Glad you are back. I love listening to you. I quoted that book " 5 Points of Calvinism" to Jordan Hatfield on Total depravity. Great book and helped me too.
@@rocketsurgeon1746 but apparently Warren did miss the title of my video. Imagine that, a guy getting upset that a video titled “Defining Total Depravity” actually defines total depravity. He expected the whole video to be about him, sorry to disappoint. lol
@@rocketsurgeon1746 look man, this has nothing to do with pride, I made my case, it just requires actually listening to what I say in order to understand. You, like Warren, are just jumping to conclusions and expecting some quick answer. It’s really not hard to understand the point. I laid it out in the beginning, that just reading a quote, or even multiple quotes, doesn’t guarantee that you understand the quotes or even principles meant to be drawn from the quotes. Warren misapplies what he quotes, and therefore has a faulty understanding. That’s somewhat normal with TD as all of the theologians I quoted say that is the case. And the last one I quote, the one that Warren didn’t get to, goes to even greater detail drawing out other misconceptions besides just that some think man is as bad as he can be. So, did I take too much time going through the theologians I did? Maybe, but the point of that was to establish agreement and to show that TD is easily misunderstood. Berkhof, the last theologian I quoted, says the doctrine requires “precise discrimination”. In other words, he is saying one must also understand what TD doesn’t mean along with what it does. The negative distinctions he makes helps with my creation of distinctions that I will use going forward when I do deal with Warrens misapplication (caused by misunderstanding TD to begin with) and arguments. Again though, this video was about establishing a solid definition and showing some things that are commonly misunderstood with TD. But sure, if you’re just looking for some short answer as to how Warren didn’t define TD, it’s not there, it’s a greater argument where I was hoping to bring clarity. My hope in this is to help dialogue, which I can admit that Warren might not be the best one to seek that with.
@@chrisharris9710 listen to the first 10 minutes of your video. Around 5 minute mark is where you made your claim he didn't define it and used rc instead. 9 minute mark you explained how people read quotes but don't understand. So many of us came out of calvinism because we let the Bible correct us. God is more important than being a calvinist. God bless you and I hope you will step back and see how calvinism makes God a monster.
On Reformed Theology it makes not the slightest iota of difference whether a person is “Totally Depraved” or not since the only people who are ever Saved are fatalistically hard determined, i.e. singled out to be especially prechosen/preselected/elected/ordained/decreed and predestined, prior to Creation, by the sovereign Calvinist potter God; while the nonchosen non-elect goat people are fatalistically double-predestined, i.e. passed over, so they can be barbecued in Hell for the sovereign Calvinist potter Gods own good selfish glory and his own good sadistic pleasure; never standing a chance, or a hope, or a prayer, of ever being Saved because the merciless unjust sovereign Calvinist potter God is so puny he doesn’t possess the omni-power of omnibenevolence, or the love of or for mercy and justice which would enable him to make provision for the goat people to be Saved like the omnibenevolent "Greatest Possible GOD", i.e. the Provisionist GOD of the Bible, actually does.
Total inability and depravity justified every time John Q types his comments. The greatest justifier of a biblical Truth, is...by those who reject it. The light requires darkness as a backdrop.
To win the debate all Calvinists have to do is plausibly, i.e. logically, i.e. non-contradictorily, demonstrate “HOW”, during pre-Creation, choosing, electing, ordaining, decreeing and predestining the elect to Heaven, and the nonchosen, non-elect goat people to Hell, by passing over them, “IS NOT” purposelessness fatalistic hard determinism which renders pointless the necessity for any doctrine of “Total Depravity”. If Calvinists make the claim ….. “The sovereign Calvinist potter God is just because he is just and what he does is just whether the created thing believes the sovereign Calvinist potter God is just or not; non-Calvinists seem to think there is some standard to be applied to God.” ….. then there is no recognizable, objective moral standard the sovereign Calvinist God abides by and the sovereign Calvinist potter God, then, the potter God, being an inconsistent arbitrary immoral reprobate himself, fails the test of being “the Greatest possible God” and there is no reason to believe in or follow him.
@JohnQPublic11 Clearly, philosophy of a carnal unregenerate mind ravages the very core of your Self Determinists worldly logic. Nobody is trying to convince or convert you of your rejection of the power of Gods effectual grace, you've already rejected that light. We just point out your darkness for a witness of Gods power, for the elects understanding.
Whoever sees this, I need yall help... Can't hold on any longer 😢
What is troubling you?
@@brunellilarbi5806 you have my prayers.
Glad you are back. I love listening to you.
I quoted that book " 5 Points of Calvinism" to Jordan Hatfield on Total depravity. Great book and helped me too.
you should apologize to Warren since he did define it, but you missed it and critique him for it. Listening is a gift :)
@@rocketsurgeon1746 I don’t have anything to apologize for. And I didn’t miss anything………
@@rocketsurgeon1746 but apparently Warren did miss the title of my video. Imagine that, a guy getting upset that a video titled “Defining Total Depravity” actually defines total depravity. He expected the whole video to be about him, sorry to disappoint. lol
@@chrisharris9710 you said he didn't define TD. he did. you were wrong. don't allow pride to hinder you, brother. it is ok to be wrong
@@rocketsurgeon1746 look man, this has nothing to do with pride, I made my case, it just requires actually listening to what I say in order to understand. You, like Warren, are just jumping to conclusions and expecting some quick answer.
It’s really not hard to understand the point. I laid it out in the beginning, that just reading a quote, or even multiple quotes, doesn’t guarantee that you understand the quotes or even principles meant to be drawn from the quotes. Warren misapplies what he quotes, and therefore has a faulty understanding. That’s somewhat normal with TD as all of the theologians I quoted say that is the case. And the last one I quote, the one that Warren didn’t get to, goes to even greater detail drawing out other misconceptions besides just that some think man is as bad as he can be.
So, did I take too much time going through the theologians I did? Maybe, but the point of that was to establish agreement and to show that TD is easily misunderstood. Berkhof, the last theologian I quoted, says the doctrine requires “precise discrimination”. In other words, he is saying one must also understand what TD doesn’t mean along with what it does. The negative distinctions he makes helps with my creation of distinctions that I will use going forward when I do deal with Warrens misapplication (caused by misunderstanding TD to begin with) and arguments.
Again though, this video was about establishing a solid definition and showing some things that are commonly misunderstood with TD.
But sure, if you’re just looking for some short answer as to how Warren didn’t define TD, it’s not there, it’s a greater argument where I was hoping to bring clarity.
My hope in this is to help dialogue, which I can admit that Warren might not be the best one to seek that with.
@@chrisharris9710 listen to the first 10 minutes of your video. Around 5 minute mark is where you made your claim he didn't define it and used rc instead. 9 minute mark you explained how people read quotes but don't understand. So many of us came out of calvinism because we let the Bible correct us. God is more important than being a calvinist. God bless you and I hope you will step back and see how calvinism makes God a monster.
On Reformed Theology it makes not the slightest iota of difference whether a person is “Totally Depraved” or not since the only people who are ever Saved are fatalistically hard determined, i.e. singled out to be especially prechosen/preselected/elected/ordained/decreed and predestined, prior to Creation, by the sovereign Calvinist potter God; while the nonchosen non-elect goat people are fatalistically double-predestined, i.e. passed over, so they can be barbecued in Hell for the sovereign Calvinist potter Gods own good selfish glory and his own good sadistic pleasure; never standing a chance, or a hope, or a prayer, of ever being Saved because the merciless unjust sovereign Calvinist potter God is so puny he doesn’t possess the omni-power of omnibenevolence, or the love of or for mercy and justice which would enable him to make provision for the goat people to be Saved like the omnibenevolent "Greatest Possible GOD", i.e. the Provisionist GOD of the Bible, actually does.
@@JohnQPublic11 good to see you old friend! When do you want to come on and talk about some of that?
Total inability and depravity justified every time John Q types his comments.
The greatest justifier of a biblical Truth, is...by those who reject it. The light requires darkness as a backdrop.
To win the debate all Calvinists have to do is plausibly, i.e. logically, i.e. non-contradictorily, demonstrate “HOW”, during pre-Creation, choosing, electing, ordaining, decreeing and predestining the elect to Heaven, and the nonchosen, non-elect goat people to Hell, by passing over them, “IS NOT” purposelessness fatalistic hard determinism which renders pointless the necessity for any doctrine of “Total Depravity”.
If Calvinists make the claim ….. “The sovereign Calvinist potter God is just because he is just and what he does is just whether the created thing believes the sovereign Calvinist potter God is just or not; non-Calvinists seem to think there is some standard to be applied to God.” ….. then there is no recognizable, objective moral standard the sovereign Calvinist God abides by and the sovereign Calvinist potter God, then, the potter God, being an inconsistent arbitrary immoral reprobate himself, fails the test of being “the Greatest possible God” and there is no reason to believe in or follow him.
@JohnQPublic11 Clearly, philosophy of a carnal unregenerate mind ravages the very core of your Self Determinists worldly logic.
Nobody is trying to convince or convert you of your rejection of the power of Gods effectual grace, you've already rejected that light. We just point out your darkness for a witness of Gods power, for the elects understanding.
well said john. those of us that do understand calv and came out of it, understand better than most calvs