Calvinism is a fallacious interpretation of the holy, Word of God. It comes from fallen man & demons, not the Holy Spirit. "Every plant that my Father in heaven has NOT PLANTED himself will be pulled up by the roots." -Matt. 15:13-14 Within Calvinism, ALL false beliefs & other false plants are planted by God Himself as the primary causal agent, according to His immutable decree.
Thanks for sharing. Here is my take. Calvinism leaves out man's choice to enter a relationship with the Lord. A true love relationship cannot be demanded but entered into voluntarily. Eph 1:3-12, I believe Paul is talking about the apostles calling and then includes those listening about believing and also being sealed in Christ. The church was predestined. Once you have chosen in your heart to believe and trust the Lord, the Spirit will guide your life and bring you through the fire of this existence. Once sealed you cannot fall away, though you may receive discipline for following the flesh from time to time. Peace.
If a true love relationship cannot be entered into voluntarily, then the Trinity does not express true love. Plus, this is not actually what Calvinists believe. Man CANNOT love God due to his sin nature. When He regenerates us, he fixes our "wanter," as Sproul puts it. So we then DO desire God. We do freely choose him, but he had to fix us first.
@@CT-316 This is a bit of nonsense since we know that God is love. The ultimate love, one of sacrifice. You seem to think three separate beings came together to agree to be one God. No matter how Calvinists try to slice and dice their stance, they ultimately deny the sacrifice of Christ as allsufficient and see it as having no bearing on whether one chooses to see it as the ultimate act of a loving God. Why have such a demonstration if it has no bearing on the outcome. Stop saying Calvin's allows for choice when it clearly does not and then appealing to some mystery that does not exist.
@@MrMan-jf8yi excuse you? How in the world did you conclude that I think three beings agreed to come together to become God? Where did I argue for that?! And where did I appeal to mystery? Edit: I see that I misphrased what I was saying with the Trinity. I was arguing against the idea that love must be freely chosen to be true love, as the Trinity does not do this.
“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy. “Safe?” said Mr Beaver; “don’t you hear what Mrs Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”
I have a genuine question: do you think Judas had the "free will" to not betray Jesus? Given that the scriptures testify to his betrayal many years before he was even born, do you believe God predetermined Judas' life, heart, and actions so as to use him in the betrayal of Jesus, or was God just hoping that he would freely choose to betray Jesus when he wrote those OT passages quoted in the gospels?
I do believe God predetermined Judas' betrayal, but without the need to predetermine his heart. I believe He does this through counterfactual knowledge. The knowledge that is between what "will" be, and what "could" be, namely, what most certainly "would" be. There are many examples of God using His omniscience in this way. Put another way, I don't believe God needs to control both sides of the chess board to ensure His victory. I believe Judas' case is just another example of judicial hardening. God knew that Judas' heart "would" most certainly desire to betray Jesus in that moment and predetermined the "event" through means of Judas' free choice. God may have even hardened him in his own rebellion to bring about a good purpose, as He did with many of the Jews and religious leaders, which we believe is the true context of Romans 9.
@@beberean612 Was Judas' choice truly free if it was predetermined by God? What about the choices he made that lead to that as well, like joining Jesus as a disciple? Were those choices also free, or predetermined?
@@beberean612 So did God give Judas the ability to freely not betray Jesus, but just knew that Judas would betray Jesus before Judas was created? I don't see how Judas could have had a free choice here if Scripture already determined that betrayal before Judas was even created.
@@RedeemedSteveJudas was a devil the scripture says. Christ calls him that. Truly if he has free will or not is actually irrelevant. Because HE WAS A DEVIL. the question is for you, WHY was he a devil? Did God preordain him to that? Or did he take what he had in life and reject God's provision and grace and choose his own way? Further, even if God used Judas to bring about redemption, that DOES NOT prove or follow that he does this for all people at all times. Not that you said that...but many follow that line of thinking and it's nonsense
Loved the video. I started my UA-cam channel with much the same impetus, the damage caused by a wicked church (I was part of the Vineyard cult). However, unlike you, I became an atheist. I'm curious about your journey, if you'd be interested in doing a live stream or a recorded Google call to edit to video, I'd love to chat. Interestingly enough, I just posted a video today about the argument over alcohol and how it shows Christianity cannot be true (or, even if it is true, you have no way to know your version of it is the "right" one). I have a special hatred, I must admit, for Calvinism. Ray Comfort once told me to my face that I was never a "real" Christian. He'd say the same to you, you were never a Calvinist in his view, a "real" one, because if you were, you couldn't leave. lol Anyway, peace to you and your journey and if you'd like to chat, I'd be happy to do so.
Thank you for this! I am an old man now. I spent many years being tossed to and fro by winds of doctrine. You are learning something extremely valuable in all of life. I am not taking a side for or against your conclusions. Like yourself, please allow me to share my journey with you. --- --- First: Pause and think about the type of debate in which neither side knows which side they will argue until the debate is about to begin. How would you prepare for that? --- --- Second: I have a friend who spent 4 years of high school and 4 years of college on competitive debate teams. He never lost, except for one time. One loss in 8 years. I asked him to tell me the most important thing about debate. Without hesitation, he said, “Know their arguments better than they do!” Now think about my first suggestion again. How would you prepare for that? ---- ---- Third: Throughout my years of being tossed to and fro by winds of doctrine I finally noticed 2 things. One, many of us do not want to say, “I don’t know,” or “I don’t understand.” On the millennia old debate over the “sovereignty of God versus the free will of man,” many on both sides stumble over their own pride in not being able to admit they don’t know; they don’t understand. Two, too many of us are petrified in fear of even hearing an opposing view because it might rattle our “faith.” In this case, should we not question our own definition of “faith?” The Holy Spirit used W. E. Vine to enlighten us, that among the concepts, faith can simply mean “persuasion.” If whenever we use the word, “faith,” we say, “persuasion,” we soon have to ask ourselves, “what exactly persuades me?” Does refusing to consider an opposing side persuade me? NO! It makes me vulnerable. Oh how many times I have been embarrassed by not doing my homework. An old trial lawyer adage that carries the same idea goes, “Don’t ask a question that you do not already know the answer you will get.” Yes, my friend was right; know their arguments better than they do. ---- ---- There is a balance. Solomon did tell us to leave the presence of a fool. If we are to leave foolishness, is it a contradiction that the Apostles admonish us to be steadfast in our faith, our persuasion? There is no contradiction. Discretion must be developed. We come to know when to walk away, and when to standfast, and when to say, “I do not know, (yet).” ---- ---- CAUTION: After Jesus healed the man who was blind from birth, this happened: (Jn9:40-41) “Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, ‘Are we also blind?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you SAY ‘we see,’ your guilt remains.” Shalom, Selah
Thats why dispensational futurists and preterists wont debate historicism. They know we were all raised in dispensational futurism and were aware of preterism. They know they dont have arguments against us so they lie about our position. If you have to lie about your opponents position you know yours has no merit. And yet they keep doing it.
And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? 41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth. Not exactly the same.
Roman's states many times that by faith alone in Christ we have been saved. I think that with true faith comes the desire to abide in God's word. I think God gave us agency to make our own choices. God wants followers not slaves. I do not know alot about Calvinism, but I do have a personal relationship with Jesus so I remain unaffected by religion and its doctrines.
this is the false view of Calvinism that I abandoned before embracing Calvinism I've never had assurance like what I have now after learning the law gospel distinction and that God is 100% responsible for salvation... I used to think this way before I properly learned reformed theology I pray you don't fall into the anti Calvinist obsession that Leighton Flowers has, it is an unhealthy obsession and he practically denies original sin... you defining "spiritual blessing" means being chosen all spiritual blessings mean we don't lack any, not that we obtain every single one instantly your argument against Ephesians 1 is a very convaluted confusing argument that just seeks to create confusion where there is none and add to what Paul is saying...
@greglorenzen5632 learning reformed theology for the first time, it finally made me understand what Jesus meant in Matthew 11: 28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” assurance of salvation, doing good works from gratitude knowing God secures my salvation, I cannot lose it because it is His and what faith alone truly means
The only way to embrace this "true" view of Calvinism you are talking about, is compatibilism, which is no less deterministic than hard determinism. It's a distinction without a difference, and the burden of proof is upon you to demonstrate for everyone how it is any less irrational than hard determinism.
I listen to Sproul and his main point that is rooted in scripture, is that your salvation is not in your hands. Its humble to let go of your own desire and plan to save yourself. We do good acts, not to earn our way into heaven, but because we know God wants a relationship with us and that the cost of our sins has been paid in full. That's what makes Christ's sacrifice so necessary, otherwise it would not of needed to be done. We downplay our wretched nature and sin in the west, while we enjoy ruminating on the idea that we are somehow already divine. There are no natural good doers down here and any good comes from God, so that none can boast. I love when the original sin, which is pride, gets destroyed from our lives. Kind of like how Dostoevsky describes that we are bound by free-will so much so, that we will ignore rationality and do something empty-headed just to exercise it. To feel like an individual and that in itself is hardly free. We need an outside source to change us and I guess the line in the sand here is whether you feel like our salvation is either synergistic or monergistic. This far into my theological study, personally I still choose the latter.
There's truth in what is described as monergism but some Calvinist preachers really just pretend to be monergists but then literally everything they preach is an epistemological contradiction to monergism. Paul Washer is one of the best examples of this. If you say stuff like works are "evidences" of salvation, sorry you are just pretending to be a monergist. But who's really a monergist for real?
I'm not keen on wholeheartedly defending caricatures for 18 years. Compatibilism is no less deterministic than hard determinism. It's a distinction without a difference, unless you can demonstrate the difference.
Your problem is that you can’t base your decisions on “well if I do this, then it was going to happen anyway because sovereignty”. As you know, God has a decretive and revealed will. One has to do with His ordaining all things, good and evil, while the other has to do with what He has instructed for us to do. To actively go against His instruction under the guise of “it was always going to be this way” is choosing to disobey Him. So while you are right in a sense that when we disobey, that is divinely ordained, the foreordination of God is descriptive not prescriptive. You can’t outthink God.
If our disobedience is causally determined by God, i.e., actively going against His instruction, this means that even our desire to do it under the guise of "it was going to be this way," is itself also divinely ordained by God, and we could not have done otherwise.
@@beberean612 There is a massive difference between being able to conceive of God ordaining all things as an excuse to disobey, and the cosmic reality of Him doing so. The fact that you can think about it doesn’t mean that you can rise above it. It is a plain teaching of scripture that God ordains all things, AND that we are held accountable for our sinful natures. To try and dismantle that truth through thought experiment is to deny God’s Word.
@@TheLordismyportion My friend do you not see that your line of thinking is fallacious? Please consider that this notion of Calvinism being a plain teaching in Scripture is "begging the question" of whether or not the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture is correct. You are using a premise in your argument as evidence for why your conclusion is correct. For example... Premise 1. The Bible is God's word. Premise 2. Calvinism is taught in the Bible. Conclusion. If you go against Calvinism, you are going against God's word. In order for your conclusion to be true, it must be demonstrated that all of your premises are true. But you cannot use a premise in your argument as evidence for why your conclusion is true, because premise 2 is the very point that is up for debate. It's like saying, "You're wrong about the Bible because I'm right about the Bible. Now, another argument... Premise 1. On Calvinism, God determines all THINGS that come to pass. Premise 2. Conceiving of God ordaining all things, as an excuse to disobey is a THING that has come to pass. Conclusion. God has determined me to conceive of Him ordaining all things, as an excuse to disobey. This is an example of a sound argument, because in order to rationally reject the conclusion, you must reject at least one of the premises. Now, the burden of proof is upon you, as a Calvinist, to demonstrate for everyone how mankind can (rationally) be held responsible for doing precisely what God has determined, when we could not have done otherwise. I understand that Calvinism teaches God determines everything AND man is responsible, but what we are trying to do here is demonstrate that this is irrational. Even if you are okay with believing a (seemingly) irrational doctrine, many others, when they realize there are alternative interpretations that ARE (seemingly) rational, will choose the rational interpretation over the irrational one. How do you square the circle?
Thank you, I’m struggling with whether Calvinism is right or wrong. I was raised no, but when you look at the great preachers of today, they are. I don’t understand it very well. I’ll keep watching your videos. I did leave Piper a long time ago because he said someone that was living with someone out of marriage would have gone to hell if he hadn’t talked her into moving out.
Read your Bible and meditate cover to cover and pray, asking with simple honesty that the Lord illuminates it for you by the power of the Holy Spirit in Jesus Name! Do this as consistently as possible and you won’t need to ponder what sort of lenses to view the scriptures through. However well meaning men are the Lord is still the one building His Church!
Ye of little faith. You're where you are because of the choices you make. God can and does, even then, work his plan. Everyone sins, its how you feel and what you do about your sin that is key. Sanctification process will be paused with no relationship.
Hey buddy, congrats and thx to the lord He's revealed the truth to you. And now, thank you for taking it upon yourself to help those that have yet to see. As you grow in the truth I highly recommend you check early church. The first Christians were not without heresy but you can clearly see those who were identified as being outside what true Christians believe by the church
Why I think Calvinism is so dangerous: 1. It makes you humble. Believing that God does the choosing makes it difficult to be haughty. Calvinism means not being able to lord it over others. 2. It creates a much more profound awe of God's plan. Who has time for that? 3. Knowing that God is sovereign eliminates neuroticism about salvation. Assurance of salvation is boring. 4. Subscribing to historic Calvinistic confessions means you can't actually blame God for things you do wrong. You do still have to get off your butt according to Calvinism. 5. It's hard to understand because God is a mystery. Who wants a God like that? Give us a simple and easy God! Scary stuff!
Do you believe you determine if you are "humble" or not? Do you believe you determine if you "stand in awe of God's plan" or not? Do you believe you determine if you blame God or not? Do you believe YOU determine if you "get off your butt or not?" Are these things you believe YOU determined before the foundation of the world and God simply determined all other things that come to pass? If so, you are not a Calvinist.
@@FalconOfStorms Why are you commenting if you are unwilling to answer simple questions? You must be waiting on God to decree a rational response into your mind.
people need to just read The Bible. Nowadays people should never step foot in a church unless they know Scripture well- so many pastors teach lies like once saved always saved and just a simple belief being enough to save you. Verses are consistently taken out of context like John 3:16 and Ephesians 2:8-2:9. Jesus Christ must be your lord in your heart- the boss of your existence in order for Him to be your savior
AW Tozer throughout his ministry spoke (later printed into books) that we tend to overemphasize certain attributes of God- and this is where problems occur. One attribute that I think is overemphasized or even misunderstood is his sovereignty. Of course, I do affirm that God is sovereign. But does this mean he controls every decision/action in his creation? We often use the word sovereign to describe nations or monarchs. Was King Henry VIII sovereign in England? Yes, of course he was! What he said went! However, did he control every decision made for every person in his kingdom? No! So he wasn't sovereign then? Yes, he was sovereign. Finally, Tozer stated in his book Attributes of God that we tend to want to explain everything- instead, we should understand and give room for mystery. Yes, God is sovereign!
On our behalf God foreknew only he could and that we could not. God "Foreknew" but it was never His will that Adam sin much less us. In the beginning God "had" a perfect plan; His plan has remained "perfect" since. Nothing catches the Lord off guard; nothing surprises Him. We can go astray from Gods original will for our lives; and live the turmoil of Consequence. It's a miserable existence indeed. Yet He forgets not His own; According to Proverbs 29:1 this is the consequential will of God. Yet either way Thy will be done! Proverbs 29:1 He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy. Adam broke the law; Praise the Lord Jesus broke the curse; When Christ is on the throne of our heart we're not When we're on the throne He's not. There's heaven to gain and hell to shun The will of God cuts both ways Romans 14:12 Paul says So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God... O' me. Eternal life is Gods gift; By that same grace His reward is earned. Great post! May your works continue to bear good fruit.
Hmm, I'm not an expert on Calvinism by any means (and I have my own issues with things) but I'm not sure "predeterminism" is the correct summation of it. There has been a false conflict between what we call Predestination vs Free Will which are theoretically connected with Calvinism and Arminianism (these are both poor summations of the two). What this is much more about seems to me to be about perspective. God's perspective and our perspective. God is the Almighty one who stands outside of our space and time out from whom all creation is generated and sustained. Of course he knows all that could happen or will happen. But we do not have this perspective. And indeed, scripture validates that we do not have his perspective and that we are fully accountable for our actions. It is not that the two ideas are opposed, but that they co-exist. God's desire over and over is to partner with his people to rule and reign through his wisdom. But when we choose to rule and reign with our own wisdom, that is indeed our choice and the consequences of that is ours to bear with full responsibility. And also, of course God knows how things will go. How can he not from his perspective? These are in tension, but we must live life from our perspective. The book of Job has much to say on both of these topics (though it can be difficult to weed through the dense Hebrew poetry)
No you misunderstand. In God's mind we are connected to Christ before the foundation of the world in the sense it was always God's plan for individuals to be in Christ at the point in time that God chooses. Union with Christ is certain not uncertain before the foundation of the world. At the point in time by God's choosing individuals will be in Christ by regeneration which leads to faith. God appoints when, where and how a person is in Christ before creation
If what you are saying is true, then being "in God's mind" was the means through which we were always been connected to Christ, when Paul said God has blessed us "in Christ" with "every" spiritual blessing (i.e., being connected to Christ through faith is the means through which we receive every spiritual blessing). It is irrational to say we are chosen because we are connected to Christ and connected to Christ because we are chosen. And if you say that being chosen (is) the connection to Christ, then the connection to Christ and the choice in God's mind are indistinguishable and being connected to Christ cannot be the means through which we receive "every" spiritual blessing. And if that is true, and being chosen is the connection, that's like saying we are chosen because we are chosen, or connected to Christ because we are connected to Christ. It only makes sense if the connection to Christ (through faith) is the means through which every spiritual blessing comes, and I believe this is precisely what Paul is saying.
There is no free will with a Calvinist. Without free will how would there be sin? In Calvin's ideology Adam and Eve were predestined to eat of the tree of knowledge and punished. They clearly chose to disobey God. We are not programed robots because we have free will.
I think the issue you have with Calvinism is a reliance on your own reasoning to explain a mystery of God. We know the Bible is clear that man is responsible for his own sin and that God is not the author of evil. We also know that God is sovereign and in control of all things. He ordains everything by his own counsel and He cannot be changed. These appear to be logical contradictions. How can God ordain history if man has free will? It's easy to diminish either God's sovereignty or man's agency, but that reveals a limit in our ability to comprehend God. If you are to believe the Bible, you have to accept that both are true. God's will and man's will are perfectly united. One does not cause the other. They are fully independent. A human analogy would be to look at it as an infinite series of coincidences. This does not have to be a contradiction.
All you're saying is, "We know man is responsible for his own sin, and we know that Calvinism's view of God's sovereignty is correct, so...." You cannot assume the Calvinistic view of "sovereignty" is right. There are mysteries in the Bible yes, but we should not create mystery where non is needed. That's my position.
@@beberean612 Yes. Why shouldn't I believe the Calvinist view that God is completely sovereign is correct? I see it plainly in scripture. It gives all the glory to God. It strengthens our trust in Him to be able to act mightily in the hearts of our families, friends, and leaders. It does not minimize or discard any other fundamental Christian doctrine.
Calvinism does not say we are not guilty and we are not responsible for our sin. Its not Gods fault we sin or dont do as we should. If you don't understand that you never understood reformed theology
I understand that Calvinists claim we are responsible on their system, but I believe it is an irrational, ad hoc claim. It's a square circle. If they are consistent within their own framework, these are the logical implications of the system. Claiming someone else doesn't understand Calvinism is not the same thing as rationally defending Calvinism.
@@Thinking-Biblically And to that I say, "It doesn't matter what you believe about it. It's biblical one day maybe you'll except it." This is the best way to spot the question begging fallacy. If I can simply turn around and say the same thing back to you, and that becomes my argument, it's fallacious. It begs the question of whether or not Calvinism is Biblical, which is the very point that is up for debate.
all my life i have held that lack of free will was TOTALLY incompatible with the existence of God. when i was an atheist i was a philosophic materialist who held that, as a hard determinist, free will could not and did not exist so neither did God For a god in a universe without free will is the author of all sin but then when converted by my own Damascus Road experience now 45 years ago i KNEW that free will existed Calvinism is such a foul misrepresentation of God, a monster who damns most simply because he can and chooses to do so, that Calvinists cannot possibly have any kind of relationship with God Himself. OR if they did they forsook it for such a blasphemy as this. the verse that refutes Calvinism is not John 3:16, for i have seen how they wiggle out of that one but the fact that God is NOT WILLINGTHAT ANY PERISH speaks for itself. IMO Calvin himself totally misunderstood God's sovereignty. Instead of am all wise Being who can and does work with free moral agents Calvin's deity was a total control freak who did nothing but build a giant terrarium, ultimately devoid of personality, for without free will personality is an empty simulcrum so love it self does not exist I could say more but i am tired . if you are interested in more please reply
This is what I hear you saying... "Either you believe in the Calvinistic view of God's sovereignty over ALL, or you don't." To that I say, "Right, we disagree with Calvinism!"
I would love to talk to you about it But you kinda have to hold two beliefs God is in complete control over every seen and unseen thing And he those in the book of life the ability to overcome. But Calvinism is understanding Jesus complete and total sovereign rule of everything. It's inescapable. But you will always be corruptible until you have been MADE incorruptible Still keep the faith And only the ignorant doubt Gods existence it's about know and faith. We should have a long form discussion on discord or something
Re: A great resource for many to listen to and learn... Bible use can become habit forming Regular reading can cause loss of anxiety Fear and a decreased appetite 4 impatience and anger. Symptoms include increased love joy peace and self-control. If symptoms persist just Praise The LORD! Crack that Bible! GBY & those you love!
For the record, you are arguing against universal divine causal determinism. Complete lack of free agency. Some but not all Calvinists believe that. Most Calvinists, myself included, do not believe that.
@@beberean612 No. That's why the 5 points of Calvinism exist. To codify the theology. Which of the 5 points implies universal lack of agency? None. Why not do a video on each of the 5 points instead of a bunch of videos on casual determinism? The only reason I can think is either you haven't researched it, or you would rather attack a strawman.
How fragile a faith that cannot defend itself against a couple basic questions. Any person you meet on the street that you might be sharing the gospel with could ask you the same questions, and what would you say then? Are those who ask no questions the only people who can be made disciples of your faith? And what does it say about your faith if it is so easily silenced? Come man. Does your Bible not command you to give a reason for the hope that you have to anyone who asks in 1 Peter 3:15!? Why do you place your hope in the writings of dead men?
There is a difference between “struggling” and sin, as a believer. A believer is “free from sin” A believer “cannot sin” The church system has polluted his Word and deceived many.
@@beberean612 1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Jesus destroyed the works of the devil. There are no “righteous sinners”. Do you believe you still sin?
@@-Thelordismyshepherd- Yes I believe you are quoting 1 John out of context. I believe what John is saying here is that if we say we love God, we should make it our goal not to sin; we should make it our goal to keep His commandments. "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. BUT IF ANYONE DOES SIN, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, IF WE KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS." 1 John 2:1-3
@@beberean612 By your statement, you believe what is written in not true. You say “context”, meaning what is written is not true. And 1jn2:1 is speaking about 2 groups of people. To be saved, one has to be “converted”; Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. So a converted believer would be “little children”. And those who be the ones who “abide” with Christ who “sinneth not”. 1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if ANY MAN sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: So we have “little children” who “sin not” who are converted, who ALREADY have Jesus as their advocate. Those who sin, “any man”, NOT “little children”, they have an advocate, who they did NOT HAVE, “Hath not seen, neither known him”. Who is the propitiation for the sins of the World. So you said this verse is not in context; 1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Is this verse written wrong? Or what do you believe is the “context” of this verse?
Re: A believer is “free from sin” Amen but not free to sin. Fact is sin is not the struggle; temptation is. The redeemed of the Lord are free from "Condemnation" of the law; but not obligation. Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. Gods moral law is for judgment; governance; continuity and harmony in community. The law of gravity is what goes up must come down "The law" of sin and death" is "condemnation" There’s heaven to gain and hell to shun. Eternal life is Gods gift; reward is earned. Not everyone will share the same address in heaven; nor should they. Jesus says In my Father's house are many mansions: Paul says So run, that ye may obtain. Judgment is coming! Romans 14:12 Paul the Apostle says So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. 2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad... Without controversy whether saved by grace or judged by law The books will be open and your life will back it up! GBY & those you love
Paul disagrees with you. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world
@@block9390 i suppose it would depend on your definition. But no i dont have pure religion according to Paul. If you mean organized religion i would say this comment isnt innaccurate for that. Although the oldest trick technically is that we can be like God. Organized religion probably followed shortly after. Christianity is a religion, and yes you must know God, it is a relationship. I believe my bible if thats what you mean, but i dont go to any church because they all embrace apostacy. Im not going to sit still while im lied to. When i was a baby christian i fell for calvinism. If you were trying to mock me no biggie, if not then i hope this answers your question.
I agree with you on Calvinism. I want to add that Christianity itself has similar problem as Calvinism has. For example: did God predetermined for Adam and Eve to fall? Or Adam and Eve could not fall also? Was it predestined for them to fall in the Garden of Eden, or wasn't? You see, Christianity as a whole is having the same problem the Calvinists have, because in Christianity there is no scenario where Adam and Eve wouldn't have fallen. If Adam and Eve wouldn't have fallen, then it wouldn't be a necessity of Jesus to come on earth and die on the cross for us to be saved, because we wouldn't need to be saved. But who in Christianity considers this possibility, regardless of whether one is Calvinist or not? No one. So in a sense any form of Christianity has the same problem as Calvinists have. You are absolutely right about Calvinism, and how it is incoherent and dangerous. However Christianity as a whole has to solve this problem, because not just Calvinists who have it. To add more, would be possible for Jesus to come to earth and not be crucified? Does any Christian consider this possibility or He came to die as was predestined? Here again no Christian considers the possibility for Jesus to have a different fate, because every Christian believes that it was predestined for Jesus to die and there is no alternative. Please reflect on these points. I want to recommend for you Divine Principle.
I would like to thank you for this great comment and actually, I have spent lots of time reflecting on these things throughout my life. Where I land is counterfactual knowledge and the understanding that knowledge and causation should not be conflated. Perfect knowledge of a free choice and allowing that choice by means of a secondary cause (allowing the agent to act freely and affect the outcome), is not the same thing as having a perfect knowledge of a choice because you causally determine it. In this scenario, there can be no secondary cause, because there can be no knowledge of the agent affecting the outcome in any way. When the only reason God knows something, is because He causally determines it, only He can be the primary or "final" cause of it. But with counterfactual knowledge of what lies between what "could" be and "will" be, God can determine to permit what most certainly "would" be, and perfectly know what will be. But knowing what most certainly "would" or "will" be, is not the same thing as causing the choice. Thank you for your comment and God bless!
What is there to solve? Ephesians 1:4-5, "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved."
@@beberean612 I think you are talking about God’s middle knowledge. However why would God grieve in Gen. 6:6? Why God is using the word “if” throughout the Bible. Why God didn't punish the people of Nineveh, even though he predestined it? Why did God change His mind? God often gives contradictory prophecies, because people have the choice to follow God's will or not. So, the outcome depends on whether people followed God's will or not. And God is giving prophecies presupposing either outcome. So, if Israel follows, becomes the head, if not, Israel becomes the tail.
Every Christian is basically Calvinistic, even those who make channels railing against Calvinism. However, Calvinism doesn't have a problem, because God is perfect and blameless in all things.
@@gheorghebirca It's not really a contradiction if it was always God's plan for Jonah to preach repentance to the Ninevites. Since God sent a sea creature to swallow Jonah when he tried to flee from God's plan, it would seem that it was always God's plan for Jonah to preach repentance to the Ninevites and Jonah was utterly unable to stop it.
i'd like to hear your explanation as to how you determine if a belief system is viable or not? is it if it makes you feel good or is there logical reasoning behind its viability in reality?
@@soapvar The system makes God the author of evil and is inconsistent with verses like 1 Timothy 2:4 that state that God desires all people to be saved. Plus I agree with the author of the video that I began to think that I was predestined to sin, so why bother taking any personal responsibility for doing it?
@@leib109 You forget that Calvinism does not reject man's free will. Most people who reject Calvinism don't understand that it teaches both God's sovereignty and man's agency. There is no sacrifice of free will.
If Calvinism is true, it will have to be God that brings me back, seeing how it is God who has determined me to leave the "truth" of Calvinism in the first place. Unless you believe that I determined that "thing," before the foundation of the world, and God simply determined all other things that come to pass?
@@christophertaylor9100 Calvinist circular reasoning at its finest. This is because Calvinists lack robust arguments, so they resort to fallacious ones. But thank you for demonstrating this for everyone else to see.
@@beberean612 In what way is pointing out that you mocking God's sovereignty is not exactly Biblical somehow fallacious? Do you think that's the proper way to speak or write about Him? The idea that Calvinists lack robust arguments is one of the most hilariously vapid and ludicrous things I have ever read on the internet. I suspect your knowledge of this theology is shockingly lacking to come to that conclusion.
If this belief system is what you believe calvinism is than yes, it is very dangerous. This belief system makes God responsible for you sin. That idea is extremely dangerous. Thankfully that is not true calvinism.
The burden of proof is upon the Calvinist to rationally demonstrate how compatibilism is any less deterministic than hard determinism. Until you can convince us of that, I'm going to respectfully say you are making an ad hoc claim. Then again, if you could convince us of this "truth," your entire system would self-destruct; as only God can open eyes to truth on Calvinism. And since a "compatibilistic" secondary cause cannot change the outcome of God's decree in any way, but lives and moves only according to what has been decreed, it must be predetermined for me to believe in Calvinism, or even understand it rightly.
Are you an open theist? Your refutation of Calvinist arguments from Ephesians 1:3-4 doesn’t make sense. There is no circular reasoning in saying that being chosen by Christ is a spiritual blessing AND the means through which we are connected to Christ from the foundation of the world. It simply makes sense and you seem to be convoluting the concept. Whose hands are best for your life to be in other than God’s? Certainly not your own. “And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days.” (Mark 13:20) Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” Romans 10:20 (ESV) Romans 9:10-20 is an incredibly brutal refutation of anti-Calvinism.
I understand why you say that. I've said the same thing before, but it's not Romans 9 or these other passages you mentioned that refute anti-Calvinism, it's the Calvinist's interpretation of Romans 9 and the other passages you mentioned that do. But that is the very point that is up for debate. No, I am not an open theist. I do believe God knows everything. But knowing something is not the same thing as causing something. I'm saying that Calvinist have misunderstood the entire concept of election. I don't believe "knowing" who will be in Christ was the basis of God's choosing. I hold to corporate election, so we are saying God chose "us" in Him (those who are in union with Christ), before the foundation of the world, that "we" (those who are in union with Christ) would be holy and blameless. We're saying He chose those within the "corporation" of Christ to be holy and blameless, and He made this choice before the foundation of the world. Yes, the direct object in the Greek is "us", and that makes perfect sense on our view because the "corporate" group is necessarily made up of individuals, who receive the spiritual blessing of being "chosen to be holy and blameless," through means of faith in Christ and become one of God's chosen people under the new covenant (i.e., adopted as sons).
Or, God could have determined that you would doubt Him, so you don't have any choice but to do it. But at the same time, your doubt of God is your own damn fault and you deserve to be punished. It's sort of as if your middle school niece (if you have one) might imagine some bad behavior for her Barbie dolls and then punish them for it. It works if God is not subject to the Law of Noncontradiction, but it makes it almost impossible to say anything meaningful about Him. Calvinism isn't supposed to make sense. It's a means of social control that employs self-congratulation and despair to get people to submit.
Then you're saying there is no free will, okay, but then, what's the point? From an atheist viewpoint, I tend to agree that free will is an illusion. If we have any, it's for the minor things we do, the big things are determined by time and location and culture of our birth (obviously, there's not too many Christians in Jakarta, but a lot of Muslims). The Calvinist position is utterly wicked as it takes a nihilistic position that you have no real choices (you were predetermined) but then punishes those who also had no choice (predetermined to go to hell).
@@michaelsbeverly You should feel right at home with a "nihilistic" and deterministic approach to life, as Richard Dawkins said, "we dance to our DNA". You still haven't said how it is wrong, however. I also do not claim to understand the seem in paradox of free will (a concept never once taught in the Bible) and the Bible explicitly saying that all is predetermined before the universe was even made.
I sure hope that the patron saint of Calvinism - John Calvin himself - repented before he died! Calvin was responsible for Michael Servetus being burned at the stake in the year 1553. He used green wood so that he would "bake like a potato" before he died. Calvin took predestination to a whole new level! Who would name the religion of their faith after a murder? Not very Christ like! I'm sure Christ would not have murdered someone because they disagreed with his position!
You’re slandering a man long-dead. Calvin didn’t kill Severtus. You’re bearing false witness and promoting an anti-Calvinist fantasy. It’s not only bad history, but sinful.
Calvin was nothing like modern calvinists. And im not sure were in a position to judge him. If its true about his role and michael was an honest man in that he believed what he was preaching and not a jesuit priest sent to divide then its terrible. But i find calvin has been twisted. For one he wasnt a dispensationalist or a futurist so he did not share the same beliefs as todays "calvinists" if he did come up with tulip he was wrong. He was certainly tainted by gnostic ideas of the catholic church.
Just saying this sort of history is impossible to verify given our position in time. Im a historian. Books have been edited by catholic scholars. You would have to check original sources in person not digital copies. And im not interested enough to make this attempt. Leave judgement to Jesus and stick to doctrine. We can refute that and we can admonish behaviours.
Historical records indicate that John Calvin, the Protestant reformer, played a significant role in the trial and execution of Michael Servetus. When Servetus arrived in Geneva, he was spotted, arrested, and sentenced to death by the local council. Calvin, whose role in Servetus’ trial had been that of expert witness managing the prosecution, wanted Servetus not to die but to recant, and spent hours with him during and after the trial seeking to change his views. Servetus was a Spanish physician and theologian whose unorthodox teachings led to his condemnation as a heretic by both Protestants and Roman Catholics. However, correspondence shows that even though Calvin didn’t sentence Servetus, he still believed it was right for him to die for his heresy. While Calvin’s involvement in Servetus’s death is a dark mark on his past, it’s important to note that Servetus was widely considered a heretic by both Catholics and Protestants in the 16th century. The penal death of Servetus was an historical event resulting from deeply held theological, social, and political views. However, the specific extent of Calvin’s responsibility in Servetus’s death is a complex historical issue that’s often debated among scholars.
@block9390 so do you lack reading comprehension? He was condemned and killed by the local government - a process that involved over 200 people. If Calvin would have protested for whatever reason, Severtus would still have died. Calvin didn’t have power over Severtus’s life at any point, and warned him that if he fled to Geneva, he’d be sentenced and put to death. This was after being condemned to death elsewhere by Catholics. Christendom was messy and Calvin (as the majority of Christian’s in Christendom) thought being a heretic against the catholic (universal) faith was worthy of death. He wasn’t a blood thirsty murderer, nor a tyrant (he could hardly get a school built in Geneva), he was a sinful man of his time. If you want to pretend to be outraged by that specific instance of capital punishment, have at it, but Calvin did not murder Severtus.
So-called "Calvinism" is nothing more than God's word, from cover to cover, plainly revealed and understood rightly. The dislike of it is not a matter of your intellect; it's a matter of your heart and your affections. In Adam, you are depraved and your natural understanding is corrupted; wickedness in the heart cannot love a truth that takes the glory and sovereignty from man and gives it to God. Repent and believe. God is certainly sovereign over salvation.
So wrong. God has free will. His foreknowledge doesn’t mean he is slave of some book, otherwise the book would be god. He changes de history as we can see many times in scriptures: Abraham talking about Sodom, Moses, and all the prayers every believer do. Except the ones made by Calvinists, sorry brother.
John Calvin was nothing but an agent of Lucifer, and practitioner of the occult. Mixing truth, in with absolute blasphemous and completely heretical lies. You people have been SEVERELY CONDITIONED, BLINDED and HEAVILY DECEIVED by the MANY false teachers/heretics teaching this absolute garbage. And some of these false teachers, are actual agents of Lucifer. Jon MacArthur being one of them, and also a practitioner of the occult. Along with being a high ranking Mason. And yes, he is fully conscious and knows EXACTLY what he is doing. MANY of you can't even begin to conceive, grasp or understand the DECEPTION that has takin you over. Calvinism and arminianism are both direct designs of Lucifer. And are NOT the ONE TRUE GOSPEL. You all better wake up before its to late.
@@rkatoperRead your Bible, cover to cover, and if God is willing to open your blind eyes it will dispel of you of the plethora of damning errors you’ve been seduced by. No, God is not a slave to “some book”, but He did choose to reveal Himself in His written Word, which is the primary means by which we know Him. Jesus Christ Himself is called the Word made flesh, and no He does not change throughout history. You’re a heretic. If you desire life, you need to repent and believe in the Biblical gospel; the written Word of God.
@@rkatoperIf God uses foreknowledge to inform His actions then He would not be unchangeable. Nothing happens to God. Edit: Don't be hasty to say that God doesn't listen to the prayers of Christians who believe in Calvinism, which is not a doctrine which contributes to or minimizes true saving faith.
blessings dear friend. As a Baptist historian of 30 years, I was always told before I began to study, how the "Old Baptists" were all Calvinists. Once I started digging, I found that was a total lie, perpetrated by so called professors and historians in colleges and seminaries. Not all Calvinists are the same, but many will lie thru their teeth and thing they are doing God's work. They sneak into churches and lie about their beliefs in order to gain a foot hold, then rip the church apart, especially the Reformed types. Keep up your work, and glorify your Lord who loves ALL people, and desires to see ALL come to repentance!
It wasn't until I left the Baptists that I actually learned anything. Baptist services are just sermons about giving money and altar calls and are rarely about anything of substance.
@@DarkMatterBurrito well "altar calls" are an invitiation to receive Jesus for eternal life. i think thats a pretty important thing. anyways sounds like u were not with the right kind of Baptists. they arent all the same. at least they dont have drag shows like the methodists, or deny the virgin birth like the episcopalians. or worship mary like the catholics, or teach calvinism like the prebyterians. not sure where u are now, but hope u growing closer to Christ
@@caman171 church services are for believers and to worship God. Evangelism is to be practiced outside of the church service. You waste believers' time constantly making the service about salvation. I know you don't like that, but I am 47 and grew up in a few Southern Baptist congregations. I look back and see that their sermons were consistently about salvation and tithing and 10 repeats of "Just As I Am" to guilt people into coming down the aisle and then giving it all up 2 weeks later. The ONLY expository teachings were on Wednesday nights for 30 minutes because people cannot be bothered to actually stay longer on a Sunday morning. They have to get out to get to the Sunday buffet.
@@DarkMatterBurrito well first off, youre very foolish to put all southern Baptists in the same boat. maybe that is YOUR experience, but its not mine. our normal sunday morning service lasted anywhere from an hour and a half to 2 hours. as for singing 10 repeats of "just as i am" i thank God for that. i gave up on the last verse and trusted Christ for my salvation. if i had walked out that day, i truly believe that God's conviction would be withdrawn, as He had been dealing with me for a long time. if a preacher wants to give as many chances as possible what is that to you? how many people have YOU evangelized "outside the church"?? has EVERY person on your street been visited by you to tell them about Christ? maybe people should be "guilted" into coming, because they ARE guilty and need to be saved. 1 cor 14:23-25 makes it clear that worship is to be conducted in such a way that unbelievers can benefit and be brought under conviction. i would rather make the mistake of "over evangelization" in giving any lost person a chance to understand the Gospel, than to over teach those who already believe. but BOTH can and should be done properly
This is sad, and I pray you start giving God the proper reverence he deserves. You are literally arguing that your personal experience has more authority than scripture.
This is a logical fallacy called "begging the question." It "begs the question" of whether or not the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture is correct, which is the very point that is up for debate. An easy way to spot this fallacy is to simply turn the same argument back on the person making it. To you I say, "I pray you start giving God the proper reverence he deserves. You are literally arguing that your belief in Calvinism has more authority than scripture." It's not because of my personal experience, it's because I believe the Bible does not teach Calvinism. We have to establish why our interpretation is correct, but you can't just claim that I'm wrong about the Bible because you're right about the Bible. That's circular reasoning. I hope this helps you on your journey! God bless!
I sure hope that the patron saint of Calvinism - John Calvin himself - repented before he died! Calvin was responsible for Michael Servetus being burned at the stake in the year 1553. He used green wood so that he would "bake like a potato" before he died. Calvin took predestination to a whole new level! Who would name the religion of their faith after a murder? Not very Christ like! I'm sure Christ would not have murdered someone because they disagreed with his position!
like all those who started the modern missionary movement and not like all the arminians who are running/attending/not attending big eva... I think the strawman in your mind is apathetic or arrogant....
Calvinism is a fallacious interpretation of the holy, Word of God.
It comes from fallen man & demons, not the Holy Spirit.
"Every plant that my Father in heaven has NOT PLANTED himself will be pulled up by the roots."
-Matt. 15:13-14
Within Calvinism, ALL false beliefs & other false plants are planted by God Himself as the primary causal agent, according to His immutable decree.
Hey , your testimony is powerful!
I was wondering can I do an interview with you on your conversion out of Calvinism. You have an email?
Thanks for sharing. Here is my take. Calvinism leaves out man's choice to enter a relationship with the Lord. A true love relationship cannot be demanded but entered into voluntarily. Eph 1:3-12, I believe Paul is talking about the apostles calling and then includes those listening about believing and also being sealed in Christ. The church was predestined. Once you have chosen in your heart to believe and trust the Lord, the Spirit will guide your life and bring you through the fire of this existence. Once sealed you cannot fall away, though you may receive discipline for following the flesh from time to time. Peace.
Thank you for your comment and God bless!
If a true love relationship cannot be entered into voluntarily, then the Trinity does not express true love. Plus, this is not actually what Calvinists believe. Man CANNOT love God due to his sin nature. When He regenerates us, he fixes our "wanter," as Sproul puts it. So we then DO desire God. We do freely choose him, but he had to fix us first.
@@CT-316 This is a bit of nonsense since we know that God is love. The ultimate love, one of sacrifice. You seem to think three separate beings came together to agree to be one God. No matter how Calvinists try to slice and dice their stance, they ultimately deny the sacrifice of Christ as allsufficient and see it as having no bearing on whether one chooses to see it as the ultimate act of a loving God. Why have such a demonstration if it has no bearing on the outcome. Stop saying Calvin's allows for choice when it clearly does not and then appealing to some mystery that does not exist.
@@MrMan-jf8yi excuse you? How in the world did you conclude that I think three beings agreed to come together to become God? Where did I argue for that?! And where did I appeal to mystery?
Edit: I see that I misphrased what I was saying with the Trinity. I was arguing against the idea that love must be freely chosen to be true love, as the Trinity does not do this.
“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.
“Safe?” said Mr Beaver; “don’t you hear what Mrs Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”
☺
I have a genuine question: do you think Judas had the "free will" to not betray Jesus? Given that the scriptures testify to his betrayal many years before he was even born, do you believe God predetermined Judas' life, heart, and actions so as to use him in the betrayal of Jesus, or was God just hoping that he would freely choose to betray Jesus when he wrote those OT passages quoted in the gospels?
I do believe God predetermined Judas' betrayal, but without the need to predetermine his heart. I believe He does this through counterfactual knowledge. The knowledge that is between what "will" be, and what "could" be, namely, what most certainly "would" be. There are many examples of God using His omniscience in this way. Put another way, I don't believe God needs to control both sides of the chess board to ensure His victory. I believe Judas' case is just another example of judicial hardening. God knew that Judas' heart "would" most certainly desire to betray Jesus in that moment and predetermined the "event" through means of Judas' free choice. God may have even hardened him in his own rebellion to bring about a good purpose, as He did with many of the Jews and religious leaders, which we believe is the true context of Romans 9.
@@beberean612 Was Judas' choice truly free if it was predetermined by God? What about the choices he made that lead to that as well, like joining Jesus as a disciple? Were those choices also free, or predetermined?
Yes of course it is a knowledge of a free choice.
@@beberean612 So did God give Judas the ability to freely not betray Jesus, but just knew that Judas would betray Jesus before Judas was created? I don't see how Judas could have had a free choice here if Scripture already determined that betrayal before Judas was even created.
@@RedeemedSteveJudas was a devil the scripture says. Christ calls him that.
Truly if he has free will or not is actually irrelevant. Because HE WAS A DEVIL. the question is for you, WHY was he a devil?
Did God preordain him to that? Or did he take what he had in life and reject God's provision and grace and choose his own way?
Further, even if God used Judas to bring about redemption, that DOES NOT prove or follow that he does this for all people at all times. Not that you said that...but many follow that line of thinking and it's nonsense
Thank you everyone for watching! Please like and subscribe if you find this helpful, or dislike if you disagree, and tell me why. God bless!
Loved the video.
I started my UA-cam channel with much the same impetus, the damage caused by a wicked church (I was part of the Vineyard cult).
However, unlike you, I became an atheist.
I'm curious about your journey, if you'd be interested in doing a live stream or a recorded Google call to edit to video, I'd love to chat.
Interestingly enough, I just posted a video today about the argument over alcohol and how it shows Christianity cannot be true (or, even if it is true, you have no way to know your version of it is the "right" one).
I have a special hatred, I must admit, for Calvinism. Ray Comfort once told me to my face that I was never a "real" Christian. He'd say the same to you, you were never a Calvinist in his view, a "real" one, because if you were, you couldn't leave. lol
Anyway, peace to you and your journey and if you'd like to chat, I'd be happy to do so.
Thank you for this! I am an old man now. I spent many years being tossed to and fro by winds of doctrine. You are learning something extremely valuable in all of life. I am not taking a side for or against your conclusions. Like yourself, please allow me to share my journey with you.
--- ---
First: Pause and think about the type of debate in which neither side knows which side they will argue until the debate is about to begin. How would you prepare for that?
--- ---
Second: I have a friend who spent 4 years of high school and 4 years of college on competitive debate teams. He never lost, except for one time. One loss in 8 years. I asked him to tell me the most important thing about debate. Without hesitation, he said, “Know their arguments better than they do!” Now think about my first suggestion again. How would you prepare for that?
---- ----
Third: Throughout my years of being tossed to and fro by winds of doctrine I finally noticed 2 things. One, many of us do not want to say, “I don’t know,” or “I don’t understand.” On the millennia old debate over the “sovereignty of God versus the free will of man,” many on both sides stumble over their own pride in not being able to admit they don’t know; they don’t understand.
Two, too many of us are petrified in fear of even hearing an opposing view because it might rattle our “faith.” In this case, should we not question our own definition of “faith?” The Holy Spirit used W. E. Vine to enlighten us, that among the concepts, faith can simply mean “persuasion.” If whenever we use the word, “faith,” we say, “persuasion,” we soon have to ask ourselves, “what exactly persuades me?” Does refusing to consider an opposing side persuade me? NO! It makes me vulnerable. Oh how many times I have been embarrassed by not doing my homework. An old trial lawyer adage that carries the same idea goes, “Don’t ask a question that you do not already know the answer you will get.” Yes, my friend was right; know their arguments better than they do.
---- ----
There is a balance. Solomon did tell us to leave the presence of a fool. If we are to leave foolishness, is it a contradiction that the Apostles admonish us to be steadfast in our faith, our persuasion? There is no contradiction. Discretion must be developed. We come to know when to walk away, and when to standfast, and when to say, “I do not know, (yet).”
---- ----
CAUTION: After Jesus healed the man who was blind from birth, this happened: (Jn9:40-41) “Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, ‘Are we also blind?”
Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you SAY ‘we see,’ your guilt remains.”
Shalom, Selah
Thats why dispensational futurists and preterists wont debate historicism. They know we were all raised in dispensational futurism and were aware of preterism. They know they dont have arguments against us so they lie about our position. If you have to lie about your opponents position you know yours has no merit. And yet they keep doing it.
And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
Not exactly the same.
@@joshportiesorry what was the point for the correction?
Wondering if you believe in preservation of the saints as the Calvinist would hold to?
Roman's states many times that by faith alone in Christ we have been saved. I think that with true faith comes the desire to abide in God's word. I think God gave us agency to make our own choices. God wants followers not slaves. I do not know alot about Calvinism, but I do have a personal relationship with Jesus so I remain unaffected by religion and its doctrines.
“Faith alone” is used once in scripture and proceeded the words “not by” James 2:27
this is the false view of Calvinism that I abandoned before embracing Calvinism
I've never had assurance like what I have now after learning the law gospel distinction and that God is 100% responsible for salvation...
I used to think this way before I properly learned reformed theology
I pray you don't fall into the anti Calvinist obsession that Leighton Flowers has, it is an unhealthy obsession and he practically denies original sin...
you defining "spiritual blessing" means being chosen
all spiritual blessings mean we don't lack any, not that we obtain every single one instantly
your argument against Ephesians 1 is a very convaluted confusing argument that just seeks to create confusion where there is none and add to what Paul is saying...
@greglorenzen5632 learning reformed theology for the first time, it finally made me understand what Jesus meant in Matthew 11: 28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
assurance of salvation, doing good works from gratitude knowing God secures my salvation, I cannot lose it because it is His
and what faith alone truly means
The only way to embrace this "true" view of Calvinism you are talking about, is compatibilism, which is no less deterministic than hard determinism. It's a distinction without a difference, and the burden of proof is upon you to demonstrate for everyone how it is any less irrational than hard determinism.
God bless you so very much for sharing your story. It really does matter. And is helping many, my brother!
Sounds like you never really understood Calvinism.
I'll give you props for predictability.
I listen to Sproul and his main point that is rooted in scripture, is that your salvation is not in your hands. Its humble to let go of your own desire and plan to save yourself. We do good acts, not to earn our way into heaven, but because we know God wants a relationship with us and that the cost of our sins has been paid in full. That's what makes Christ's sacrifice so necessary, otherwise it would not of needed to be done. We downplay our wretched nature and sin in the west, while we enjoy ruminating on the idea that we are somehow already divine. There are no natural good doers down here and any good comes from God, so that none can boast. I love when the original sin, which is pride, gets destroyed from our lives. Kind of like how Dostoevsky describes that we are bound by free-will so much so, that we will ignore rationality and do something empty-headed just to exercise it. To feel like an individual and that in itself is hardly free. We need an outside source to change us and I guess the line in the sand here is whether you feel like our salvation is either synergistic or monergistic. This far into my theological study, personally I still choose the latter.
Are you "Calvinist"?
@@block9390 No ma'am and im not sure what everyone is arguing about.
There's truth in what is described as monergism but some Calvinist preachers really just pretend to be monergists but then literally everything they preach is an epistemological contradiction to monergism. Paul Washer is one of the best examples of this. If you say stuff like works are "evidences" of salvation, sorry you are just pretending to be a monergist. But who's really a monergist for real?
Did you actually read Calvin? It sounds like you are rejecting a caricature.
I'm not keen on wholeheartedly defending caricatures for 18 years. Compatibilism is no less deterministic than hard determinism. It's a distinction without a difference, unless you can demonstrate the difference.
It's quite telling, when a religious person won't or can't answer questions given in good faith. Don't you think?
Your problem is that you can’t base your decisions on “well if I do this, then it was going to happen anyway because sovereignty”. As you know, God has a decretive and revealed will. One has to do with His ordaining all things, good and evil, while the other has to do with what He has instructed for us to do. To actively go against His instruction under the guise of “it was always going to be this way” is choosing to disobey Him. So while you are right in a sense that when we disobey, that is divinely ordained, the foreordination of God is descriptive not prescriptive. You can’t outthink God.
If our disobedience is causally determined by God, i.e., actively going against His instruction, this means that even our desire to do it under the guise of "it was going to be this way," is itself also divinely ordained by God, and we could not have done otherwise.
@@beberean612 There is a massive difference between being able to conceive of God ordaining all things as an excuse to disobey, and the cosmic reality of Him doing so. The fact that you can think about it doesn’t mean that you can rise above it. It is a plain teaching of scripture that God ordains all things, AND that we are held accountable for our sinful natures. To try and dismantle that truth through thought experiment is to deny God’s Word.
@@TheLordismyportion My friend do you not see that your line of thinking is fallacious? Please consider that this notion of Calvinism being a plain teaching in Scripture is "begging the question" of whether or not the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture is correct. You are using a premise in your argument as evidence for why your conclusion is correct. For example...
Premise 1. The Bible is God's word.
Premise 2. Calvinism is taught in the Bible.
Conclusion. If you go against Calvinism, you are going against God's word.
In order for your conclusion to be true, it must be demonstrated that all of your premises are true. But you cannot use a premise in your argument as evidence for why your conclusion is true, because premise 2 is the very point that is up for debate. It's like saying, "You're wrong about the Bible because I'm right about the Bible. Now, another argument...
Premise 1. On Calvinism, God determines all THINGS that come to pass.
Premise 2. Conceiving of God ordaining all things, as an excuse to disobey is a THING that has come to pass.
Conclusion. God has determined me to conceive of Him ordaining all things, as an excuse to disobey.
This is an example of a sound argument, because in order to rationally reject the conclusion, you must reject at least one of the premises. Now, the burden of proof is upon you, as a Calvinist, to demonstrate for everyone how mankind can (rationally) be held responsible for doing precisely what God has determined, when we could not have done otherwise. I understand that Calvinism teaches God determines everything AND man is responsible, but what we are trying to do here is demonstrate that this is irrational. Even if you are okay with believing a (seemingly) irrational doctrine, many others, when they realize there are alternative interpretations that ARE (seemingly) rational, will choose the rational interpretation over the irrational one. How do you square the circle?
Thank you, I’m struggling with whether Calvinism is right or wrong. I was raised no, but when you look at the great preachers of today, they are. I don’t understand it very well. I’ll keep watching your videos. I did leave Piper a long time ago because he said someone that was living with someone out of marriage would have gone to hell if he hadn’t talked her into moving out.
God bless you brother and thank you for your comment!
Read your Bible and meditate cover to cover and pray, asking with simple honesty that the Lord illuminates it for you by the power of the Holy Spirit in Jesus Name! Do this as consistently as possible and you won’t need to ponder what sort of lenses to view the scriptures through. However well meaning men are the Lord is still the one building His Church!
Ye of little faith.
You're where you are because of the choices you make. God can and does, even then, work his plan. Everyone sins, its how you feel and what you do about your sin that is key.
Sanctification process will be paused with no relationship.
Amen and thank you for your comment!
Humility and Holiness - YES!!!!, tulip?, I kindly say “No thank you!”
Hey buddy, congrats and thx to the lord He's revealed the truth to you. And now, thank you for taking it upon yourself to help those that have yet to see.
As you grow in the truth I highly recommend you check early church. The first Christians were not without heresy but you can clearly see those who were identified as being outside what true Christians believe by the church
Adam and Eve only had moral free will in the Garden of Eden. The same as every descendent of Adam.
Why I think Calvinism is so dangerous:
1. It makes you humble. Believing that God does the choosing makes it difficult to be haughty. Calvinism means not being able to lord it over others.
2. It creates a much more profound awe of God's plan. Who has time for that?
3. Knowing that God is sovereign eliminates neuroticism about salvation. Assurance of salvation is boring.
4. Subscribing to historic Calvinistic confessions means you can't actually blame God for things you do wrong. You do still have to get off your butt according to Calvinism.
5. It's hard to understand because God is a mystery. Who wants a God like that? Give us a simple and easy God!
Scary stuff!
Do you believe you determine if you are "humble" or not? Do you believe you determine if you "stand in awe of God's plan" or not? Do you believe you determine if you blame God or not? Do you believe YOU determine if you "get off your butt or not?" Are these things you believe YOU determined before the foundation of the world and God simply determined all other things that come to pass? If so, you are not a Calvinist.
@@beberean612 I'm not angry with God for how He shaped the clay. If you are, deal with it.
@@FalconOfStorms If I am, God predetermined it, right???
@@beberean612 Calvinism and the Bible both say that's your own problem. Stop blaming God.
@@FalconOfStorms Why are you commenting if you are unwilling to answer simple questions? You must be waiting on God to decree a rational response into your mind.
people need to just read The Bible. Nowadays people should never step foot in a church unless they know Scripture well- so many pastors teach lies like once saved always saved and just a simple belief being enough to save you. Verses are consistently taken out of context like John 3:16 and Ephesians 2:8-2:9.
Jesus Christ must be your lord in your heart- the boss of your existence in order for Him to be your savior
AW Tozer throughout his ministry spoke (later printed into books) that we tend to overemphasize certain attributes of God- and this is where problems occur. One attribute that I think is overemphasized or even misunderstood is his sovereignty. Of course, I do affirm that God is sovereign. But does this mean he controls every decision/action in his creation? We often use the word sovereign to describe nations or monarchs. Was King Henry VIII sovereign in England? Yes, of course he was! What he said went! However, did he control every decision made for every person in his kingdom? No! So he wasn't sovereign then? Yes, he was sovereign. Finally, Tozer stated in his book Attributes of God that we tend to want to explain everything- instead, we should understand and give room for mystery. Yes, God is sovereign!
Thank you for your kind comment! God bless!
On our behalf God foreknew only he could and that we could not.
God "Foreknew" but it was never His will that Adam sin much less us.
In the beginning God "had" a perfect plan; His plan has remained "perfect" since.
Nothing catches the Lord off guard; nothing surprises Him.
We can go astray from Gods original will for our lives; and live the turmoil of
Consequence. It's a miserable existence indeed. Yet He forgets not His own;
According to Proverbs 29:1 this is the consequential will of God.
Yet either way Thy will be done!
Proverbs 29:1
He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.
Adam broke the law; Praise the Lord Jesus broke the curse;
When Christ is on the throne of our heart we're not
When we're on the throne He's not.
There's heaven to gain and hell to shun
The will of God cuts both ways
Romans 14:12 Paul says So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God...
O' me.
Eternal life is Gods gift;
By that same grace His reward is earned.
Great post!
May your works continue to bear good fruit.
Hmm, I'm not an expert on Calvinism by any means (and I have my own issues with things) but I'm not sure "predeterminism" is the correct summation of it. There has been a false conflict between what we call Predestination vs Free Will which are theoretically connected with Calvinism and Arminianism (these are both poor summations of the two). What this is much more about seems to me to be about perspective. God's perspective and our perspective. God is the Almighty one who stands outside of our space and time out from whom all creation is generated and sustained. Of course he knows all that could happen or will happen. But we do not have this perspective. And indeed, scripture validates that we do not have his perspective and that we are fully accountable for our actions. It is not that the two ideas are opposed, but that they co-exist. God's desire over and over is to partner with his people to rule and reign through his wisdom. But when we choose to rule and reign with our own wisdom, that is indeed our choice and the consequences of that is ours to bear with full responsibility. And also, of course God knows how things will go. How can he not from his perspective? These are in tension, but we must live life from our perspective. The book of Job has much to say on both of these topics (though it can be difficult to weed through the dense Hebrew poetry)
READ THE BIBLE FOR YOURSELVES PEOPLE AND DON'T LET OTHERS EXPAIN ANYTHING TO YOU, THAT IS WHAT THE HOLY SPIRIT DOES NOT MAN!
No you misunderstand. In God's mind we are connected to Christ before the foundation of the world in the sense it was always God's plan for individuals to be in Christ at the point in time that God chooses. Union with Christ is certain not uncertain before the foundation of the world. At the point in time by God's choosing individuals will be in Christ by regeneration which leads to faith. God appoints when, where and how a person is in Christ before creation
If what you are saying is true, then being "in God's mind" was the means through which we were always been connected to Christ, when Paul said God has blessed us "in Christ" with "every" spiritual blessing (i.e., being connected to Christ through faith is the means through which we receive every spiritual blessing). It is irrational to say we are chosen because we are connected to Christ and connected to Christ because we are chosen. And if you say that being chosen (is) the connection to Christ, then the connection to Christ and the choice in God's mind are indistinguishable and being connected to Christ cannot be the means through which we receive "every" spiritual blessing. And if that is true, and being chosen is the connection, that's like saying we are chosen because we are chosen, or connected to Christ because we are connected to Christ. It only makes sense if the connection to Christ (through faith) is the means through which every spiritual blessing comes, and I believe this is precisely what Paul is saying.
There is no free will with a Calvinist. Without free will how would there be sin? In Calvin's ideology Adam and Eve were predestined to eat of the tree of knowledge and punished. They clearly chose to disobey God. We are not programed robots because we have free will.
I think the issue you have with Calvinism is a reliance on your own reasoning to explain a mystery of God. We know the Bible is clear that man is responsible for his own sin and that God is not the author of evil. We also know that God is sovereign and in control of all things. He ordains everything by his own counsel and He cannot be changed.
These appear to be logical contradictions. How can God ordain history if man has free will? It's easy to diminish either God's sovereignty or man's agency, but that reveals a limit in our ability to comprehend God.
If you are to believe the Bible, you have to accept that both are true. God's will and man's will are perfectly united. One does not cause the other. They are fully independent. A human analogy would be to look at it as an infinite series of coincidences. This does not have to be a contradiction.
All you're saying is, "We know man is responsible for his own sin, and we know that Calvinism's view of God's sovereignty is correct, so...." You cannot assume the Calvinistic view of "sovereignty" is right. There are mysteries in the Bible yes, but we should not create mystery where non is needed. That's my position.
@@beberean612 Yes. Why shouldn't I believe the Calvinist view that God is completely sovereign is correct? I see it plainly in scripture. It gives all the glory to God. It strengthens our trust in Him to be able to act mightily in the hearts of our families, friends, and leaders. It does not minimize or discard any other fundamental Christian doctrine.
Calvinism does not say we are not guilty and we are not responsible for our sin. Its not Gods fault we sin or dont do as we should. If you don't understand that you never understood reformed theology
I understand that Calvinists claim we are responsible on their system, but I believe it is an irrational, ad hoc claim. It's a square circle. If they are consistent within their own framework, these are the logical implications of the system. Claiming someone else doesn't understand Calvinism is not the same thing as rationally defending Calvinism.
@@beberean612 doesn't matter what you believe about it. It's biblical one day maybe you'll expect it.
@@Thinking-Biblically And to that I say, "It doesn't matter what you believe about it. It's biblical one day maybe you'll except it." This is the best way to spot the question begging fallacy. If I can simply turn around and say the same thing back to you, and that becomes my argument, it's fallacious. It begs the question of whether or not Calvinism is Biblical, which is the very point that is up for debate.
Thats right, amen.
Thank you for your comment! God bless!
all my life i have held that lack of free will was TOTALLY incompatible with the existence of God.
when i was an atheist i was a philosophic materialist who held that, as a hard determinist, free will could not and did not exist so neither did God For a god in a universe without free will is the author of all sin
but then when converted by my own Damascus Road experience now 45 years ago i KNEW that free will existed
Calvinism is such a foul misrepresentation of God, a monster who damns most simply because he can and chooses to do so, that Calvinists cannot possibly have any kind of relationship with God Himself. OR if they did they forsook it for such a blasphemy as this.
the verse that refutes Calvinism is not John 3:16, for i have seen how they wiggle out of that one
but the fact that God is NOT WILLINGTHAT ANY PERISH speaks for itself.
IMO Calvin himself totally misunderstood God's sovereignty. Instead of am all wise Being who can and does work with free moral agents Calvin's deity was a total control freak who did nothing but build a giant terrarium, ultimately devoid of personality, for without free will personality is an empty simulcrum so love it self does not exist
I could say more but i am tired . if you are interested in more please reply
Thank you for your comment my friend and God bless!
Either you believe God is sovereign over ALL or you don't.
This is what I hear you saying... "Either you believe in the Calvinistic view of God's sovereignty over ALL, or you don't." To that I say, "Right, we disagree with Calvinism!"
I would love to talk to you about it
But you kinda have to hold two beliefs
God is in complete control over every seen and unseen thing
And he those in the book of life the ability to overcome.
But Calvinism is understanding Jesus complete and total sovereign rule of everything.
It's inescapable.
But you will always be corruptible until you have been MADE incorruptible
Still keep the faith
And only the ignorant doubt Gods existence it's about know and faith.
We should have a long form discussion on discord or something
thanks for taking the time to make these videos. A great resource for many to listen to and learn.
Thank you for your kind comment and God bless!
Re: A great resource for many to listen to and learn...
Bible use can become habit forming
Regular reading can cause loss of anxiety
Fear and a decreased appetite 4 impatience and anger.
Symptoms include increased love
joy peace and self-control.
If symptoms persist just
Praise The LORD!
Crack that Bible!
GBY & those you love!
For the record, you are arguing against universal divine causal determinism. Complete lack of free agency. Some but not all Calvinists believe that. Most Calvinists, myself included, do not believe that.
And you are inconsistant in your Calvinism because of that.
@@beberean612 No. That's why the 5 points of Calvinism exist. To codify the theology. Which of the 5 points implies universal lack of agency? None. Why not do a video on each of the 5 points instead of a bunch of videos on casual determinism? The only reason I can think is either you haven't researched it, or you would rather attack a strawman.
How fragile a faith that cannot defend itself against a couple basic questions. Any person you meet on the street that you might be sharing the gospel with could ask you the same questions, and what would you say then? Are those who ask no questions the only people who can be made disciples of your faith? And what does it say about your faith if it is so easily silenced? Come man. Does your Bible not command you to give a reason for the hope that you have to anyone who asks in 1 Peter 3:15!? Why do you place your hope in the writings of dead men?
There is a difference between “struggling” and sin, as a believer.
A believer is “free from sin”
A believer “cannot sin”
The church system has polluted his Word and deceived many.
Can you give us your favorite passage of Scripture to support your view that a believer cannot sin?
@@beberean612
1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
Jesus destroyed the works of the devil.
There are no “righteous sinners”.
Do you believe you still sin?
@@-Thelordismyshepherd- Yes I believe you are quoting 1 John out of context. I believe what John is saying here is that if we say we love God, we should make it our goal not to sin; we should make it our goal to keep His commandments.
"My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. BUT IF ANYONE DOES SIN, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, IF WE KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS." 1 John 2:1-3
@@beberean612
By your statement, you believe what is written in not true.
You say “context”, meaning what is written is not true.
And 1jn2:1 is speaking about 2 groups of people.
To be saved, one has to be “converted”;
Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
So a converted believer would be “little children”.
And those who be the ones who “abide” with Christ who “sinneth not”.
1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if ANY MAN sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
So we have “little children” who “sin not” who are converted, who ALREADY have Jesus as their advocate.
Those who sin, “any man”, NOT “little children”, they have an advocate, who they did NOT HAVE,
“Hath not seen, neither known him”.
Who is the propitiation for the sins of the World.
So you said this verse is not in context;
1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
Is this verse written wrong? Or what do you believe is the “context” of this verse?
Re: A believer is “free from sin”
Amen but not free to sin.
Fact is sin is not the struggle; temptation is.
The redeemed of the Lord are free from "Condemnation" of the law; but not obligation.
Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Gods moral law is for judgment; governance; continuity and harmony in community.
The law of gravity is what goes up must come down
"The law" of sin and death" is "condemnation"
There’s heaven to gain and hell to shun.
Eternal life is Gods gift; reward is earned.
Not everyone will share the same address in heaven; nor should they.
Jesus says In my Father's house are many mansions:
Paul says So run, that ye may obtain.
Judgment is coming!
Romans 14:12 Paul the Apostle says So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad...
Without controversy whether saved by grace or judged by law
The books will be open and your life will back it up!
GBY & those you love
God does determine everything. It’s true. However you should live your life in your mind, not trying to think in Gods mind
But my friend, if God determines everything, then whether I desire to live my life in my mind, or in God's mind, is determined by God.
Calvinism =“ fueling my apathy” wow!! That should be a t shirt
Religion is the oldest trick in the book i dont count Christianity as a religion its a relationship with God
Paul disagrees with you.
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world
@@joshportie 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@joshportie so you are a religious person?
@@block9390 i suppose it would depend on your definition. But no i dont have pure religion according to Paul. If you mean organized religion i would say this comment isnt innaccurate for that. Although the oldest trick technically is that we can be like God. Organized religion probably followed shortly after. Christianity is a religion, and yes you must know God, it is a relationship. I believe my bible if thats what you mean, but i dont go to any church because they all embrace apostacy. Im not going to sit still while im lied to. When i was a baby christian i fell for calvinism. If you were trying to mock me no biggie, if not then i hope this answers your question.
@@Redkodiak1994 so youre claiming to have a relationship with God but you mock his word?
I agree with you on Calvinism. I want to add that Christianity itself has similar problem as Calvinism has. For example: did God predetermined for Adam and Eve to fall? Or Adam and Eve could not fall also? Was it predestined for them to fall in the Garden of Eden, or wasn't? You see, Christianity as a whole is having the same problem the Calvinists have, because in Christianity there is no scenario where Adam and Eve wouldn't have fallen. If Adam and Eve wouldn't have fallen, then it wouldn't be a necessity of Jesus to come on earth and die on the cross for us to be saved, because we wouldn't need to be saved. But who in Christianity considers this possibility, regardless of whether one is Calvinist or not? No one. So in a sense any form of Christianity has the same problem as Calvinists have. You are absolutely right about Calvinism, and how it is incoherent and dangerous. However Christianity as a whole has to solve this problem, because not just Calvinists who have it.
To add more, would be possible for Jesus to come to earth and not be crucified? Does any Christian consider this possibility or He came to die as was predestined? Here again no Christian considers the possibility for Jesus to have a different fate, because every Christian believes that it was predestined for Jesus to die and there is no alternative.
Please reflect on these points. I want to recommend for you Divine Principle.
I would like to thank you for this great comment and actually, I have spent lots of time reflecting on these things throughout my life. Where I land is counterfactual knowledge and the understanding that knowledge and causation should not be conflated. Perfect knowledge of a free choice and allowing that choice by means of a secondary cause (allowing the agent to act freely and affect the outcome), is not the same thing as having a perfect knowledge of a choice because you causally determine it. In this scenario, there can be no secondary cause, because there can be no knowledge of the agent affecting the outcome in any way. When the only reason God knows something, is because He causally determines it, only He can be the primary or "final" cause of it. But with counterfactual knowledge of what lies between what "could" be and "will" be, God can determine to permit what most certainly "would" be, and perfectly know what will be. But knowing what most certainly "would" or "will" be, is not the same thing as causing the choice. Thank you for your comment and God bless!
What is there to solve? Ephesians 1:4-5, "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved."
@@beberean612 I think you are talking about God’s middle knowledge. However why would God grieve in Gen. 6:6? Why God is using the word “if” throughout the Bible. Why God didn't punish the people of Nineveh, even though he predestined it? Why did God change His mind?
God often gives contradictory prophecies, because people have the choice to follow God's will or not. So, the outcome depends on whether people followed God's will or not. And God is giving prophecies presupposing either outcome. So, if Israel follows, becomes the head, if not, Israel becomes the tail.
Every Christian is basically Calvinistic, even those who make channels railing against Calvinism. However, Calvinism doesn't have a problem, because God is perfect and blameless in all things.
@@gheorghebirca It's not really a contradiction if it was always God's plan for Jonah to preach repentance to the Ninevites. Since God sent a sea creature to swallow Jonah when he tried to flee from God's plan, it would seem that it was always God's plan for Jonah to preach repentance to the Ninevites and Jonah was utterly unable to stop it.
I had a similar experience when I dabbled in Calvinism. Thankfully, it didn’t take me as long to drop it as a viable belief system.
i'd like to hear your explanation as to how you determine if a belief system is viable or not? is it if it makes you feel good or is there logical reasoning behind its viability in reality?
I'm thankful for that!
@@soapvar The system makes God the author of evil and is inconsistent with verses like 1 Timothy 2:4 that state that God desires all people to be saved. Plus I agree with the author of the video that I began to think that I was predestined to sin, so why bother taking any personal responsibility for doing it?
@@leib109 You forget that Calvinism does not reject man's free will. Most people who reject Calvinism don't understand that it teaches both God's sovereignty and man's agency. There is no sacrifice of free will.
Great job explaining. Don't be disappointed when attacked. Stand for the truth!. Subscribed.
Thank you so much for your kind comment! There is a lot of that going on! Haha! God bless!
Some day I hope God brings you back to the truth. In the mean time go back to being Berean and studying scripture.
If Calvinism is true, it will have to be God that brings me back, seeing how it is God who has determined me to leave the "truth" of Calvinism in the first place. Unless you believe that I determined that "thing," before the foundation of the world, and God simply determined all other things that come to pass?
@@beberean612 We can only pray that you will return to Biblical teaching some day -- you surely will in paradise.
Ultimately though @@beberean612 mocking the concept of God's sovereignty certainlyl is not a good sign, definitely not "Berean"
@@christophertaylor9100 Calvinist circular reasoning at its finest. This is because Calvinists lack robust arguments, so they resort to fallacious ones. But thank you for demonstrating this for everyone else to see.
@@beberean612 In what way is pointing out that you mocking God's sovereignty is not exactly Biblical somehow fallacious? Do you think that's the proper way to speak or write about Him?
The idea that Calvinists lack robust arguments is one of the most hilariously vapid and ludicrous things I have ever read on the internet. I suspect your knowledge of this theology is shockingly lacking to come to that conclusion.
If this belief system is what you believe calvinism is than yes, it is very dangerous. This belief system makes God responsible for you sin. That idea is extremely dangerous.
Thankfully that is not true calvinism.
The burden of proof is upon the Calvinist to rationally demonstrate how compatibilism is any less deterministic than hard determinism. Until you can convince us of that, I'm going to respectfully say you are making an ad hoc claim. Then again, if you could convince us of this "truth," your entire system would self-destruct; as only God can open eyes to truth on Calvinism. And since a "compatibilistic" secondary cause cannot change the outcome of God's decree in any way, but lives and moves only according to what has been decreed, it must be predetermined for me to believe in Calvinism, or even understand it rightly.
You seem to be suffering from an extreme case of hyper-Calvinism. Relax and enjoy the ride.
It's a distinction without a difference.
Are you an open theist?
Your refutation of Calvinist arguments from Ephesians 1:3-4 doesn’t make sense. There is no circular reasoning in saying that being chosen by Christ is a spiritual blessing AND the means through which we are connected to Christ from the foundation of the world. It simply makes sense and you seem to be convoluting the concept.
Whose hands are best for your life to be in other than God’s? Certainly not your own.
“And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days.” (Mark 13:20)
Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” Romans 10:20 (ESV)
Romans 9:10-20 is an incredibly brutal refutation of anti-Calvinism.
I understand why you say that. I've said the same thing before, but it's not Romans 9 or these other passages you mentioned that refute anti-Calvinism, it's the Calvinist's interpretation of Romans 9 and the other passages you mentioned that do. But that is the very point that is up for debate. No, I am not an open theist. I do believe God knows everything. But knowing something is not the same thing as causing something. I'm saying that Calvinist have misunderstood the entire concept of election. I don't believe "knowing" who will be in Christ was the basis of God's choosing. I hold to corporate election, so we are saying God chose "us" in Him (those who are in union with Christ), before the foundation of the world, that "we" (those who are in union with Christ) would be holy and blameless. We're saying He chose those within the "corporation" of Christ to be holy and blameless, and He made this choice before the foundation of the world. Yes, the direct object in the Greek is "us", and that makes perfect sense on our view because the "corporate" group is necessarily made up of individuals, who receive the spiritual blessing of being "chosen to be holy and blameless," through means of faith in Christ and become one of God's chosen people under the new covenant (i.e., adopted as sons).
Calvinism is dangerous because it abases man and his pride.
Or, God could have determined that you would doubt Him, so you don't have any choice but to do it. But at the same time, your doubt of God is your own damn fault and you deserve to be punished. It's sort of as if your middle school niece (if you have one) might imagine some bad behavior for her Barbie dolls and then punish them for it. It works if God is not subject to the Law of Noncontradiction, but it makes it almost impossible to say anything meaningful about Him. Calvinism isn't supposed to make sense. It's a means of social control that employs self-congratulation and despair to get people to submit.
Calvinism is not scripture. It’s a man made script. Not scripture. Good on ya for saying this.
Thank you for your comment and God bless!
Calvinism is a cult.
What is more dangerous is thinking that your "free will" can usurp a sovereign God. What a low view of God that you have.
Then you're saying there is no free will, okay, but then, what's the point?
From an atheist viewpoint, I tend to agree that free will is an illusion. If we have any, it's for the minor things we do, the big things are determined by time and location and culture of our birth (obviously, there's not too many Christians in Jakarta, but a lot of Muslims).
The Calvinist position is utterly wicked as it takes a nihilistic position that you have no real choices (you were predetermined) but then punishes those who also had no choice (predetermined to go to hell).
@@michaelsbeverly You should feel right at home with a "nihilistic" and deterministic approach to life, as Richard Dawkins said, "we dance to our DNA". You still haven't said how it is wrong, however. I also do not claim to understand the seem in paradox of free will (a concept never once taught in the Bible) and the Bible explicitly saying that all is predetermined before the universe was even made.
You comment is condescending. If you are so entrenched into Calvinism, why do care if someone does not believe in Calvinism.
"A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so.” A.W. Tozer
@@beberean612 God fears nothing. People just cannot accept a sovereign God. If He is not sovereign then He is not a being worthy of my time.
I sure hope that the patron saint of Calvinism - John Calvin himself - repented before he died! Calvin was responsible for Michael Servetus being burned at the stake in the year 1553. He used green wood so that he would "bake like a potato" before he died. Calvin took predestination to a whole new level! Who would name the religion of their faith after a murder? Not very Christ like! I'm sure Christ would not have murdered someone because they disagreed with his position!
You’re slandering a man long-dead. Calvin didn’t kill Severtus. You’re bearing false witness and promoting an anti-Calvinist fantasy. It’s not only bad history, but sinful.
Calvin was nothing like modern calvinists. And im not sure were in a position to judge him. If its true about his role and michael was an honest man in that he believed what he was preaching and not a jesuit priest sent to divide then its terrible. But i find calvin has been twisted. For one he wasnt a dispensationalist or a futurist so he did not share the same beliefs as todays "calvinists" if he did come up with tulip he was wrong. He was certainly tainted by gnostic ideas of the catholic church.
Just saying this sort of history is impossible to verify given our position in time. Im a historian. Books have been edited by catholic scholars. You would have to check original sources in person not digital copies. And im not interested enough to make this attempt. Leave judgement to Jesus and stick to doctrine. We can refute that and we can admonish behaviours.
Historical records indicate that John Calvin, the Protestant reformer, played a significant role in the trial and execution of Michael Servetus. When Servetus arrived in Geneva, he was spotted, arrested, and sentenced to death by the local council. Calvin, whose role in Servetus’ trial had been that of expert witness managing the prosecution, wanted Servetus not to die but to recant, and spent hours with him during and after the trial seeking to change his views.
Servetus was a Spanish physician and theologian whose unorthodox teachings led to his condemnation as a heretic by both Protestants and Roman Catholics. However, correspondence shows that even though Calvin didn’t sentence Servetus, he still believed it was right for him to die for his heresy.
While Calvin’s involvement in Servetus’s death is a dark mark on his past, it’s important to note that Servetus was widely considered a heretic by both Catholics and Protestants in the 16th century. The penal death of Servetus was an historical event resulting from deeply held theological, social, and political views.
However, the specific extent of Calvin’s responsibility in Servetus’s death is a complex historical issue that’s often debated among scholars.
@block9390 so do you lack reading comprehension? He was condemned and killed by the local government - a process that involved over 200 people. If Calvin would have protested for whatever reason, Severtus would still have died. Calvin didn’t have power over Severtus’s life at any point, and warned him that if he fled to Geneva, he’d be sentenced and put to death. This was after being condemned to death elsewhere by Catholics.
Christendom was messy and Calvin (as the majority of Christian’s in Christendom) thought being a heretic against the catholic (universal) faith was worthy of death. He wasn’t a blood thirsty murderer, nor a tyrant (he could hardly get a school built in Geneva), he was a sinful man of his time.
If you want to pretend to be outraged by that specific instance of capital punishment, have at it, but Calvin did not murder Severtus.
So-called "Calvinism" is nothing more than God's word, from cover to cover, plainly revealed and understood rightly. The dislike of it is not a matter of your intellect; it's a matter of your heart and your affections. In Adam, you are depraved and your natural understanding is corrupted; wickedness in the heart cannot love a truth that takes the glory and sovereignty from man and gives it to God. Repent and believe. God is certainly sovereign over salvation.
So wrong. God has free will. His foreknowledge doesn’t mean he is slave of some book, otherwise the book would be god. He changes de history as we can see many times in scriptures: Abraham talking about Sodom, Moses, and all the prayers every believer do. Except the ones made by Calvinists, sorry brother.
John Calvin was nothing but an agent of Lucifer, and practitioner of the occult. Mixing truth, in with absolute blasphemous and completely heretical lies. You people have been SEVERELY CONDITIONED, BLINDED and HEAVILY DECEIVED by the MANY false teachers/heretics teaching this absolute garbage. And some of these false teachers, are actual agents of Lucifer. Jon MacArthur being one of them, and also a practitioner of the occult. Along with being a high ranking Mason. And yes, he is fully conscious and knows EXACTLY what he is doing. MANY of you can't even begin to conceive, grasp or understand the DECEPTION that has takin you over. Calvinism and arminianism are both direct designs of Lucifer. And are NOT the ONE TRUE GOSPEL. You all better wake up before its to late.
@@rkatoperRead your Bible, cover to cover, and if God is willing to open your blind eyes it will dispel of you of the plethora of damning errors you’ve been seduced by. No, God is not a slave to “some book”, but He did choose to reveal Himself in His written Word, which is the primary means by which we know Him. Jesus Christ Himself is called the Word made flesh, and no He does not change throughout history. You’re a heretic. If you desire life, you need to repent and believe in the Biblical gospel; the written Word of God.
@@rkatoperso God is reactive to mankind? Sounds like the sovereignty of man.
@@rkatoperIf God uses foreknowledge to inform His actions then He would not be unchangeable. Nothing happens to God.
Edit:
Don't be hasty to say that God doesn't listen to the prayers of Christians who believe in Calvinism, which is not a doctrine which contributes to or minimizes true saving faith.
blessings dear friend. As a Baptist historian of 30 years, I was always told before I began to study, how the "Old Baptists" were all Calvinists. Once I started digging, I found that was a total lie, perpetrated by so called professors and historians in colleges and seminaries. Not all Calvinists are the same, but many will lie thru their teeth and thing they are doing God's work. They sneak into churches and lie about their beliefs in order to gain a foot hold, then rip the church apart, especially the Reformed types. Keep up your work, and glorify your Lord who loves ALL people, and desires to see ALL come to repentance!
Thank you for this! God bless you and have a great week!
It wasn't until I left the Baptists that I actually learned anything. Baptist services are just sermons about giving money and altar calls and are rarely about anything of substance.
@@DarkMatterBurrito well "altar calls" are an invitiation to receive Jesus for eternal life. i think thats a pretty important thing. anyways sounds like u were not with the right kind of Baptists. they arent all the same. at least they dont have drag shows like the methodists, or deny the virgin birth like the episcopalians. or worship mary like the catholics, or teach calvinism like the prebyterians. not sure where u are now, but hope u growing closer to Christ
@@caman171 church services are for believers and to worship God. Evangelism is to be practiced outside of the church service. You waste believers' time constantly making the service about salvation. I know you don't like that, but I am 47 and grew up in a few Southern Baptist congregations. I look back and see that their sermons were consistently about salvation and tithing and 10 repeats of "Just As I Am" to guilt people into coming down the aisle and then giving it all up 2 weeks later. The ONLY expository teachings were on Wednesday nights for 30 minutes because people cannot be bothered to actually stay longer on a Sunday morning. They have to get out to get to the Sunday buffet.
@@DarkMatterBurrito well first off, youre very foolish to put all southern Baptists in the same boat. maybe that is YOUR experience, but its not mine. our normal sunday morning service lasted anywhere from an hour and a half to 2 hours. as for singing 10 repeats of "just as i am" i thank God for that. i gave up on the last verse and trusted Christ for my salvation. if i had walked out that day, i truly believe that God's conviction would be withdrawn, as He had been dealing with me for a long time. if a preacher wants to give as many chances as possible what is that to you? how many people have YOU evangelized "outside the church"?? has EVERY person on your street been visited by you to tell them about Christ? maybe people should be "guilted" into coming, because they ARE guilty and need to be saved. 1 cor 14:23-25 makes it clear that worship is to be conducted in such a way that unbelievers can benefit and be brought under conviction. i would rather make the mistake of "over evangelization" in giving any lost person a chance to understand the Gospel, than to over teach those who already believe. but BOTH can and should be done properly
The way he described Calvinism is dangerous, it’s not an identity you get when you’re saved.
This is sad, and I pray you start giving God the proper reverence he deserves. You are literally arguing that your personal experience has more authority than scripture.
This is a logical fallacy called "begging the question." It "begs the question" of whether or not the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture is correct, which is the very point that is up for debate. An easy way to spot this fallacy is to simply turn the same argument back on the person making it. To you I say, "I pray you start giving God the proper reverence he deserves. You are literally arguing that your belief in Calvinism has more authority than scripture." It's not because of my personal experience, it's because I believe the Bible does not teach Calvinism. We have to establish why our interpretation is correct, but you can't just claim that I'm wrong about the Bible because you're right about the Bible. That's circular reasoning. I hope this helps you on your journey! God bless!
I sure hope that the patron saint of Calvinism - John Calvin himself - repented before he died! Calvin was responsible for Michael Servetus being burned at the stake in the year 1553. He used green wood so that he would "bake like a potato" before he died. Calvin took predestination to a whole new level! Who would name the religion of their faith after a murder? Not very Christ like! I'm sure Christ would not have murdered someone because they disagreed with his position!
it either inspires apathy or extreme arrogance.
like all those who started the modern missionary movement and not like all the arminians who are running/attending/not attending big eva... I think the strawman in your mind is apathetic or arrogant....