole issue of infant baptism goes back to Augustine himself…and his view of total depravity and determinism was fully rejected by the church during his time. It’s disgusting to believe that God chooses that even some babies will go to Hell. Unbelievable.
But, but, but... it brings so much glory to God!
In as Christian a manner as I can muster, I honestly pray this beef continues. This is simply too good to stop. You may have stumbled upon the Calvin killer. You are quietly and calmly burning James white to the ground, leaving nothing but ashes. He has no where to run and hide and is lashing out like a cornered rat. His only responses are the logical fallacy of every defeated foe, the ad hominem. I do not know why any debate between a Calvinist and Provisionist should not begin with the provisionist asking the Calvinist, "Do you affirm Infant Damnation - The belief that some infants who die will suffer eternal damnation in hell?". If they say no, they are giving up calvinist predestination and if they say yes, the debate is over. No one in their right mind can go along with such a horrendous doctrine.
You know some christians will clutch there pearls and say" how can you say this we dont want any beef to continue christians need to stick together" but you are 100 percent correct qith this comment
Underrated comment. Debating Calvinists philosophically is the only way to go. You cannot debate these people scripturally because the Calvinsit is totally incapable of removing their Calvinsit lenses in order to see other interpretations of scripture, let alone entertaining the idea that those interpretations might possibly be true. They are as dogmatically hardened as any Pharisee. But nothing, and I mean nothing, gets their blood boiling more than having to defend positions like this. I only wish they didn't lack the self introspection to ask themsevels why that is.
@@TheAhull15This is very accurate. Their foundation is that God wills and predetermines EVERYTHING including all evil, sin, and deception. They can’t debate scripture without pretending like their own foundation is false. They have no way of discerning the difference between truth and deception. God decrees both……….
I agree. This could become the "kill shot" against Calvinism. One can only hope.
Why would infant damnation be a necessary conclusion is Calvinism? You would first have to demonstrate that for it to be the "kill shot"
I'm sorry for the people that attack you. Calvinism is as sick as you portray it. You do it with satire,which drives the point home even more!!!!! I appreciate your videos. Thank you.
That RC Sproul clip made my blood boil.
I appreciated him once. Then I read "Chosen By God." Then I watched his atonement theory videos. Then I listened to his other stuff. He's a waste of time to read and makes me sick.
Infant damnation. Doesn't that say it all?
I'm an ex-Reformed Baptist and I'm surprised James White did not just quote from his rule book, the 1689 Reformed Baptist Confession of Faith, "Chapter 10, entitled “Of Effectual Calling.” Matching the Westminster Confession of Faith almost verbatim, it reads, “Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.” So un-elect infants will go to hell according to their confession of faith. Please check this out!
James actually DID cite it and his fans continued to claim he didn't affirm Infant Damnation... can't make up this sort of thing
🤣 That "Geneva Baby"!
This is such a BAD look for Calvinists.
If there's any Calvinist doctrine that you should NOT be trying to stand for, infant damnation is like....the last thing any Calvinist should defend, or even be cool with.
And yet, we're seeing these guys planting their flags on that hill. 😅
They are fine with preaching that Jesus Christ only died for some people and that God predetermines all evil, sin, and deception. This is small potatoes for them……..
Christians are commanded to "know God." Yet Calvinists don't seem to know the God of the Bible very well.
Because of God's decree.
Ik that this is bold, but the god of Calvinism is not the God of the Bible. I’m a former Calvinist and I thank God above that He pulled me out of it. I’ve studied and studied and I can tell you that the god of Calvinism is a cosmological dictator who doesn’t love everyone.
That is certainly how a Calvinist would see the issue, @@michaellawlor5625 .
I struggle with that idea, @@KJBChristian . There are times when it sure seems like Calvinists are worshipping a false deity -- especially when you look at how poorly the exegete. They're notorious for eisegeting their ideas, concepts, and philosophies into the biblical Text.
@@michaellawlor5625 BINGO!!!! Yes!! In Calvinism - the reason FALSE PERCEPTIONS of scripture come to pass within the Jehovah's Witness mind - or the Mormon's mind, or the Atheist's mind - is simply because those are the PERCEPTIONS established at the foundation of the world - by a decree which grants NO ALTERNATIVE from that which is decreed.
But what is to prevent Calvin's god from decreeing FALSE PERCEPTIONS of scripture come to pass within the Calvinist mind?
The typical Calvinist answer to that question is - he is ELECT and Calvin's god would not decree FALSE PERCEPTIONS to come to pass within the ELECT.
But that answer utterly collapses because the Calvinist has no way of knowing if his PERCEPTION of ELECTION is not an infallibly decreed FALSE PERCEPTION.
So under scrutiny it becomes obvious - Calvin's god is *NOT REALLY* the sovereign one
The Calvinist is! :-]
Wow just wow, he questioned if you are born again or not, simply because you disagree with him on this subject, and challenged him to a debate for him to explain biblically why he thinks infants go to hell..😮 which he cannot do.
Super cool ,
Warren, “ the boy who kicked the hornets nest “
✌️
Honestly Warren, I don’t think that the mindset of Calvinists can be honestly compared the mindsets of pagans who commit child sacrifice ... the pagans gave their children in hopes of obtaining the favor of their gods ... Calvinists believe that God can not be pleased or influenced and that the damnation or salvation of your child is entirely out of their hands.
However, the response to the challenge to debate the topic is amazing. The horrific implications of their theology is what they are horrified at.
Ouch 😅
The thing that is TRULY "disgusting and vile" is James' choice of SWEATERS. WHY?!
😂
You can’t blame him. God ordained it lol😂
@@Tilbillygirl who are you, oh woman, to talk back to God about the SWEATER. Does the Stylist not have the right to dress one lump for honor and another like a color blind grandmother? Will the theologian say, “why have you dressed me so?”
I actually dig that sweater
@@AllThingsChristian🤣
It's very sad that JW accuses ppl of not being saved because they disagree with his interpretation of scripture.
The DARVO info is powerful!!!!
Excellent catch Warren!!!
Fits perfect!!!
I can't take credit. A viewer posted it to Facebook, but it's spot on
8:26 James White saying you should get born again? did James just admit we can choose to get saved? free will confirmed?
this always bugs me how Calvinist say we have no
free will or choice then turn right around and act like we do have free will and a choice in instances like this. everyone subconsciously knows and believes free will exist and any Calvinist in the comments that tries to convince me otherwise is also assuming i have free will that they are able to change my mind and believe what they are trying to tell me and are just hypocrites
The wallace shawn / Vizzini bit KILLED me.
How can James White attack anyone when according to his own doctrine, they are doing and believing what God has ordained them to do and believe? How can he suggest to someone that they need to get born again if they are incapable of doing so? So many inconsistencies. Seems to me he's actually attacking God.
If calvinists continue their current run of taking their beliefs to their ultimate congruent conclusions, expect calvinists to stop evangelizing and praying sometime soon.
Please pray for me everyone. When I hear White speak my soul is so distressed, my blood pressure elevates, seething anger fires up within me. And I intimate expression toward him that must be repented of…I think. Either that or this verse applies: Matt 23: 13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.
That's your amygdala trying to control you. Use your inner cortex
I suspect Warren is going to turn a bunch of Calvinists into Molinists with this subject.
Calvinism < Molinism < Strong Dynamic Omniscience
We'll get them there eventually 😂
@@IdolKiller baby steps 😜
I used to watch the dividing line and wonder why they shut off the comments. Now I know lol, people like warren would’ve shredded his arguments ages ago.
Yep. Any layman that knows what White actually believes could go into the comments and refute everything he says.
all babies go to heaven!!!
On what basis?
@@chaddonal4331 on Gods sovereign election of all babies.
@@chaddonal4331The basis that Jesus says so. You know that He’s kind of “sovereign” over who goes to heaven right?
”But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”“
Matthew 19:14
@@chaddonal4331 God's love, grace, and heart towards children as expressed in the Bible.
@@JohnK557 So, Jesus’ words to his disciples who were hindering young children from coming to Jesus (presuming that He was too busy and should spend His time with mature adults), Jesus said to not hinder them. And used them as a model for describing the kingdom of God (I.e. perhaps -we enter without sophistication, with childlike trust, and with the most simple faith).
But by Jesus welcoming their bringing children to him, he isn’t necessarily saying anything about eternal destiny for all children, right?
What are viable application points?
- Parents, introduce your children to Jesus when they are young. Don’t wait.
- Churches, invest in children’s ministry to root young kids in their faith
- Sophisticated adults: quit making the gospel too complex. The pathway is simple enough to be entered by a trusting child.
I’m sure there are more.
But where is there any direct line from “do not hinder the little children from coming to me” to “all babies who die prematurely will go to heaven.”
This is beautiful sentiment. But is it not mere speculation?
Or who can draw a firm link?
The TULIP song at the end oh my goodness
JW: This is a pastoral issue, and not one for public debate/discourse, because the Bible is not exhaustive or definitive on the matter.
JW: Those who disagree with me on this simply don't believe the Bible.
He needs to decide which of these statements he wants to hold to.
Warren,
I just want to say thank you.
Thank you for taking this away from mere rhetoric and also addressing the pastoral element in all of this.
And not doing it behind closed doors.
As a father of a wonderful young boy, I still carry the hurt and pain over the two children my wife and I lost before they came to term...
Your words provide some measure of comfort and healing.
Please do not stop, not only standing up for God's character, but also, providing a voice of healing for those who may be watching your videos.
God bless you and yours.
Amen.
Calvinism...... Doctrines not fit for the pulpit!
Also doctrines that will pull you into the pit!
Calvinists are sometimes logically consistent. But about 96% of the time, they argue AS IF there was no "immutable decree", by simply ignoring it & blameshifting sin to man.
Giving up idols is not easy. I hope by not letting them grow in cognitive dissonance by not letting them pretend that calvinism does not require they believe in infant damnation, they will come to their senses and it will help them to want to repent of that which is keeping them in darkness.
@Loves2HugItOut -- Logic is a God- given tool designed to help sinners with a WILLINGNESS to do what is right, find their way back to God.
"For I know that NOTHING GOOD dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the WILLING is present in me, but the working out of the good is not."
Even having a WILL to do "what is right" is defined as "Nothing good".
Unfortunately, some are hardened with their fallacious viewpoints & erroneous presuppositions, causing them tk REJECT such tools.
@@primeobjective5469 ya if someone is UNWILLING to be logical there is not a lot we can do. Similar to how those in the woke have abandoned logic so what can we possibly do to reason with them? I think giving up logic is something you have to willfully choose to do. Similar I think to Roman’s 1 where people willfully “did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” I honestly think that these Calvinists who have been confronted with the doctrine but WILL NOT accept that it is flawed “do not like to retain God in their knowledge” and are actively pushing the gospel away because for some reason they do not want to believe in such good news about a Savior for the whole world (???) Willful deception is powerful.
@Loves2HugItOut -- Calvinists have adopted the god of fate and assigned Christianity towards him.
Fatalistic gods have been around for thousands of years.
Fortune & Destiny were false gods of the Old Testament & God warned about worshipping them in Isaiah 65:11,
"But you who forsake the LORD, who forget my holy mountain, who set a table for FORTUNE and fill cups of mixed wine for DESTINY, I will destine you to the sword, and all of you shall bow down to the slaughter, because, when I called, you did not answer; when I spoke, you did not listen, but you did what was evil in my eyes and CHOSE what I did not DELIGHT in.”
Calvinists choose every day to deceive the hearts & minds of the naive with their rejection of the Word of God.
@@primeobjective5469 yes and I also think that many of these Calvinists think they are saved because they started “taking God seriously” so they equate that to being saved. But a lot of Jews “take God seriously” and a lot of Mormons “take God seriously” and Muslims who “take God seriously” but just because you take the Bible, a particular faith, or religion seriously does not mean you actually are following God. Even if you had some kind of “irresistible grace” feeling/experience at some time, that again doesn’t mean you are born again because almost every person (including unbelievers) have felt tangibly Gods grace and presence since God is drawing all people to Himself and revealing Himself to each person. I know I am preaching to the choir since your not a Calvinist but just wanted to share what I think is going on with some who are locked into this. The question is will you follow not just “have you experienced”. Calvinists think that ONLY “the elect” ever taste and see that the Lord is good. Scripture says otherwise and I know in my personal life I felt Gods drawing and nearness a handful of different times between the ages of 4 and 17 before I started following Him and was saved. Even one time at 11 years old I was so deeply and even fearfully convicted by Him (which makes sense bc scripture says the Holy Spirit is convicting the WHOLE WORLD of sin, righteousness, and the judgement)
I do think there are some Calvinists who are saved and are super ignorant and inconsistent and even if they don’t repent right away, God is still walking them through and away from calvinism, but I really fear so many Calvinists just think they are saved because they take God “seriously” and like to talk theology and philosophize and read ABOUT God which is a sign they must be “one of the Elect” and so they are trusting they must be one of the ones Jesus died on the cross for since their feelings demonstrate “elect type behavior”.
James white is a coward, we can see this by his refusal to allow comments on his videos. I have found that most Calvinists are like this.
The ones that do allow comments will usually block you if you challenge them. They will often lie and say you’re behaving badly when all you are doing is asking them about their own beliefs.
Along with the DARVO tactic, all we need to do when confronted by a malignant narcissist is to picture them looking in a mirror as they attack us because they are actually speaking about themselves. It's a valuable coping skill to apply so the narc doesn't get into our minds and cause damage. Let their words bounce off the mirror they are looking at💌
Good point. I always remind myself that their foundational belief is that God willed and predetermined everything including what they attack. When they attack something or pretend like something shouldn’t be the way it is they are actually refuting their own position. All you ever have to do is state their own claims back at them and watch them tear them down.
RC Sproul is the Kenny Copeland of Calvinists. You can see and hear evil ooze from them.
Warren, I think this reaction by Calvinists shows that they are indeed ideologically possessed by Calvinism/Augustinianism (as Kevin Thompson at BTF describes them). Criticizing the ideology means criticizing their very identity
Absolutely... the thing is to protect the "ism" AT ALL COST... truth doesn't matter, logic doesn't matter, nothing matter but 'protect the Calvinism' it matter how much much they have lie, ad hoc rationalize on the spot or how much those ad hoc rationalizations contradict themselves, other Calvinists or John Calvin himself, they obfuscate and lie some more cover-up and logic, sense and Truth be damned...
The only logical stance a Calvinist can take is that only infants who are elect are saved. Did God elect all infants? Who knows? According to Calvinism, God elects before born and it is not based on any human quality or future action. The same would hold true of infants.
I'm a Reformed Baptist, but may I attempt to speak to this issue neutrally? (Not that the comment section ever persuaded anyone, but I can still speak my mind.) For starters, let me say thank you for this video, Warren. Your source citations in the editing are helping me go back to original sources, view them in context, and examine this controversy for myself. Secondly, while I'm not certain the Provisionists' handling of this issue has been fair or with pure motives, I also see plain as day that Dr. White's exasperation gets the better of him and adds fuel to the fire. Regardless of the truth of either perspective, neither side looks pretty.
From the Provisionist perspective, I can see how the teaching - or even the implication - that any infant is damned is appalling and shocking. And on the surface is definitely a "winning issue." I thought the historical Reformed position was that all infants who die are elect (as was Spurgeon's belief, carried on by John MacArthur and John Piper, etc.), but seeing Dr. White's position and the citation from St. Augustine calls into question which side is the "historical" one. Lastly, if I put myself in Dr. White's shoes, he probably feels like he's not being treated fairly, so why would he debate an issue of biblical silence with his enemies, regardless of if it's a winning issue?
Most Calvinists behave like the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector in the temple since they tend to think they are the only one who are selected by God.
Certainly among their leadership and the Cagestagers, but not all of them
And the members of the Sanhedrin who interrogated the blind man Jesus healed in John 9, were confounded by the man's simple faith and surprising wisdom, and ultimately spouted the most Calvinist sounding words in the entire Bible: "They answered and said to him, 'You were completely born in sins, and are you teaching us?' And they cast him out." (John 9:34) Doesn't that sound exactly like James White and most internet Calvinists?
If Calvinistic soteriology for infants is correct, then God and PP ultimately share the same attitude.
"My sovereignty, my choice!" - James White's God
He won't (can't) debate what he can't win bro.
This whole debate shows that infant damnation might be the best argument against Calvinism. Because there really is no difference between an infant being elect to hell and an adult being elect to hell. Don’t they say the elect are in Christ from eternity past? Or at the very least, they’ve been in Christ before the foundation of the world? So what difference does it make if we have knowledge of God or not? The decision has been made. That is the ENTIRE point of predestination: you have been destined for heaven or hell. An unelect adult has the same chance as an unelect infant. So it certainly is the consistent position to believe that a good number of infants go to hell on Calvinism, but infant damnation is so obviously a moral absurdity. I don’t think I can imagine a more immoral situation. And most people would agree. It’s a disgusting view to hold, but it is the most consistent view on Calvinism. Thus, Calvinism is a morally absurd doctrine.
Funny how they so quickly resorted to attacking you (ad hominem) instead of the argument.
Bro you need to clip the infamous "Inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument" quip from one of White's many debates and slot it into any of your videos featuring him
James White does not like how Warren mcgrew makes determinism plain for everyone see.
Dont let up on the subject. You've pinched a big nerve. I hope the Holy Spirit is convicting JW! He knows his take is nonsense
Emerson: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." . ...I always wondered, Didn't Emerson mean inconsistency ? Then I learned of consistent Calvinists.
James goes to the Confessions for a scant reference. I thought James was Sola Scriptura....
--- 1) How does someone pay for the sin of another? How was Adam's sin paid for on the cross and is paid for again by babies in hell? Was paid or not? Was it then "partially" paid?
--- 2) How does one REPENT for a sin they did not commit? How is that?
--- 3) When specifically was Adam's judged if he was paid for again and again by babies? In the last baby that existed? Logical problems for White everywhere.
--- 4) Calvinists say, "if babies are not guilty, why do they die"? As if it were that if I fornicate and my son is born with AIDS and when I am forgiven for my fornication, the AIDS automatically goes away. Is the baby guilty of my sin of fornication? No. Do you suffer the consequences? Yes. When my sin is forgiven, will AIDS cease to be in it? No. Likewise, the "Consequence-sin" implication is false. One can suffer (and we do) the physical and spiritual consequences of Adam's fall, but not be guilty of it. Jesus himself had to sweat to eat and that was a consequence of Adam's curse and he was not guilty of Adam's sin. The atonement does not eliminate the fallen nature in the offspring but no one is guilty of a sin they did not commit.
Logical problems everywhere.
The result of calvinistic ideology . Illogical when held in contrast with scripture and reality itself . Good points my friend.
4. I'd add that, access to the tree of life is cut off as a consequence of the fall. It seems more appropriate to think immortality was conditional at the very beginning of man's creation. If we cannot access the tree of life anymore, why should we expect that even a mortal person would live forever? Unless we think of the garden's fruit as some metaphor or reference to something not literal.
@@ip7101 Agree. Adam would have lived forever, but only if he was in the Presence of God.
very excellent points
James White: How dare you ask me to defend a position I profess to hold, the very idea is disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself
Me- But who are you to question what God preordained me to question
He’s making it up as he goes along…
The "Geneva Baby" killed me! 😂
Warren, if you keep this up Dr. White may twist an ankle running away. He's met his match IMO.🏆
Warren McGrew needs to change his name to the killer of Calvinism. He keeps slaying the dragon called Calvinism. Keep your sword -sharp Idol Killer. God is using you!
I LOVE these videos, how you confront head on the absurdities of Calvinism without falling for the red herrings and straw men
Every Calvinist believing this twisted nonsense needs to be called out on it. It's beyond the pale that anyone could read Scripture in such a manner!
Great video brother
Glad you liked it!
No Calvinist should complain about what Warren said. The doctrine of infant damnation is clearly stated by John Calvin in Institutes Book 4, Ch 15, Par 10, Calvinism supports infant damnation.
Calvinists: "God decreed for me to complain against what He decreed for Warren to say!"
The closing song 😂😂😂👏👏🤌
The clip comparison at the end of this video is the beginning of a good thing.
Can hardly wait for this one.
What an absolutely reprehensible statement by Sproul!! But,thats the kind of spirit that Calvinism causes one to develop! Sounds like his namesake: Calvin!
The more complicated you make your doctrine and the more obtuse the teaching, the more likely it is flawed or false.
It’s almost like “Gods not the author of confusion.”
James as a fruit would be a lemon. Very sour.
Possibly, but he's bitter enough to be a grapefruit...
Keep it up! You are a Calvinist Matador!! If you ever debate White, you must dress up as a matador 😆
I'd already planned to wear a bald cap, cougi sweater & bow-tie with a large ball of cotton on my chin. Maybe I could do that for the second debate?
@@IdolKiller 😂
1:53 blasphemous? How is what you said blasphemous? Seems to me that saying God would cast a baby let alone a one that died in the womb to hell is absolutely blasphemous of God character…
Blasphemy can’t even exist in determinism. If God decreed that a person who blasphemes has no choice but to blaspheme. It should just be called Gods decree not blasphemy.
I do enjoy waging war on this heresy. RC Sproul was a dangerous wolf!
I used to live his teaching. I couldn't even begin to estimate how many hours I listened to him over the years. It's so sad
So many people follow his teaching and they don’t even understand what it is he believed……….
@@JohnK557 Calvinists are the most gullible!
@@stephenclayden21 Yeah, I call it willingly ignorant.
@@JohnK557 Yes that would be the biblical term! 👍🏻
"I can't think of a reason to debate a topic with someone who disagrees with me."
Right?!
"Everything was so much better in the 80s." 😂☠️
Great work, Warren!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thanks so much for standing up for Truth and exposing Calvinist Leaders who creep in and take over churches and seminaries with their divisive double talk and anti gospel message . God bless you and may your efforts inspire others to shine the light of Christ on the darkness hiding within these Calvanist/Reformed doctrines.
Elect infants
“Whatever that means!” -JW
Calvin in teaching that hell is copiously populated by infants not more than a cubit in diameter reminds us that among certain views of grace and predestination the difference between worshipping God as opposed to the devil is at most a matter of prudence.
- David Bentley Hart