Does this mean that He is a true man of God, because the video happened to be 13 min. 48 sec. He completely distorted such a simple and clear passage of God's word, removing the work of God, not glorifying the words of our Lord.
@@leonardu6094 Hey Leonard. You must see that the difference between you and me is that I believe in predestination and election of God as it is clearly written unto The Church, His Body, which He hath purchased with His Own Blood. I believe in the work of Christ and Christ Alone that turns the ungodliness away from Jacob. And so as it is written, All of Israel shall be saved. You as most, do not know who True Israel is? So when false teachers proclaim that Jesus came to save the ordained false teachers that Jude speaks of, they are totally and wilfully ignorant of the Doctrine Of Christ. Jesus called these people out for who they truly were! They were not, nor shall they ever be part of the Kingdom Of God! They are the children of the wicked one, and the enemy that soweth them is the devil! So on that Great and Terrible Day of The Lord, you shall stand before Him in your wilfull and deliberate decision to reject clear prophecy. The preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery of the Gospel has been clearly made known unto All Nations and All Men. Predestination and election are both inseparable from the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery of the Gospel! Sounds like you've jumped onto the wrong boat!
Just want you to know that I am so thankful for your channel. And I'm so thankful for the shorter teachings. I dont always have time to listen to something over an hour long and it's tough to figure out where I left off. But with the shorter vids I am able to watch the entire thing, usually. :-) God bless you and your family!!
Why are you glad, I am not a Calvinist but what if calvinism is true, just because you dont like what you see dont purposely try to interpret it ptherwise.
@@danielgreeff125 if you’re not a Calvinist, then it’s because you don’t think it’s true. If you thought it was true you’d be a Calvinist. If you think it’s not true and you love the Bible then you don’t agree with the way Calvinists interpret the Scriptures. So these videos expose the illogical ways Calvinist interpret these passages. If Calvinism is true, then let’s embrace it. But I don’t think that it is.
I just realized something... At 11:50 Dr. Flowers brings up a verse in Romans 10 about Israel's disobedience. If you think about it, EVERY verse in the entirety of Scripture that mentions disobedience to God, is a proof text against calvinism. According to their false beliefs, the ability to disobey God is impossible, because God has already decreed everything that would happen. They believe that God has "sovereignly" predestined everything, including sin. So, if humans can disobey God, that's an act AGAINST his decree, because otherwise, He would have decreed them to do what they chose to do instead. Disobedience to God literally proves that we have free will. If the act of disobedience is what God "sovereignly decreed" them to do, it would NOT, and COULD NOT be disobedience; because the very act of disobeying would be obeying what God had decreed them to do. So, according to the God's word, disobeying God is possible. According to calvinism, it's impossible to disobey God's decrees. Both cannot be correct, so one of these worldviews is wrong! I chose to belive the Bible... NOT calvinism.
Check out RC Sproul's video on UA-cam "if God is Sovereign, How Can Man be Free?" It does a pretty good job of explaining your observation with simple logic and Biblical support. I hope that helps, friend 😁
This verse should really be read, "And so did believe -- as many as were determined for eternal life". This leaves it in English as ambiguous as it is in Greek. It's in the 'middle-passive' voice, so it can be taken as either middle (were determining themselves for...) or passive (were determined by someone else for...). Both Philip Doddridge (a puritan) and Alexander Campbell (a non-calvinist) agreed here; in a New Testament translation by Doddridge and published by Campbell in 1826, the verse is rendered this way: "and as many as were determined for eternal life believed." In the index, Campbell assesses the reading with many other versions, but states, "We prefer Doddridge, because his translation is as ambiguous as the Greek." Too many translations today are picking a side when translating verses that can go equally in 2 different directions. When we ought to seek to render it with the same level of ambiguity as the Greed does, and let readers (in English) see that ambiguity. No ambiguous text can be used as a foundation for a theological principle. And this IS an ambiguous text. It obviously is not meant by Luke to teach Calvinism, since he would have been clear (not unclear) if that was his purpose. Wilkin is also right in it's contrast in this context with the Jews "judging _themselves_ unworthy of eternal life" 2 verses earlier. The Gentiles here were simply "determined" for eternal life. Just as I'm *determined* to go eat a sandwich right now.
@@Mr_A1-37 but if you're translating it one way based on context, you're interpreting it for the reader. You should translate it accurately, and let the reader discern whether which direction to interpret it (based on context and hermeneutical principles). That's why this verse is an obstacle for many people... It's been interpreted by the translator (and inaccurately, most often).
@@timffoster Yes, positive. It is *middle-passive* - it is highly debated over which direction it should be taken. Many scholars only say 'passive' because they believe that's how it should be taken. But you'll find other scholars assuming it's in the middle voice as well. Especially back in the 19th century. Many translators have rendered it as "disposed themselves for eternal life" for that very reason.
Not necessarily. If you look at the usage of tetagmenoi in the book of Acts and other books, it's barely translated as "determined" and always as "appointed". And as always, context makes that clear.
Mic drop!! This is what I’ve prayed for. I’ve been on the fence about whether the calvinistic view of salvation is accurate or not. This video has finally solidified in my mind that Jesus’s offer of salvation IS for all people. The “predestined before the foundation of the world” is the fact that the Lord was going to make the offer of salvation through faith in Christ’s atoning work open to the gentiles also. NOT that he picked certain individuals before creation. I do have a question though Leighton, I absolutely love the expository preaching of McArthur and Sproul. I have to admit that I have learned more from those 2 about the love of God and the history of the bible, and what it means to live a godly life then from anyone else. Do you think it’s not wise or possibly even detrimental to my faith to listen to calvinist preachers? Would it be possible for you to do a video that gives a list of teachers/preachers who are as excellent in this expository style but are not Calvinists? Waiting on answer, thank you!
@@Soteriology101 Brother... she basically asked if it would be detrimental to continue to listen to Calvinists preach/teach because she does not want it to hinder her growth in Christ, even though she's learned much from the men on things not necessarily related to the Calvinist's belief system. While you provided two names for her to search out, her main question was not addressed.
I am a KJV Bible Believing Christian Baptist. But left the southern Baptist for many reasons but am very encouraged by the Ministry you have been given and enjoy a lot especially the short videos so I can get to watch with the short breaks I get at my job. I pray you always stay on a place where God may be able to continually Bless all the Ministry. I wish I could have time to sit with you and talk about Gods Holy Inspired infallible WORD. If there were more like you I the the SBC would not have moved so far from the truth.
(KJV+) Hebrews 12:2: "Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." (KJV+) John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."
Not exegesis. Mr. Flowers says lets check the context, and then immediately leaves the context, acts 20, acts 28, luke, on and on. No. As many of those hearers who heard Paul speak those words to that audience who were ordained to eternal life believed. Then down the rabbit hole we go discussing the word choice “ordained” of the translators, how bob wilkin would do better and nearly ends up saying they ordained themselves. The word “ordained” is a perfect choice, strongs 5021, check it. I agree that there are scriptures that raise difficult questions but this is not exegesis, this is making hard truths easier to deal with for our comforts sake.
Flowers' arguments fell flat. The retranslating ordained to fit the argument was especially poorly done. Soldiers don't deploy themselves; they get deployed by their commanding officer, all the more so in the Roman world when the New Testament was written.
Another great video brother Leighton. Loved it!!! I just can't help but wonder what is in the mind of a Calvinist regarding their love relationship with God? I mean when I enter into a personal time of worship with the Lord and I just feel so close, so loved...I see His beauty and Majesty and great splendor. I am just aww struck as the lover of my soul draws near to me. And here's the thing brother. Love in any relationship is understood to only be meaningful if it is genuine. In order for it to be genuine it must be freely given and freely received. I mean I can program my computer screen saver to randomly tell me it loves me. However that means nothing. But when my wife just randomly sends me a text message during the day that says "I love you," well that makes my heart skip in fills me with great joy. The reason is because I know she is not forced to say that. She does it because she wants to. With even the thought that God has forced His will upon me to be predetermined from the foundations of the world to love Him, steals away all the magic of those precious moments I enjoy with Him. I would think for the Calvinist they could never really experience real aww struck worship because their theology reduces everything with God to a strictly intellectual experience. The pizzazz and emotion for them in worship would be non existent or at best overshadowed by the thought that they have no choice but to love Him.
I don't have magic moments with Jesus, but I do have fulfillment in growing in the grace and the knowledge of Our Lord through the studying of His Word. For whom the Lord loveth, he chastened. If one loves his child, then would not that parent violate the free will of the child as needed to correct them, to chastened them, to chastise them, and to train them up in the way they should go? That is a lie from Satan that God will not go against man's free will. No, God did not go against King David's free will to lay with Basheba, but He did go against Jonah's free will in not wanting to go to Nineveh to warn the people of judgment to come. God had Jonah swallowed up by the big fish and sent him to Nineveh against Jonah's free will. However, according to the new and better covenant Philippians 2:13 says: For it is God that worketh in you, both to Will and to do of His good pleasure. I can only thank the Good Lord for going against my free will that was set on the temporal things of the world. He, according as it is written, gave me a new heart, He put His fear in my heart that I should not depart from Him as Jeremiah teaches in regards to the new covenant to come. I now hate the things of the world that God hates, and now love the things that God loves. He made me a new man In Christ Jesus. Oh yes, the old man and his free will must crucified daily, risen with Christ, because greater is He that is In You, then he that is in the world.
I am in awe that The Creator of the world loved me first, called me to be His. I love Him because He first loved me. He is Life. John 10:29 His sheep know His voice. A gift from the Father to the Son.
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
““Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine. Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”” John 12:27-28, 30-32 Jesus draws to himself.. yet the Father draws first??.. how? By the work of the cross and the Father’s sacrifice. “Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”” John 6:29 The works of the Father has paved our salvation. Through the cross and gospel, eternal life needs only faith. “But I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I am leaving; for if I do not leave, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment: regarding sin, because they do not believe in Me; and regarding righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you no longer are going to see Me; and regarding judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.” John 16:7-11 So what else happened with the cross?? The Holy Spirit was able to be poured out onto men. To convict the WORLD of sin. The same world in John 3:16-18…
Gah! This is excellent! I've been finding flaws in the Calvinist viewpoint for 20 years. You said it, the whole counsel of God disagrees with that view. You even used some of the scriptures verses I've used for awhile, "All day long I've held out My hands..." I love this channel. I'm so thankful it providentially came across my UA-cam. 😁
The whole counsel of God shall never agree with the bringing of the ordained false prophets that Jude speaks of, the children of the wicked one into the Kingdom Of God! This shall never be! You as most do not understand The Doctrine Of Christ, for they shall call His name Jesus, for He Shall Save His People from their Sins! Much injustice being done to the Doctrine Of Christ, All in the name of John Calvin! For they have departed from the faith that was once delivered unto the saints, All in the name of John Calvin!
This video is so helpful. Thanking God for you, Dr. Flowers. The part where Paul said - (and now we are turning to the Gentiles.)Me being a Gentile, I’m so thankful!!!! ❤
The true Calvinist can not even lead their own children to salvation by grace, because they do not know if they are chosen or not. What a horrible doctrine. John 3:16, First John 2:2, and the bible says Jesus tasted death for every man, and that He is no respecter of persons. John 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent me, that ALL that seeth the Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise Him up on the last day. John 6:29 Jesus, answered, and said unto them, this is the work of God, that ye believe on the one He has sent. Calvinism, Arminianism, and Lordship salvation give no assurance of everlasting life. But thank God, Jesus does. John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me HATH EVERLASTING LIFE. Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it.
For anyone to use this verse in support of the calvinistic interpretation, they are 100% admitting that they believe the Bible contradicts itself. If I interpret one verse in a way that seems to contradict multiple other verses, I guarantee that the seemingly contradiction is on my understanding. So, instead of ignoring the multiple other verses, I need to dig deeper into the text and context to see what I'm missing. I assure you that the word of God does not contradict itself. This is a result of using verses in stand-alone fashion, which can only lead to false beliefs. Water baptism saves, works salvation, word of faith, prosperity gospel, name it-claim it, calvinism, catholicism, etc can all be "proven" biblically as long as verses are separated from the whole of scripture.
Amen and amen! You have put your finger on how so many false teachings come about. People take a set of verses, draw conclusions from them and ignore all other scripture that may shed more light on the subject. You are correct in saying that God's Word does not contradict itself. As you have pointed out, there are however, many paradoxes in scripture. A paradox is a seeming contradiction and must be resolved by considering the whole Word of God to harmonize the scriptures concerning any doctrine. :)
Isaiah 1:18 King James Version 18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool..
Dr Leighton, I thank God for these teachings of the Word of God so correctly in its context! I have been debating with one of our Calvinist Pastor that I discover in our church. so sad that after long year of study the Word he still not in the right interpretation of Scriptures even bringing clear deeply evidences that I also gained from you what actually the Bible says. Definetly Im standing firm, because I honor the Word of God and rejoice when Teachers like you bring truth that we dont often hear out there! May the Lord bless you and keep you! 🙏
EXCELLENT PRESENTATION!! Here's a comment I posted concerning this passage (and expands and includes other related passages) a week or so ago..... Men in general were "lined up" ("arranged", and "inclined", "tasso") to receive God's Promises. After all, everyone wants to be beneficiaries of God's Promises, but the question is, what do they do with Christ and the Message of His Cross? What I mean is, many Jews STUMBLED over the "STUMBLING STONE" (Salvation through Christ, NOT through "Torah Observance" in the weakness of man's own effort in the flesh, Rom.8:1-9), and stepped "out of line". Many of the Greeks considered the Cross "FOOLISHNESS", and stepped "out of line"! But to whoever would hear God's Call, and become willing to receive God's Promises as being conditioned upon Christ, the Gospel was "the Power of God" and "Wisdom of God" (Rom.1:16; 9:1-8,24-33; 1st Cor.ch.1)! There were also a great number of the Gentiles who were "lined up", hungry like beggars and desperate for "crumbs", not knowing God had a FEAST prepared for them, along with a "believing remnant" of Jews (Matt.8:5-13; 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-31; Acts 13:46; 28:16-31; Rom.9:1-8,24-33; 11:1-26)! These PEOPLES were being REJECTED and also ACCEPTED as PEOPLES, and were not being predetermined as individuals (which was for the individuals to do, not God, Acts 13:46. Compare principle of 2nd Thess.2:10-12; Rom.1:16-2:16). If one cannot gather this from Romans 9-11 (particularly the Cultivated Olive Tree and the Wild One, Broken Off Branches & Grafted In Branches, with Christ as the ROOT) as a whole, and from 1st Peter 2:6-10, it becomes apparent that it is because they are not reading the Bible in its WHOLE CONTEXT on what "ELECTION" was, especially in God's Creation of a New Covenant People IN CHRIST, from a REMNANT of believing natural Israelites from ALL 12 TRIBES as "FIRSTFRUITS OF HIS CREATURES", that is, of EVERY CREATURE, individuals from out of "EVERY NATION KINDRED PEOPLE TRIBE AND TONGUE" (Rom.1:5,6,13; 9:1-8,24-33; 11:1-36; 16:25-27; 2nd Cor.1:18-20; 5:14-21; Gal.3:8-16,19,26-29; 4:1-7,19-31; 6:15,16; Col.1:5,6,23-29; Rev.7:1-8,9-17; 14:1-5,6-8)! Understanding the Cultivated Olive Tree, God's New Covenant People and Holy Nation IN CHRIST, grasping that He is the ROOT, as the Branch/Offspring of Abraham, yet Root/Progenitor at the beginning (John 8:56-59) and AFRESH in His Resurrection Life, Col.1:18-2:7), and also understanding what the Wild Olive Tree represents, the Broken Off Branches, the Grafted In Branches etc. is vital to understanding "ELECTION" Biblically speaking. Clearly INDIVIDUALS are the BRANCHES, not the TREES! The determining factor of whether one was "ELECTED" or "REJECTED" was whether or not one came to be IN CHRIST THROUGH FAITH, OR ELSE WERE CUT OFF FROM HIM THROUGH DISBELIEF! It is that response of FAITH or else DISBELIEF that determines whether they would be a SHATTERED POTTERY AS VESSELS OF WRATH, OR ELSE HIS POTTERY OF HONORABLE USE AS VESSELS OF MERCY! This is why it was the case that "NOT MY PEOPLE" ("LO-AMMI") could become God's Chosen People IN CHRIST (1st Peter 2:6-10), and why those who boasted in "having Abraham as father" and also boasted in their self-righteousness in Torah, were warned about how the "AXE WAS ALREADY LAID AT THE *ROOT* OF THE TREES", and also about how "GOD WAS ABLE TO RAISE UP CHILDREN UNTO ABRAHAM FROM *THESE STONES*" (Matt.3:8-12 & compare Josh.4, 12 Stone Memorial at Bethabara Joshua had built, and where John Baptized)!
It seems that Bob Wilkins is attempting to say those that were appointed to eternal life, had actually positioned themselves to be saved. This sounds like synergistic salvation, which is unbiblical. At 0:37 you add presuppositions to the text, with the assumption that Calvinists are using Calvinism as their hermeneutic. But the word "appointed" is there. The ESV, NASB95, NASB2020, NKJV, CSB, and NIV all render the Greek word there as "appointed." No presuppositions are needed here. Let's ask the question: who does the appointing? Wilkins thinks the people are appointing themselves, but that would be synergistic salvation. Who then has authority to appoint? Let's consider Wilkins' claim that the Greek word is a military term. Who places the troops? The commander does, as he is the one with authority. Wilkins is suggesting the people have the authority to place themselves. Who has authority over salvation? God does. Did we have to appeal to Calvinism to figure this out? No. Did we have to presuppose Calvinism to see the problem here? No. To accept Wilkins' claim, we have to reject the work of all the committees involved in all the Bible versions listed above, that somehow, they all screwed up this one word that seems to point to God's authority. But that's the crux: God has authority over salvation, and Dr. Flowers does not seem to appreciate that.
A key verse to understanding the Greek word “Tasso” that is translated into “Ordained/Appointed is this: Acts 18:6 (ESV) And when they opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them, "Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles." Notice the word “Opposed.” If you look up the Greek word for that it is “AntiTasso,” which is the opposite of the word that gets translated into “Ordained/Appointed.” So, “Open to eternal life” really would be a better translation.
Are you a Greek scholar? How many bible committees, with experts in Greek (and yes many I am sure were not reformed), translate this as "appointed" or "ordained"? That is the part I think is dangerous, when we force a interpretation based on what WE think the Greek should be, when literally tens if not hundreds of translations, by hundreds if not thousands of experts in the Greek language, don't see it that way. If Luke wanted to say "open to eternal life" I'm sure that would have been a simple phrase and yet the most consistent translation is "appointed or ordained".
@@mcgragor1 Reasoning that the majority says this so it must be so is dangerous. The majority of Jewish Bible scholars in Jesus day missed the most important thing in their Scriptures...the coming of the Messiah. It was the "rebels" like Nicodemus who came to Jesus by night that were right. Were you present at any of these Bible translation committee meetings? Do you know if there was a minority that was shouted down and dismissed because "the majority" thought it was thus and so? I'm not saying you are right or wrong...just that your logic is flawed.
To make your point, we'd have to find someone hostile to translation and wanting to keep it all to themselves--for example, the Jehovah's Witness translate it exactly like many on here want it translated. That should raise suspicion, but the other way around, not so much. We'd have to assume that the majority of Greek scholars in every translation meeting working on different translations, maybe even in different lifetimes, all somehow saw this wrong...that is highly unlikely. None of us were present at bible translations, but many from all different denominations concerned with accuracy, have signed off on what the majority of trained Greek scholars agreed on over these many years, centuries, and lifetimes of these many different groups of Greek translators. So I think I am right in my logic, I'd agree I could be wrong, but not because I am using flawed reasoning. keep in mind, many if not all cults based off of Christianity always want to mess with the translations, like the Jehovah's Witness I mentioned above. So wouldn't logic have us be more suspect when they translate it the way we wish it was, rather than the way it is? It's possible I guess, but if any red flag is raised, I'd be questioning the cults rather than the Christians who gave us our most popular and respected versions accepted by every major denomination.
Can we maybe take the same system of interpretation that you proposed here (leaving aside the Greek implied that makes it evident the passive of Appointed) and apply it consistently thru the Bible in the context?
I just don't see how you can punish someone for something you forced them to do. It really hits upon the goodness of our God. My son, here is a test which I designed specifically to make you fail. When you fail, I will disown you and cast you out for eternity. I have given the answer key to your sister. She passed, and now I will reward her for eternity.
Calvinism makes no sense. If God appointed man to go to heaven or hell before that man was created, then some (or most) men are going to hell because they were fully within God's will.
4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, - Ephesians 1:4-5 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, - 2 Timothy 1:9 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. - John 6:44 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. - Romans 8:30 Flowers, if you’re reading this, already your mind has done mental gymnastics to explain away each of these verses from their intended meaning. And what you said above is pure eisegesis. This is not the same method of operation we would perform to defend the trinity.
Having been an Arminian I remember that one of the reasons Arminians stumble out of the starting gate when examining soteriological issues is that Arminians do not understand original sin, that is, the default spiritual condition of man. I find this rather astounding given that both the OT and NT are quite clear on this doctrine. Having made this mistake at the outset, Arminians have no hope to recover their soteriological stance since they just pile one error on top of another. Kind of like liberal democrats trying to fix the American economy. They have disqualified themselves ab initio.
Ive been confused by this verse and the story of Cornelus for a long time ... im just stating to slightly understand it after watching .... increase my faith, Lord
“When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48) Leighton begins this video by asserting, “Calvinists understand this verse to mean that God unconditionally selected a particular number of Gentiles before the foundation of the world and is irresistibly changing their hearts to cause them to believe the apostle’s teaching.” First of all, we believe this is about unconditional election, not necessarily irresistible grace, though we do believe they are saved by irresistible grace. The point of the text is that God has chosen to bring salvation to the Gentiles (13:47, not merely make salvation possible, but to actually save them), hence why they rejoiced when they heard it in verse 48. Then, the apostle asserts that the scope of those who believe is determined by God. Namely, “as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” That, sir, is the Calvinistic understanding of the text. And yes, this appointing happened before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). Leighton then goes on to present (0:36 in the video) a “Calvinized” version of Acts 13:48, which reads, “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were unconditionally appointed by God before the foundation of the world for eternal life believed.” He argues that we presuppose that this “appointing” is “unconditional.” The problem is, we are getting that from the text. The appointing results in those who are appointed, believing in Him. Not that people are appointed because they believe, but to believe. The former is a backwards reading of this passage. Then, he argues that we presuppose that the appointing happens “by God,” as if someone other than God could appoint us to eternal life. This is just absurd on its face. To appoint someone to eternal life is a divine action, not a human action. It cannot be something done by us or someone else. It can only be done by Him. Furthermore, he argues that we presuppose that this appointing by God happens “before the foundation of the world.” Why do we believe that? Because we contrast this passage with Ephesians 1:4, which is about the exact same subject, and the choice took place when? It says, “before the foundation of the world.” That’s why. Then, (at 4:11 in the video) he seems to draw a connection between the audience in 13:16 (God-fearing Gentiles) & 13:48 (a Gentile audience), which is exegetically indefensible. This is a completely different context in a different location on a different day with a different audience (13:44 makes this clear). This is a false, erroneous assumption. Worst of all, he references Dr. Bob Wilkin (ThM, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) at 7:23-9:46 in the video, speaking about Acts 13:48. He references verse 46, where the Jews “judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.” From this, he argues that this does not fit the Calvinistic doctrine of election as commonly taught (8:20 in the video). This couldn’t be further from the truth. The reason they were not believing is because they were not appointed to eternal life, and they hated God, so they did not consider themselves worthy of eternal life. I mean, the Jews had just crucified the Messiah. Why would they? They are living in rebellion. That is completely consistent with our understanding of election & our understanding of total depravity, if we understand it exegetically & in light of our actual position. He argues that τεταγμένοι (appointed) in Acts 13:48 (at 8:46-9:06) is functioning in the middle passive voice. The proposed translation being, “as many as had positioned themselves in relation to eternal life believed.” As for the middle voice, the construct concept and context determines that. There is no evidence of τεταγμένοι being in the middle voice. This would not only be a universal break from ALL Biblical theology (men don’t appoint themselves to eternal life, God does), but conceptually it may be utterly nonsensical. And I don’t see how anyone who can read Koine would make the case from Acts 13:46: οὐκ ἀξίους κρίνετε ἑαυτοὺς // (lit) “not worthy you judge yourselves” I must immediately point out that there is no M/P verb form. κρίνετε is in the active voice and the reflexive comes not from the verb but from the supplied pronoun serving as the object. Not only would be the most bizarre kind of hermeneutic to try and exegete an unrelated participle two verses later regarding a different verb and objects, in a different tense and voice without a supplied reflexive pronoun, but even the construction of v46 isn't a M/P verbal construction. So, that is a terrible argument, grammatically speaking. In this context, τεταγμένοι is in what’s called a “periphrastic construction.” The term τεταγμένοι is not just a verb. It’s a perfect passive participle (not a perfect middle). And right before it is the Greek term ἦσαν. ἦσαν is a particular form of the verb εἰμί, the verb of being. When you have a form of εἰμί and a participle in this form [ἦσαν followed by τεταγμένοι], you have a periphrastic construction. Periphrastic constructions have means of being interpreted unto themselves, and this particular one, where you have the imperfect form of εἰμί with the perfect passive participle τεταγμένοι, this becomes what’s called a “pluperfect” translation. A “pluperfect periphrastic.” It tells us that this action [ordained, set, appointed] took place in the past, prior to the event of Acts 13. Therefore, this argument simply does not have any weight to it at all. It is woeful use of the Greek, and I would challenge him to substantiate his assertion that τεταγμένοι is a perfect middle participle. The context would have to determine that, and no attempt was made to exegetically substantiate this assertion. Not even a scintilla of fairness to the other side (perfect passive participle) was presented. Further, he argues that v46 & v48 are “antithetically parallel.” (9:12-9:18) Notice that he did not say “grammatically parallel,” but “antithetically” parallel. This is a theological assertion that did not come from exegesis, but from an assumption that is being imposed onto the text. They are unrelated participles with different objects, and have different grammatical constructions to one another. This argument is grammatically fallacious, and it is deceiving those who are ignorant of the original language. This kind of argumentation needs to stop. Hear me clearly: ALL committee-produced translations recognize that an examination of Lukan usage, relating both to meanings and syntax, the wider NT witness, etc., all point to the same conclusion: the text says “as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Indisputable. Folks, brethren, my brothers and sisters, I could go on and on. The amount of errors were so many. The eisegesis in this video is just shameful, and needs to be repented of by any serious student of the Word who has adopted it. Let us return to rightly handling the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).
Could you explain to me in what way Driscoll is questionable as a believer? What does it mean to you to be a believer and what has he said or done that does not match that description?
Dr Flowers is making the mistake in attributing faith the to believer. Ephesians tells us this is not from ourselves. This makes sense, as God knows all and controls all, we cannot surprise him or participate in our salvation. Otherwise salvation would not be from God alone, but also from us. Someone who is dead in their sins cannot exercise faith unless God grants them faith. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
Why do people get so mad that God is in control of our salvation and that we contribute nothing to our spiritual birth? “ grrr Calvinist! I chose God and I can leave him anytime I want!! My choice even though I’m spiritually dead and my work of making that choice. God is out of the picture unless I myself choose him. it’s up to meeee!! Freee will” Arrogance and pride at it’s worse.
John Calvin confessed that the doctrine of Double Predestination was a horrible and dreadful decree in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin believed that the scriptures taught that God made an "absolute decree" (latin. decretum absolutum) before the foundation of the world that all people would be divided into two classes of the elect and the reprobate that was determined by God's decision alone. Unlike many Calvinists today, Calvin believed that God's absolute decree to predestine an individual to eternal death was not a wonderful or glorious thing, instead Calvin confessed that it was a dreadful and horrible decree. Is it not a horrible decree that God would create something for eternal perdition? And it is dreadful and horrible indeed! How could we respond in any other way than to say such a final ends is horrible and dreadful! The possibility that God would create any person for eternal death calls into question the goodness of God.
The same concept applies to John 3:19-21, another Calvinist proof-text. I think sometimes Calvinists forget that people could be saved under the old covenant. This is why “coming to the light” in John 3:21 isn’t about conversion, it’s about an already-saved person coming to Jesus upon hearing about Him for the first time, otherwise you have people “doing what is true” BEFORE conversion, which makes no sense.
SOTERIOLOGY 101, YOUR EXPLANATION WITH ACTS 18:6 AND ACTS 28:27-28 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ACTS 13:48, because THIS VERSE(Acts 13:48 ) is an independent verse and can stand by itself without referring to other verses... For example of other INDEPENDENT VERSE THAT CAN STAND BY ITSELF: When God said, ''I AM THE LORD WHO CREATED ALL THINGS...'' =>>> You don't need other verses to support or contradict this verse because this verse can stand by itself without reference to other verses...=>>> 2nd, Acts 18 and Acts 28 COMES LATER THAN ACTS 13... SO YOU CANNOT SAY THAT BECAUSE OF ACTS 18 AND ACTS 28 , THEY WERE THE REASONS THAT ACTS 13 WAS MADE...=>>>> AND THIRD, WHEN THE APOSTLES SPEAK ABOUT ISRAEL THAT THEIR HEARTS HAVE BECOME CALLOUSED AND SO THEY WILL TURN TO THE GENTILES, =>>> THE APOSTLES WERE REFERRING TO THE NATION OF ISRAEL AND TO THE GENTILES IN GENERAL... THEY WERE NOT REFERRING TO INDIVIDUAL SALVATION AS WHAT HAPPENED IN ACTS 13:48.... =>>>> ACTS 13:48(KJV) ''And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.'' =>>> NOTE: '''AS MANY AS WERE ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED.''' =>>> IT SAYS, 'AS MANY', IT DID NOT SAY 'ALL '...=>> ''WHICH SIMPLY MEANS AS MANY INDIVIDUALS''=>>>>> AND 4TH, YOU SAID THAT IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY BELIEVED, BUT ONLY THAT THEY ARE BELIEVING THE TRUTH ABOUT JESUS AND THEIR INCLUSION INTO THE COVENANT BY FAITH ALONE... IT IS IN FACT THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY BELIEVED ACCORDING TO THE VERSE ITSELF UNLESS YOU REWRITE THE VERSE... =>>> ''AS MANY AS WERE ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED.''' =>>> NOTE: They believed because they were ordained to ETERNAL LIFE....=>>>> NOTE: Please don't remove this post because this is the BIBLICAL TRUTH... I will stand to defend this TRUTH to anyone who will challenge me.... I AM NOT A CALVINIST BUT I BASED MY BELIEF IN THE BIBLE ALONE.... MANY THANKS.....
Just because its your opinion does not mean its Biblical truth. The Bible has to be taken as a whole, not just taking one verse and ignoring everything else. But anyways God bless bro
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo yes but when trying to get the real meaning of a verse it's always best to go to the original greek language, and the word they use is appointed, which is decided on beforehand. So if you look at the Bible as a WHOLE you will see that decided before hand doesn't mean God chose specific people, but that in God's divine sovereignty he already knew beforehand who would believe
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo Well thank you for responding to my response, and yes they do know more, that's probably why they translated it and not me. But once again I make the same point that its not about picking one verse to support your statement, but the whole Bible. If that is how you use that verse in John 6:44, then it contradicts verse 40, And this is the will of him that sent me, that EVERY ONE which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. The Bible doesn't contradict itself, so one verse can't say that everyone who see's the son and believes in him will be saved and then that only does who are drawn to (predestined as you say) Jesus by the Father will be saved. So then what is the context of the verse that we're looking at, the crowd of people that were with Jesus were grumbling amongst themselves because Jesus said that he was the bread that came down from heaven. They said, verse 42 is this not Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? So in that moment they were filled with unbelief because they knew Joseph and Mary. So that is when Jesus responds with verse 44, that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father draws them. Draws them is not predestined, because of their unbelief draws them is, gives him the desire and inclination to come and the ability to place trust in Christ. Because then verse 47 says Truly, truly, I say to you, WHOEVER believes has eternal life (ESV) verse 51 says I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if ANY man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. (KJV) So in no way using the context of the whole verse is it talking about predestination.
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo God bless you, my question is how do you get elect from those verses? Verse 40 says everyone, verse 47 says whoever believes and verse 51 says any man. Where in the CONTEXT of that whole chapter do you see it mention elect
The Jewish unbelief throughout the New Testament is so sad, but Thank God, for through their Unbelief, we, gentiles, were grafted in, as Paul said, to perhaps stir the jealousy of his countrymen, that they also would turn back in faith and again be grafted in. Amen, Halleluyah!
Couldn't the word translated "appointed" also mean "commission, or to bring something newly produced into working order"? So those whose God-given faith was at the needed point of quality and growth received more?
"What about Ephesians 1 4-5?" What about Eph 1:3 and 6? Did you read the whole sentence? It clarifies that God chose those of us in Christ to be holy and blameless. That has been God's desire from time immemorable - He wants a people that are his very own who will be holy. Christ died for us to set us free from sin. We should all be striving to become like Christ.
I suppose that further evidence that these Gentiles were already worshipping God would be found in the fact that they were present at the synagogue on the first day. It's still a peculiar text and use of the word ordain. Presuming it is not for the sake of the Calvinist viewpoint, I still wonder why Luke would record it as such. Is there any point in separating the three major points: "ordained", "eternal life", and "believed"?
The very thought that God has chosen people goes against human Theology Man wants to be part of his salvation robbing God of his glory The wedding feast the person who never had the right garment was ousted The blood of Christ must be applied To the sinner something only.the holy spirit can perform!
Calvinism has one basic problem. They understood that man is totally depraved. That is correct. But, they never were able to figure out why that is so. A man's soul is trapped in the prison of his fallen flesh. Its in the flesh that the sin nature resides and has a domineering control over the soul. The parents of a child produced the flesh, but God created the soul that is entrapped in that flesh. So, the soul being from God is potentially being perfect from the hand of God. And, its only the soul that God saves for that reason. .Not the body... If God did not do something about the flesh's dominance over the soul? No soul could be free to believe. Yet.. Believers who study, should learn from Scripture that the control of the filling of the Spirit nixes the flesh's influence, so we do not walk in the flesh. What the Calvinists failed to see? That the Spirit has the same power (grace) to control anyone's flesh as God wills when drawing all men. If God wants to introduce a thought into the mind of a person whom God is drawing? God's grace will temporarily suppress that person's flesh power over his soul. Why so? So, that person from his soul (without the overbearing depraved flesh) he can be free to decide what he wants to believe about some thought in his mind given by God. That is why Jesus said ... They shall be taught by God. (John 6:45). That also makes a soul free to reject God if he should so desire. In that manner all people are drawn by God at some point in their lives. All are given a fair chance by having their sin natures suppressed by grace as God draws them. Only the souls that desire more and keep remaining positive to what God reveals in drawing them, will eventually arrive over God's finish line. Then the Father will hand those souls over to His Son, as a gift from the Father to the Son. To keep this from being too long.. I will not comment now about what "chosen in the Son before the foundations of the world" indicates about predestination. Please ask, and I will take gladly respond. Grace and peace.
@@SerendipitousProvidence Who claims a majority in Hell? After all, two thirds of the angels stayed with the Lord. Some passages refer to many believers choosing for poor teachings over sound doctrine. But, they will be saved. What they will lose will be eternal rewards, not their salvation. Read 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. They will be saved, but at a loss of their rewards that God wanted to accompany their salvation.
@@SerendipitousProvidence It not irrelevant. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction of the spiritual life. We have over 1000 denominations that contradict one another in many ways. That is the broad and wide road. Only a few believers out of the many will endure the pressures (narrow path) and follow the strait (means strict adherence) to accurate understanding. The word was not spelled "straight." Strait was old English for 'strict.' Very few teachers teach soundly today. The many teach what the people want to hear, rather than what they need to hear. 2 Timothy 4:3 tells us that is the case we are finding today! "For the time will come when men *will not put up with sound doctrine.* Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." In contrast to that great number? (broad and wide) James 3:1, tells us we should only find a few good teachers if we were all Spirit led. A great number are not being led of the Spirit, but by their emotions and a demonic influence counterfeiting as the Holy Spirit. It says, Few will find "life." Jesus did not say a few will find salvation. "Life more abundantly" is not being found by many today.... Only a few find it.
@@SerendipitousProvidence Even so if what you say were accurate? Only 3 percent would be Christian in the world. That would be a few. Near half is far from being a few...
@@SerendipitousProvidence Looking for a fight? Something tells me that's what you really seek. Not truth. The Word is your means by which to pick a fight. Explaining things only frustrates you more........
God chose these people beforehand (in eternity past) and now 1.)through giving them repentance Acts 11:18,,2Tim2:25 2.)has brought them to faith in Christ Eph2:8... 3)Luke uses the passive voice("were appointed") indicating God is the agent.
Τεταγμενοι (to put in order, to appoint) could also be middle voice. The point is that there is ambiguity to the meaning. It is not as straight forward as Calvinists would indicate.
Only Leighton Flowers can make a video like this where in his explanation of a biblical study ends up saying that an unregenerate, not born again, void of the Holy Spirit, unbelieving person can offer up good works through charity and prayer and it be pleasing to God. And everyone is the comments are like " this is such and awesome videoooo!" that's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.
Lol, he spends time telling Calvinist what they are reading into the verse and I am thinking I've never done that. The word "appointed" says it all. This is not exegesis. He also likes to spend time everywhere in the bible outside of the text being debated-he does this a lot because if he just took the context around the actual text, its inescapable that the verse is making a distinction between the appointed and not appointed.
Mcgragor he did examine the text both before and after. You obviously did not watch the entire 13:48 of the video! He also examined other texts as a good expositor should. It’s called interpreting scripture with scripture. This is ESSENTIAL in order to rightly divide the word, since scripture cannot contradict itself. Even though Greek scholars agree that “appointed” is not the best translation of the word in the verse in question, leighton skillfully explains that it really makes zero difference. Sproul, piper, white, MacArthur, they all love this verse because by itself it sounds Calvinistic but in the logical flow of Acts it is not.
Leatherwood Outdoors this is such an awesome videooooooo! Your claim was never stated in this video nor is it leighton position. No unbelieving person can please God because without faith it is impossible to please God, every baby christian knows that. You should not put words in someone’s mouth. You should also consider the scripture “let the wicked forsake his way and return to the Lord and he will abundantly pardon”. Wait the WICKED can forsake his way? Not in calvinism they can’t they have to be regenerated first. But then they wouldn’t be wicked would they. Can’t you just see, calvinism is wrong wrong wrong.
@@sp4gsus I have no problem with using "scripture to interpret scripture", but LF goes out of his way to interpret many text with anything other than the text itself. I noticed this in several of his prior videos. Greek scholars do NOT agree that "appointed" isn't the best word if you're assuming "disposed" is what they agree on. Give me the English translations that would agree with this? Are there any? Most I've seen use "ordained", "appointed". Are we to believe that all of the Greek scholars for translation after translation have been wrong? I did see where the Jehovah's Witness use "rightly disposed", so that ought to tell you something. I'm betting in older versions of their translation, it didn't say that.
Those Gentiles were appointed to eternal life by Paul by the preaching of the Gospel unto them.. All the text is saying is that every one of those Gentiles that had gathered and heard the words of Paul, Believed. Just as Paul quotes the Lord, 'I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT (YOU) MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.'" By Paul's appointment, all that heard, believed.
@@goldenarm2118 Unlike you, I'm not comfortable believing in a God who dies for everyone, while also knowing who will choose Him, and still hopes for those who won't ever choose Him to choose Him. That's a very confusing God. This then leads to double jeopardy, whereby Jesus dies the death on behalf of the unbeliever, yet the unbeliever still goes into the lake of fire. So Jesus suffers for the unbeliever's sin and the sinner suffers for those same sins?? That's not just and I know God is just. Therefore, I must reject the non-calvinist view as unjust and illogical.
@@toddcote4904 Allow me to pop one little bubble in that comment. Not that I couldn't pop more but one at a time is best. Could you, if your life depended on it, make a distinction between the words desire and hope?
This is very simple. To the Jew first then the Gentile. The Gospel had come to the Jew but seeing that they judge themselves unworthy, the Gospel was taken to the Gentiles. What is the Word of the Lord v44, this is the Word of the Lord: John 3:16 King James Version 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. So who was ordained to eternal life? The elect chosing before the foundation of the world? No, whosoever shall BELIEVE in the Son of the living God, did.
@@allendula it's not opposing God's Sovereignty, it's opposing how Calvinism has defined it. Both sides seem to be convinced that they're right so it's hard to figure out which is true when you see verses like 2 Timothy 2:25 & John 6:44, but then you see verses like "don't harden your own heart", "humble yourself", "choose this day who you will serve", etc.
Here is an example of these verses in a real life scenario from scripture. You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.” Acts 8:21-23
Has anybody ever heard the phrase, " I never said you stole the money?" If you go back through that phrase and emphasize a different word in that phrase each time, you come up with a different meaning. The only way to know the intent of the phrase is to read the before and after to find the context of the phrase. This verse is no different. Reading before and after 13:48 gives you complete context and intent of the verse. Gentiles were believing and being saved. Wow! This is a big big deal, and marks a turning point in the preaching of the Gospel. This is the first time in scripture where Paul starts preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, and many believed! Wow! Unlike many of the Jews who WOULD NOT believe, v46.
Several times throughout scripture we read that Israel is God's elect. However not all Israel believed and was saved. Also we read that Christ was God's elect, and he did not need saving! I think it needs to be looked at closer as to what the meaning of elect is. I believe election has to do with a work that God has called us to. Many reject it. Thoughts??
We for many years no have problems with Calvinis, maybe with hipercalvinist yes, but just now appear many tehilogicl teachers that made big discovers against Calvinism This for me, happen BECOUSE of wrongs teaching of Calvinism, or good teaching of armianismo.Juan Pueresko.
Calvinism is Biblical Christianity. To think otherwise is proof of error in someone's Theology. Spurgeon was a Calvinist. No one here is more versed in scripture than Spurgeon. Christians are choosen before the foundation of the world ~ Unconditionally. It's not by works. It's not by our will. It's by God
Another Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, said that Calvinism is simply historical orthodox Christianity. It is what the original Christians believed. Read the early church fathers and they do not sound like Arminians such as Flowers. They sound like today's RC Sproul, Al Mohler, Steven Lawson, John MacArthur, John Piper, etc. Plus, to have Arminianism, you must have Jacobus Arminius, its founder, who did not come along until the 1500's, that is, over fifteen centuries after the Ascension of our Lord. There are no Arminian detractors from the Gospel described in the New Testament (unless you want to count the Pharisees) or in the Old Testament (unless you want to count the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel).
Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ will be forgiven. God wants everyone saved and to come to the knowledge of Lord. The Holy Spirit has been poured out on all flesh and the Holy Spirit is drawing all to the Lord Jesus for salvation
thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. Acts 13:10-11 The Lord said: it is written and you say like the serpent: did God really say? Instead of letting the word stand, you twist it. This is the surest path to Catholicism. Do not become many teachers, says the Scripture, for they will have a hard judgment. May God opens your eyes after He'll blind you, for blindling the eyes of many 🙏
I see the text about those that believed and were “saved” as the calvinists see it in your opening part of the video . It is clear from many texts within scripture that God is the author and finisher of our faith . It is clear that man is unable to save himself and can only be saved by God . This consideration never loses the fact that man must by his will accept the Lords call on His life . Many people resist that calling much of their life and suffer the consequences of Gods lessons . As a Father loves His children so the Lord Loves His , even greater . Much misunderstanding about God is that people read 1/100th of the bible in their lives . They read texts and then build a religion on multiple texts . God being a jealous God does what only God can do, He disciplines and chastens His in order that they will never be lost . The consideration of how the devil can interfere and how people can reject an all loving God is because many don’t read the bible and know what it says . Satan has been given certain boundaries and legal abilities by God , most of this is related to disobeying God like Adam and Eve in the garden . The evil one exists , he gets in by suggestion and his lie penetrates and grows like leaven . The fool says in his heart there is no God , the righteousness he speaks if any can only come from God and as the fool is chastened and taught He is born again into eternity by Christ alone . None of his salvation was his part except he humbled himself and proclaimed God is my God . Children keep yourselves from idols reflects dearly on Gal 3 . There is only one Gospel .
Just prior to the ascension, Jesus Christ instructed his disciples on what they were to do while they were waiting for the power to come. They were to remain in Jerusalem. Luke 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power [dunamis - inherent power] from on high. Was it available for the apostles to renew their minds while they were waiting for the power to arrive? Yes, of course, the renewed mind is very much a part of the senses, a work of the flesh, something man does with his body and soul abilities. The power from on high is spiritual power that comes from God. The receiving of this power from God is what we call the new birth, it is our supernatural life. The renewed mind is the key to energising that power resident within the gift of holy spirit that comes with the new birth. The new birth has been trodden under so much religious horseshit through the centuries, that we need to take the time to dig it out of the pages of the bible and explore it. We've all heard the expressions born again and born dead in sins but do we know what they mean? With our deeper understanding of body, soul and spirit, we are now ready to embark on an adventure into the holy spirit field and discover how to energise our power for abundant living. Man was a three-part being back in Genesis, but as a consequence of his disobedience, he lost his spirit and became just body and soul. With this understanding, many scriptures will now make sense. Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened [made alive], who were dead in trespasses and sins; To be made alive is a reference to the receiving of the gift of holy spirit, which is to be born again. To be born dead in trespasses and sins is a reference to our physical birth into this world. It has absolutely nothing to do with sex being evil, as some teach, it is merely a reference to being born body and soul with no spirit. Man is born without spirit, so he is dead at birth, and I don't care how religious some people think they are. If they have no spirit, they are dead. Man died back in Genesis when he lost his spirit, and it is this lack of spirit which is referred to here. Being dead in trespasses and sins is simply a reference to man being born without spirit. Without spirit, man is dead, so when man is born into the world without spirit he is dead in trespasses and sins. It is merely a reference to the fall of man and its consequences. Back in Genesis, man was body, soul, and spirit. Man died, he lost his spirit and became an animal of just body and soul. Jesus Christ paid for man's redemption and reconciled man back to God so he could be whole again, with body, soul, and spirit. It is the receiving of the gift of holy spirit that is the new birth, and it is that spirit that is our power for abundant living. Ephesians 5:14 Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. God is light and the gift of holy spirit is light. When we are born again, we are raised from the dead and become children of light. 1 Thessalonians 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. This being raised from the dead, this receiving of spiritual light, is what is referred to in the bible as being saved. Being saved is actually a beautiful term, but unfortunately it has been smeared with centuries of religious horseshit. It's time to clean it up and see what it really means. Ephesians 2:4,5 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us [made us alive] together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved [sōzō - made whole];) Sōzō in the Greek simply means to be made whole. We are born into this world without spirit and when we are born again and receive God's gift of holy spirit, we are saved, made whole, having three parts again instead of two. That is what it means to be saved, sōzō, made whole. Dead in sins in verse 5 is another reference to being born with just body and soul, without spirit. Quickened is old language meaning to be made alive. When we receive this spirit and become whole again, we are made alive and, therefore, we are no longer dead. We are born into a new life. The receiving of the gift of holy spirit, the new birth, first became available on the day of Pentecost when man could once again be made whole by receiving spirit. So what do we have to do to receive it? What mechanics are involved? Romans gives us the details. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved [sōzō - made whole]. Whenever and wherever a man, woman, or child confesses Jesus as Lord and believes in their heart that God raised him from the dead, that person receives the gift of holy spirit. In that very instant, they are born again, raised from the dead, saved, made whole - they receive spirit born within them. That spirit is a new creation, something that has never existed before. 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature [creation]: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
I responded to James White on this passage. This is the comment: You guys are so hung up on election you do not see it. This is what happen according to God purifies our hearts by our faith Acts 15.. The gospel was preached, the Holy Spirit convicts through the gospel, God knows their hearts, He purifies our hearts by our faith in Him. They are appointed to eternal life when they are granted repentance unto eternal life. This can be looked at as election according to Gods will. Which is for us to believe in Jesus! We may have the inability to not be righteous before God but we have the ability to respond to the gospel according to faith. Some people do not want to come to Jesus because they love darkness rather than the light. John 3.. As far as salvation goes, we did nothing but respond to what God provided. I do appreciate you not understanding why people would not accept it, but it is not because God did not want them. It is because they did not want God, because they love darkness. They may have other beliefs of the truth of God, and avoid the truth of the gospel. So if it is doubt or rebellion, or hanging on to a false belief, the devil blinded them, and they did not have faith in the gospel of Jesus. They did not believe God. Romans 8:24-25 King James Version 24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? 25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it. Who would have hope if they believe it is only a selected?
Honest and serious question... Even if one should say that God doesn't directly cause unbelief, or ordain individuals to be lost or saved, etc., How can we reconcile the fact that God still grants earthly life to people He already foreknew would reject Him and go to Hell? Isn't that creating someone and choosing to let them live a full life, yet knowing they would reject the Gospel before they were born? I know we have free will, that's clear from our choice to sin. We choose what we want and God gave us a choice and we have all ruined it with sin. He permitted that, so that we are not robots. But if God permitted it, doesn't that mean also that He knew the repercussions beforehand and still chose to allow it to happen? Basically, what I'm getting at is this- if God gave us a choice to sin, and we failed the test, and we all deserve to die and go to Hell, then why do we try to take credit for God acting to save us when we're already condemned? God is under absolutely no obligation to save anyone and the fact that He saves anyone at all is an act of mercy none of us deserve. So why are we trying to make scripture suggest all of a sudden in the last few decades say that it's no longer by grace alone through faith alone but now we have to activate our almighty human free will to truly respond to the Gospel, this denying the necessity of the Holy Spirit moving in a sinner's heart. I don't mean to sound argumentative, I'm not trying to be. I'm genuinely trying to ask how we can say God is completely sovereign in salvation but then redefine and reinterpret scriptures that support that statement. I'm just confused by the logic of it in the light of what scripture seems to clearly teach.
As I dig deeper into understanding calvinism I'm shocked how many "intelligent" people can adhere to such a belief. There are so many mind blowing issues, such as who would ever create anyone just to send them to hell. No loving parent would do that. How do they know their part of the elect. I mean in their world God just might use them for His purpose and they aren't part of the elect. It's so bizarre and their response is just as bizarre "we're not God so it's beyond our understanding"
These shorter videos are a blessing. The longer videos are too, when I need to dig more and at times I want to be exhaustive, especially when I was digging in to seek the truth for myself, but I have to set down time for that. These I can listen to on the way somewhere or on a break. Thanks! Also while I'm not necessarily a fan of the TLB translation, I do like how they worded this verse: "When the Gentiles heard this, they were very glad and rejoiced in Paul’s message; and as many as wanted eternal life, believed."
Sadly, the calvinists will pounce on a difficult verse such as Acts 13v48, but will totally discredit the multiple verses in Scripture which prove their theology wrong. When painted into a corner (which they always are) they will just shrug their shoulders and claim their contradictions are a 'divine paradox'! They will misuse Deut. 29v29 which says that the secret things belong unto God. This way they can avoid taking responsibility for their logical inconsistencies and contradictions. Piper has brazenly interpreted God wanting all men to repent and be saved as His wanting all 'classes of men' to be saved. Of course this would also mean that He wants no 'class of men' to be lost. These people are slippery and dishonest. They are under the spell of calvinism, as brainwashed by their theology as Roman Catholics and Watchtower Witnesses are by theirs. If I sound harsh it is because I see souls being lost and a false gospel being preached on the doorstep.
Clearly, it's not a Calvinist "election" verse. The Calvinist claim that it means "elect from the foundation to be regenerated so that they would exercise faith" should be rejected by any reasonable person not drinking the Kool-Aide. Even if God determined to make sure that a group of Gentiles would believe, the text-only indicates Paul's preaching. Not God was electing with other means. What I find very compelling is Dr. Wilkin's information on the context and literary parallelism. Parallelism is a common and well-known method of teaching and writing. The point is that the text of v. 46 states that the Jews themselves (reflexively) did not "consider" themselves worthy of eternal life. They heard Paul's reasoning and explanation and rejected that path of salvation with no other cause aside from their own processing of the information. No one else, not even God, gets implicated in their self-made decision to reject the message. Verses 46 and 48 are connected contextually and literally. So you have the Jews reflexively being in position as God's chosen instrument to carry the Word and bring forth the Messiah, CHOOSING to reject that opportunity. You have God-Fearing Gentiles going to synagogue week in and week out, wanting to be part of the Jewish family and covenant. Then you have the covenant people in the proper position ethnically rejecting their birthright. Then, in contrast, you have the Gentiles. They had no ethnic or covenant promise from God. They had POSITIONED themselves outside of the Pagan religions and went to the Synagogue, hoping to receive eternal life and be part of God's family. We have them positioning "themselves" to be ready to jump at the opportunity. That literary structure brings beauty and harmony worthy of Luke's powerful command of the language, writing, and academic skills that would be recognized. I believe Calvinism and other interpretations rob the prose and skill the Holy Spirit gave Luke in his writing.
You seem to struggle with accepting the sovereignty of God. Let me pose some questions to you. Was Jesus Christ's crucifixion predetermined, as it was foretold in the Bible? Was there ever a moment when Christ could not have been crucified? Could Judas have chosen not to betray Jesus at any point? Was Christ's crucifixion merely foreseen, or was it predetermined by God? If it was predetermined, what ensures the certainty of its outcome? Why do you find it challenging to accept that when the Bible speaks of God appointing, electing, or predestining, it means exactly that? Perhaps it's time to reflect, repent, and humble yourself instead of being arrogant, presumptuous, and counterproductive.
It is apparent that you do not know the answers to the very questions you propose. Perhaps it is time for you "to reflect, repent, and humble yourself instead of being arrogant, presumptuous, and counterproductive."
(KJV+) Hebrews 12:2: "Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." (KJV+) John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."
Pag sinabing Works ang context ni Paul jan is Mosaic Law not Good Works by Humans. Jan pa lang, pag ayaw mo nang ayusin, meaning may gusto kang ipasok na Doktrina na salungat sa original intention/context ng Biblical Author. Totoo naman ang Election kasi sa Revelations ung mga hindi tatanggap sa tatak ng Anticristo ay predestined na nakasulat na ung pangalan nila sa Book of Life
I think the KJV does a better job rendering the Greek word “tasso” by using the word “ordained” (instead of appointed). A plain sense reading of Acts 13:48 establishes God’s sovereignty in election. Neither a historical explanation, nor prolix philosophical input are necessary to properly interpret said verse. All that is required for proper interpretation is a plain sense reading, and (if there are any doubts), allowing scripture to interpret scripture, via the multiple other verses that clearly establish God’s sovereignty in election. This video does a good job trying to “Arminianize” a text using the method of eisegesis (instead of the proper method of exegesis). The verse still simply means what it says, so I’ll still side with the reformers.
so then, what if it turns out you were never 'elect' but predestined to the other camp all along - will you still accept G.d's sovereign will, or will you rebel instead?
@@blackfalkon4189 I was a rebel against God for many years, as I was an atheist. The Bible teaches that we can have assurance of our salvation. The Holy Spirit testifies to me that I’m His, and I can prove the same through the Scriptures. I know that my faith is genuine simply because I love God. An unsaved person has no desire to follow God, nor to be obedient because they are spiritually dead in trespasses and sin. The Bible teaches unconditional eternal security of the believer. I can lay down and sleep in peace and comfort at night knowing that the next I will still be a believer because God has given me an enduring faith, and He keeps me.
@@blackfalkon4189 I’m saved and have eternal life, and that’s it. The question being asked is a hypothetical question, and I’m not going to involve myself with answering hypothetical questions. God is sovereign no matter what. God can do what He wants; when he wants, and whether or not someone likes it is irrelevant to the end result.
@@doveofgrace that's contradictory but before I elaborate I must ask: do you believe in all 5 points of TULIP? (and especially the U & L : Unconditional election & Limited atonement)
The question is...How did the gentile believers come to be that way in the first place? There are none who seek God. Yes, whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. All Calvinists agree with that. The question is, How do they come to believe?
At minute 3:10 you said the Jews were hardened they were predisposed to be that way I suppose you mean this was their own doing their culture or whatever and that has nothing to do with Isaiah 6:10 quoted in all four gospels as well as Acts ( also see Deuteronomy 29 three and four Isaiah 29:10 Ezekiel 12:2 those are the ones off the top of my head...) and then you said the Gentiles ate more open to the truth I can only assume that you mean to say that they would be an easier people to hear the truth believe it and hang on to it wow historically you have to know that this is not true the Gentiles my friend were incredible pagans hanging onto polytheism and pantheism with an iron claw.
Historically speaking, the Gentiles were any people group that were not ethnically Israelites. The Jews, during the time of Jesus, had deemed any Gentile as inferior to them. They considered themselves the ONLY people God called, his ONLY chosen people. (Any modern belief system sound like that to you?) They were not allowed to participate in the same rituals as the Jews, no matter their beliefs. It was even believed that contact with a Gentile would make a Jew, or his possessions, ceremonially unclean. This did not stop the Gentiles from accepting the Jewish faith, even though it was often difficult for them to do the ceremonial rituals to become "Jews," and thus saved according to the Jewish leaders. Imagine being told that you could not gain access to Heaven because you weren't born into the right family, and then this guy comes along and tells you that a man named Jesus came and died for you so that you could enter Heaven. Would you not be more willing to listen and act to attain this right that seemed previously unobtainable to you?
So flowers would have you believe that acts 28:28 should actually read "... this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles as Plan B I REALLY HOPE they will listen fingers crossed guys". You can dance around the text as much as you want and try to massage the words into saying what you think they should have said but really what you're saying is God tried; the Jews failed, the Gentiles are up to bat. The question is when it says the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable in Romans 11:29 it DIDN'T MEAN the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Flowers would have you believe the verse should say the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable unless you cannot muster up the faith within yourself to believe in 30 years. I'm not sure when acts was written. or was there a deliberate hardening of Israel. Flowers says you shouldn't come to the text with presuppositions I disagree I think that if you're a new Christian and you're stumbling through the text like I was it's a good idea to see what people have said historically to have an open mind and an unbiased heart put that lens on. The calvinistic lens and the autonomous free moral agent(God makes a way if you will just believe) provisionary lens. with election these are really the only two historic postures you can assume there are of course Fringe ideas molinism is one I can think of and many brilliant people have written words and words and words from either perspective. For me unconditional election for the foundation of the Earth was just easier to see merry Christmas everybody
Irrevocable - not able to be changed, reversed, or recovered; final. When it's talking about irrevocable gifts, it means that God will not take them back or change them. It does NOT mean that the gifts and callings are unrefusable. Furthermore, since you bring up Romans 11, let's look at a few verses not too far before 29. Romans 11: 22. "Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!" Did you notice the conditions given to the audience in order to remain grafted in? "...provided that you continue in his kindness." "...if they (the Jews) do not persist in unbelief..." Both the Jews and the Gentiles must act of their own volition to be grafted in, remain grafted, and even be grafted in again. Otherwise, they could be removed permanently due to their own persistence in unbelief.
@@davidtrue4255, Did you notice that Romans 11 speaks of a Nation(Israel) a group of people and the gentiles as a group of people also? You cannot refer Romans 11 to Acts 13:48, because this verse refers to individual who are predestined(ordained) to eternal life ... Jesus several time speak about the Sheep(elect) and and also about the goats(reprobates).....=>>> In John 10:11(KJV), It says: JOHN 10:11 (KJV) ''I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd ''''GIVETH HIS LIFE FOR THE SHEEP.'''''=>>>> JOHN 10:15 (KV) As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and ''''I LAY DOWN MY LIFE FOR THE SHEEP''''. IN ACTS 13:48, THOSE WHO BELIEVED THAT WERE ORDAINED FOR ETERNAL LIFE DEFINITELY REFERS TO THE ELECT(SHEEP)...
Calvinists are NOT "The Elect." The Elect has ALWAYS been Israel. "Election" is NOT "unto salvation" as calvinists teach. The Biblical definition of Election is "chosen for a purpose," as in the Nation of Israel was chosen to be the priests to teach the world about a Holy God and show them the way to salvation. You can check this out by doing a word study of all the verses with election and elect in it. You will find it's not connected to "getting saved." BTW, there are more than 2 ways that you mentioned to understanding Scripture. That's quite the narrow view you have.
Again, the overall teaching of the scripture is that God is sovereign in salvation. By not letting scripture speak in its totality, you set up a scenario whereby Christ's death could have been in vain in that NO ONE WOULD EXERCISE THEIR OWN ABILITY TO PLACE FAITH IN THE WORK OF JESUS. i.e. if man is left alone to apply Christ's work, it left the possibility that no one would choose Christ. This is robbing God of his sovereign grace.
And what is your definition of sovereign? I suspect that it is not the dictionary one. Calvinism teaches that Christ's death, burial, and resurrection were insufficient to save mankind.
@davidberar5905 God foreknew EVERYTHING, that's why this debate is so silly....everything begins and ends with God, including the will to believe Ephesians 1
Those "Calvinist" presupposition are just fluff that you added. The point is who id the one who appointed them to believe was it God or themselves the text clearly makes the belief limited to those who were appointed, so who appointed them. Calvinist do not add unconditionally appointed before the foundation of the world, we are just dealing with who appointed them here. If God, when, then we can go to Ephisians 1:3-15, but, if its the autonomously decided action though they are in the flesh and can not please God, how did they do that when the Bible is clear they can not. Also this is literally semi Pelagianism. Scratxh that, he goes full Pelagianian later. Also also it literally does say they began believing then, "When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed Notice the and, that means that they believe for the first time then.
Has anyone noticed that it’s over acts 13:48 and video is 13 minutes and 48 seconds…. BRILLIANT
Omg that's amazing! Never noticed that. God is great 👍
Cue the Twilight Zone theme song.
Does this mean that He is a true man of God, because the video happened to be 13 min. 48 sec. He completely distorted such a simple and clear passage of God's word, removing the work of God, not glorifying the words of our Lord.
@@edsnyder2801 Exactly what i expect a calvinist to say. Sad to think I used to be you
@@leonardu6094 Hey Leonard. You must see that the difference between you and me is that I believe in predestination and election of God as it is clearly written unto The Church, His Body, which He hath purchased with His Own Blood. I believe in the work of Christ and Christ Alone that turns the ungodliness away from Jacob. And so as it is written, All of Israel shall be saved. You as most, do not know who True Israel is? So when false teachers proclaim that Jesus came to save the ordained false teachers that Jude speaks of, they are totally and wilfully ignorant of the Doctrine Of Christ. Jesus called these people out for who they truly were! They were not, nor shall they ever be part of the Kingdom Of God! They are the children of the wicked one, and the enemy that soweth them is the devil! So on that Great and Terrible Day of The Lord, you shall stand before Him in your wilfull and deliberate decision to reject clear prophecy. The preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery of the Gospel has been clearly made known unto All Nations and All Men. Predestination and election are both inseparable from the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery of the Gospel! Sounds like you've jumped onto the wrong boat!
Just want you to know that I am so thankful for your channel. And I'm so thankful for the shorter teachings. I dont always have time to listen to something over an hour long and it's tough to figure out where I left off. But with the shorter vids I am able to watch the entire thing, usually. :-) God bless you and your family!!
@@mandersdaro8136 Amen!! I agree. Love the shorter teachings. 👍🏼✝️❤️
These specific videos focused on Calvinist’s go to verses are so so good!!! Thank Jesus for this!!!
Amen !!
That's okay, they were destined to read verses out of context. Haha. For sure these are good videos!
Not really smh
Why are you glad, I am not a Calvinist but what if calvinism is true, just because you dont like what you see dont purposely try to interpret it ptherwise.
@@danielgreeff125 if you’re not a Calvinist, then it’s because you don’t think it’s true. If you thought it was true you’d be a Calvinist. If you think it’s not true and you love the Bible then you don’t agree with the way Calvinists interpret the Scriptures. So these videos expose the illogical ways Calvinist interpret these passages.
If Calvinism is true, then let’s embrace it. But I don’t think that it is.
I just realized something...
At 11:50 Dr. Flowers brings up a verse in Romans 10 about Israel's disobedience. If you think about it, EVERY verse in the entirety of Scripture that mentions disobedience to God, is a proof text against calvinism. According to their false beliefs, the ability to disobey God is impossible, because God has already decreed everything that would happen. They believe that God has "sovereignly" predestined everything, including sin. So, if humans can disobey God, that's an act AGAINST his decree, because otherwise, He would have decreed them to do what they chose to do instead. Disobedience to God literally proves that we have free will. If the act of disobedience is what God "sovereignly decreed" them to do, it would NOT, and COULD NOT be disobedience; because the very act of disobeying would be obeying what God had decreed them to do. So, according to the God's word, disobeying God is possible. According to calvinism, it's impossible to disobey God's decrees. Both cannot be correct, so one of these worldviews is wrong! I chose to belive the Bible... NOT calvinism.
Check out RC Sproul's video on UA-cam "if God is Sovereign, How Can Man be Free?"
It does a pretty good job of explaining your observation with simple logic and Biblical support.
I hope that helps, friend 😁
Check out Romans 9:11-24
This verse should really be read, "And so did believe -- as many as were determined for eternal life". This leaves it in English as ambiguous as it is in Greek. It's in the 'middle-passive' voice, so it can be taken as either middle (were determining themselves for...) or passive (were determined by someone else for...). Both Philip Doddridge (a puritan) and Alexander Campbell (a non-calvinist) agreed here; in a New Testament translation by Doddridge and published by Campbell in 1826, the verse is rendered this way: "and as many as were determined for eternal life believed." In the index, Campbell assesses the reading with many other versions, but states, "We prefer Doddridge, because his translation is as ambiguous as the Greek."
Too many translations today are picking a side when translating verses that can go equally in 2 different directions. When we ought to seek to render it with the same level of ambiguity as the Greed does, and let readers (in English) see that ambiguity. No ambiguous text can be used as a foundation for a theological principle. And this IS an ambiguous text. It obviously is not meant by Luke to teach Calvinism, since he would have been clear (not unclear) if that was his purpose. Wilkin is also right in it's contrast in this context with the Jews "judging _themselves_ unworthy of eternal life" 2 verses earlier. The Gentiles here were simply "determined" for eternal life. Just as I'm *determined* to go eat a sandwich right now.
Context sheds light, however.
Hmm, ambiguous. Nice to see that others see what I see ☺. Nice point regarding ambiguous text cannot be used to craft theology 👍
@@Mr_A1-37 but if you're translating it one way based on context, you're interpreting it for the reader. You should translate it accurately, and let the reader discern whether which direction to interpret it (based on context and hermeneutical principles). That's why this verse is an obstacle for many people... It's been interpreted by the translator (and inaccurately, most often).
@@timffoster Yes, positive. It is *middle-passive* - it is highly debated over which direction it should be taken. Many scholars only say 'passive' because they believe that's how it should be taken. But you'll find other scholars assuming it's in the middle voice as well. Especially back in the 19th century. Many translators have rendered it as "disposed themselves for eternal life" for that very reason.
Not necessarily. If you look at the usage of tetagmenoi in the book of Acts and other books, it's barely translated as "determined" and always as "appointed". And as always, context makes that clear.
Mic drop!! This is what I’ve prayed for. I’ve been on the fence about whether the calvinistic view of salvation is accurate or not. This video has finally solidified in my mind that Jesus’s offer of salvation IS for all people. The “predestined before the foundation of the world” is the fact that the Lord was going to make the offer of salvation through faith in Christ’s atoning work open to the gentiles also. NOT that he picked certain individuals before creation. I do have a question though Leighton, I absolutely love the expository preaching of McArthur and Sproul. I have to admit that I have learned more from those 2 about the love of God and the history of the bible, and what it means to live a godly life then from anyone else. Do you think it’s not wise or possibly even detrimental to my faith to listen to calvinist preachers? Would it be possible for you to do a video that gives a list of teachers/preachers who are as excellent in this expository style but are not Calvinists? Waiting on answer, thank you!
Angie Skelly
Ronnie Rogers who I’ve had on the show is a great preacher.
Also look up Chris Osborne from Central Baptist in Texas. Great expositor
Soteriology101 thank you so much for the reply. Im going to check those guys out now!
@@webbangel2054 notice. The list isn't that long.
@@justice3043 notice. She asked him about 2 ( MacArthur and Sproul) and he gave her 2 to replace them.
@@Soteriology101 Brother... she basically asked if it would be detrimental to continue to listen to Calvinists preach/teach because she does not want it to hinder her growth in Christ, even though she's learned much from the men on things not necessarily related to the Calvinist's belief system. While you provided two names for her to search out, her main question was not addressed.
I really appreciate you’re Dr Flowers. God is blessing it. I’ve told so many people about your channel
I like that the time of this video is 13:48
I wanted more
Whaaaaaat
Oh wow. That’s cool
The John 6:44 video was 6:45 and I said it would be perfect if it was 1 second shorter. Looks like these videos are being sanctified more and more!
Michael Arnold I noticed that, too! So close!!
I am a KJV Bible Believing Christian Baptist. But left the southern Baptist for many reasons but am very encouraged by the Ministry you have been given and enjoy a lot especially the short videos so I can get to watch with the short breaks I get at my job. I pray you always stay on a place where God may be able to continually Bless all the Ministry. I wish I could have time to sit with you and talk about Gods Holy Inspired infallible WORD. If there were more like you I the the SBC would not have moved so far from the truth.
(KJV+) Hebrews 12:2: "Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."
(KJV+) John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."
Not exegesis. Mr. Flowers says lets check the context, and then immediately leaves the context, acts 20, acts 28, luke, on and on. No. As many of those hearers who heard Paul speak those words to that audience who were ordained to eternal life believed. Then down the rabbit hole we go discussing the word choice “ordained” of the translators, how bob wilkin would do better and nearly ends up saying they ordained themselves. The word “ordained” is a perfect choice, strongs 5021, check it. I agree that there are scriptures that raise difficult questions but this is not exegesis, this is making hard truths easier to deal with for our comforts sake.
Flowers' arguments fell flat. The retranslating ordained to fit the argument was especially poorly done. Soldiers don't deploy themselves; they get deployed by their commanding officer, all the more so in the Roman world when the New Testament was written.
Great video, Dr. Flowers. I appreciate the extensive commentary over a single passage, so it's easier to digest. Thank you.
Another great video brother Leighton. Loved it!!! I just can't help but wonder what is in the mind of a Calvinist regarding their love relationship with God? I mean when I enter into a personal time of worship with the Lord and I just feel so close, so loved...I see His beauty and Majesty and great splendor. I am just aww struck as the lover of my soul draws near to me. And here's the thing brother. Love in any relationship is understood to only be meaningful if it is genuine. In order for it to be genuine it must be freely given and freely received. I mean I can program my computer screen saver to randomly tell me it loves me. However that means nothing. But when my wife just randomly sends me a text message during the day that says "I love you," well that makes my heart skip in fills me with great joy. The reason is because I know she is not forced to say that. She does it because she wants to. With even the thought that God has forced His will upon me to be predetermined from the foundations of the world to love Him, steals away all the magic of those precious moments I enjoy with Him. I would think for the Calvinist they could never really experience real aww struck worship because their theology reduces everything with God to a strictly intellectual experience. The pizzazz and emotion for them in worship would be non existent or at best overshadowed by the thought that they have no choice but to love Him.
I don't have magic moments with Jesus, but I do have fulfillment in growing in the grace and the knowledge of Our Lord through the studying of His Word. For whom the Lord loveth, he chastened. If one loves his child, then would not that parent violate the free will of the child as needed to correct them, to chastened them, to chastise them, and to train them up in the way they should go? That is a lie from Satan that God will not go against man's free will. No, God did not go against King David's free will to lay with Basheba, but He did go against Jonah's free will in not wanting to go to Nineveh to warn the people of judgment to come. God had Jonah swallowed up by the big fish and sent him to Nineveh against Jonah's free will. However, according to the new and better covenant Philippians 2:13 says: For it is God that worketh in you, both to Will and to do of His good pleasure. I can only thank the Good Lord for going against my free will that was set on the temporal things of the world. He, according as it is written, gave me a new heart, He put His fear in my heart that I should not depart from Him as Jeremiah teaches in regards to the new covenant to come. I now hate the things of the world that God hates, and now love the things that God loves. He made me a new man In Christ Jesus. Oh yes, the old man and his free will must crucified daily, risen with Christ, because greater is He that is In You, then he that is in the world.
I am in awe that The Creator of the world loved me first, called me to be His. I love Him because He first loved me. He is Life. John 10:29
His sheep know His voice. A gift from the Father to the Son.
Just prayed for this video exegesis on this verse alone and this video showed up! God is good!
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
““Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine. Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.””
John 12:27-28, 30-32
Jesus draws to himself.. yet the Father draws first??.. how? By the work of the cross and the Father’s sacrifice.
“Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.””
John 6:29
The works of the Father has paved our salvation. Through the cross and gospel, eternal life needs only faith.
“But I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I am leaving; for if I do not leave, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment: regarding sin, because they do not believe in Me; and regarding righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you no longer are going to see Me; and regarding judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.”
John 16:7-11
So what else happened with the cross?? The Holy Spirit was able to be poured out onto men. To convict the WORLD of sin.
The same world in John 3:16-18…
By your admission of “draw” everyone is saved. That makes you a universalist because Jesus will draw all man to Him
Gah! This is excellent! I've been finding flaws in the Calvinist viewpoint for 20 years. You said it, the whole counsel of God disagrees with that view. You even used some of the scriptures verses I've used for awhile, "All day long I've held out My hands..." I love this channel. I'm so thankful it providentially came across my UA-cam. 😁
The whole counsel of God shall never agree with the bringing of the ordained false prophets that Jude speaks of, the children of the wicked one into the Kingdom Of God! This shall never be! You as most do not understand The Doctrine Of Christ, for they shall call His name Jesus, for He Shall Save His People from their Sins! Much injustice being done to the Doctrine Of Christ, All in the name of John Calvin! For they have departed from the faith that was once delivered unto the saints, All in the name of John Calvin!
Looking unto Jesus, the author and the finisher of our faith.
This video is so helpful. Thanking God for you, Dr. Flowers. The part where Paul said - (and now we are turning to the Gentiles.)Me being a Gentile, I’m so thankful!!!! ❤
The true Calvinist can not even lead their own children to salvation by grace, because they do not know if they are chosen or not. What a horrible doctrine. John 3:16, First John 2:2, and the bible says Jesus tasted death for every man, and that He is no respecter of persons. John 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent me, that ALL that seeth the Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise Him up on the last day. John 6:29 Jesus, answered, and said unto them, this is the work of God, that ye believe on the one He has sent.
Calvinism, Arminianism, and Lordship salvation give no assurance of everlasting life. But thank God, Jesus does. John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me HATH EVERLASTING LIFE. Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it.
Gracias! You are doing a great job brother! IT was a real blessing to watch this video. Dios le bendiga mucho!
Another great video! Keep laying the axe of truth to the root of Calvinism!
Amen brother thank you so much God bless your channel and may the true Gospel reach more people to be saved Amen!
Somo of the men i respect believe in Calvinism, but i don't believe in Calvinism because it does not make sense from a biblical point of view..
For anyone to use this verse in support of the calvinistic interpretation, they are 100% admitting that they believe the Bible contradicts itself.
If I interpret one verse in a way that seems to contradict multiple other verses, I guarantee that the seemingly contradiction is on my understanding.
So, instead of ignoring the multiple other verses, I need to dig deeper into the text and context to see what I'm missing.
I assure you that the word of God does not contradict itself.
This is a result of using verses in stand-alone fashion, which can only lead to false beliefs.
Water baptism saves, works salvation, word of faith, prosperity gospel, name it-claim it, calvinism, catholicism, etc can all be "proven" biblically as long as verses are separated from the whole of scripture.
Amen and amen! You have put your finger on how so many false teachings come about. People take a set of verses, draw conclusions from them and ignore all other scripture that may shed more light on the subject. You are correct in saying that God's Word does not contradict itself. As you have pointed out, there are however, many paradoxes in scripture. A paradox is a seeming contradiction and must be resolved by considering the whole Word of God to harmonize the scriptures concerning any doctrine. :)
Isaiah 1:18
King James Version
18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool..
Dr Leighton,
I thank God for these teachings of the Word of God so correctly in its context! I have been debating with one of our Calvinist Pastor that I discover in our church.
so sad that after long year of study the Word he still not in the right interpretation of Scriptures even bringing clear deeply evidences that I also gained from you what actually the Bible says.
Definetly Im standing firm, because I honor the Word of God and rejoice when Teachers like you bring truth that we dont often hear out there! May the Lord bless you and keep you!
🙏
I love that your context quote was from Don Carson, one of the men in your Calvinist graphic.
Just shows his inconsistency.
EXCELLENT PRESENTATION!!
Here's a comment I posted concerning this passage (and expands and includes other related passages) a week or so ago.....
Men in general were "lined up" ("arranged", and "inclined", "tasso") to receive God's Promises. After all, everyone wants to be beneficiaries of God's Promises, but the question is, what do they do with Christ and the Message of His Cross? What I mean is, many Jews STUMBLED over the "STUMBLING STONE" (Salvation through Christ, NOT through "Torah Observance" in the weakness of man's own effort in the flesh, Rom.8:1-9), and stepped "out of line". Many of the Greeks considered the Cross "FOOLISHNESS", and stepped "out of line"! But to whoever would hear God's Call, and become willing to receive God's Promises as being conditioned upon Christ, the Gospel was "the Power of God" and "Wisdom of God" (Rom.1:16; 9:1-8,24-33; 1st Cor.ch.1)! There were also a great number of the Gentiles who were "lined up", hungry like beggars and desperate for "crumbs", not knowing God had a FEAST prepared for them, along with a "believing remnant" of Jews (Matt.8:5-13; 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-31; Acts 13:46; 28:16-31; Rom.9:1-8,24-33; 11:1-26)!
These PEOPLES were being REJECTED and also ACCEPTED as PEOPLES, and were not being predetermined as individuals (which was for the individuals to do, not God, Acts 13:46. Compare principle of 2nd Thess.2:10-12; Rom.1:16-2:16). If one cannot gather this from Romans 9-11 (particularly the Cultivated Olive Tree and the Wild One, Broken Off Branches & Grafted In Branches, with Christ as the ROOT) as a whole, and from 1st Peter 2:6-10, it becomes apparent that it is because they are not reading the Bible in its WHOLE CONTEXT on what "ELECTION" was, especially in God's Creation of a New Covenant People IN CHRIST, from a REMNANT of believing natural Israelites from ALL 12 TRIBES as "FIRSTFRUITS OF HIS CREATURES", that is, of EVERY CREATURE, individuals from out of "EVERY NATION KINDRED PEOPLE TRIBE AND TONGUE" (Rom.1:5,6,13; 9:1-8,24-33; 11:1-36; 16:25-27; 2nd Cor.1:18-20; 5:14-21; Gal.3:8-16,19,26-29; 4:1-7,19-31; 6:15,16; Col.1:5,6,23-29; Rev.7:1-8,9-17; 14:1-5,6-8)!
Understanding the Cultivated Olive Tree, God's New Covenant People and Holy Nation IN CHRIST, grasping that He is the ROOT, as the Branch/Offspring of Abraham, yet Root/Progenitor at the beginning (John 8:56-59) and AFRESH in His Resurrection Life, Col.1:18-2:7), and also understanding what the Wild Olive Tree represents, the Broken Off Branches, the Grafted In Branches etc. is vital to understanding "ELECTION" Biblically speaking.
Clearly INDIVIDUALS are the BRANCHES, not the TREES!
The determining factor of whether one was "ELECTED" or "REJECTED" was whether or not one came to be IN CHRIST THROUGH FAITH, OR ELSE WERE CUT OFF FROM HIM THROUGH DISBELIEF! It is that response of FAITH or else DISBELIEF that determines whether they would be a SHATTERED POTTERY AS VESSELS OF WRATH, OR ELSE HIS POTTERY OF HONORABLE USE AS VESSELS OF MERCY!
This is why it was the case that "NOT MY PEOPLE" ("LO-AMMI") could become God's Chosen People IN CHRIST (1st Peter 2:6-10), and why those who boasted in "having Abraham as father" and also boasted in their self-righteousness in Torah, were warned about how the "AXE WAS ALREADY LAID AT THE *ROOT* OF THE TREES", and also about how "GOD WAS ABLE TO RAISE UP CHILDREN UNTO ABRAHAM FROM *THESE STONES*" (Matt.3:8-12 & compare Josh.4, 12 Stone Memorial at Bethabara Joshua had built, and where John Baptized)!
GOD BLESS YOU DR. LEIGHTON FLOWERS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE CLEAR EXPLANATION.
It is no coincidence that the video is 13:48 minutes long...
It seems that Bob Wilkins is attempting to say those that were appointed to eternal life, had actually positioned themselves to be saved. This sounds like synergistic salvation, which is unbiblical.
At 0:37 you add presuppositions to the text, with the assumption that Calvinists are using Calvinism as their hermeneutic. But the word "appointed" is there. The ESV, NASB95, NASB2020, NKJV, CSB, and NIV all render the Greek word there as "appointed." No presuppositions are needed here. Let's ask the question: who does the appointing? Wilkins thinks the people are appointing themselves, but that would be synergistic salvation. Who then has authority to appoint?
Let's consider Wilkins' claim that the Greek word is a military term. Who places the troops? The commander does, as he is the one with authority. Wilkins is suggesting the people have the authority to place themselves. Who has authority over salvation? God does.
Did we have to appeal to Calvinism to figure this out? No. Did we have to presuppose Calvinism to see the problem here? No. To accept Wilkins' claim, we have to reject the work of all the committees involved in all the Bible versions listed above, that somehow, they all screwed up this one word that seems to point to God's authority. But that's the crux: God has authority over salvation, and Dr. Flowers does not seem to appreciate that.
A key verse to understanding the Greek word “Tasso” that is translated into “Ordained/Appointed is this:
Acts 18:6 (ESV) And when they opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them, "Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles."
Notice the word “Opposed.” If you look up the Greek word for that it is “AntiTasso,” which is the opposite of the word that gets translated into “Ordained/Appointed.” So, “Open to eternal life” really would be a better translation.
Are you a Greek scholar? How many bible committees, with experts in Greek (and yes many I am sure were not reformed), translate this as "appointed" or "ordained"? That is the part I think is dangerous, when we force a interpretation based on what WE think the Greek should be, when literally tens if not hundreds of translations, by hundreds if not thousands of experts in the Greek language, don't see it that way.
If Luke wanted to say "open to eternal life" I'm sure that would have been a simple phrase and yet the most consistent translation is "appointed or ordained".
@@mcgragor1 Reasoning that the majority says this so it must be so is dangerous. The majority of Jewish Bible scholars in Jesus day missed the most important thing in their Scriptures...the coming of the Messiah. It was the "rebels" like Nicodemus who came to Jesus by night that were right. Were you present at any of these Bible translation committee meetings? Do you know if there was a minority that was shouted down and dismissed because "the majority" thought it was thus and so? I'm not saying you are right or wrong...just that your logic is flawed.
To make your point, we'd have to find someone hostile to translation and wanting to keep it all to themselves--for example, the Jehovah's Witness translate it exactly like many on here want it translated. That should raise suspicion, but the other way around, not so much.
We'd have to assume that the majority of Greek scholars in every translation meeting working on different translations, maybe even in different lifetimes, all somehow saw this wrong...that is highly unlikely.
None of us were present at bible translations, but many from all different denominations concerned with accuracy, have signed off on what the majority of trained Greek scholars agreed on over these many years, centuries, and lifetimes of these many different groups of Greek translators.
So I think I am right in my logic, I'd agree I could be wrong, but not because I am using flawed reasoning.
keep in mind, many if not all cults based off of Christianity always want to mess with the translations, like the Jehovah's Witness I mentioned above. So wouldn't logic have us be more suspect when they translate it the way we wish it was, rather than the way it is?
It's possible I guess, but if any red flag is raised, I'd be questioning the cults rather than the Christians who gave us our most popular and respected versions accepted by every major denomination.
Can we maybe take the same system of interpretation that you proposed here (leaving aside the Greek implied that makes it evident the passive of Appointed) and apply it consistently thru the Bible in the context?
Thanks for this video!!! you solved a lot of questions that I had
I just don't see how you can punish someone for something you forced them to do. It really hits upon the goodness of our God. My son, here is a test which I designed specifically to make you fail. When you fail, I will disown you and cast you out for eternity. I have given the answer key to your sister. She passed, and now I will reward her for eternity.
Amen! I immediately thought of Cornelius as well. Thank You for your channel.
What's with Cornelius ?
Calvinism makes no sense. If God appointed man to go to heaven or hell before that man was created, then some (or most) men are going to hell because they were fully within God's will.
could you do a video on 1peter chapter 1?
4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
5 he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, - Ephesians 1:4-5
who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, - 2 Timothy 1:9
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. - John 6:44
And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. - Romans 8:30
Flowers, if you’re reading this, already your mind has done mental gymnastics to explain away each of these verses from their intended meaning. And what you said above is pure eisegesis. This is not the same method of operation we would perform to defend the trinity.
Having been an Arminian I remember that one of the reasons Arminians stumble out of the starting gate when examining soteriological issues is that Arminians do not understand original sin, that is, the default spiritual condition of man. I find this rather astounding given that both the OT and NT are quite clear on this doctrine.
Having made this mistake at the outset, Arminians have no hope to recover their soteriological stance since they just pile one error on top of another. Kind of like liberal democrats trying to fix the American economy. They have disqualified themselves ab initio.
Molinism is most correct.
Please can you de calvinized Acts 16:14.
Ive been confused by this verse and the story of Cornelus for a long time ... im just stating to slightly understand it after watching .... increase my faith, Lord
“When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48)
Leighton begins this video by asserting, “Calvinists understand this verse to mean that God unconditionally selected a particular number of Gentiles before the foundation of the world and is irresistibly changing their hearts to cause them to believe the apostle’s teaching.”
First of all, we believe this is about unconditional election, not necessarily irresistible grace, though we do believe they are saved by irresistible grace. The point of the text is that God has chosen to bring salvation to the Gentiles (13:47, not merely make salvation possible, but to actually save them), hence why they rejoiced when they heard it in verse 48. Then, the apostle asserts that the scope of those who believe is determined by God. Namely, “as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” That, sir, is the Calvinistic understanding of the text. And yes, this appointing happened before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4).
Leighton then goes on to present (0:36 in the video) a “Calvinized” version of Acts 13:48, which reads, “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were unconditionally appointed by God before the foundation of the world for eternal life believed.”
He argues that we presuppose that this “appointing” is “unconditional.” The problem is, we are getting that from the text. The appointing results in those who are appointed, believing in Him. Not that people are appointed because they believe, but to believe. The former is a backwards reading of this passage.
Then, he argues that we presuppose that the appointing happens “by God,” as if someone other than God could appoint us to eternal life. This is just absurd on its face. To appoint someone to eternal life is a divine action, not a human action. It cannot be something done by us or someone else. It can only be done by Him.
Furthermore, he argues that we presuppose that this appointing by God happens “before the foundation of the world.” Why do we believe that? Because we contrast this passage with Ephesians 1:4, which is about the exact same subject, and the choice took place when? It says, “before the foundation of the world.” That’s why.
Then, (at 4:11 in the video) he seems to draw a connection between the audience in 13:16 (God-fearing Gentiles) & 13:48 (a Gentile audience), which is exegetically indefensible. This is a completely different context in a different location on a different day with a different audience (13:44 makes this clear). This is a false, erroneous assumption.
Worst of all, he references Dr. Bob Wilkin (ThM, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) at 7:23-9:46 in the video, speaking about Acts 13:48. He references verse 46, where the Jews “judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.” From this, he argues that this does not fit the Calvinistic doctrine of election as commonly taught (8:20 in the video).
This couldn’t be further from the truth. The reason they were not believing is because they were not appointed to eternal life, and they hated God, so they did not consider themselves worthy of eternal life. I mean, the Jews had just crucified the Messiah. Why would they? They are living in rebellion. That is completely consistent with our understanding of election & our understanding of total depravity, if we understand it exegetically & in light of our actual position.
He argues that τεταγμένοι (appointed) in Acts 13:48 (at 8:46-9:06) is functioning in the middle passive voice. The proposed translation being, “as many as had positioned themselves in relation to eternal life believed.”
As for the middle voice, the construct concept and context determines that. There is no evidence of τεταγμένοι being in the middle voice. This would not only be a universal break from ALL Biblical theology (men don’t appoint themselves to eternal life, God does), but conceptually it may be utterly nonsensical. And I don’t see how anyone who can read Koine would make the case from Acts 13:46:
οὐκ ἀξίους κρίνετε ἑαυτοὺς // (lit) “not worthy you judge yourselves”
I must immediately point out that there is no M/P verb form. κρίνετε is in the active voice and the reflexive comes not from the verb but from the supplied pronoun serving as the object. Not only would be the most bizarre kind of hermeneutic to try and exegete an unrelated participle two verses later regarding a different verb and objects, in a different tense and voice without a supplied reflexive pronoun, but even the construction of v46 isn't a M/P verbal construction. So, that is a terrible argument, grammatically speaking.
In this context, τεταγμένοι is in what’s called a “periphrastic construction.” The term τεταγμένοι is not just a verb. It’s a perfect passive participle (not a perfect middle). And right before it is the Greek term ἦσαν. ἦσαν is a particular form of the verb εἰμί, the verb of being. When you have a form of εἰμί and a participle in this form [ἦσαν followed by τεταγμένοι], you have a periphrastic construction.
Periphrastic constructions have means of being interpreted unto themselves, and this particular one, where you have the imperfect form of εἰμί with the perfect passive participle τεταγμένοι, this becomes what’s called a “pluperfect” translation. A “pluperfect periphrastic.” It tells us that this action [ordained, set, appointed] took place in the past, prior to the event of Acts 13.
Therefore, this argument simply does not have any weight to it at all. It is woeful use of the Greek, and I would challenge him to substantiate his assertion that τεταγμένοι is a perfect middle participle. The context would have to determine that, and no attempt was made to exegetically substantiate this assertion. Not even a scintilla of fairness to the other side (perfect passive participle) was presented.
Further, he argues that v46 & v48 are “antithetically parallel.” (9:12-9:18) Notice that he did not say “grammatically parallel,” but “antithetically” parallel. This is a theological assertion that did not come from exegesis, but from an assumption that is being imposed onto the text. They are unrelated participles with different objects, and have different grammatical constructions to one another.
This argument is grammatically fallacious, and it is deceiving those who are ignorant of the original language. This kind of argumentation needs to stop. Hear me clearly: ALL committee-produced translations recognize that an examination of Lukan usage, relating both to meanings and syntax, the wider NT witness, etc., all point to the same conclusion: the text says “as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Indisputable.
Folks, brethren, my brothers and sisters, I could go on and on. The amount of errors were so many. The eisegesis in this video is just shameful, and needs to be repented of by any serious student of the Word who has adopted it. Let us return to rightly handling the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).
Mark Driscoll is questionable as a believer and has outright rejected calvinism entirely, so you might want to fix your graphic
Could you explain to me in what way Driscoll is questionable as a believer? What does it mean to you to be a believer and what has he said or done that does not match that description?
Jeff Lavenau source?
Dr Flowers is making the mistake in attributing faith the to believer. Ephesians tells us this is not from ourselves. This makes sense, as God knows all and controls all, we cannot surprise him or participate in our salvation. Otherwise salvation would not be from God alone, but also from us. Someone who is dead in their sins cannot exercise faith unless God grants them faith.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
This is so good. God bless you
With all due respect, the background music is distracting as one tries to listen carefully to the argument being made.
Why do people get so mad that God is in control of our salvation and that we contribute nothing to our spiritual birth? “ grrr Calvinist! I chose God and I can leave him anytime I want!! My choice even though I’m spiritually dead and my work of making that choice. God is out of the picture unless I myself choose him. it’s up to meeee!! Freee will” Arrogance and pride at it’s worse.
John Calvin confessed that the doctrine of Double Predestination was a horrible and dreadful decree in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin believed that the scriptures taught that God made an "absolute decree" (latin. decretum absolutum) before the foundation of the world that all people would be divided into two classes of the elect and the reprobate that was determined by God's decision alone.
Unlike many Calvinists today, Calvin believed that God's absolute decree to predestine an individual to eternal death was not a wonderful or glorious thing, instead Calvin confessed that it was a dreadful and horrible decree. Is it not a horrible decree that God would create something for eternal perdition? And it is dreadful and horrible indeed! How could we respond in any other way than to say such a final ends is horrible and dreadful! The possibility that God would create any person for eternal death calls into question the goodness of God.
"Why do people expect God to follow the ethics he laid out to us?"
Thank you, makes me cry. So many are deceived 🙏🏼
Because they want to mix in their own version like this man !
He tries to spin it as much as he can but it still doesn't change the reality !
The same concept applies to John 3:19-21, another Calvinist proof-text. I think sometimes Calvinists forget that people could be saved under the old covenant. This is why “coming to the light” in John 3:21 isn’t about conversion, it’s about an already-saved person coming to Jesus upon hearing about Him for the first time, otherwise you have people “doing what is true” BEFORE conversion, which makes no sense.
The text does not say to all who believe are appointed to eternal life...
SOTERIOLOGY 101, YOUR EXPLANATION WITH ACTS 18:6 AND ACTS 28:27-28 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ACTS 13:48, because THIS VERSE(Acts 13:48 ) is an independent verse and can stand by itself without referring to other verses... For example of other INDEPENDENT VERSE THAT CAN STAND BY ITSELF: When God said, ''I AM THE LORD WHO CREATED ALL THINGS...'' =>>> You don't need other verses to support or contradict this verse because this verse can stand by itself without reference to other verses...=>>> 2nd, Acts 18 and Acts 28 COMES LATER THAN ACTS 13... SO YOU CANNOT SAY THAT BECAUSE OF ACTS 18 AND ACTS 28 , THEY WERE THE REASONS THAT ACTS 13 WAS MADE...=>>>> AND THIRD, WHEN THE APOSTLES SPEAK ABOUT ISRAEL THAT THEIR HEARTS HAVE BECOME CALLOUSED AND SO THEY WILL TURN TO THE GENTILES, =>>> THE APOSTLES WERE REFERRING TO THE NATION OF ISRAEL AND TO THE GENTILES IN GENERAL... THEY WERE NOT REFERRING TO INDIVIDUAL SALVATION AS WHAT HAPPENED IN ACTS 13:48.... =>>>> ACTS 13:48(KJV) ''And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.'' =>>> NOTE: '''AS MANY AS WERE ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED.''' =>>> IT SAYS, 'AS MANY', IT DID NOT SAY 'ALL '...=>> ''WHICH SIMPLY MEANS AS MANY INDIVIDUALS''=>>>>> AND 4TH, YOU SAID THAT IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY BELIEVED, BUT ONLY THAT THEY ARE BELIEVING THE TRUTH ABOUT JESUS AND THEIR INCLUSION INTO THE COVENANT BY FAITH ALONE... IT IS IN FACT THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY BELIEVED ACCORDING TO THE VERSE ITSELF UNLESS YOU REWRITE THE VERSE... =>>> ''AS MANY AS WERE ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED.''' =>>> NOTE: They believed because they were ordained to ETERNAL LIFE....=>>>> NOTE: Please don't remove this post because this is the BIBLICAL TRUTH... I will stand to defend this TRUTH to anyone who will challenge me.... I AM NOT A CALVINIST BUT I BASED MY BELIEF IN THE BIBLE ALONE.... MANY THANKS.....
Just because its your opinion does not mean its Biblical truth. The Bible has to be taken as a whole, not just taking one verse and ignoring everything else. But anyways God bless bro
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo yes but when trying to get the real meaning of a verse it's always best to go to the original greek language, and the word they use is appointed, which is decided on beforehand. So if you look at the Bible as a WHOLE you will see that decided before hand doesn't mean God chose specific people, but that in God's divine sovereignty he already knew beforehand who would believe
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo Well thank you for responding to my response, and yes they do know more, that's probably why they translated it and not me. But once again I make the same point that its not about picking one verse to support your statement, but the whole Bible. If that is how you use that verse in John 6:44, then it contradicts verse 40, And this is the will of him that sent me, that EVERY ONE which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. The Bible doesn't contradict itself, so one verse can't say that everyone who see's the son and believes in him will be saved and then that only does who are drawn to (predestined as you say) Jesus by the Father will be saved. So then what is the context of the verse that we're looking at, the crowd of people that were with Jesus were grumbling amongst themselves because Jesus said that he was the bread that came down from heaven. They said, verse 42 is this not Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? So in that moment they were filled with unbelief because they knew Joseph and Mary. So that is when Jesus responds with verse 44, that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father draws them. Draws them is not predestined, because of their unbelief draws them is, gives him the desire and inclination to come and the ability to place trust in Christ. Because then verse 47 says Truly, truly, I say to you, WHOEVER believes has eternal life (ESV) verse 51 says I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if ANY man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. (KJV) So in no way using the context of the whole verse is it talking about predestination.
@@reynaldodavid2913Jo God bless you, my question is how do you get elect from those verses? Verse 40 says everyone, verse 47 says whoever believes and verse 51 says any man. Where in the CONTEXT of that whole chapter do you see it mention elect
The Jewish unbelief throughout the New Testament is so sad, but Thank God, for through their Unbelief, we, gentiles, were grafted in, as Paul said, to perhaps stir the jealousy of his countrymen, that they also would turn back in faith and again be grafted in. Amen, Halleluyah!
Couldn't the word translated "appointed" also mean "commission, or to bring something newly produced into working order"? So those whose God-given faith was at the needed point of quality and growth received more?
What about Ephesians 1 4-5 He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world.
"What about Ephesians 1 4-5?" What about Eph 1:3 and 6? Did you read the whole sentence? It clarifies that God chose those of us in Christ to be holy and blameless. That has been God's desire from time immemorable - He wants a people that are his very own who will be holy. Christ died for us to set us free from sin. We should all be striving to become like Christ.
I suppose that further evidence that these Gentiles were already worshipping God would be found in the fact that they were present at the synagogue on the first day. It's still a peculiar text and use of the word ordain. Presuming it is not for the sake of the Calvinist viewpoint, I still wonder why Luke would record it as such. Is there any point in separating the three major points: "ordained", "eternal life", and "believed"?
The very thought that God has chosen people goes against human
Theology
Man wants to be part of his salvation robbing God of his glory
The wedding feast the person who never had the right garment was ousted
The blood of Christ must be applied
To the sinner something only.the holy spirit can perform!
Those who dislikes are Calvinists,open yourday eyes fo not suppress the truth.
Calvinism has one basic problem. They understood that man is totally depraved. That is correct. But, they never were able to figure out why that is so. A man's soul is trapped in the prison of his fallen flesh. Its in the flesh that the sin nature resides and has a domineering control over the soul. The parents of a child produced the flesh, but God created the soul that is entrapped in that flesh. So, the soul being from God is potentially being perfect from the hand of God. And, its only the soul that God saves for that reason. .Not the body... If God did not do something about the flesh's dominance over the soul? No soul could be free to believe.
Yet.. Believers who study, should learn from Scripture that the control of the filling of the Spirit nixes the flesh's influence, so we do not walk in the flesh. What the Calvinists failed to see? That the Spirit has the same power (grace) to control anyone's flesh as God wills when drawing all men. If God wants to introduce a thought into the mind of a person whom God is drawing? God's grace will temporarily suppress that person's flesh power over his soul. Why so? So, that person from his soul (without the overbearing depraved flesh) he can be free to decide what he wants to believe about some thought in his mind given by God. That is why Jesus said ... They shall be taught by God. (John 6:45). That also makes a soul free to reject God if he should so desire.
In that manner all people are drawn by God at some point in their lives. All are given a fair chance by having their sin natures suppressed by grace as God draws them. Only the souls that desire more and keep remaining positive to what God reveals in drawing them, will eventually arrive over God's finish line. Then the Father will hand those souls over to His Son, as a gift from the Father to the Son.
To keep this from being too long.. I will not comment now about what "chosen in the Son before the foundations of the world" indicates about predestination. Please ask, and I will take gladly respond. Grace and peace.
@@SerendipitousProvidence Who claims a majority in Hell? After all, two thirds of the angels stayed with the Lord. Some passages refer to many believers choosing for poor teachings over sound doctrine. But, they will be saved. What they will lose will be eternal rewards, not their salvation. Read
1 Corinthians 3:11-15. They will be saved, but at a loss of their rewards that God wanted to accompany their salvation.
@@SerendipitousProvidence It not irrelevant. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction of the spiritual life. We have over 1000 denominations that contradict one another in many ways. That is the broad and wide road. Only a few believers out of the many will endure the pressures (narrow path) and follow the strait (means strict adherence) to accurate understanding. The word was not spelled "straight." Strait was old English for 'strict.' Very few teachers teach soundly today. The many teach what the people want to hear, rather than what they need to hear. 2 Timothy 4:3 tells us that is the case we are finding today!
"For the time will come when men *will not put up with sound doctrine.* Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."
In contrast to that great number? (broad and wide) James 3:1, tells us we should only find a few good teachers if we were all Spirit led. A great number are not being led of the Spirit, but by their emotions and a demonic influence counterfeiting as the Holy Spirit. It says, Few will find "life." Jesus did not say a few will find salvation. "Life more abundantly" is not being found by many today.... Only a few find it.
@@SerendipitousProvidence You can not always know who is saved.
@@SerendipitousProvidence Even so if what you say were accurate? Only 3 percent would be Christian in the world. That would be a few. Near half is far from being a few...
@@SerendipitousProvidence Looking for a fight? Something tells me that's what you really seek. Not truth. The Word is your means by which to pick a fight. Explaining things only frustrates you more........
God chose these people beforehand (in eternity past) and now 1.)through giving them repentance Acts 11:18,,2Tim2:25 2.)has brought them to faith in Christ Eph2:8... 3)Luke uses the passive voice("were appointed")
indicating God is the agent.
Crystal Reddick wrong but hey enjoy the lies you’ve been thought
Τεταγμενοι (to put in order, to appoint) could also be middle voice. The point is that there is ambiguity to the meaning. It is not as straight forward as Calvinists would indicate.
Only Leighton Flowers can make a video like this where in his explanation of a biblical study ends up saying that an unregenerate, not born again, void of the Holy Spirit, unbelieving person can offer up good works through charity and prayer and it be pleasing to God. And everyone is the comments are like " this is such and awesome videoooo!" that's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.
Lol, he spends time telling Calvinist what they are reading into the verse and I am thinking I've never done that. The word "appointed" says it all. This is not exegesis. He also likes to spend time everywhere in the bible outside of the text being debated-he does this a lot because if he just took the context around the actual text, its inescapable that the verse is making a distinction between the appointed and not appointed.
Mcgragor he did examine the text both before and after. You obviously did not watch the entire 13:48 of the video! He also examined other texts as a good expositor should. It’s called interpreting scripture with scripture. This is ESSENTIAL in order to rightly divide the word, since scripture cannot contradict itself. Even though Greek scholars agree that “appointed” is not the best translation of the word in the verse in question, leighton skillfully explains that it really makes zero difference. Sproul, piper, white, MacArthur, they all love this verse because by itself it sounds Calvinistic but in the logical flow of Acts it is not.
If you’re talking about Cornelius, Acts 10-11 tells us all that. It’s not from me. He did all that prior to hearing the gospel and receiving the HS.
Leatherwood Outdoors this is such an awesome videooooooo! Your claim was never stated in this video nor is it leighton position. No unbelieving person can please God because without faith it is impossible to please God, every baby christian knows that. You should not put words in someone’s mouth. You should also consider the scripture “let the wicked forsake his way and return to the Lord and he will abundantly pardon”. Wait the WICKED can forsake his way? Not in calvinism they can’t they have to be regenerated first. But then they wouldn’t be wicked would they. Can’t you just see, calvinism is wrong wrong wrong.
@@sp4gsus I have no problem with using "scripture to interpret scripture", but LF goes out of his way to interpret many text with anything other than the text itself. I noticed this in several of his prior videos.
Greek scholars do NOT agree that "appointed" isn't the best word if you're assuming "disposed" is what they agree on.
Give me the English translations that would agree with this? Are there any? Most I've seen use "ordained", "appointed".
Are we to believe that all of the Greek scholars for translation after translation have been wrong?
I did see where the Jehovah's Witness use "rightly disposed", so that ought to tell you something. I'm betting in older versions of their translation, it didn't say that.
Just let the text speak! Acts 13:48 needs no other proof text...It says what it says explicitly!!!!
Those Gentiles were appointed to eternal life by Paul by the preaching of the Gospel unto them.. All the text is saying is that every one of those Gentiles that had gathered and heard the words of Paul, Believed. Just as Paul quotes the Lord, 'I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT (YOU) MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.'" By Paul's appointment, all that heard, believed.
Appointed doesn't mean appointed....got it.
Lol, great argument 🤣
Just like all doesn't mean all...right?
@@goldenarm2118
😂
@@toddcote4904 Just like appointed doesn't mean pre-appointed.
@@goldenarm2118
Unlike you, I'm not comfortable believing in a God who dies for everyone, while also knowing who will choose Him, and still hopes for those who won't ever choose Him to choose Him. That's a very confusing God. This then leads to double jeopardy, whereby Jesus dies the death on behalf of the unbeliever, yet the unbeliever still goes into the lake of fire. So Jesus suffers for the unbeliever's sin and the sinner suffers for those same sins?? That's not just and I know God is just. Therefore, I must reject the non-calvinist view as unjust and illogical.
@@toddcote4904 Allow me to pop one little bubble in that comment. Not that I couldn't pop more but one at a time is best.
Could you, if your life depended on it, make a distinction between the words desire and hope?
This is very simple.
To the Jew first then the Gentile. The Gospel had come to the Jew but seeing that they judge themselves unworthy, the Gospel was taken to the Gentiles.
What is the Word of the Lord v44, this is the Word of the Lord:
John 3:16
King James Version
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
So who was ordained to eternal life? The elect chosing before the foundation of the world?
No, whosoever shall BELIEVE in the Son of the living God, did.
De-Calvinize 2 Timothy 2:25-26?
Amen, it's shocking how many oppose God's obvious sovereignty in all things, especially that which God ordained eternity past
@@allendula it's not opposing God's Sovereignty, it's opposing how Calvinism has defined it. Both sides seem to be convinced that they're right so it's hard to figure out which is true when you see verses like 2 Timothy 2:25 & John 6:44, but then you see verses like "don't harden your own heart", "humble yourself", "choose this day who you will serve", etc.
@@allendula Plus if what you believe is true and we are opposing Calvinism because God ordained that we oppose calvinism
Here is an example of these verses in a real life scenario from scripture.
You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.”
Acts 8:21-23
6:11 - 6:23 hits hard 🔥
Has anybody ever heard the phrase, " I never said you stole the money?"
If you go back through that phrase and emphasize a different word in that phrase each time, you come up with a different meaning. The only way to know the intent of the phrase is to read the before and after to find the context of the phrase. This verse is no different.
Reading before and after 13:48 gives you complete context and intent of the verse. Gentiles were believing and being saved. Wow!
This is a big big deal, and marks a turning point in the preaching of the Gospel. This is the first time in scripture where Paul starts preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, and many believed! Wow! Unlike many of the Jews who WOULD NOT believe, v46.
Mark excellent example!
It’s this guy who has to work the scriptures to get to his pretext. Faith is a gift from God.
Thank you brother Leighton.. well explained... Praise God for wisdom 🙏
I have never seen such a hateful comment section in all of youtube, and on a Christian video nonetheless...where is the love?
Amen! Thank you for these explanations. Much needed!
Several times throughout scripture we read that Israel is God's elect. However not all Israel believed and was saved. Also we read that Christ was God's elect, and he did not need saving! I think it needs to be looked at closer as to what the meaning of elect is. I believe election has to do with a work that God has called us to. Many reject it. Thoughts??
We for many years no have problems with Calvinis, maybe with hipercalvinist yes, but just now appear many tehilogicl teachers that made big discovers against Calvinism This for me, happen BECOUSE of wrongs teaching of Calvinism, or good teaching of armianismo.Juan Pueresko.
Calvinism is Biblical Christianity. To think otherwise is proof of error in someone's Theology. Spurgeon was a Calvinist. No one here is more versed in scripture than Spurgeon. Christians are choosen before the foundation of the world ~ Unconditionally. It's not by works. It's not by our will. It's by God
Jesus was more versed than Spurgeon. We do not follow Spurgeon. We follow Jesus Christ.
Another Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, said that Calvinism is simply historical orthodox Christianity. It is what the original Christians believed.
Read the early church fathers and they do not sound like Arminians such as Flowers. They sound like today's RC Sproul, Al Mohler, Steven Lawson, John MacArthur, John Piper, etc. Plus, to have Arminianism, you must have Jacobus Arminius, its founder, who did not come along until the 1500's, that is, over fifteen centuries after the Ascension of our Lord.
There are no Arminian detractors from the Gospel described in the New Testament (unless you want to count the Pharisees) or in the Old Testament (unless you want to count the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel).
Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ will be forgiven. God wants everyone saved and to come to the knowledge of Lord. The Holy Spirit has been poured out on all flesh and the Holy Spirit is drawing all to the Lord Jesus for salvation
Please do a video on Ephesians 2:1-3
thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season.
Acts 13:10-11
The Lord said: it is written and you say like the serpent: did God really say?
Instead of letting the word stand, you twist it. This is the surest path to Catholicism.
Do not become many teachers, says the Scripture, for they will have a hard judgment.
May God opens your eyes after He'll blind you, for blindling the eyes of many
🙏
I see the text about those that believed and were “saved” as the calvinists see it in your opening part of the video . It is clear from many texts within scripture that God is the author and finisher of our faith . It is clear that man is unable to save himself and can only be saved by God . This consideration never loses the fact that man must by his will accept the Lords call on His life . Many people resist that calling much of their life and suffer the consequences of Gods lessons . As a Father loves His children so the Lord Loves His , even greater .
Much misunderstanding about God is that people read 1/100th of the bible in their lives . They read texts and then build a religion on multiple texts .
God being a jealous God does what only God can do, He disciplines and chastens His in order that they will never be lost . The consideration of how the devil can interfere and how people can reject an all loving God is because many don’t read the bible and know what it says . Satan has been given certain boundaries and legal abilities by God , most of this is related to disobeying God like Adam and Eve in the garden . The evil one exists , he gets in by suggestion and his lie penetrates and grows like leaven . The fool says in his heart there is no God , the righteousness he speaks if any can only come from God and as the fool is chastened and taught He is born again into eternity by Christ alone . None of his salvation was his part except he humbled himself and proclaimed God is my God .
Children keep yourselves from idols reflects dearly on Gal 3 .
There is only one Gospel .
Acts 13: 48 is clear as is Acts 16:14...Yes we exercise free will...but those who do were appointed to!!!!!! Good?
Just around 15 minutes is my cup o tea... I listen to the super long ones while on my deliveries
Just prior to the ascension, Jesus Christ instructed his disciples on what they were to do while they were waiting for the power to come. They were to remain in Jerusalem.
Luke 24:49
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power [dunamis - inherent power] from on high.
Was it available for the apostles to renew their minds while they were waiting for the power to arrive? Yes, of course, the renewed mind is very much a part of the senses, a work of the flesh, something man does with his body and soul abilities. The power from on high is spiritual power that comes from God. The receiving of this power from God is what we call the new birth, it is our supernatural life. The renewed mind is the key to energising that power resident within the gift of holy spirit that comes with the new birth.
The new birth has been trodden under so much religious horseshit through the centuries, that we need to take the time to dig it out of the pages of the bible and explore it. We've all heard the expressions born again and born dead in sins but do we know what they mean? With our deeper understanding of body, soul and spirit, we are now ready to embark on an adventure into the holy spirit field and discover how to energise our power for abundant living.
Man was a three-part being back in Genesis, but as a consequence of his disobedience, he lost his spirit and became just body and soul. With this understanding, many scriptures will now make sense.
Ephesians 2:1
And you hath he quickened [made alive], who were dead in trespasses and sins;
To be made alive is a reference to the receiving of the gift of holy spirit, which is to be born again. To be born dead in trespasses and sins is a reference to our physical birth into this world. It has absolutely nothing to do with sex being evil, as some teach, it is merely a reference to being born body and soul with no spirit. Man is born without spirit, so he is dead at birth, and I don't care how religious some people think they are. If they have no spirit, they are dead.
Man died back in Genesis when he lost his spirit, and it is this lack of spirit which is referred to here. Being dead in trespasses and sins is simply a reference to man being born without spirit. Without spirit, man is dead, so when man is born into the world without spirit he is dead in trespasses and sins. It is merely a reference to the fall of man and its consequences.
Back in Genesis, man was body, soul, and spirit. Man died, he lost his spirit and became an animal of just body and soul. Jesus Christ paid for man's redemption and reconciled man back to God so he could be whole again, with body, soul, and spirit. It is the receiving of the gift of holy spirit that is the new birth, and it is that spirit that is our power for abundant living.
Ephesians 5:14
Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
God is light and the gift of holy spirit is light. When we are born again, we are raised from the dead and become children of light.
1 Thessalonians 5:5
Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
This being raised from the dead, this receiving of spiritual light, is what is referred to in the bible as being saved. Being saved is actually a beautiful term, but unfortunately it has been smeared with centuries of religious horseshit. It's time to clean it up and see what it really means.
Ephesians 2:4,5
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us [made us alive] together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved [sōzō - made whole];)
Sōzō in the Greek simply means to be made whole. We are born into this world without spirit and when we are born again and receive God's gift of holy spirit, we are saved, made whole, having three parts again instead of two. That is what it means to be saved, sōzō, made whole.
Dead in sins in verse 5 is another reference to being born with just body and soul, without spirit. Quickened is old language meaning to be made alive. When we receive this spirit and become whole again, we are made alive and, therefore, we are no longer dead. We are born into a new life.
The receiving of the gift of holy spirit, the new birth, first became available on the day of Pentecost when man could once again be made whole by receiving spirit. So what do we have to do to receive it? What mechanics are involved? Romans gives us the details.
Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved [sōzō - made whole].
Whenever and wherever a man, woman, or child confesses Jesus as Lord and believes in their heart that God raised him from the dead, that person receives the gift of holy spirit. In that very instant, they are born again, raised from the dead, saved, made whole - they receive spirit born within them. That spirit is a new creation, something that has never existed before.
2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature [creation]: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
I responded to James White on this passage.
This is the comment:
You guys are so hung up on election you do not see it.
This is what happen according to God purifies our hearts by our faith
Acts 15..
The gospel was preached, the Holy Spirit convicts through the gospel, God knows their hearts, He purifies our hearts by our faith in Him.
They are appointed to eternal life when they are granted repentance unto eternal life.
This can be looked at as election according to Gods will.
Which is for us to believe in Jesus!
We may have the inability to not be righteous before God but we have the ability to respond to the gospel according to faith.
Some people do not want to come to Jesus because they love darkness rather than the light. John 3..
As far as salvation goes, we did nothing but respond to what God provided.
I do appreciate you not understanding why people would not accept it, but it is not because God did not want them.
It is because they did not want God, because they love darkness.
They may have other beliefs of the truth of God, and avoid the truth of the gospel.
So if it is doubt or rebellion, or hanging on to a false belief, the devil blinded them, and they did not have faith in the gospel of Jesus.
They did not believe God.
Romans 8:24-25
King James Version
24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
Who would have hope if they believe it is only a selected?
Honest and serious question...
Even if one should say that God doesn't directly cause unbelief, or ordain individuals to be lost or saved, etc., How can we reconcile the fact that God still grants earthly life to people He already foreknew would reject Him and go to Hell?
Isn't that creating someone and choosing to let them live a full life, yet knowing they would reject the Gospel before they were born?
I know we have free will, that's clear from our choice to sin. We choose what we want and God gave us a choice and we have all ruined it with sin. He permitted that, so that we are not robots.
But if God permitted it, doesn't that mean also that He knew the repercussions beforehand and still chose to allow it to happen?
Basically, what I'm getting at is this- if God gave us a choice to sin, and we failed the test, and we all deserve to die and go to Hell, then why do we try to take credit for God acting to save us when we're already condemned?
God is under absolutely no obligation to save anyone and the fact that He saves anyone at all is an act of mercy none of us deserve. So why are we trying to make scripture suggest all of a sudden in the last few decades say that it's no longer by grace alone through faith alone but now we have to activate our almighty human free will to truly respond to the Gospel, this denying the necessity of the Holy Spirit moving in a sinner's heart.
I don't mean to sound argumentative, I'm not trying to be. I'm genuinely trying to ask how we can say God is completely sovereign in salvation but then redefine and reinterpret scriptures that support that statement. I'm just confused by the logic of it in the light of what scripture seems to clearly teach.
It’s not a presupposition. That’s what it says in Ephesians 2.
As I dig deeper into understanding calvinism I'm shocked how many "intelligent" people can adhere to such a belief. There are so many mind blowing issues, such as who would ever create anyone just to send them to hell. No loving parent would do that. How do they know their part of the elect. I mean in their world God just might use them for His purpose and they aren't part of the elect. It's so bizarre and their response is just as bizarre "we're not God so it's beyond our understanding"
These shorter videos are a blessing. The longer videos are too, when I need to dig more and at times I want to be exhaustive, especially when I was digging in to seek the truth for myself, but I have to set down time for that. These I can listen to on the way somewhere or on a break. Thanks! Also while I'm not necessarily a fan of the TLB translation, I do like how they worded this verse: "When the Gentiles heard this, they were very glad and rejoiced in Paul’s message; and as many as wanted eternal life, believed."
Sadly, the calvinists will pounce on a difficult verse such as Acts 13v48, but will totally discredit the multiple verses in Scripture which prove their theology wrong. When painted into a corner (which they always are) they will just shrug their shoulders and claim their contradictions are a 'divine paradox'! They will misuse Deut. 29v29 which says that the secret things belong unto God. This way they can avoid taking responsibility for their logical inconsistencies and contradictions. Piper has brazenly interpreted God wanting all men to repent and be saved as His wanting all 'classes of men' to be saved. Of course this would also mean that He wants no 'class of men' to be lost. These people are slippery and dishonest. They are under the spell of calvinism, as brainwashed by their theology as Roman Catholics and Watchtower Witnesses are by theirs. If I sound harsh it is because I see souls being lost and a false gospel being preached on the doorstep.
Clearly, it's not a Calvinist "election" verse. The Calvinist claim that it means "elect from the foundation to be regenerated so that they would exercise faith" should be rejected by any reasonable person not drinking the Kool-Aide. Even if God determined to make sure that a group of Gentiles would believe, the text-only indicates Paul's preaching. Not God was electing with other means.
What I find very compelling is Dr. Wilkin's information on the context and literary parallelism. Parallelism is a common and well-known method of teaching and writing. The point is that the text of v. 46 states that the Jews themselves (reflexively) did not "consider" themselves worthy of eternal life. They heard Paul's reasoning and explanation and rejected that path of salvation with no other cause aside from their own processing of the information. No one else, not even God, gets implicated in their self-made decision to reject the message.
Verses 46 and 48 are connected contextually and literally. So you have the Jews reflexively being in position as God's chosen instrument to carry the Word and bring forth the Messiah, CHOOSING to reject that opportunity. You have God-Fearing Gentiles going to synagogue week in and week out, wanting to be part of the Jewish family and covenant. Then you have the covenant people in the proper position ethnically rejecting their birthright. Then, in contrast, you have the Gentiles. They had no ethnic or covenant promise from God. They had POSITIONED themselves outside of the Pagan religions and went to the Synagogue, hoping to receive eternal life and be part of God's family. We have them positioning "themselves" to be ready to jump at the opportunity.
That literary structure brings beauty and harmony worthy of Luke's powerful command of the language, writing, and academic skills that would be recognized. I believe Calvinism and other interpretations rob the prose and skill the Holy Spirit gave Luke in his writing.
You seem to struggle with accepting the sovereignty of God. Let me pose some questions to you. Was Jesus Christ's crucifixion predetermined, as it was foretold in the Bible? Was there ever a moment when Christ could not have been crucified? Could Judas have chosen not to betray Jesus at any point? Was Christ's crucifixion merely foreseen, or was it predetermined by God? If it was predetermined, what ensures the certainty of its outcome? Why do you find it challenging to accept that when the Bible speaks of God appointing, electing, or predestining, it means exactly that? Perhaps it's time to reflect, repent, and humble yourself instead of being arrogant, presumptuous, and counterproductive.
It is apparent that you do not know the answers to the very questions you propose. Perhaps it is time for you "to reflect, repent, and humble yourself instead of being arrogant, presumptuous, and counterproductive."
Respectfully … this is utter nonsense. 😑
(KJV+) Hebrews 12:2: "Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."
(KJV+) John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."
Pag sinabing Works ang context ni Paul jan is Mosaic Law not Good Works by Humans. Jan pa lang, pag ayaw mo nang ayusin, meaning may gusto kang ipasok na Doktrina na salungat sa original intention/context ng Biblical Author.
Totoo naman ang Election kasi sa Revelations ung mga hindi tatanggap sa tatak ng Anticristo ay predestined na nakasulat na ung pangalan nila sa Book of Life
I think the KJV does a better job rendering the Greek word “tasso” by using the word “ordained” (instead of appointed). A plain sense reading of Acts 13:48 establishes God’s sovereignty in election. Neither a historical explanation, nor prolix philosophical input are necessary to properly interpret said verse. All that is required for proper interpretation is a plain sense reading, and (if there are any doubts), allowing scripture to interpret scripture, via the multiple other verses that clearly establish God’s sovereignty in election. This video does a good job trying to “Arminianize” a text using the method of eisegesis (instead of the proper method of exegesis). The verse still simply means what it says, so I’ll still side with the reformers.
so then, what if it turns out you were never 'elect' but predestined to the other camp all along - will you still accept G.d's sovereign will, or will you rebel instead?
@@blackfalkon4189 I was a rebel against God for many years, as I was an atheist. The Bible teaches that we can have assurance of our salvation. The Holy Spirit testifies to me that I’m His, and I can prove the same through the Scriptures. I know that my faith is genuine simply because I love God. An unsaved person has no desire to follow God, nor to be obedient because they are spiritually dead in trespasses and sin. The Bible teaches unconditional eternal security of the believer. I can lay down and sleep in peace and comfort at night knowing that the next I will still be a believer because God has given me an enduring faith, and He keeps me.
@@doveofgrace but that doesnt answer the question
@@blackfalkon4189 I’m saved and have eternal life, and that’s it. The question being asked is a hypothetical question, and I’m not going to involve myself with answering hypothetical questions. God is sovereign no matter what. God can do what He wants; when he wants, and whether or not someone likes it is irrelevant to the end result.
@@doveofgrace that's contradictory
but before I elaborate I must ask: do you believe in all 5 points of TULIP? (and especially the U & L : Unconditional election & Limited atonement)
The question is...How did the gentile believers come to be that way in the first place? There are none who seek God. Yes, whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. All Calvinists agree with that. The question is, How do they come to believe?
Jesus is the author and finisher of our faith. And faith is a gift. (See Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 2:8-9)
At minute 3:10 you said the Jews were hardened they were predisposed to be that way I suppose you mean this was their own doing their culture or whatever and that has nothing to do with Isaiah 6:10 quoted in all four gospels as well as Acts ( also see Deuteronomy 29 three and four Isaiah 29:10 Ezekiel 12:2 those are the ones off the top of my head...) and then you said the Gentiles ate more open to the truth I can only assume that you mean to say that they would be an easier people to hear the truth believe it and hang on to it wow historically you have to know that this is not true the Gentiles my friend were incredible pagans hanging onto polytheism and pantheism with an iron claw.
Historically speaking, the Gentiles were any people group that were not ethnically Israelites. The Jews, during the time of Jesus, had deemed any Gentile as inferior to them. They considered themselves the ONLY people God called, his ONLY chosen people. (Any modern belief system sound like that to you?) They were not allowed to participate in the same rituals as the Jews, no matter their beliefs. It was even believed that contact with a Gentile would make a Jew, or his possessions, ceremonially unclean. This did not stop the Gentiles from accepting the Jewish faith, even though it was often difficult for them to do the ceremonial rituals to become "Jews," and thus saved according to the Jewish leaders. Imagine being told that you could not gain access to Heaven because you weren't born into the right family, and then this guy comes along and tells you that a man named Jesus came and died for you so that you could enter Heaven. Would you not be more willing to listen and act to attain this right that seemed previously unobtainable to you?
So flowers would have you believe that acts 28:28 should actually read "... this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles as Plan B I REALLY HOPE they will listen fingers crossed guys". You can dance around the text as much as you want and try to massage the words into saying what you think they should have said but really what you're saying is God tried; the Jews failed, the Gentiles are up to bat. The question is when it says the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable in Romans 11:29 it DIDN'T MEAN the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Flowers would have you believe the verse should say the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable unless you cannot muster up the faith within yourself to believe in 30 years. I'm not sure when acts was written. or was there a deliberate hardening of Israel. Flowers says you shouldn't come to the text with presuppositions I disagree I think that if you're a new Christian and you're stumbling through the text like I was it's a good idea to see what people have said historically to have an open mind and an unbiased heart put that lens on. The calvinistic lens and the autonomous free moral agent(God makes a way if you will just believe) provisionary lens. with election these are really the only two historic postures you can assume there are of course Fringe ideas molinism is one I can think of and many brilliant people have written words and words and words from either perspective. For me unconditional election for the foundation of the Earth was just easier to see merry Christmas everybody
Irrevocable - not able to be changed, reversed, or recovered; final. When it's talking about irrevocable gifts, it means that God will not take them back or change them. It does NOT mean that the gifts and callings are unrefusable. Furthermore, since you bring up Romans 11, let's look at a few verses not too far before 29.
Romans 11: 22. "Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!"
Did you notice the conditions given to the audience in order to remain grafted in? "...provided that you continue in his kindness." "...if they (the Jews) do not persist in unbelief..." Both the Jews and the Gentiles must act of their own volition to be grafted in, remain grafted, and even be grafted in again. Otherwise, they could be removed permanently due to their own persistence in unbelief.
@@davidtrue4255, Did you notice that Romans 11 speaks of a Nation(Israel) a group of people and the gentiles as a group of people also? You cannot refer Romans 11 to Acts 13:48, because this verse refers to individual who are predestined(ordained) to eternal life ... Jesus several time speak about the Sheep(elect) and and also about the goats(reprobates).....=>>> In John 10:11(KJV), It says: JOHN 10:11 (KJV) ''I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd ''''GIVETH HIS LIFE FOR THE SHEEP.'''''=>>>> JOHN 10:15 (KV) As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and ''''I LAY DOWN MY LIFE FOR THE SHEEP''''. IN ACTS 13:48, THOSE WHO BELIEVED THAT WERE ORDAINED FOR ETERNAL LIFE DEFINITELY REFERS TO THE ELECT(SHEEP)...
Calvinists are NOT "The Elect."
The Elect has ALWAYS been Israel.
"Election" is NOT "unto salvation" as calvinists teach.
The Biblical definition of Election is "chosen for a purpose," as in the Nation of Israel was chosen to be the priests to teach the world about a Holy God and show them the way to salvation.
You can check this out by doing a word study of all the verses with election and elect in it. You will find it's not connected to "getting saved."
BTW, there are more than 2 ways that you mentioned to understanding Scripture. That's quite the narrow view you have.
Again, the overall teaching of the scripture is that God is sovereign in salvation. By not letting scripture speak in its totality, you set up a scenario whereby Christ's death could have been in vain in that NO ONE WOULD EXERCISE THEIR OWN ABILITY TO PLACE FAITH IN THE WORK OF JESUS. i.e. if man is left alone to apply Christ's work, it left the possibility that no one would choose Christ. This is robbing God of his sovereign grace.
And what is your definition of sovereign? I suspect that it is not the dictionary one. Calvinism teaches that Christ's death, burial, and resurrection were insufficient to save mankind.
Ephesians 1 and Romans 9...you can't cherry pick
He solved them în others video...
@@davidberar5905 hardly, he just dismisses all clear passages regarding Divine Election
@@fzr1000981 Do you believe that God ordained all evil în world?
@@fzr1000981 Romans 9 is not a clear pasage for election
@davidberar5905 God foreknew EVERYTHING, that's why this debate is so silly....everything begins and ends with God, including the will to believe
Ephesians 1
Those "Calvinist" presupposition are just fluff that you added. The point is who id the one who appointed them to believe was it God or themselves the text clearly makes the belief limited to those who were appointed, so who appointed them. Calvinist do not add unconditionally appointed before the foundation of the world, we are just dealing with who appointed them here. If God, when, then we can go to Ephisians 1:3-15, but, if its the autonomously decided action though they are in the flesh and can not please God, how did they do that when the Bible is clear they can not.
Also this is literally semi Pelagianism. Scratxh that, he goes full Pelagianian later.
Also also it literally does say they began believing then, "When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed
Notice the and, that means that they believe for the first time then.
Love these short vids dealing with specific passages