The Church wasn't prepared in 2020. They either practice idolatry, cowardness, or apathy. Some have even left the faith. Since 2020 God is separating the wheat from the chaff. The last 3 years definitely has woken me up and brought me back to faith in God. I was not in a good place mentally, emotionally, or spiritually before the plandemic. Now, in 2023 I am trying to learn everything I can about apologetics and what I truly believe. God is faithful and merciful.
Thanks so much for this podcast!! I was always taught in the church to believe in the rapture, I did for many years. I started to question the the concept of the rapture. So began my Journey, of what I now believe to be true, same conclusion as you. To be prepared, know that Christians will be hated, excluded and many of us martyred. Jesus said the heart of many will grow cold. It’s easy to say you love Jesus when your life or the life of a loved one isn’t on the line. Turn up the heat, many will fall away!! God, separating the wheat from the chaff. I pray for Courage that it won’t be me!
What about the Christians outside the safety of western nations? Their homes are destroyed, their jobs are taken or reduced to removing filth, their daughters are kidnapped and raped and forced to marry and convert out of Christianity, they’re stoned, spit on, laughed at, mocked, tortured unendingly and eventually killed, then paraded to the public. Is that what pre-trib means? That only the safe Christians in safe countries get to escape horror and persecution for them and their loved ones??
What are you talking about!!!! Did you really read my comment??? I said we would be martyred!! I said at the end that I hope it isn’t me, meaning that I don’t let my heart grow cold!! Sounds like your looking for a fight!! Shame on you!!
I am mindful of Winston Churchill who said "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject". Changing one's mind means that what we once held to be true was not true, holding out the possibility that everything we have taken to be true may be false, in theology, politics, science and life, so the process of mind changing is valuable!. Having said this, truth is not subject to the person, however wise and knowledgeable they are, but is revealed by truth seeking, investigations, preparedness to change one's mind when necessary. I have changed my mind several times, not because of intelligence or received wisdom, but perhaps the recognition of earlier ignorance and the arrogance that goes with it.
I find that for myself of these issues I just became comfortable saying I think X may be closer to the truth but it’s not settled in scripture and God knows.
I remain open-minded about eschatology, but I do lean toward the belief that the “rapture” is not taught anywhere in the Bible and that it must be read into Scripture by people who already believe in it. Having said that, I am deeply troubled that Bobby provided NO scriptural support for his views. Throughout this entire interview, he appealed almost exclusively to emotions and human logic to rationalize the positions about which he has changed his mind. There was virtually no interaction with the Word of God whatsoever, and that is very telling. Scripture is our supreme authority and the final court of appeal on all matters of doctrine, belief, and behavior. I fear that Bobby is heading in the same direction of men such as Andy Stanley, who is practically an apostate at this point. We all seriously need to be praying for Bobby, as well as Andy and others who keep changing their minds on issues simply because of feelings, personal experiences, or the notion that “It just doesn’t sit right with me and seems unfair.” Very dangerous thinking.
Hello! I’m so glad to hear that you are willing to look at well formed paradigms and change your mind according to what scripture actually teaches. If I can I would like to also suggest you think of the preterist view. Where there is no tribulation but all of what you were describing actually happened in 70 A.D., to the Jews. I agree with you that the rapture and the second coming all happened together. This differs somewhat from a pure preterist view. It may help to look up the teachings of Steve Gregg. He has researched this for many years.
Two "BRIEF" comments regarding your comment... How can the rapture & 2nd coming be rolled into ONE event based on these few verses... In *I Thess **4:13**,ff* we find Paul having to teach the believers about the rapture...they were UN-learned about it. The bible reads, "But I would not have you to be IGNORANT, brethren...", and then in verses 14-18 he instructs them. _HOWEVER..._ In the VERY NEXT FEW VERSES in *I Thess 5:1,2* he goes on to say this; "But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have NO NEED that I write unto you. For yourselves KNOW PERFECTLY that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night." The point being, a person can't be both IGNORANT & LEARNED about the same matter...it's either one or the other. That being said, these are two *DIFFERENT* events. Now, as far as the Preterist position goes... What really can't be reconciled with the Preterist position, in suggesting that *Matt 24* has already been fulfilled is this... *Matt **24:27* says, "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." *1* That verse speaks of Christ coming as _"LIGHTNING"_ (quick & short lived to say the least!),but it took over 5 months to destroy Jerusalem.' *2* The Romans attacked from the NORTH, yet the verse tells us Christ comes from the EAST. There's really more that could be provided to refute the Preterist position (the 1st point as well actually) but I don't want to overwhelm the comment section with such a _l e n g t h y_ post which I can be found doing at times! LOL All the best to you in your search for truth, *MARANATHA!*
13:45 Bobby, I hold to same exact position. I'm very sympathetic to CS Lewis universalistic leanings. I would differentiate between exclusivism with restrictivism of Calvinism. Inclusivism allows for other ways other than the gospel. Soft exclusivism would be soft inclusivism and hard exclusivism is restrictivism. Hard inclusivism would be pluralism.
Totally agree with him on Calvinism. Great points. I would also describe myself as a confusionist for the same reason, ha ha. Not sure I agree with him on his soft exclusivism view though. I understand the logic, but all the apostles say "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved", not "believe there is a god and repent of your sins". I just don't see his view backed by Scripture. I did see another view not too long ago explained that anyone doesn't know God the Father wouldn't believe in Jesus anyway, so that's one reason why people who never hear the gospel won't be saved, since God would see their future and know they won't accept the Son because they already rejected the Father. I understand why he's post trib.
I'm finding myself in this camp as well. One of my points of reasoning is, God's people in old and new Testament have been present for the antiChrists in their day, why would we be absent from the final one being revealed..
Grateful to hear the transition from pretrib to post-trib. However, be open to amillennialism! In my mind, that’s what scripture is really pointing out.
I love the channel, podcast, and knowledge from all the experience in the walk with Christ. I like your measured approach. I was wondering if you can do a video, or if you have already made one on your position on old earth, young earth, flat earth, firmament, hollow earth, evolution, creation etc? I' haven't done my due diligence, but I believe William lane Craig takes the position of evolution, and God breaths life into Homo sapiens.
Here’s some verses in acts that speaks upon God setting out every person’s habitations. These give the connotation that He knows where we all will live and our surrounding and gives each person the opportunity to come to Him with what He has provided them with in life, Whether they are born in America or some tribe in South America or anywhere else. Acts 17:24-27 KJVS [24] God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; [25] Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; [26] And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; [27] That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Why would Christians need to follow the Sabbath, if the Sabbath was a sign between God and Israel under the old covenant? In fact, the Sabbath was a mere shadow of what was to come the Messiah. Jesus is our Sabbath rest, we enter HIS rest when we believe. New Testament believers are not under the old covenant which has been replaced - Hebr 8 & 9.
@@AntWoord_YT Well, because the gentiles were grafted into israel, the sabbath is a shadow yes, but of something that yet to come. Notice that hebrews 4 speaks of a future rest that we must be careful to enter in it. This rest (heaven) was foreshadowed by God resting on the sabbath. So also, the sabbath is a shadow of heaven that is to come, of which pertains to Christ. Read the context of Colossians 2, Pauls main talking point is that we must follow what is of Christ, not of this world (verse 8). It is clear that Paul is saying that the sabbath is is of Christ and separate from the the other laws from men (do not touch, do not taste...). Constantly Jesus was judged for eating on the sabbath, healing on the sabbath, not washing their hands before eating.. This is why Paul says that you should not let anyone judge you in these laws that are of Christ. I'm currently going through all the opposing arguments for sabbath keeping, if you manage to bring up a new argument to me that would be awesome!
@@jeremiest-louis2943 Hebrews talks about Jesus being our Sabbath rest (which we enter through faith), and that was fore-shadowed by the Sabbath as a sign between Israel and God. There are absolutely no Scriptural reasons, under the NEW covenant, to observe the Jewish Sabbath.
1st off, really appreciate the dialogue. 1st issue: Question: Does Romans 9 being a corporate statement change the fact that God chose Israel over Edom? Was Edom able to come to God? Doesn't this just kick the can down the road? I get the argument of culpability... but how can you get another option from scripture? Isn't your argument based on philosophy, emotion, logic and not scripture? I just leave room for God to be bigger than our system, but I just can't see another interpretation... 2nd Issue: Bobby, isn't this just because your feelers don't feel right. I think the scenario you pose is something that makes God seem unable to work out timing or be sovereign there... this isn't a good way to write something off. -maybe you are right, but I think it's concerning. Did Paul risk his neck just to give people a better life on earth? Wasn't it to be spared from the wrath of God? Regarding dreams and visions...aren't those folks directed to someone who shares the gospel message? 3rd issue: Why are you convinced AMil or Post mil are incorrect?
Psalm 9:18 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. Many Cultures rejected God and they been in darkness ever since blind def lost
God is Love.. Since He is what love truly is and is the ultimate expression of it; I think that would by necessity require Him to truly offer salvation to every human being.
Brother Bobby is confused. He’s been through many downs in his ministry. I saw him rubbing elbows with many Calvary guys as well. I also remember him doing a Q & A with Brian B from Costa Mesa Calvary and that was a mess after Chuck. Bobby is saying many things here that he didn’t feel or couldn’t accept, leading him to inconsistencies. Love you bro
Irvin Baxter opened my eyes, but first I was offended by his post trib stance. However, I gave him my ear because he was very humble and kind and respectful, and he studied and researched the topic. It always bothered me that no one would give him respect. I remember asking a evangalist who came to my church at the time,(I am deconstructing now), what he thought of Irvin Baxter and all he did was INSULT him! I appreciate Dr. Bobby so much
You say you are deconstructing - are you make provisions to leave the faith, or are simply reforming your faith? Deconstructing has become more a synonym for taking out belief of God word and judging it by one's feelings, then by God's word judging our feelings I wasn't sure what you meant at the moment, and wanted to reach out. Thank you for sharing
@@andrewwoode I have not lost my faith... it's just that pre trib, mid trib or post trib does not change my salvation. It did, however, become a trun off when others will insult a differing of opinion of the rapture. Thank you
Bobby. (I too fell into the Calvin trap for a few years) So do you teach that one who follows Jesus on His return will Will be taken to heaven or to Zion/New Jerusalem///where ever he is ruling from?
The "POST" position rules out the promise of heaven, and it also doesn't allow for the Bema Judgment or the marriage to the Lamb, BOTH of which take place in heaven I believe. And as far as His millennial reign goes, I would say this... There is prophesy to fulfilled, and the only way possible for this to happen, is for Christ to rule here on earth. We read in *Isaiah 2:2,3...* =====> "And it shall come to pass _in the last days,_ that THE MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOUSE shall be established IN THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAINS, and shall be exalted above the HILLS; and *all nations* shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and LET US GO UP TO THE MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD FROM JERUSALEM." Also we read... =====> "...the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." *Matt **19:28* =====> "...the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:" *Matt **25:31* Then too, you'll recall from *Matt 4* where we read, "Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him _ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD,"_ which speaks of the PHYSICAL WORLD here on earth. And the great battle to unfold in *Revelation,* is when Christ wrests power from satan over this *EARTH...* that which satan CURRENTLY controls. These few verses would argue for Christ's millennial reign here on earth. *MARANATHA!*
I do believe it’s important to keep our hearts and minds open to be corrected. However I’m sad at your departure from some sound positions. I didn’t hear much biblical reasoning, just “I didn’t like this so I decided to believe that instead.” And so called “logical” reasoning - God is infinite and our finite minds will never actually understand how it works!
Hmmm...Theological View #1 I generally agree, although I do believe the Scripture clearly teaches apostasy (the word itself carries the idea of "moving away from "- one cannot depart from what one did not genuinely possess) The idea of apostasy for American Christianity (who have been saturated with the "once saved always saved" message) is uncomfortable and so there is a rationalization of texts that utilize straightforward language on the issue. Theological View #2, I strongly disagree with your move toward inclusivism. There are some problems with what you stated. First, you spoke about how you emotionally resonated with inclusivism based on your experience in other parts of the world. Truth is not determined by our emotions or experiences. Your example of someone in Thessalonica falls into a type of either/or fallacy. You constructed the hypothetical for the outcome of the point you were making (which is why hypotheticals are not how we should address explicit biblical truth). There is no need for a hypothetical because there is the actual example in Acts 10 describing how the Lord deals with those who were "God fearers" but had not expressly heard of Jesus (and it wasn't inclusivism). You mention Romans 2 regarding the law on our hearts. Paul's point, however, is to show that all are guilty and without excuse. Paul explicitly states in Gal. 3 that the law is a schoolmaster that points us to Jesus. Also, while you mentioned John 14 with Jesus' exclusive statement about himself, you neglected Romans 1 and Ephesians 2. The latter expressly states that we are saved by grace through faith. In Acts 2 Peter calls the multitude to repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus. Matthew 28, Jesus commands his followers to make disciples of all peoples (ethne) baptizing in the name of the triune God and teaching obedience. In Acts 1 Jesus states that the Holy Spirit would empower us for the purpose of being his witnesses. Romans 10 Paul expressly speaks about faith associated with salvation. If inclusivism is true, then faith and repentance are not required. If inclusivism is true then, evangelism is not urgent at least and unnecessary at worse. If we hold out the possibility of inclusivism then we must hold to the possibility that some who died in the universal flood of Noah's day (for example) are potentially saved, but we have no real biblical basis for such a belief. Also, inclusivism is a stepping stone to universalism (which utilizes a similar rationalization process to arrive at conclusions), which opens up the door to religious pluralism being acceptable. Additionally, I think that we have in our mind a particular idea about how evangelism is to be practiced and how it works, and the result is that we unintentionally put God in a box. The questions to be answered are these, "Is faith in Jesus necessary for salvation?" (if it is unnecessary for some, it is necessary for none). "Is God just in judging those who do not place faith in Jesus?" Theological View #3 I am in agreement. I also no longer hold to a pre-tribulation view of the rapture. I also see the rapture and the Lord's return in a singular type event and believe the church will be present on the earth through the tribulation.
@ Royal T.. my question to you as a believer who believes that salvation is by Grace alone through Faith in Christ .. but who would hold to a mild inclusivism view point based off Romans chapter 2:13-16 when Paul (I'm paraphrasing but could break it down word for word lol) Paul says that Gentiles who dont have the Law (Gentiles are obviously non Jews who weren't raised with the Law or Torah like Jews were culturally raised knowing the Torah) so Gentiles who were raised knowing their pagan religion & tradition only, not having even the basic knowledge of there being 1 God who created, who is Holy, Resurrection from the Dead and a day of Judgment.. because their culture wouldn't have known that..so Paul's example of a Gentile was someone who didn't have the Law and he said "Gentiles not having the Law, by nature doing the thing contained in the Law, showing that the Law was written in their hearts, were a Law unto themselves, their conscience bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts ACCUSING THEM or EXCUSING THEM" so a modern day example of a Gentile (a non Jew who doesn't know the Law or Torah or the prophets, or even a example of a group of people during the NT church period that would be a example of "included" inclusivism.. would be the Tribal Indians for example before the gospel reached the west , would you say that these tribal Indians (what we would call Native Americans today) who didn't hear the gospel and the Judeo Christian world view didn't even penetrate or have influence, but they fit the description of Romans 2:13-16 Gentiles who didn't have the Law but we're a law unto themselves.. would be an example of a "Certain circumstance, of certain people" who wouldn't be damned to Hell per se, according to the view of inclusivism that was described in this video and that many believers hold to. Would you say that they would be damned to Hell? What about another example.. I was watching a video about missionaries wanting to bring the gospel to these indigenous tribes that are remote and isolated and still to this day remain uncontacted by modern civilization (this is a certain extreme set of circumstances I'm presenting as another example) but these indigenous tribe killed everyone who tried to make contact with them like these missionaries who wanted to bring the gospel, I mean, God bless those brothers who wanted to bring the good news to these people groups.. (I even have a good friend who was hired as a armed military personnel to accompany a convoy of people that were wanting to make contact with a indigenous tribe similar to the other one I'm taking about.. and they all survived and made contact and national geographic did a documentary on this particular contact with this tribe and of course they learned what a lighter was and started fires quicker and of course they were influenced and I'm not saying that bad or that we should of left them alone.. but I'm just providing a real example of a certain circumstance that there are indigenous tribes that exist that still remain uncontacted.. like the tribe that killed the Missionaries who showed up to bring the gospel (again which I commend those missionaries for their boldness and taking a step of Faith like that) but in certain cases these missionaries had to go out of their way to make it near the shores of this indigenous tribe.. In the particular example I'm thinking of.. it was against international UN law to try and make contact with these uncontacted tribes.. because it was determined by law that leaving them uncontacted as to not disturb their way of life was best and humane.. anyway so this particular real life example that im thinking of where this missionary knowingly broke the Law to make contact, had to convince & pay these fisherman to bring him to the shore, where their forest is where they live is visible, but he had to swim to make it to the shore.. and he had a back up kayak to paddle away just in case.. and the 1st attempt he got shot at with arrows and he fled in his kayak.. and he eventually did get Mytared for trying to bring the gospel to them.. but in this certain case of this indigenous tribe who doesn't know English and doesn't have a way of hearing the gospel because the scripture says "how can they believe unless they hear and how can they hear unless someone is sent" would these people groups be condemned to HELL for not knowing about Jesus? Our argument that we are making as those who this inclusivism view is no they won't because of Romans 2:13-16.
@ Royal T.. so with all of that in mind.. do you still believe that we must hold a universalist view because of the inclusivism view for these certain cases?
@@tannermackenzie6440 Paul is writing Romans in Rhetorical form. Chapter 2 must be interpreted in light of Chapter 1. Rom. 1:18-32 establishes that God has revealed himself in creation but that the revelation of himself in creation is suppressed in the unrighteousness of men who do not even acknowledge him. As a result, they are without excuse. The righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel which is the power of God to save through faith. The reason the righteousness of God is necessary is because the wrath of God is revealed against ungodliness, unrighteousness, and the suppression of truth in unrighteousness that has been made available to everyone. Explicit faith in Jesus is required.
Dr. Dr. Bobby, I enjoyed your podcast; however, I was pretty surprised by your comment on people who believe in eternal security Salvation SAVED once always Save. if I understood you right, you stated that people could lose their salvation. wouldn't that make God unsure of himself saving someone's soul and then taking it away from them because of sin? how is that even possible with an all-knowing God? God knows all about our past and our future there is no surprise to God as to what will happen in our life. Now I say then, I believe that when we received the Lord as our personal savior there will be a change in one's life, For example, We have the attendance to look for signs in our life as we travel along life's highway to help on our journey toward our heavenly home. I am reminded of the words of Jesus when he said, "My sheep know my voice and I know them and they follow me, John 10:27; Again he said, "By this man will know that you are my disciples if you love one another, John 13:35, Again he said, "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them, Matthew 7:16-20 and I think you get what I am trying to say when God saves one soul he already knows everything about us from the day of our salvation acceptance of Christ into our life and unto heaven. I believe once saved Always SAVED by the grace of God even if that means God's fatal discipline to remove one life from the earth in order to SAVE their soul as stated in Romans 1:28, where Paul speaks of God giving one over to a reprobate mind, and I truly believe that to be so, as the word of God is written.
I think people are drawn to Molinism because it appeals to their feelings. God is sovereign and man at least appears to have the capacity to freely choose. But some of the tenets of Molinism leans toward Arminianism or even open theism if we are not careful.
Why do you think Calvinism is biblical, @@joshbeard9809 ? Cite one verse that teaches that God makes a person "born-again" so that the individual is then able to repent and place her faith & trust in Jesus. You can't. Because Calvinism is a false gospel that has no basis in Scripture.
@@IndianaJoe0321 The whole bible is loaded with verses. Pharaoh's heart being hardened, Jesus choosing the disciples, being born in sin nature and a slave to sin verses, Matt 5:48, John 3:7 (can you make yourself born again? Just look up the words chosen, election, and predestination in the Bible and you'll see.
@@IndianaJoe0321 Plus, Arminianism for example was over 200 years seen as heresy not as the Church has gone soft on sin, teaching of hell and God's wrath, and conforming to the teachings of the world it has gone the opposite direction of the early church fathers through the 1600s. Most of the famous Christian authors, preachers, and theologians were Calvinists in there lifetime. Even today some of the best preachers happen to Calvinists. But they are all some how wrong because it is no longer to be cool to be a Calvinists.
@@IndianaJoe0321 I asked this because of the suicide by starvation that took place in an African nation because a pastor told his congregation that they would be martyred and would meet Jesus in the air. It got me thinking about the types of leadership that will arise during the times of tribulation. Some of us are more susceptible to these charismatic people who claim Jesus as the reason. For whatever season. The church needs to equip believers to have discernment regarding the character of man. Just a thought.
… and the point of this grand experiment to a Being with no need is… and here comes the million word ten volume set explanation. A being with no needs and no woulds creates all this? I wouldn’t and neither would anything else. I can see mans need for the God but I can’t the Gods need for man. Please explain why this reality we inhabit exist at all?
So would a Calvinist boldly proclaim the Gospel as the good news? And what is he going to say the person he's proclaiming it to, "hey good news!, you might be one of the elect"
If a Calvinist does not -- it doesn't matter because God decreed that. If a Calvinist does -- it doesn't matter because God decreed that. To a Calvinist -- go do whatever you're going to do, because God decreed it.
God doesn't send people to hell for not being regenerated. He sends people to hell for the breaking of his law. They're guilty in the first place. Grace is given to those predestined before the foundation of the earth. Romans Ephesians 1.
People are condemned for not believing in Christ (John 3:18), precisely BECAUSE Christ atoned for their sin so that they their guilt could be taken away (1 John 2:2). Nowhere does Scripture say - definitely not Eph 1 - that grace is given only to those predestined before the foundation of the earth.
I'm glad not many people have watched this......... yikes. Emotions? Feelings? No scriptural basis for his statements at all. " For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." 2 Tim. 4:3-4
Lol. This wasn't meant to be a study on the Scriptural support for his views - simply a discussion on what views he has changed on. Just because it disagrees with your own views, doesn't mean he cannot defend it. This just wasn't the place to do so.
LOL to you as well. You just unwittingly acknowledged that Bobby has provided NO scriptural support for his views. Howard is correct. Throughout this entire interview, Bobby appealed almost exclusively to emotions and human logic to rationalize the positions about which he has changed his mind. There was virtually no interaction with the Word of God whatsoever, and that is very telling. Scripture is our supreme authority and the final court of appeal on all matters of doctrine, belief, and behavior. I fear that Bobby is heading in the same direction of men such as Andy Stanley, who is practically an apostate at this point. We all seriously need to be praying for Bobby, as well as Andy and others who keep changing their minds on issues simply because of feelings, personal experiences, or the notion that “It just doesn’t sit right with me and seems unfair.” Very dangerous thinking.
Re Rapture: How can it not have happened if Paul told those people he was writing to that “some of us who are alive (at the reading) would not die?” If they did die then what Paul wrote was not true? If the book of Thessalonians is inspired of God then God was telling the living Thessalonians they would have that experience of not dying. So it had to have happened. We know both Enoch and Elijah did not die. Why can’t God do that in segregation’s? Or individually for some? It’s a mystery after all Would you address that? You say you would answer questions if proposed to you.
@@IndianaJoe0321 1 Thess 4:17,18 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words. He doesn’t say those in a future time who are alive will be caught up…he was writing to a group of people Then. There. So how could they be comforted if it wasn’t for them, then and there?
Context, @@cericeborrelli3404 -- if you go back to verse 13, please read verses 13 thru 18 as an entire "chunk." Then you'll see that Saul/Paul was writing about future events.
“Those who never hear about Christ”- “God I don’t know who you are,but I know you created the universe…etc. “The only trouble is God states in Romans chapter 3,no one seeks after God,no one understands,all have turned away,those in the flesh are hostile to God.
..people will not respond to God ,they are hostile to God,Bobby. God is glorifying Himself by saving an undeserving elect,while the rest receive justice for their rebellion.I received the undeserved gift of Grace,why me I don’t know why,but I have been brought from darkness into the light and am forever thankful.
If they are undeserving, which they are, then why save a limited amount of people? The very people you describe as hostile to God, for some reason God decided to save some of them? This is why Calvinism makes no sense and is an insult to the gospel. YOU chose of your own will to respond to the gospel. YOU chose to accept Christ as your Lord and Saviour. God is not obligated to choose to save anyone. If it was only up to God's choice, then no one would be saved, because we have ALL sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is NO partiality with God. There has to be a mutual agreement. God provided the offer of salvation for everyone, and everyone is required to make a choice. Honestly, to believe you were chosen to be saved from the wrath of God out of all the sinners that exist is the very height of pride, a disgusting sin.
@@Lukandon …to keep it simple, no one seeks after God,all have turned away,all are hostile to God,they will no accept Gods law ,nor can they do so. God saves an undeserved election to show His power and Glory. As Christ says ,no one can come to me unless the Father enables them. Regeneration precedes Faith. Our undeserved gift of Grace is a humbling realisation. “IF IT WAS ONLY UP TO GOD’S CHOICE,THEN NO ONE WOULD BE SAVED”? What?? The Gospel is preached and as it says in Acts 13:48, all those appointed to eternal life believed. God has a decree and is fulfilling His purposes ,all for His Glory.
@@chrismachin2166Taking verses out of context and their intended meaning is a classic Calvinist move, in order to justify their pride of being chosen, as well as their inability to use logical and critical thinking to realise they’re wrong. As I’ve already said, there is no partiality with God. If it was only up to God, then no one would be saved, because we all stand equal before God, because we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Since we’re all equal, then no one should be individually picked by God to be saved as that would be unjust and show favouritism on God’s part. The other option is if it was only up to God’s choice, would be saving everyone, but that obviously contradicts Scripture. Since those 2 “options” are out because of the reasons I laid out, then that means it’s not only up to God’s choice and any interpretations of verses you’re referencing should be deemed misinterpreted because they would conflict with the logical conclusions made above with the interpretation you’re using. “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” In other words, the only other possibility, however improbable it sounds to you, must be true, and that’s that everyone has the choice to respond to the gospel when they hear it. I thank God for the gift of free will that every human being has. The truth is, God wants everyone to be saved, as Scripture teaches, but not everyone is able to be saved due to their hard hearts. If you can’t accept the above, then your heart is hard and your pride overpowers you. I will pray for you.
@@Lukandon pride of being chosen? I take no pride of being undeservedly chosen,all the Glory goes to God. On the other hand ,you take pride and boast you chose God,whereas “your next door neighbour “ rejected Christ,in your misunderstood theology.
@@Lukandon “since we’re all equal,then no one should be individually picked by God Because that would be unjust…..” We are all hostile to God in the flesh ( Romans ch 8) ,we all deserve just punishment. Grace is an undeserved gift or it wouldn’t be Grace. Your statement starting “since were all equal..” is an example of a man centred view of Scripture. Read Romans chapter 9 ,your objection to God deciding who will and who will not be saved is actually dealt with in that chapter,how ironic you brought up that objection!
As Charles Spurgeon famously said, I preach the Gospel to everyone,the elect and the unelect.If the elect had a big E on their backs I would just preach to them.
What does every person deserve? They hate God,they are in rebellion,they will not accept God’s law etc etc. There is a day of judgement, what is their just punishment? The saving Grace that the elect receive is undeserved,is God wrong in saving these people to show His Glory? The cry is that’s not fair- read Romans 9 again !
As a 5 point Calvinist myself, I don’t think you’ve quite understood limited atonement or the tension between the sovereignty of god and the responsibility of man as it is taught by Sproul and MacAurthur who you mentioned as early influencers on your Calvinist roots. They are two of my main influences as well. We don’t teach the idea you articulated of “you OUGHT to believe, but you CANT believe, yet you are still morally responsible for the unbelief you weren’t capable of changing”. My understanding of what we teach is that you OUGHT to believe and you ARE able to believe, but in God’s sovereign foreknowledge and ordination, it is a forgone conclusion that you WONT believe, therefore you are still responsible for your unbelief. But this does not necessarily call for the “hard exclusivism” you describe. I lean toward your “soft exclusivist” position myself which you articulated very nicely. I don’t see a conflict there.
“You ought to believe and you are able to believe…in God’s sovereignty forknowledge and ordination it is a foregone collusion that you won’t believe…” Without Freewill, it’s just semantics. Either God preordained you for hell? or he didn’t Which is it?
🙄 personally I think Calvinism is a lie.. I believe in free Grace Theology and I believe that to be the truth and what Paul Taught.. but to each his own..
All people believe!! But they are in rebellion/ hostile to the Creator . They know God exists by his eternal power and divine nature so they are without excuse. Total depravity is another one you reject…biblical revelation is not on your side,Bobby!
Alas, there is a categorical fallacy at work here. The matter is the 'free will' discourse. It appears there is a semi-Pelagian sense expressed here. That would not be good. Amen.
@@IndianaJoe0321 I’ve read the Bible,it says over and over again,no one can come to Christ unless the Father enables them. But you seen to think man has the free will within himself to choose Christ.You seem to contradict Scripture?
You are forever lost, @@chrismachin2166 , unless you freely choose to repent and follow Jesus. Calvinism is a false gospel and Calvinists worship a false deity that authored evil and caused Hitler to kill almost 14 million people. The Calvinist god is a false deity.
9:40 If you don't believe you can lose your salvation, it is because you have still accepted the novel false doctrines of Cavlinism. No Christian before Calvin taught once justified always justified. It doesn't matter who you read...Irenaeus, Chrysostom, Augustine, even Luther...every Christian prior to Calvin correctly interpreted the Bible as teaching one can fall away from God's grace after being justified.
That's not true. An understanding of Gods word and the Gispel teaches us you cannot lose your salvation. if you believe you can lose your salvation then it would imply that Jesus' sacrifice and death on the cross as payment for sin does not fully satisfy the debt of our sin which is contrary to the word of God.
@@keepingupwithkelsey2980 Not a single verse in the Scriptures say Jesus' paying for all your sins means Jesus Himself will not condemn you if you keep sinning. He bought you so that you would be his obedient slave, not so that you would keep living as a child of the devil. The Scriptures literally say "For *if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries* . 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by *the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified* , and has outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, 'Vengeance is mine; I will repay.' And again, 'The Lord will judge his people.' 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." - Hebrews 10:26-31 (ESV). Jesus Christ even tells you the Parable of the Unforgiving what the Kingdom of Heaven is like, and He literally tells you that you can have your debt payment revoked if you fall into the sin of unforgiveness. "Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. 24 When he began to settle, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 And since he could not pay, his master ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. 26 So the servant[c] fell on his knees, imploring him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ 27 *And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt* . 28 But when that same servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii,[d] and seizing him, he began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay what you owe.’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ 30 He refused and went and put him in prison until he should pay the debt. 31 When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their master all that had taken place. 32 *Then his master summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers,[e] until he should pay all his debt. 35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart* ” - Matthew 18:23-35 (ESV)
Hebrews 10 was Paul specifically stating that Jesus' sacrifice was once for all. 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Later in the chapter refers to the person who hears and knows the truth of the Gospel and deliberately rejects the sacrifice of Jesus. You have a misunderstanding of the context as this is referring to apostate and not the believer. Remember Peter denying Christ 3 times? He went on to write portions of the Bible and change the world. He wasn't condemned to hell because of his slip into sinfulness. As far as the unforgiving servant parable, Jesus is demonstrating that a believer that understands the debth of grace he has been extended must extend grace to others. I dont believe it should be interpreted as eternal damnation to believers who have unforgiveness in their heart in light of all the scripture that ensures our eternal security and assures us that our works will not earn favor with God. Scripture about our eternal security Romans 8:37-39, John 10:28, Eph 4:30, John 6:37, John 5:24, 1 John 5:10-13, Eph 2:8, 2 Corinthians 1:22, 1 Cor. 1:8, psalm 34:22, 2 Tim 2:19, Phil. 3:20-21 The parable of the Prodigal son, and many many more verses. Jesus paid for all sins, for everyone. Past sins, current sins, future sins. Whosoever believes and calls on him WILL be saved from damnation. It was a the gift of God and he does not rescind his offer. We can infer that if we can do nothing to earn salvation, we can do nothing to lose salvation. I hope that can give you some clarity :)
@@keepingupwithkelsey2980 You say: "Hebrews 10 was Paul specifically stating that Jesus' sacrifice was once for all. 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." "this is referring to apostate and not the believer." You are twisting the Scriptures and do not have even the slightest explanation for what Hebrews 10:26-31 actually says. An apostate is a former believer. It literally says the person spoken of was once sanctified by Christ's blood and that he had the sacrifice but no longer. "Once and for all" in Hebrews 10 is saying no more blood sacrifices have to be made since Christ did that once. Literally no one is saying he would have to die again. You are making a classic fallacy of a missplaced modifier by changing the "once and for all" sacrifice to "once and for all" salvation. No Scripture says your salvation is once and for all. t literally says you can lose the sanctification of Christ's blood, and Jesus can revoke that "once for all" sacrifice from you if you go on willfully sinning. This is what all the Christian church believed for 1500 years until Calvin the heretic. None of the other verses you cite saying anything about one not being able to fall away of one's own evil will. I don't have time to go through each one, but give me one and I will refute it. There are no passages in the Bible that teach once saved always saved, only those people twist.
@@Haukman66 Well, it seems that after thoughtfully considering it, he has changed his mind that Calvinism is sound theology. Why would that mean that he wasn't a Calvinist?
@@AntWoord_YT I was commenting on this particular video. In which he seemed to be embracing molinism. And is anti biblical. I don’t follow the guy so if he has changed his mind again, then so be it. But if he is embracing an anti biblical view of God then I’m gonna state my opinion on it.
@@Haukman66 Yes, we all have our opinion on what is unbiblical. Whether it actually is unbiblical, is another discussion entirely. Unless and until you have engaged the actual arguments for a particular view, it doesn't say much when you call it "bad apologetics".
Officiating the ceremony wasn't Discussed. He did say he was willing to go if invited and be a witness to that matrimony. Like I said he’s a clown he’s better suited to be some theologian and philosopher than teaching the Bible.
The Church wasn't prepared in 2020. They either practice idolatry, cowardness, or apathy. Some have even left the faith. Since 2020 God is separating the wheat from the chaff. The last 3 years definitely has woken me up and brought me back to faith in God. I was not in a good place mentally, emotionally, or spiritually before the plandemic. Now, in 2023 I am trying to learn everything I can about apologetics and what I truly believe. God is faithful and merciful.
Great discussion, Bobby!
Thanks so much for this podcast!! I was always taught in the church to believe in the rapture, I did for many years. I started to question the the concept of the rapture. So began my Journey, of what I now believe to be true, same conclusion as you. To be prepared, know that Christians will be hated, excluded and many of us martyred. Jesus said the heart of many will grow cold. It’s easy to say you love Jesus when your life or the life of a loved one isn’t on the line. Turn up the heat, many will fall away!! God, separating the wheat from the chaff. I pray for Courage that it won’t be me!
What about the Christians outside the safety of western nations? Their homes are destroyed, their jobs are taken or reduced to removing filth, their daughters are kidnapped and raped and forced to marry and convert out of Christianity, they’re stoned, spit on, laughed at, mocked, tortured unendingly and eventually killed, then paraded to the public.
Is that what pre-trib means? That only the safe Christians in safe countries get to escape horror and persecution for them and their loved ones??
What are you talking about!!!! Did you really read my comment??? I said we would be martyred!! I said at the end that I hope it isn’t me, meaning that I don’t let my heart grow cold!! Sounds like your looking for a fight!! Shame on you!!
@@tamihernandez7816 - you’re not backing away from this ‘fight’ are you?
@@I9s7lam5is-S3tu1pid
Oh brother…grow up!
I am mindful of Winston Churchill who said "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject". Changing one's mind means that what we once held to be true was not true, holding out the possibility that everything we have taken to be true may be false, in theology, politics, science and life, so the process of mind changing is valuable!. Having said this, truth is not subject to the person, however wise and knowledgeable they are, but is revealed by truth seeking, investigations, preparedness to change one's mind when necessary. I have changed my mind several times, not because of intelligence or received wisdom, but perhaps the recognition of earlier ignorance and the arrogance that goes with it.
HI Dr. Bobby, I don't know much, but what I do know, is to follow Jesus. love Brother
your awesome dude!
This is thought provoking.
I find that for myself of these issues I just became comfortable saying I think X may be closer to the truth but it’s not settled in scripture and God knows.
I remain open-minded about eschatology, but I do lean toward the belief that the “rapture” is not taught anywhere in the Bible and that it must be read into Scripture by people who already believe in it. Having said that, I am deeply troubled that Bobby provided NO scriptural support for his views. Throughout this entire interview, he appealed almost exclusively to emotions and human logic to rationalize the positions about which he has changed his mind. There was virtually no interaction with the Word of God whatsoever, and that is very telling. Scripture is our supreme authority and the final court of appeal on all matters of doctrine, belief, and behavior. I fear that Bobby is heading in the same direction of men such as Andy Stanley, who is practically an apostate at this point. We all seriously need to be praying for Bobby, as well as Andy and others who keep changing their minds on issues simply because of feelings, personal experiences, or the notion that “It just doesn’t sit right with me and seems unfair.” Very dangerous thinking.
Hello! I’m so glad to hear that you are willing to look at well formed paradigms and change your mind according to what scripture actually teaches.
If I can I would like to also suggest you think of the preterist view. Where there is no tribulation but all of what you were describing actually happened in 70 A.D., to the Jews.
I agree with you that the rapture and the second coming all happened together. This differs somewhat from a pure preterist view.
It may help to look up the teachings of Steve Gregg. He has researched this for many years.
Two "BRIEF" comments regarding your comment...
How can the rapture & 2nd coming be rolled into ONE event based on these few verses...
In *I Thess **4:13**,ff* we find Paul having to teach the believers about the rapture...they were UN-learned about it. The bible reads, "But I would not have you to be IGNORANT, brethren...", and then in verses 14-18 he instructs them. _HOWEVER..._
In the VERY NEXT FEW VERSES in *I Thess 5:1,2* he goes on to say this; "But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have NO NEED that I write unto you. For yourselves KNOW PERFECTLY that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."
The point being, a person can't be both IGNORANT & LEARNED about the same matter...it's either one or the other. That being said, these are two *DIFFERENT* events. Now, as far as the Preterist position goes...
What really can't be reconciled with the Preterist position, in suggesting that *Matt 24* has already been fulfilled is this...
*Matt **24:27* says, "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."
*1* That verse speaks of Christ coming as _"LIGHTNING"_ (quick & short lived to say the least!),but it took over 5 months to destroy Jerusalem.'
*2* The Romans attacked from the NORTH, yet the verse tells us Christ comes from the EAST.
There's really more that could be provided to refute the Preterist position (the 1st point as well actually) but I don't want to overwhelm the comment section with such a _l e n g t h y_ post which I can be found doing at times! LOL All the best to you in your search for truth, *MARANATHA!*
13:45 Bobby, I hold to same exact position. I'm very sympathetic to CS Lewis universalistic leanings.
I would differentiate between exclusivism with restrictivism of Calvinism. Inclusivism allows for other ways other than the gospel. Soft exclusivism would be soft inclusivism and hard exclusivism is restrictivism. Hard inclusivism would be pluralism.
Totally agree with him on Calvinism. Great points. I would also describe myself as a confusionist for the same reason, ha ha.
Not sure I agree with him on his soft exclusivism view though. I understand the logic, but all the apostles say "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved", not "believe there is a god and repent of your sins". I just don't see his view backed by Scripture. I did see another view not too long ago explained that anyone doesn't know God the Father wouldn't believe in Jesus anyway, so that's one reason why people who never hear the gospel won't be saved, since God would see their future and know they won't accept the Son because they already rejected the Father.
I understand why he's post trib.
I tend to be a pre wrath tribulation believer, but post tribulation isn’t of the table for me. Thank you for your discussion.
I'm finding myself in this camp as well. One of my points of reasoning is, God's people in old and new Testament have been present for the antiChrists in their day, why would we be absent from the final one being revealed..
Grateful to hear the transition from pretrib to post-trib. However, be open to amillennialism! In my mind, that’s what scripture is really pointing out.
also I believe it says the Holy spirit convicts the "world" of its sin so everyone has a shot no-one is excluded.
I love the channel, podcast, and knowledge from all the experience in the walk with Christ. I like your measured approach. I was wondering if you can do a video, or if you have already made one on your position on old earth, young earth, flat earth, firmament, hollow earth, evolution, creation etc? I' haven't done my due diligence, but I believe William lane Craig takes the position of evolution, and God breaths life into Homo sapiens.
Here’s some verses in acts that speaks upon God setting out every person’s habitations. These give the connotation that He knows where we all will live and our surrounding and gives each person the opportunity to come to Him with what He has provided them with in life, Whether they are born in America or some tribe in South America or anywhere else.
Acts 17:24-27 KJVS
[24] God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; [25] Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; [26] And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; [27] That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
we agree on all those beliefs! next belief you might wanna question is if we as Christians should follow the sabbath in obedience
Why would Christians need to follow the Sabbath, if the Sabbath was a sign between God and Israel under the old covenant? In fact, the Sabbath was a mere shadow of what was to come the Messiah. Jesus is our Sabbath rest, we enter HIS rest when we believe. New Testament believers are not under the old covenant which has been replaced - Hebr 8 & 9.
@@AntWoord_YT Well, because the gentiles were grafted into israel, the sabbath is a shadow yes, but of something that yet to come. Notice that hebrews 4 speaks of a future rest that we must be careful to enter in it. This rest (heaven) was foreshadowed by God resting on the sabbath. So also, the sabbath is a shadow of heaven that is to come, of which pertains to Christ. Read the context of Colossians 2, Pauls main talking point is that we must follow what is of Christ, not of this world (verse 8). It is clear that Paul is saying that the sabbath is is of Christ and separate from the the other laws from men (do not touch, do not taste...). Constantly Jesus was judged for eating on the sabbath, healing on the sabbath, not washing their hands before eating.. This is why Paul says that you should not let anyone judge you in these laws that are of Christ.
I'm currently going through all the opposing arguments for sabbath keeping, if you manage to bring up a new argument to me that would be awesome!
@@jeremiest-louis2943 Hebrews talks about Jesus being our Sabbath rest (which we enter through faith), and that was fore-shadowed by the Sabbath as a sign between Israel and God. There are absolutely no Scriptural reasons, under the NEW covenant, to observe the Jewish Sabbath.
1st off, really appreciate the dialogue.
1st issue: Question: Does Romans 9 being a corporate statement change the fact that God chose Israel over Edom? Was Edom able to come to God? Doesn't this just kick the can down the road?
I get the argument of culpability... but how can you get another option from scripture? Isn't your argument based on philosophy, emotion, logic and not scripture? I just leave room for God to be bigger than our system, but I just can't see another interpretation...
2nd Issue: Bobby, isn't this just because your feelers don't feel right. I think the scenario you pose is something that makes God seem unable to work out timing or be sovereign there... this isn't a good way to write something off. -maybe you are right, but I think it's concerning. Did Paul risk his neck just to give people a better life on earth? Wasn't it to be spared from the wrath of God?
Regarding dreams and visions...aren't those folks directed to someone who shares the gospel message?
3rd issue: Why are you convinced AMil or Post mil are incorrect?
To point 1, the old and new testament have accounts of eject Jews rejecting God and unelect Gentiles believing
Psalm 9:18 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. Many Cultures rejected God and they been in darkness ever since blind def lost
God is Love..
Since He is what love truly is and is the ultimate expression of it; I think that would by necessity require Him to truly offer salvation to every human being.
God is also a God of Wrath,Judgement and Punishment.
Brother Bobby is confused. He’s been through many downs in his ministry. I saw him rubbing elbows with many Calvary guys as well. I also remember him doing a Q & A with Brian B from Costa Mesa Calvary and that was a mess after Chuck. Bobby is saying many things here that he didn’t feel or couldn’t accept, leading him to inconsistencies. Love you bro
Irvin Baxter opened my eyes, but first I was offended by his post trib stance. However, I gave him my ear because he was very humble and kind and respectful, and he studied and researched the topic. It always bothered me that no one would give him respect. I remember asking a evangalist who came to my church at the time,(I am deconstructing now), what he thought of Irvin Baxter and all he did was INSULT him! I appreciate Dr. Bobby so much
You say you are deconstructing - are you make provisions to leave the faith, or are simply reforming your faith?
Deconstructing has become more a synonym for taking out belief of God word and judging it by one's feelings, then by God's word judging our feelings
I wasn't sure what you meant at the moment, and wanted to reach out. Thank you for sharing
@@andrewwoode I have not lost my faith... it's just that pre trib, mid trib or post trib does not change my salvation. It did, however, become a trun off when others will insult a differing of opinion of the rapture.
Thank you
Bobby.
(I too fell into the Calvin trap for a few years)
So do you teach that one who follows Jesus on His return will Will be taken to heaven or to Zion/New Jerusalem///where ever he is ruling from?
The "POST" position rules out the promise of heaven, and it also doesn't allow for the Bema Judgment or the marriage to the Lamb, BOTH of which take place in heaven I believe. And as far as His millennial reign goes, I would say this...
There is prophesy to fulfilled, and the only way possible for this to happen, is for Christ to rule here on earth. We read in *Isaiah 2:2,3...*
=====> "And it shall come to pass _in the last days,_ that THE MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOUSE shall be established IN THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAINS, and shall be exalted above the HILLS; and *all nations* shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and LET US GO UP TO THE MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD FROM JERUSALEM." Also we read...
=====> "...the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." *Matt **19:28*
=====> "...the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:" *Matt **25:31*
Then too, you'll recall from *Matt 4* where we read, "Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him _ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD,"_ which speaks of the PHYSICAL WORLD here on earth. And the great battle to unfold in *Revelation,* is when Christ wrests power from satan over this *EARTH...* that which satan CURRENTLY controls. These few verses would argue for Christ's millennial reign here on earth.
*MARANATHA!*
I do believe it’s important to keep our hearts and minds open to be corrected. However I’m sad at your departure from some sound positions.
I didn’t hear much biblical reasoning, just “I didn’t like this so I decided to believe that instead.” And so called “logical” reasoning - God is infinite and our finite minds will never actually understand how it works!
Hmmm...Theological View #1 I generally agree, although I do believe the Scripture clearly teaches apostasy (the word itself carries the idea of "moving away from "- one cannot depart from what one did not genuinely possess) The idea of apostasy for American Christianity (who have been saturated with the "once saved always saved" message) is uncomfortable and so there is a rationalization of texts that utilize straightforward language on the issue. Theological View #2, I strongly disagree with your move toward inclusivism. There are some problems with what you stated. First, you spoke about how you emotionally resonated with inclusivism based on your experience in other parts of the world. Truth is not determined by our emotions or experiences. Your example of someone in Thessalonica falls into a type of either/or fallacy. You constructed the hypothetical for the outcome of the point you were making (which is why hypotheticals are not how we should address explicit biblical truth). There is no need for a hypothetical because there is the actual example in Acts 10 describing how the Lord deals with those who were "God fearers" but had not expressly heard of Jesus (and it wasn't inclusivism). You mention Romans 2 regarding the law on our hearts. Paul's point, however, is to show that all are guilty and without excuse. Paul explicitly states in Gal. 3 that the law is a schoolmaster that points us to Jesus. Also, while you mentioned John 14 with Jesus' exclusive statement about himself, you neglected Romans 1 and Ephesians 2. The latter expressly states that we are saved by grace through faith. In Acts 2 Peter calls the multitude to repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus. Matthew 28, Jesus commands his followers to make disciples of all peoples (ethne) baptizing in the name of the triune God and teaching obedience. In Acts 1 Jesus states that the Holy Spirit would empower us for the purpose of being his witnesses. Romans 10 Paul expressly speaks about faith associated with salvation. If inclusivism is true, then faith and repentance are not required. If inclusivism is true then, evangelism is not urgent at least and unnecessary at worse. If we hold out the possibility of inclusivism then we must hold to the possibility that some who died in the universal flood of Noah's day (for example) are potentially saved, but we have no real biblical basis for such a belief. Also, inclusivism is a stepping stone to universalism (which utilizes a similar rationalization process to arrive at conclusions), which opens up the door to religious pluralism being acceptable. Additionally, I think that we have in our mind a particular idea about how evangelism is to be practiced and how it works, and the result is that we unintentionally put God in a box. The questions to be answered are these, "Is faith in Jesus necessary for salvation?" (if it is unnecessary for some, it is necessary for none). "Is God just in judging those who do not place faith in Jesus?" Theological View #3 I am in agreement. I also no longer hold to a pre-tribulation view of the rapture. I also see the rapture and the Lord's return in a singular type event and believe the church will be present on the earth through the tribulation.
I wonder what your thoughts on Melchizedek are.
@ Royal T.. my question to you as a believer who believes that salvation is by Grace alone through Faith in Christ .. but who would hold to a mild inclusivism view point based off Romans chapter 2:13-16 when Paul (I'm paraphrasing but could break it down word for word lol) Paul says that Gentiles who dont have the Law (Gentiles are obviously non Jews who weren't raised with the Law or Torah like Jews were culturally raised knowing the Torah) so Gentiles who were raised knowing their pagan religion & tradition only, not having even the basic knowledge of there being 1 God who created, who is Holy, Resurrection from the Dead and a day of Judgment.. because their culture wouldn't have known that..so Paul's example of a Gentile was someone who didn't have the Law and he said "Gentiles not having the Law, by nature doing the thing contained in the Law, showing that the Law was written in their hearts, were a Law unto themselves, their conscience bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts ACCUSING THEM or EXCUSING THEM" so a modern day example of a Gentile (a non Jew who doesn't know the Law or Torah or the prophets, or even a example of a group of people during the NT church period that would be a example of "included" inclusivism.. would be the Tribal Indians for example before the gospel reached the west , would you say that these tribal Indians (what we would call Native Americans today) who didn't hear the gospel and the Judeo Christian world view didn't even penetrate or have influence, but they fit the description of Romans 2:13-16 Gentiles who didn't have the Law but we're a law unto themselves.. would be an example of a "Certain circumstance, of certain people" who wouldn't be damned to Hell per se, according to the view of inclusivism that was described in this video and that many believers hold to. Would you say that they would be damned to Hell? What about another example.. I was watching a video about missionaries wanting to bring the gospel to these indigenous tribes that are remote and isolated and still to this day remain uncontacted by modern civilization (this is a certain extreme set of circumstances I'm presenting as another example) but these indigenous tribe killed everyone who tried to make contact with them like these missionaries who wanted to bring the gospel, I mean, God bless those brothers who wanted to bring the good news to these people groups.. (I even have a good friend who was hired as a armed military personnel to accompany a convoy of people that were wanting to make contact with a indigenous tribe similar to the other one I'm taking about.. and they all survived and made contact and national geographic did a documentary on this particular contact with this tribe and of course they learned what a lighter was and started fires quicker and of course they were influenced and I'm not saying that bad or that we should of left them alone.. but I'm just providing a real example of a certain circumstance that there are indigenous tribes that exist that still remain uncontacted.. like the tribe that killed the Missionaries who showed up to bring the gospel (again which I commend those missionaries for their boldness and taking a step of Faith like that) but in certain cases these missionaries had to go out of their way to make it near the shores of this indigenous tribe.. In the particular example I'm thinking of.. it was against international UN law to try and make contact with these uncontacted tribes.. because it was determined by law that leaving them uncontacted as to not disturb their way of life was best and humane.. anyway so this particular real life example that im thinking of where this missionary knowingly broke the Law to make contact, had to convince & pay these fisherman to bring him to the shore, where their forest is where they live is visible, but he had to swim to make it to the shore.. and he had a back up kayak to paddle away just in case.. and the 1st attempt he got shot at with arrows and he fled in his kayak.. and he eventually did get Mytared for trying to bring the gospel to them.. but in this certain case of this indigenous tribe who doesn't know English and doesn't have a way of hearing the gospel because the scripture says "how can they believe unless they hear and how can they hear unless someone is sent" would these people groups be condemned to HELL for not knowing about Jesus? Our argument that we are making as those who this inclusivism view is no they won't because of Romans 2:13-16.
@ Royal T.. so with all of that in mind.. do you still believe that we must hold a universalist view because of the inclusivism view for these certain cases?
@@tannermackenzie6440 Paul is writing Romans in Rhetorical form. Chapter 2 must be interpreted in light of Chapter 1. Rom. 1:18-32 establishes that God has revealed himself in creation but that the revelation of himself in creation is suppressed in the unrighteousness of men who do not even acknowledge him. As a result, they are without excuse. The righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel which is the power of God to save through faith. The reason the righteousness of God is necessary is because the wrath of God is revealed against ungodliness, unrighteousness, and the suppression of truth in unrighteousness that has been made available to everyone. Explicit faith in Jesus is required.
Love for my not so blessed hope post, Great Tribulation wrath of the Lamb, event described in 1st Thessalonians masochistic brothers
Dr. Dr. Bobby, I enjoyed your podcast; however, I was pretty surprised by your comment on people who believe in eternal security Salvation SAVED once always Save. if I understood you right, you stated that people could lose their salvation. wouldn't that make God unsure of himself saving someone's soul and then taking it away from them because of sin? how is that even possible with an all-knowing God? God knows all about our past and our future there is no surprise to God as to what will happen in our life. Now I say then, I believe that when we received the Lord as our personal savior there will be a change in one's life, For example, We have the attendance to look for signs in our life as we travel along life's highway to help on our journey toward our heavenly home. I am reminded of the words of Jesus when he said, "My sheep know my voice and I know them and they follow me, John 10:27;
Again he said, "By this man will know that you are my disciples if you love one another, John 13:35, Again he said, "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them, Matthew 7:16-20 and I think you get what
I am trying to say when God saves one soul he already knows everything about us from the day of our salvation acceptance of Christ into our life and unto heaven. I believe once saved Always SAVED by the grace of God even if that means God's fatal discipline to remove one life from the earth in order to SAVE their soul as stated in Romans 1:28, where Paul speaks of God giving one over to a reprobate mind, and I truly believe that to be so, as the word of God is written.
God does not control us we are to be "led" by the spirit to be children of God not controlled by it.
I think people are drawn to Molinism because it appeals to their feelings. God is sovereign and man at least appears to have the capacity to freely choose. But some of the tenets of Molinism leans toward Arminianism or even open theism if we are not careful.
Arminianism and Molinism are biblical. Do you not believe in Sola Scriptura?
@@IndianaJoe0321 Both of those as well as Calvinism are all Biblical. To reject any in there entirety is to reject Sola Scriptura.
Why do you think Calvinism is biblical, @@joshbeard9809 ? Cite one verse that teaches that God makes a person "born-again" so that the individual is then able to repent and place her faith & trust in Jesus.
You can't. Because Calvinism is a false gospel that has no basis in Scripture.
@@IndianaJoe0321 The whole bible is loaded with verses. Pharaoh's heart being hardened, Jesus choosing the disciples, being born in sin nature and a slave to sin verses, Matt 5:48, John 3:7 (can you make yourself born again? Just look up the words chosen, election, and predestination in the Bible and you'll see.
@@IndianaJoe0321 Plus, Arminianism for example was over 200 years seen as heresy not as the Church has gone soft on sin, teaching of hell and God's wrath, and conforming to the teachings of the world it has gone the opposite direction of the early church fathers through the 1600s. Most of the famous Christian authors, preachers, and theologians were Calvinists in there lifetime. Even today some of the best preachers happen to Calvinists. But they are all some how wrong because it is no longer to be cool to be a Calvinists.
Does Bobby believe in Annihilationism?
No he does not
That was my initial thought, too.
We may want to reread John 5:16-30.
Big one here !!!
Amen.
22:41 will a suicide during the tribulation period be considered a martyred death for Christ. It’s going to be hard to watch loved ones starve.
There is a difference between someone killing you for your faith ... versus you cowardly ending your life so as to avoid persecution.
@@IndianaJoe0321 I asked this because of the suicide by starvation that took place in an African nation because a pastor told his congregation that they would be martyred and would meet Jesus in the air. It got me thinking about the types of leadership that will arise during the times of tribulation. Some of us are more susceptible to these charismatic people who claim Jesus as the reason. For whatever season. The church needs to equip believers to have discernment regarding the character of man. Just a thought.
… and the point of this grand experiment to a
Being with no need is… and here comes the million word ten volume set explanation. A being with no needs and no woulds creates all this? I wouldn’t and neither would anything else. I can see mans need for the God but I can’t the Gods need for man. Please explain why this reality we inhabit exist at all?
So would a Calvinist boldly proclaim the Gospel as the good news? And what is he going to say the person he's proclaiming it to, "hey good news!, you might be one of the elect"
If a Calvinist does not -- it doesn't matter because God decreed that. If a Calvinist does -- it doesn't matter because God decreed that.
To a Calvinist -- go do whatever you're going to do, because God decreed it.
Whosoever believes is in scripture. Somuch of isms terms are adding to scripture’s point of view
Amen, nice & biblical understanding.
Stay away from catholicism & catholicism
God doesn't send people to hell for not being regenerated. He sends people to hell for the breaking of his law.
They're guilty in the first place. Grace is given to those predestined before the foundation of the earth. Romans Ephesians 1.
People are condemned for not believing in Christ (John 3:18), precisely BECAUSE Christ atoned for their sin so that they their guilt could be taken away (1 John 2:2). Nowhere does Scripture say - definitely not Eph 1 - that grace is given only to those predestined before the foundation of the earth.
The sin of the world is not believing in the One God sent.
I'm glad not many people have watched this......... yikes. Emotions? Feelings? No scriptural basis for his statements at all.
" For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." 2 Tim. 4:3-4
Lol. This wasn't meant to be a study on the Scriptural support for his views - simply a discussion on what views he has changed on. Just because it disagrees with your own views, doesn't mean he cannot defend it. This just wasn't the place to do so.
LOL to you as well. You just unwittingly acknowledged that Bobby has provided NO scriptural support for his views. Howard is correct. Throughout this entire interview, Bobby appealed almost exclusively to emotions and human logic to rationalize the positions about which he has changed his mind. There was virtually no interaction with the Word of God whatsoever, and that is very telling. Scripture is our supreme authority and the final court of appeal on all matters of doctrine, belief, and behavior. I fear that Bobby is heading in the same direction of men such as Andy Stanley, who is practically an apostate at this point. We all seriously need to be praying for Bobby, as well as Andy and others who keep changing their minds on issues simply because of feelings, personal experiences, or the notion that “It just doesn’t sit right with me and seems unfair.” Very dangerous thinking.
Re Rapture:
How can it not have happened if Paul told those people he was writing to that “some of us who are alive (at the reading) would not die?” If they did die then what Paul wrote was not true? If the book of Thessalonians is inspired of God then God was telling the living Thessalonians they would have that experience of not dying.
So it had to have happened.
We know both Enoch and Elijah did not die. Why can’t God do that in segregation’s? Or individually for some? It’s a mystery after all
Would you address that? You say you would answer questions if proposed to you.
You allegedly quote Saul/Paul and yet you don't provide an address. Interesting.
Care to cite your source?
@@IndianaJoe0321
1 Thess 4:17,18
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
He doesn’t say those in a future time who are alive will be caught up…he was writing to a group of people
Then. There. So how could they be comforted if it wasn’t for them, then and there?
Context, @@cericeborrelli3404 -- if you go back to verse 13, please read verses 13 thru 18 as an entire "chunk." Then you'll see that Saul/Paul was writing about future events.
“Those who never hear about Christ”- “God I don’t know who you are,but I know you created the universe…etc. “The only trouble is God states in Romans chapter 3,no one seeks after God,no one understands,all have turned away,those in the flesh are hostile to God.
5+ Calvinist😂
As James White says ,a person rejecting limited atonement is really rejecting unconditional election.
... because, biblically, salvation is conditional. So your comment makes sense. #SolaScriptura
..people will not respond to God ,they are hostile to God,Bobby. God is glorifying Himself by saving an undeserving elect,while the rest receive justice for their rebellion.I received the undeserved gift of Grace,why me I don’t know why,but I have been brought from darkness into the light and am forever thankful.
If they are undeserving, which they are, then why save a limited amount of people? The very people you describe as hostile to God, for some reason God decided to save some of them? This is why Calvinism makes no sense and is an insult to the gospel. YOU chose of your own will to respond to the gospel. YOU chose to accept Christ as your Lord and Saviour. God is not obligated to choose to save anyone. If it was only up to God's choice, then no one would be saved, because we have ALL sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is NO partiality with God. There has to be a mutual agreement. God provided the offer of salvation for everyone, and everyone is required to make a choice.
Honestly, to believe you were chosen to be saved from the wrath of God out of all the sinners that exist is the very height of pride, a disgusting sin.
@@Lukandon …to keep it simple, no one seeks after God,all have turned away,all are hostile to God,they will no accept Gods law ,nor can they do so. God saves an undeserved election to show His power and Glory. As Christ says ,no one can come to me unless the Father enables them. Regeneration precedes Faith. Our undeserved gift of Grace is a humbling realisation. “IF IT WAS ONLY UP TO GOD’S CHOICE,THEN NO ONE WOULD BE SAVED”? What?? The Gospel is preached and as it says in Acts 13:48, all those appointed to eternal life believed. God has a decree and is fulfilling His purposes ,all for His Glory.
@@chrismachin2166Taking verses out of context and their intended meaning is a classic Calvinist move, in order to justify their pride of being chosen, as well as their inability to use logical and critical thinking to realise they’re wrong. As I’ve already said, there is no partiality with God. If it was only up to God, then no one would be saved, because we all stand equal before God, because we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Since we’re all equal, then no one should be individually picked by God to be saved as that would be unjust and show favouritism on God’s part. The other option is if it was only up to God’s choice, would be saving everyone, but that obviously contradicts Scripture. Since those 2 “options” are out because of the reasons I laid out, then that means it’s not only up to God’s choice and any interpretations of verses you’re referencing should be deemed misinterpreted because they would conflict with the logical conclusions made above with the interpretation you’re using.
“When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
In other words, the only other possibility, however improbable it sounds to you, must be true, and that’s that everyone has the choice to respond to the gospel when they hear it. I thank God for the gift of free will that every human being has.
The truth is, God wants everyone to be saved, as Scripture teaches, but not everyone is able to be saved due to their hard hearts.
If you can’t accept the above, then your heart is hard and your pride overpowers you. I will pray for you.
@@Lukandon pride of being chosen? I take no pride of being undeservedly chosen,all the Glory goes to God. On the other hand ,you take pride and boast you chose God,whereas “your next door neighbour “ rejected Christ,in your misunderstood theology.
@@Lukandon “since we’re all equal,then no one should be individually picked by God Because that would be unjust…..” We are all hostile to God in the flesh ( Romans ch 8) ,we all deserve just punishment. Grace is an undeserved gift or it wouldn’t be Grace. Your statement starting “since were all equal..” is an example of a man centred view of Scripture. Read Romans chapter 9 ,your objection to God deciding who will and who will not be saved is actually dealt with in that chapter,how ironic you brought up that objection!
Rapture and second coming of chrost
... are one occurrence. They are the same thing -- the Second Advent.
As Charles Spurgeon famously said, I preach the Gospel to everyone,the elect and the unelect.If the elect had a big E on their backs I would just preach to them.
What does every person deserve? They hate God,they are in rebellion,they will not accept God’s law etc etc. There is a day of judgement, what is their just punishment? The saving Grace that the elect receive is undeserved,is God wrong in saving these people to show His Glory? The cry is that’s not fair- read Romans 9 again !
As a 5 point Calvinist myself, I don’t think you’ve quite understood limited atonement or the tension between the sovereignty of god and the responsibility of man as it is taught by Sproul and MacAurthur who you mentioned as early influencers on your Calvinist roots. They are two of my main influences as well. We don’t teach the idea you articulated of “you OUGHT to believe, but you CANT believe, yet you are still morally responsible for the unbelief you weren’t capable of changing”. My understanding of what we teach is that you OUGHT to believe and you ARE able to believe, but in God’s sovereign foreknowledge and ordination, it is a forgone conclusion that you WONT believe, therefore you are still responsible for your unbelief. But this does not necessarily call for the “hard exclusivism” you describe. I lean toward your “soft exclusivist” position myself which you articulated very nicely. I don’t see a conflict there.
“You ought to believe and you are able to believe…in God’s sovereignty forknowledge and ordination it is a foregone collusion that you won’t believe…”
Without Freewill, it’s just semantics.
Either God preordained you for hell? or he didn’t
Which is it?
🙄 personally I think Calvinism is a lie.. I believe in free Grace Theology and I believe that to be the truth and what Paul Taught.. but to each his own..
All people believe!! But they are in rebellion/ hostile to the Creator . They know God exists by his eternal power and divine nature so they are without excuse. Total depravity is another one you reject…biblical revelation is not on your side,Bobby!
Alas, there is a categorical fallacy at work here. The matter is the 'free will' discourse. It appears there is a semi-Pelagian sense expressed here.
That would not be good.
Amen.
Do you even know what semi-Pelagian means? Or are you just saying that because Dr. White says it?
You interpret Romans 9 as a corporate message - you’re still left with the problem of unconditional election,think about it.
Salvation is conditional. Have you not read the Bible? #SolaScriptura
@@IndianaJoe0321 I’ve read the Bible,it says over and over again,no one can come to Christ unless the Father enables them. But you seen to think man has the free will within himself to choose Christ.You seem to contradict Scripture?
You are forever lost, @@chrismachin2166 , unless you freely choose to repent and follow Jesus. Calvinism is a false gospel and Calvinists worship a false deity that authored evil and caused Hitler to kill almost 14 million people.
The Calvinist god is a false deity.
9:40 If you don't believe you can lose your salvation, it is because you have still accepted the novel false doctrines of Cavlinism. No Christian before Calvin taught once justified always justified. It doesn't matter who you read...Irenaeus, Chrysostom, Augustine, even Luther...every Christian prior to Calvin correctly interpreted the Bible as teaching one can fall away from God's grace after being justified.
I am not a Calvinist or an Armenian but a semi Augustian, yet I believe that a person can't lose their salvation (eternal life).
That's not true. An understanding of Gods word and the Gispel teaches us you cannot lose your salvation. if you believe you can lose your salvation then it would imply that Jesus' sacrifice and death on the cross as payment for sin does not fully satisfy the debt of our sin which is contrary to the word of God.
@@keepingupwithkelsey2980
Not a single verse in the Scriptures say Jesus' paying for all your sins means Jesus Himself will not condemn you if you keep sinning. He bought you so that you would be his obedient slave, not so that you would keep living as a child of the devil.
The Scriptures literally say "For *if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries* . 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by *the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified* , and has outraged the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, 'Vengeance is mine; I will repay.' And again, 'The Lord will judge his people.' 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."
- Hebrews 10:26-31 (ESV).
Jesus Christ even tells you the Parable of the Unforgiving what the Kingdom of Heaven is like, and He literally tells you that you can have your debt payment revoked if you fall into the sin of unforgiveness.
"Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. 24 When he began to settle, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 And since he could not pay, his master ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. 26 So the servant[c] fell on his knees, imploring him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ 27 *And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt* . 28 But when that same servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii,[d] and seizing him, he began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay what you owe.’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ 30 He refused and went and put him in prison until he should pay the debt. 31 When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their master all that had taken place. 32 *Then his master summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers,[e] until he should pay all his debt. 35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart* ”
- Matthew 18:23-35 (ESV)
Hebrews 10 was Paul specifically stating that Jesus' sacrifice was once for all. 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Later in the chapter refers to the person who hears and knows the truth of the Gospel and deliberately rejects the sacrifice of Jesus. You have a misunderstanding of the context as this is referring to apostate and not the believer. Remember Peter denying Christ 3 times? He went on to write portions of the Bible and change the world. He wasn't condemned to hell because of his slip into sinfulness. As far as the unforgiving servant parable, Jesus is demonstrating that a believer that understands the debth of grace he has been extended must extend grace to others. I dont believe it should be interpreted as eternal damnation to believers who have unforgiveness in their heart in light of all the scripture that ensures our eternal security and assures us that our works will not earn favor with God.
Scripture about our eternal security Romans 8:37-39, John 10:28, Eph 4:30, John 6:37, John 5:24, 1 John 5:10-13, Eph 2:8, 2 Corinthians 1:22, 1 Cor. 1:8, psalm 34:22, 2 Tim 2:19, Phil. 3:20-21 The parable of the Prodigal son, and many many more verses.
Jesus paid for all sins, for everyone. Past sins, current sins, future sins. Whosoever believes and calls on him WILL be saved from damnation. It was a the gift of God and he does not rescind his offer. We can infer that if we can do nothing to earn salvation, we can do nothing to lose salvation. I hope that can give you some clarity :)
@@keepingupwithkelsey2980
You say:
"Hebrews 10 was Paul specifically stating that Jesus' sacrifice was once for all. 10:10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
"this is referring to apostate and not the believer."
You are twisting the Scriptures and do not have even the slightest explanation for what Hebrews 10:26-31 actually says. An apostate is a former believer. It literally says the person spoken of was once sanctified by Christ's blood and that he had the sacrifice but no longer.
"Once and for all" in Hebrews 10 is saying no more blood sacrifices have to be made since Christ did that once. Literally no one is saying he would have to die again. You are making a classic fallacy of a missplaced modifier by changing the "once and for all" sacrifice to "once and for all" salvation. No Scripture says your salvation is once and for all. t literally says you can lose the sanctification of Christ's blood, and Jesus can revoke that "once for all" sacrifice from you if you go on willfully sinning. This is what all the Christian church believed for 1500 years until Calvin the heretic.
None of the other verses you cite saying anything about one not being able to fall away of one's own evil will. I don't have time to go through each one, but give me one and I will refute it. There are no passages in the Bible that teach once saved always saved, only those people twist.
Wow. It’s hard to believe you were a Calvinist. This is very bad apologetics. Using the same apologetics that Dave Hunt used.
Wait, changing your mind is very bad apologetics?
@@AntWoord_YT no. Changing your mind from sound theology to stuff that isn’t even biblical is very bad.
@@Haukman66 Well, it seems that after thoughtfully considering it, he has changed his mind that Calvinism is sound theology. Why would that mean that he wasn't a Calvinist?
@@AntWoord_YT I was commenting on this particular video. In which he seemed to be embracing molinism. And is anti biblical. I don’t follow the guy so if he has changed his mind again, then so be it. But if he is embracing an anti biblical view of God then I’m gonna state my opinion on it.
@@Haukman66 Yes, we all have our opinion on what is unbiblical. Whether it actually is unbiblical, is another discussion entirely. Unless and until you have engaged the actual arguments for a particular view, it doesn't say much when you call it "bad apologetics".
I talked to bobby once on the radio and he said he would be an active participant in a homosexual marriage. Bobby is a clown 🤡
By stating that he would be an "ACTIVE PARTICIPANT", you mean he said he would perform the ceremony?
Officiating the ceremony wasn't Discussed. He did say he was willing to go if invited and be a witness to that matrimony. Like I said he’s a clown he’s better suited to be some theologian and philosopher than teaching the Bible.
@@bobcatpnw9123 Thx for the clarification
You can be LGBT and Christian 👬
@@dansaber4427 Not pleasing God, sure.
You can be LGBT and Christian 👬