Why all the fury? Just like R.C. Sproul - teaching that God loves the whole world is a DANGEROUS heresy. Why??? How?? If you are Calvinist there is no “danger”. The elect WILL be saved. The others WILL go to hell. Puny man can not thwart His will. He could say it’s a heretical teaching I guess if he wanted to. But I fail to see the danger and fuss is God is in control. Calvinists are constantly tripping over the logical gaps in their theology.
Laura Kakoschke The Bible is a dangerous book. The love of God for all is plain to see on every page. The very idea that God is just, that He doesn't want anyone to perish, and all that goes with that flies in the face of Calvanism. God gave man dominion over his creation on earth in Genesis. Man was put was in control. Under authority of course but responsible for his actions. Repeating the the idea that scripture does not say this will not change its plain meaning. To be a Calvinist one had to believe that Scripture is deceitful on so many levels. It would demonstrate God to be anything but Holy according to His own definition. Something I cannot accept.
That's my question too! I don't understand that crazy Calvinism defender. Was he predestined to act like that? He convinced me even more to be against Calvinism.
Jeswinth Gabriel It’s presupposed in that the authors of Scripture believe in choice and Libertarian Free-will is the ability to do others without being forced to act by external causes. Causal Determinism must also be “presupposed” in order for Calvinism to work.
Well done, Leighton. My stomach hurt when I heard the Calvinistic position. I was in two churches that taught this and never understood the love of God. I am no longer a Calvinist. It does not hold up to the love of God and His for all to be saved.
@@ShepherdMinistry I think the Calvinists would say you can't know how much your sin nature influences your ability to interpret Scripture. But if you can't even trust your own mind to think critically about a subject then it is pointless to even try. It is the flip side of R.C. Sproul's Reliability of Sense Perception: you have to have certainty about your own mental autonomy with regard to theology (independently of actually believing it and following it) in order to trust that your philosophy is internally self-consistent and consistent with objective reality.
Free will=culpability=sin guilt = need of a savior which Justifies the existence of Yahoshua Hamashiac/Jesus the Christ because if God is Love and Loves mankind and wishes all to be saved then he would create a way home for autonomous beings, because we are created autonomous we have the ability to choose salvation or to deny the saving grace of God which is simple - TO BELIEVE IN HIM WHO THE FATHER HAS SENT! we believe by hearing we get a choice even though God wishes that none would perish that the 1 lost of 100 would be found and be saved. Calvinism theology denies the need of a savior and pronounces a death sentence for the lost which is a spiritual crime. Repentance and wisdom come quickly for those stuck in bad theology for God desires all to be saved!
I think Dr. Leighton Flowers and Dr. Johnathan Pritchett won this debate if for no other reason then that they conducted themselves in a godly manner. The fruit of the Spirit is evident in their lives. The Calvinist's did not conduct themselves as godly men.
The bible in the 10 commandments says that you shall not bear false witness. This Calvinist is bearing a false witness of God. How full of self, pride and arrogance do you have to be to so forcefully, openly and boldly bear a false witness of an ALMIGHTY GOD??!!!
He's right: I "don't know this god of scripture because [I] CHOOSE the texts that [I] seek to follow." - namely the texts of the ENTIRE REST OF THE BIBLE! Can you imagine standing before God on the day of judgement and pointing your chubby little finger at Him and telling Him that He ordered you to commit every sin you committed in your life? 😱 Seriously: Lord have mercy, please!
These Calvinists literally make the GOSPEL sound like the absolute worst villainous plot in history. I listened to this debate in podcast format and I thought they were just very, very rude. Watching this is something else entirely. Their body language--and body language is about 55% of perceived communication, mind you--is openly hostile, derogatory and capricious. My God, this was horrible to watch. I don't know what spirit they received, but it don't look like the Holy one to me...
David . Greetings Sir. I agree with you. Even though I am no Calvinist, and agree fully with Dr Flowers, I felt very very embarrassed watching this, why? Because of the BAD behaviour of these two men. What would an unbeliever say and think after wstching this? If that's how Christians behave, I want no part of this. So sad. Yes we can disagree very strongly, but we must always behave like gentlemen, and be in the Spirit.
They quoted far more MEN of the world, both Christian an non-Christian alike, than they quoted scripture. This is a THEOLOGY, not an exegesis of the Bible. And this debate by far demonstrates that. I honestly am awed by how well they represented the flaws of hyper-reformed theology.
Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is LOVE, JOY, PEACE, PATIENCE, KINDNESS, GOODNESS, FAITHFULNESS.. Yikes. Well done Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett!!
And here we see the fruits of calvinism gone too far, hostility that is frothing at the mouth and seeking to sow division among the body of Christ. Those two calvinist opponents should be ashamed of themselves.
Absolutely agree. These two are the absolute bottom of the barrel on the Calvinist side. Both a nasty attitude and shoddy arguments. Someone like James White would make a much better opponent.
King4him - Diary of a Holiness Teacher It has been a rare event and maybe even something I’ve never experienced to debate a Calvinist and not experience vitriol And arrogance and ignorance coming from the Calvinist side. Not trying to use such a white brush but that’s just been my experience.
The Calvinists are correct in saying 'these non Calvinists don't know our God' in the sense that their view of God includes persons being doomed from the womb and the non Calvanists does not...
@@josiahsmailes791 they are right in the fact they make their God to be some tyrant who watches those who he caused to be damned from the womb struggle through life without any hope of being anything other than a puny piece of clay without hope whos entire existence is essentially meaningless
I just listen to the second calvinistic speaker and I just can't stop laughing and wondering what in the world is wrong with him? "This according to calvinistic history is heresy", said he, and if this happened then in that history I suppose these two gentlemen (Jonathan and Leighton) would be killed on the spot. What a display of hatred. And this is exactly our point: You don't understand God's love! And if I wanted to imagine how inquisitors looked like, I could well imagine these two calvinistic gentlemen. They would be both judges and executors. There is not a drop of love in them and I am convinced they would have sentenced to death Dr. Flowers without any hesitation.
I conjecture that this is the representative of the same lack of love and charity that was the genesis of John Calvin's vow to have Servetus killed- which he ultimately succeeded in.
I have been immersed in topics related to Calvinism for the past year or so, and I had to take a break because I found myself getting upset that people would believe such foolishness that compromise the holiness of God. It was really frustrating me. I decided to watch this video, and as I listened to these Calvinists, my blood began to boil. They are absolutely arrogant and negative. Additionally, they do not know the Scriptures, and they know very little about presenting arguments and debating.
Its called telling the TRUTH , thats why your hurting. You cant stand it . Listen to the debate between this false teacher leighton flowers and james white and you will see the difference between calvinism and arminiansm , one is biblical and the other is just crap hahhaha
@@cog4808 Hi Bernie, the other is heretical... that doesn't mean we shouldn't love Arminians and not give them the dignity of describing their views as heretical rather than crap.
@@josiahsmailes791 i really belive Leighton Flowers is a false teacher and a devil . There is nothing more wicked in this earth than a false teacher in my view . He must be called out . I do have simpaty for people that listen to Leighton or else i wouldent even bother,,but you are right sometimes i do come across as mean thats because its difficult to love heretics....but i will try
@@cog4808 " There is nothing more wicked in this earth than a false teacher *_in my view"_* there are 64 instances of εὐθὲς in the old testament... you can find most of them in reading about how the children of Israel _also_ pursued what was right in their own eyes. The most condemning element of your comment is that you blame God for your disobedience!
“When God created Adam he did not give him free will. He gave them a command, ‘Do not eat from this tree.’” So God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree but prior to creating them he predestined them to eat from the tree? The logic and brilliance of Calvinism. Somebody see this guy out.
K V, How did the Calvinist know that God did not give Adam and Eve free will? I agree that God did know before creation that Adam and Eve will Fall, But God did not ordained them to disobey Him..... God knew that by their free will they will Fall, but God created them any way because God need man with free will in His Kingdom....
The ability to respectfully disagree with your opponent is a sign of maturity and intellectuality. Therefore, during any debate, dispute, or disagreement always remember that yelling is not a substitute for the intelligent argument. Thus, even if you disagree; do it respectfully! Peace be with you,
I like how he criticizes his opponents for their tradition, rather than using Scripture (after they both used Scripture to prove their beliefs), then he immediately quotes an unbiblical, uninspired text to criticize those who disagree with him.
I thank God for Leighton Flowers ministry to the Calvinists. Calvinists don't even realize they are fighting God and not serving Him. My delight is when I hear of a Calvinist coming to Christ. It gives me hope and encouragement that anyone can be saved if they are truly desiring God. God calls first! Man either responds or rejects! God's call to every man is much louder and forceful than any mans rejection of Him will ever be. That is LOVE! That is Gods desire for all: This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a
@@ImnotaCalvinist All kinds of men would leave out women wouldn't it? A calvinist's love for Calvi-god is like a dead rat floating in your well. It taints everything it touches.
@@truth7416 Amen to that, Amen. I lost a friend over Calvinism, he wants nothing else to do with me because I will not accept Calvinism. We can talk about anything about eschatology , the impassibility of God, Eternal Sonship of Christ etc.. but when it comes to touching the sacred cow of John Calvin he gets so upset and starts insulting me. We were friends for 30years but because I reject Calvinism he no longer wants anything to do with me. Now that to me is cultic brainwashed thinking.
Thanks for uploading this. I believe Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett represented Traditionalism charitably and with integrity. Dr. Hernandez and Dr. Zachariades were both rude and ungracious.
it is the Calvinist that does not believe in the sovereignty of God. For they assume His sovereignty has the same limitations as of a man. For a man can only know about what he plans and forces into fruition. God knows His ways and the ways of men are not hidden from Him. Why is it impossible for the Calvinist to believe that God can know everything He didn't will to come to pass before it comes to pass, but allows it because of free will? Why is it that the Calvinist says that if God knows everything there is no free will? Because deep down they compare the power of God to that of a man. They assume that though God is more powerful than a man, He can only know what he plans and forces into being. This is a limited view of God and is not the God of the Bible.
@@cancer-hq2dp "The one who does not believe in provisionism is condemned already, because he believed that God is sovereign in salvation!" Wait that's not right...
I felt the hatred spewed during this debate infect me, I was enraged by the vile behavior of the two calvinist men. I am myself ashamed of my anger, and words that I often shouted at the TV I was watching this debate on. Good on Dr. Flowers and his colleague, I can only imagine that it must have been difficult to restrain his annoyance, and even outright anger. God please give me the ability to love those who say things I absolutely despise.
I agree, what frustrated me even more than the Calvinists behavior was knowing that they are "Pastors" and don't even affirm the Gospel! Every verse and passage they cited, they perverted and twisted out of context. It saddens me greatly that there are innocent victims who just want to know the Gospel, are being mislead by those fake Christian Calvinists.
TS lost the debate in the beginning when he prayed - "Your will, indeed, will be done, and may be done tonight..."... oops... the determinist just made a theological freudian slip confirming he doesn't think God's will "may be done" without his strong freewill contribution.
Good observation! Calvinists are literally walking talking contradictions... it surprises me that anyone would ever fall for it. You literally have to just accept contradictions and lie to yourself until you begin to believe your lies. "We are sola scriptura"... when they literally twist everything in the Scripture to make scripture submit to their Calvinism.
Do Calvanists actually believe that God forces people to sin? Zachariades literally said God commands people to commit adultery when he wants them to. I dont think Calvinists actually believe that do they?
Most Calvinists will say they don't believe that, but when walking their theology to it's logical conclusions, that's exactly what you come to. Most Calvinists will say these guys are "hyper-Calvinists" and don't rightly represent them, but let's be honest, these guys are consistent Calvinists.
I think James White would say (and I'm trying to be as fair as possible here) that he feels better with the idea that God ordains adultery because it at least then has a sovereign purpose, as God would have a reason for it and would have ordained it according to the council of his will. On free will, adultery is pointless and senseless and he doesn't believe that God would let something like that happen. Summary: For God to allow a senseless rape would be evil, but ordaining it to happen for some higher purpose is not.
If "hard determinism" is true...and every word that comes out of the mouth of Dr. Flowers is predetermined to give God the ultimate glory...why is Dr. Zachariades so angry and his heart so full of bile? If I do come back to Christianity (which I have recently been considering) I hope I never find myself in a camp with James White, Sye Ten Brugencate and Theodore Zachariades. "Love" is what attracts me to the gospel, and I see no love coming from that ilk.
I honestly don't see how anyone can look at Jesus and believe in Calvinism(nevermind the fact that scripture makes it clear that we are responsible for our own choices). When you see Jesus you see the Father. Take a look at Jesus. Come home ♥♥♥
Jordon, My testimony is as I read the gospel and the new testament and saw that Jesus Christ is the Judge that paid in full the sins of the world, and I knew that if I rejected His works. I would have no hope and deserve the punishment of Lake of Fire for rejecting the spotless Lamb the took my sins and the sins of the whole world. The goodness and kindness of God will lead to Godly repentance. Pray that you give up your life to Jesus Christ, and it will never been the same.
I didn't say either of them were hard determinists. But...I listened to James White's "Dividing Line" program for 6 years (without missing a single episode hosted by him). I know his position well. He may not identify as a "hard determinist" but any distinction he may try to draw is purely semantic.
1:09:11 This kind of attitude is disheartening, especially in light of Scripture, which teaches us that ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble’ (James 4:6). It’s concerning to see how often Calvinism, in certain circles, seems to foster not just theological rigor but also a lack of humility and grace in interactions with others, which is entirely contrary to the spirit of Christ. 1:24:44 There is much to be saddened by in this debate. Like I mentioned before, It is often the case that many Calvinists seem to adopt not just the theology but also the combative spirit of John Calvin himself. We are fortunate to live in an era where free speech and the exchange of ideas are valued, something that was not always the case. May the memory of Michael Servetus remind us of the importance of humility and respect in theological discourse. That being said, Calvinists often claim to rely solely on Scripture alone, yet consider Jesus’ own words in John 5:40: “Yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” The original Greek word used here is ‘Thelete’, meaning ‘you are willing’ or ‘you desire,’ which conveys the idea of willingness or refusal. Essentially, Jesus is saying that the people are choosing not to come to Him for life. Whether it’s translated as ‘you refuse to come’ or ‘you will not come,’ the core meaning remains the same: they are willfully rejecting His offer of life.
As a Calvinist, I feel compelled to apologize and reject the attitude and implications of these men who have now become a festering sore on the face of Calvinism
So God made the devil fall and temp Jesus Christ just too prove God can't temp himself? God made a grown man rape a child, now an adult, so it's his fault? God put the sinful temptations, anger, last, greedy in our hearts? God's irresistible grace is so powerful even if free will is a thing I can't choose to stay away and he can force himself on me against MY FREE WILL! I am so dead in my sins I could never see, speak, hear God? Though when Adam and Eve ate of the tree and were DEAD could still hear God, speak too God, have relationship with God. Watch Dr. Norman Giesler as I respectfully know without a doubt you will never be able to explain away any of the questions I just brought up without creating a false God, a moral monster who forces people too sin only too then damn them too hell for all eternity. That's not the God of the Bible.
Irenaeus wrote a book called Against Heresies back in the early church to combat heresies of his day. In his 4th book chapter 37-39 he combats a heretical believe that we have no free will.
You did such a good job, brothers Johnathan and Leighton! It was so much better the second time without the weird audio happenings and the missing Q&A and closing statements that were in the temporary UA-cam video. I LOVED your closing statement, L.F.! Would that every Calvinist would take the time to listen really closely and THINK about your opening statements as well as all the rest. This debate was a clear win for the Free Willies over the Robotics, 10 - 0, in content and character.
@lorimayberry3534, you nailed it. Those two Calvinists weren't interested in debating as much as they just wanted to pummel anyone who didn't agree with them. Both of them came across to me as angry and vindictive. I don't think they ever heard a word of Flowers or Pritchett.
@@Search4godstruthhomestead Calvinism is the Gospel and even though the attitude of some Calvinists is not the right one, what they said was the truth. By the way, not even all who call themselves Calvinists know what Calvinism (=the true Gospel) is and not all will be saved. The way is very narrow.
@@Search4godstruthhomestead Yea, that was very evil to say about God, that is making God the author of sin. I would also go onto to say, that he is calling evil good, because in his mind, it was the goodness of God, that made those people commit adultery, not only those poeple, but also made that transgender not only be transgender, but to also shoot up that Christian school, and kill those kids. That is very evil to do, to attribute those evil acts to God.
I’m sorry, did he just say God “orders those to commit adultery when He wants to” at the 44:11? Last I checked, number 7 of the 10 commandments was “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. Exodus 20:14. Is it me, or do these Reformed debaters seem to harp so much on God’s Sovereignty to the neglect of harping on God’s character? Just because God CAN order someone to do a heinous act of evil because He’s sovereign, doesn’t mean He will. Why? Because doing so would contradict His character, His nature, and His law. Which is absolute.
Debate was a shame, but I really appreciate the comments. Thank you, Calvinist brothers and sisters, for showing the grace that the men in the video did not. I do not share your soteriological views, but appreciate you, and thank you for showing the same mercy Jesus has shown to us all.
Wow I have never heard so much twisting of the scriptures I have noticed that you are not a brother in Christ if you are not a calvinist. Only calvinist are saved 😨 to be called a brother ..
boutique imagery Hey! Me too!!! Clue - when Todd once mentioned that the torment of the burning sinners from the pit of hell will bring God glory... somehow... in a way we can’t understand...
Brothers, thank you. Thank you for remaining calm during Dr Zachariades outbursts, as well as his demeanor. I honestly didn't see a single defense for that of determinism, and merely quoting Scripture does not necessitate an answer. Dr Flowers, and Dr Pritchett, it is days like these that I thank you, and others, for providing the Christian audience, with a reading of Scripture that is not only a two-sided debate (Calvinism vs Armininianism), but that there is a solid viewpoint that holds up against the scrutiny of Scripture. Praise God for your ministries, and praise the Lord for these teachings being able to be spread to all.
Darryl Le Roux I find it very annoying that Calvinists always refer to anyone who believes in Salvific Free-Will as an Arminian, when both Flowers and Prichett are Baptist Traditionalists.
Oh my word. Those calvanists are a disgrace. I downloaded this to my phone to listen to while tiling a customer's kitchen floor. The hostility coming from the calvanists made me literally put down my trowel and pick up the phone to see who these guys were. I simply could not beleive the hostility. And this is supposed to be a Christian debate?? I hope no atheists watched this as they would be laughing there heads off. Sad.
I’m a Calvinist and I’m embarrassed by these guys. They are arguing a hyper Calvinist position and on top of that it’s done with absolutely no love. Please go watch debates with James White and Michael Brown, Olson and Horton, and the one with Bruce Ware and Schreiner for a more accurate representation of the Calvinist position and they are done with charity and respect. These guys here need to be rebuked for their hostility and lack of a willingness to reason.
Troy Smallwood They’re not carefully presenting the position. It’s coming across as hyper Calvinist because they are not defining terms carefully. Their demeanor makes it worse.
Jordan Hartley: As a non-Calvinist, I appreciate you recognizing the lack of Godly love and respect here. I agree that all Calvinist/Reformed don't behave like these two. I watch a lot of these and I was shocked and am left feeling hurt and disappointed. God bless you brother.
Jordan Hartley I'm also a reformed believer and am also disgusted by these guys. They do sound like hyper calvinists to be honest. They're unwilling to reason, unwilling to define terms, unwilling to call the opposing side brothers, their boastful, and haughty. Speaking of the doctrines of Grace without showing it.
I would really like it if you could expound upon this assertion. (" however they took the system to the ultimate logical conclusion") What logical conclusion is that, exactly?
I know better Calvinist scholarship is easy to find... *However* The arguments these guys were throwing around are the same pat arguments and assumptions I've heard from many Calvinist's I've engaged with. So while they presented their arguments in a very repulsive manner, the content of their arguments is just your routine daily dose of standard Calvinist answers you'll hear whenever you discuss soteriology with Calvinists. Again,I know better arguments and deeper arguments exist. But I'm also saying what Sonny/ Theodore presented was, in some sense, just an exaggerated version of routine Calvinist lines of argumentation. Lot's of recycled Calvinist clichés and proof-texts.
Great commentary!! Thank you Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett for a strong argument! I appreciate your wisdom and composure while delivering your stance on free- will- during this debate. I am in total agreement with you both.
If hard determinism is true, then if I were to go beat up my neighbor, after every punch I should say "this is for God's glory" "This is for God's glory" "This is for God's glory". Then when he is reeling in pain, I kick him some more and say "For God is the glory". Then I steal is wallet, and say "For God is the glory". Okay, now back to my real self, how is this "glorifying" God? And Calvinist who hold to hard determinism wonder why I have a problem with this???
If hard determinism is true, then you wouldn't be responsible for any of your actions. But if soft determinism is true, then you WOULD be responsible for your actions. Your evil actions could then bring glory to God in one of two ways. God would either be glorified in the demonstration of his mercy by forgiving you, or he would be glorified in the demonstration of his wrath by punishing you. So either way, God would be glorified by your evil actions.
Sam there is no such thing as soft and hard determinism only determinism. Saying that determinism is soft and hard is spin doctoring the actual meaning of determinism.
@@philochristos If hard determinism is true, then you wouldn't be responsible for any of your actions. Yeah, you would, because you acted according to your desires, it wouldn't matter if God put the desires into you, either.
@@jahiddle Neither soft nor hard determinism spin doctors the actual meaning of determinism. They are both determinism. Determinism is just the view that antecedent conditions are sufficient to bring about an effect or choice. The difference between hard and soft determinism is in what is doing the determining. In hard determinism, the immediate cause of your actions is blind mechanical forces, initial physical conditions plus the laws of nature, etc. In soft determinism the immediate cause of your actions is your own desires, motives, intentions, etc. That makes a big difference when it comes to to morality. It also makes a difference when it comes to rationality--whether the immediate cause of your belief is merely the motion of molecules in your brain or antecedent reasons, perceptions, etc.
He lost when he said that "it's not sin for God to ordain sin". This is in direct contradiction to the Scriptures where we see that God is not the author of sin.
Author and ordaining are different things. Author means creator whereas ordain means allows. If God didn’t ordain things to come pass that were evil then the cross wouldn’t have happened
This Zachariades guy is a character. I was actually laughing out loud during his first speech. I'm sure even most Calvinists would be embarrassed by him.
I know what you mean, but I wasn't laughing at all. I think he needs to repent of what he said, both in his opening statement and later, when he made a point of retracting how he called his opponents brothers. Shameful, shameful behavior.
When Leighton Flowers mentions Deuteronomy 30:19 it reminded me of a time a few years ago that I quoted that verse to my hyper-Calvinist and he said that Deuteronomy 30:19 was written to the Israelites only. He completely missed the point. In Calvinism everything even the Israelites did or would do was preordained by God. So it's still a disingenuous offer, no matter whom it was written to. But instead of getting into a fight I decided to move on and went to the book of Joshua where he says choose this day whom you will serve. My hyper-Calvinist reminded me that this too was only written to the Israelites. So I went to the book of Revelations chapter 3 verse 20. It says ... Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To this my hyper-Calvinist said that it was only written to the early church. That's how he dismissed every verse that clearly says that it is man's not God's choice. So I took my bible and threw it in the garbage and said then I don't need any of that. You see Matthew, Mark and John was most likely written to Jews. Luke and Acts was written to Theophilus. Romans was written to Rome. First and second Corinthians was written to Corinth. Etc. You get my point. Don't worry throwing the bible away was only an illustration for this Calvinist to see. I don't believe that it's only written for people long ago and far away, so I took it out, wiped it clean because it is my lifeline. The Calvinist says that a man can freely choose his own bride via his free will but Christ can't choose his bride via his own free will? Does this Calvinist really not have a brain? Seriously the man may freely choose his own bride but SHE MUST SAY YES or the wedding will NEVER happen!!! So yes, Jesus can choose his own bride but he waits for her to receive him and say YES to him.
Holy smokes…this was crazy. I completely agree with everything Dr. Flowers presented. So thankful. First time I hear someone compare Pharoah’s taking the straw away from the Israelites and punishing them for not performing to how God is presented in Calvinism. I came to that conclusion last year reading through the OT again. Even though I completely disagree with the determinists here, I do not know any who behave the way they did. It was sad to see/hear. I was a Calvinist for 17 years but revisited it 2 1/2 years ago and came away with a very different view. It seemed like the Calvinists in this debate did a lot of yelling, philosophical arguments, and didn’t listen very well to the other side. They present things in a way that represents the other side extremely incorrectly. It was a little annoying because it’s immature. They kept saying we cannot save ourselves…yes! We agree! Listen! Lol Anyway, enjoyed watching.
You say you were a Calvinist for 17 years yet in all of your videos you get every petal in that little tulip flower wrong. You show no knowledge of the biblical version of reformed theology. You may have gone to a reformed church but you apparently learned very little of what they believe or they weren't biblically correct.
@@AlanaL3 @AlanaL3 sure, at around the 13 minute mark of this video...."In and out of Calvinism Part 2 Compatibalism & T; Total Depravity!" you refer to total depravity and imply that it says "man is incapable of seeking God...". That is the typical misrepresentation of Calvinist thought on Total Depravity. The Bible doesn't teach that and neither does the T in tulip. The Bible teaches that man does not want to seek God and not that he is incapable of doing it. We are absolutely capable of doing it. It says that he will never seek God because his will is in bondage. We do what we want at the time we are given a choice. When given the choice we will ALWAYS (Total Depravity) choose to run from God. The Bible teaches, and we believe, that when man is awakened from spiritual death by the Holy Spirit then we run TO God by our own will. Do you see the difference? In your videos you give the standard anti-Calvinist arguments that those like Leighton Flowers and the guy BTF guy give. You paint with a very broad brush just like them. You rattle off a long list of objections yet rarely will you delve into a single point and flush out the exegetical meaning of a verse. An example is when you say something about the word "all" or "all men" or "all kinds of men" and off-handedly dismiss the entire package without addressing them one by one. If you sat down with your Bible and exegeted it like you're supposed to, reading from the beginning to the end, you'd see what I'm saying. Here's my broad brush......My guess is you lived your Calvinist life the same way. I'm guessing you just bought into what they said without doing your own studying. And like me it was difficult to accept that man didn't have libertarian free will. So when the day came that your friend showed you a way out you jumped at it and jumped on the synergistic bandwagon. I say this in love.....do your own studying. If you have the faith in the Bible that you profess to have and think that it is to be taken for what it says you'd have to put everything aside that says things one way or the other. You have to do your own study. And if you did you would come to the conclusion that God's sovereignty trumps man's choices.
@@bucky91361 So you believe a person whose will is in bondage will never seek God but is capable of seeking God? Do you really believe a person can seek God without God drawing them? You don't sound like a Calvinist. And you believe God's sovereignty trumps man's choices but you still believe a person whose will is in bondage can seek God but won't?
I was reading in a Clarence Larken book this week that we are free moral agents, NOT because we can choose between good and evil, BUT, because we can choose between our will and God's will. I thought that was a fresh take
As a Calvinist I am ashamed at the two individuals debating my side of the issue. One even retracted calling his opponents “brothers”! If you believe you are arguing a position that Paul would you should strive to do it firmly but also in love. A little humility goes a long way and these men did not appear to have any whatsoever.
I watched about half of the debate until my stomach was tied up in knots over the behavior of the Calvinist. After the nausea passed I knew I needed to weigh in on the shameful misuse of power behind the mic. Shameful action on the Calvinist part. Reminds me of the Democratic Party. When was the line drawn on Christianity? These men are to reflect Jesus? I know many Calvinist whom I have great respect. I don’t believe some wrong doctrine will keep them out of heaven. Example of love for Christ is John Piper. I may not agree with his doctrine but clearly I have never encountered the hostility displayed by the Angry Calvinist in this debate. I think we need to do what the Bible teaches about every man working out their own salvation with fear and trembling. Getting loud and nasty does not make you right. Where was the love your neighbor as yourself in this mess. Do I believe in backsliding? I do now after watching the murder in the eyes and hearing murder in the voice of the Calvinist. Shameful! Perhaps they weren’t chosen after all. Perhaps they are predestined to, well, not heaven.
Is the god of calvinist same as biblical God, the maker of sin? that doesnt love all? Creates man and put them in hell for "his glory" and his good pleasure. The GOD of the Bible will say NO THAT IS NOT ME..
You missed the cross examination? Flowers and Pritchett, had mostly philosophical arguments, and the "Calvinist" had way more scripture.. re watch the debate without a biased, its for scripture sake not tradition.
You did not watch the whole thing... "Lacked coherent arguments" what part is that.. please make a reference in the video. In the cross exam they were more biblical and straightforward then Flowers & Pritchett.
Lol, I know what I watched. The Bible is so clear on this topic children can learn the truth on their own. Read Jeremiah 18 and Ezekiel 18 then get back to me. If you still think Calvinism is accurate I can't help you.
I did not argue for Calvinism, I simply stated what part of the video was incoherent.. You mentioned the first Calvinist got up and quoting from a non biblical book, yes he did, but then in the cross examination the two Calvinist were way more biblical. I have read both of those books and those verses. Jeremiah 18 The Potter and the Clay and Ezekiel 18 is the Soul Who Sins Shall Die.. What point are you trying to make?
I read the warning too late.. Now i need to go to hospital because of the second calvinist destroyed my hearing, that i might not listen to his non-existent arguments.
I'm so appreciative the teachings of Dr. Flowers and others alike that stand up against the popularism. I came from a hyper-charismatic background of which I followed for many years as a hypocritical pretender. About 4 years ago, God showed me my true depravity and my need for TRUE faith and repentance. And though I fought against it, I slowly began to agree more and more with the Calvinistic doctrines, as they were the only ones who seemed to be taking faith seriously in this post-modern lukewarm country. But after finding Dr. Flowers teachings, and others like David Bercot, I realized that these verses can be interpreted in both the Calvinist as well as the traditionalist point of view. And when you realize that the Ante-Nicene church fathers did not follow Calvinism, it's very hard to agree with that interpretation. Thank you Dr. Flowers for all that you do, and I would encourage anyone else to make sure and challenge your beliefs. Eat, sleep, and live the Bible, and look at what the early church (0-300 A.D.) believed, and don't just follow what's 'popular' at the moment.
Happy for you. It's encouraging to hear you avoided the cult. It's what I will call the Calvinist "Schizophrenia double mind syndrome." The truth is this: God initiates the knowledge of His existence to every man! God convicts every man of his emptiness and need something more in their life! God opens the eyes of every man at some point in their lives where they: Make their decision to follow Gods leading! Or make their decision reject Gods leading! Its foolishness and heresy to follow the devils agent John Calvin who said : "God arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death and are to glorify him by their destruction.( John Calvin Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6) This is a doctrine of demons and all who follow this lie are not of God but they are of their father father of lies! This is Gods truth to mankind. 1 Timothy 2 : 3-6 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. Those that don't see this, can't see this, because they have blinded themselves and will not see. There isn't one thing attractive about the Calvinist god. Hate, destruction, false salvation by lottery, pleasure in creating and forcing sin on the World. Calvin's god actually condemns people to false salvation. It is forcing you against your will and then making you think it was your idea. That is the description of rape. Calvinists convinced of their lottery win, then go out and teach people that they and everyone else have no free will! How could it be your idea?? It sounds like organized insanity when you are not in the Calvinist organizations. TRUTH IN LOVE
Ignoring the fact that you're talking about extra-Biblical sources, this is a flawed understanding. First, of course the ante-Nicene fathers didn't follow Calvinism. Calvin followed Scripture and the ante-Nicene fathers views. It didn't exist. Second, the ante-Nicene fathers believed that free will existed within God's will and wasn't truly autonomous. Very much what Calvin, Luther, and reformed theology affirm, while the modern church affirms the humanist perspective that we choose without any outside influence based on our own rationality or emotions. Man cannot rationally choose God, regardless of how wise he is, for he is foolish and wicked in comparison to God.
This man really said, "God orders men to commit adultery." Yet in some mysterious way, God is not responsible for what he's responsible for 🤔. A = not A ✍️✍️
@ 1:28:04 the calvinist lies when quoting and explaining Eph 1. He says "God's power makes us believe" from that passage. Eph 1:19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power 20 which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places," The "power" is not descriptive of our faith, it is certainly not saying God gave us faith by His "power" as the calvinist just said. "Power" is describing the event of Christ being raised from the dead. Calvinists consistently use isolated texts and create an argument from calvinism, not the text itself.
The Calvinists sure seem angry. When we are sure of something and in dialogue with others who disagree yet are willing to listen why would we lose our tempers like this? If faith is a gift of the Spirit then it is something the recipient must choose to receive. A gift is never forced. It is freely received. A good God does not decree evil.
Calling the hellish blasphemies of Calvinism "the doctrines of grace" is not only a lie, but it is itself blasphemous, as Calvinism is nothing but pagan fatalism dressed up in Christianese.
Question for Calvies, how is it just or fair for a Creator to bring a creature into the world with a nature that is wicked to the point it can only do evil and for that Creator to command and expect that creature to do good when he knows they do not have the freedom or ability to do so and then to torment it forever when it doesn't comply? That sounds like the prime example if hatred and evil. Without free will, what makes us any different from animals that are driven by instinct? Why would God hold us to a different standard and expect us to do something we can't do? If that is how the creator rolls then everyone is not guilty of sin but innocent because they don't have a choice in the matter. There can be no accountability.
I have asked a similar question to multiple Calvinists and their answer is usually Romans 9, that God can do whatever He wants to. This is the height of insanity. A holy and just God doing such an unjust thing? Ridiculous in my opinion. Many Calvinists are so bent on defending their theology that they in turn make such ridiculous claims about our holy and just God. They prove their allegiance to be truly to their theology instead of God and His clear word. Sad.
"Question for Calvies, how is it just or fair for a Creator to bring a creature into the world with a nature that is wicked to the point it can only do evil and for that Creator to command and expect that creature to do good when he knows they do not have the freedom or ability to do so and then to torment it forever when it doesn't comply? " Actually your question works equally against the classical Arminian position because Arminianism, too, affirms total depravity (sans prevenient grace), or in other words, Arminianism affirms that God brings creatures into the world that are wicked and can only do evil, then asks them to do good. The only difference between Arminianism and Calvinism at this point is that in Arminianism God gives sinners Prevenient Grace which only re-enables them to respond positively to the gospel. But both systems believe men are evil and cannot do any spiritual good. Remember, our righteousness is as filthy rags in God's sight. This is true for both Calvinism and Arminianism. It is not exclusive to Calvinism. As for free will, Calvinists do not deny that man has a will. They simply say it is not truly free, but enslaved to sin. Calvinists affirm you can make decisions. Calvinists affirm you can choose anything you want. *The key is the word "want"*. The Calvinist position is that without regeneration, a person will never want Christ, thus, will never choose Christ. To reiterate, Calvinists believe that since man is made in God's image, man's will works the same as God's will. God only chooses things according to His nature. He is just, holy, righteous, etc. So God only chooses those things. It is impossible for God to choose unjust things, for example. In like manner, man only chooses things according to his nature (just like God does). Man's (fallen, unregenerate) nature is hostile to God and enslaved to sin and finds Christ foolish, thus, man chooses accordingly. In other words, man will never choose spiritually good things (Such as obeying the gospel and repenting and trusting in Jesus) because those things are contrary to his (fallen) nature. That is why in Calvinism man must first be regenerated before those things are possible (and inevitable) In other words, since man chooses according to his nature, his nature must first be changed. So both Arminianism and Calvinism affirm that sinners are hostile to the gospel and will reject it without some kind of divine intervention. For Arminianism, that intervention is "Prevenient Grace" which re-enables man to choose spiritually good things. For Calvinism, that intervention is regeneration itself. Both systems affirm that God must intervene to make it possible for men to believe the gospel. The two systems simply disagree on what that "thing" is. Hope this helped in some small way. Blessings friend
Excellent questions! I answered the overarching question and then broke down the others. The overall question asked has a fundamental flaw. You are looking from eternity past and fastforwarding to the end of that person's life and there is no mention of their life and the process which lead them to hell. God creates us and knows our innermost being and thoughts. (Psalm 139:2). We fell in sin when Adam ate. So we are all born evil. The person evil today may repent with their dying breath like the thief on the cross. Don't count anyone out in this life. God saved a murderer like Paul, a coward like Peter, and an adulterer like David. He can save you, your family and your neighbors. Anyone who puts their faith in Jesus will find Him to be a perfect Savior. John 3:16. 1. How is it fair? If it was fair God would bring his wrath to bear right now and send everyone to hell. That is what we deserve., (John 3:36). Yet he is showing patience for those He has called to choose him. 1 Timothy 2:4. 2. How can a Creator expect an evil person to do good? I am going to add this descriptor of, "doing good": repent from sin and be saved through Jesus. John 3:16, 1 John 1:9. An evil person cannot do good unless they change their heart. They hear this command by God to do good, and decide to love God. In one sense we do make a choice. Thst is real. What happens behind the scenes is that God has taken a heart of stone and replaced it with a heart of flesh. ( Ezekiel 36:26). He has drawn that person, John 6:44, and amazingly this happened before the creation of the world. Ephesians 1:4. Question now is, are you one of God's elect children? 3. Without free will what makes us different from animals,? God has given us spirits. Animals do not have a spirit. We have a will, but it is not free, it is one enslaved to our own sinful desires. Romans 6:6. We all start out not wanting God. Animals do not sin or rebel. They may kill humans or other animals but this is because of the corruption by a human's choice: Adam. 4. Why would God hold us to a different standard and expect us to do things we cannot do? We cannot, because we do not want too. We despise God's standard. We love ourselves and our sin. Yet God continues to proclaim his standard to each new person born in time. We do not know who will respond to that standard, or how long they will take in responding.
I'm honestly disappointed with the anger from the Calvinists. Does God tell us to yell at people that disagree with you? In their opening arguments, it's clear they didn't even listen to either of you. They just listed off canned arguments against a doctrine they fear, as it means they are responsible in thought, word and deed.
Apparently it pleases God to make a world of puppets that He can cause to do evil, and somehow not be culpable for that evil. How can you have _real_ love without *REAL* choice? Love requires choice, it requires self sacrifice. If you turn God into a dualistic God that controls both sides of the Chess board, then he risked nothing by becoming man.
I have a brother who is calvinist and I’ve noticed that he is always angry and judgmental we always get into arguments and he will get mean and he even said our mother was in Hell and she is not my mother loved God and I believe she is with Jesus she loved Jesus and she loved singing praises to God
My goodness The two representing the Calvinist view had to have been the most rude, obnoxious so called Christians I've had ever seen! Talk about "noisy gongs"
@Carl Peterson, agreed. The reformed side said that the Confession they were holding to was their idea of faith and such. Yet when the Confession affirms human free will, they avoid it and say they trust Scripture!
Dr. Flowers, Just having listened to your opening speech so far........BRAVO! Yes!...just because some things were determined, that, by no means, means all things were/ are determined. You are just getting better and better!
Joe, I believe Leighton stated that free will has parameters. Besides, even if I didn't choose what country or state I was born in, my parents and their parents did. Jn 1 shows the dichotomy between the spiritual birth and the birth brought about by "the will of man", which is the physical birth. I hope you realize that your whole reasoning is based on pure Philosophy. Let's take the argument to the scriptures. The Bible shows that Israel was blinded so that salvation could go the the Gentiles. Israel was given a spirit of stupor to bring about the cross. Besides the fact that God doesn't need to send a spirit of stupor to "totally depraved" people, only Israel was ever said to be blinded and that, temporary. Gentiles were never said to be blinded. You and all other calvies take the extremely few blindness and "predestination" verses, which in context, pertain to Israel, and you erroneously apply them to the nations. In the new covenant, God is "no respecter of persons". This is said to be the case four times in Acts 10 34, Romans 2 11, Eph 6 9, and Col 3 25. What does "no respecter of persons mean to you? This is in contrast to the one, old testament nation of Israel being favored among nations by God. But what were they "chosen" for....so that every Jew would be saved? No. The baptist told them that just because they were Abraham's children didn't mean much. Paul states that only if you are Christ's are you then children of Abraham and heirs according to the promise. Israel was chosen to bring forth the Messiah and only those who had the faith of Abraham in her history were saved. Then, certain prophets and apostles were "chosen" within Israel to do certain things of great importance. Once the lamb was slain and the history recorded, whosoever may come and freely drink. Salvation is by faith....not by predestination. God is now no respecter of persons.....exactly the opposite of what calvinism teaches. Peace
I just watched this through for the first time. I have been in the Calvinistic camp all my life. The Calvinist team came across as smug, unloving and bullish. It was embarrassing. It seemed they came with their mantra, and just kept repeating it. Sad. They agreed to the debate, submitted the 1689 LBCF as their backup, but then showed up on stage saying they believed in no form of free will. So what was the point of them being there? Left a bad taste in my mouth. Sadly, this smugness seems to be too common in the camp. Earnestly contend, yes. But in love.
@@ShepherdMinistry sure we can. Jesus tells us: “And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil.” John 3:19 NASB2020 In Romans 1 man that suppresses the truth become darkened: “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasonings, and their senseless hearts were darkened.” Romans 1:21 Also in Romans 2 it’s presented that different people are pursuing different things: “to those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, He will give eternal life; but to those who are self-serving and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, He will give wrath and indignation.” Romans 2:7-8 Not to mention the countless co traits between the righteous and the foolish in provers and psalms. Last I think this scripture can speak to that question as well: “For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even as I weep, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who have their minds on earthly things.” Philippians 3:18-19 All we know for sure is that faith comes by hearing the word of God and with the heart an believes. The rest is mysterious. We cannot pretend to understand fully, or draw concrete conclusions that are extra biblical. “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” Romans 10:17 “for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.” Romans 10:10 Amen!!
As an unashamed, full-fledged Calvinist, these Calvinists in the debate did a real disservice to everyone: Fellow Arminian Christians, Calvinism itself, people who are neutral and not sure which category they fit into, people who are neither, and finally and especially the gospel.
dr theodore zacharaides started off well with a great prayer but when he was done launches off like his colleague yelling and screaming like a carnival barker. wthell??? calm down make your case i love debates but the 2 Calvinists think if they yell louder they won the debate. NOT !!!
Wow! “I retract...” calling them brothers!? Maybe the Lord will decree more patience, gentleness, and kindness next time. -you know the Fruit of the Spirit.
I agree that the retraction of having called the brothers was very uncharitable, but it was capped off by calling then heretics. I guess they were predetermined to act the way they did, couldn’t help themselves since they don’t have free will.
The second Calvinist, shows no sign whatsoever of being born again. Watching how he behaves---the arrogance, the aggression, the abominable spirit, sounds a lot like Cain in 1 John 3:12...he is trying to hide behind his knowledge. HE can't even call the other two men brothers in Christ---that is not good.
In his effort to use Isaiah 46 to affirm that God "determines the end from the beginning," Dr. Zachariades misquotes scripture. Here is the context: Isiah 46:10 AMP "Declaring the end and the result from the beginning, And from ancient times the things which have not [yet] been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will do all that pleases Me and fulfills My purpose,’" The scripture uses the word "declare" not "determine" as he suggests. The scripture proves that God foreknows and has declared that knowledge since ancient times. There is insufficient evidence stating that He determines all of our choices (especially our decision to give our lives to Jesus). The scripture also affirms that God is at work in the world "establishing His purpose." Personally, I believe the scripture affirms God works to free us from the bondage of slavery through Jesus. And in so doing brings glory to Himself, drawing all of us, new Christian and old, to Himself. He deepens our understanding of the holistic impact of the gospel, enabling us to build a better future for ourselves and those around us, proving the power of and sharing the Gospel with those in our lives. Edit: posted this comment before Dr. Flowers astutely pointed this out. You gotta love the guy.
The two calvinist made fools of themselves. I am still researching the topic, and have not definitively picked a side. But these guys were an embarrassment to reform theology.
"Free will cannot save you" sonny says in his closing remarks. this very statement shows that after clear and profound explanation of the position he (and Calvinists like him) JUST DONT GET IT. JESUS saves. We never said we save ourselves by our free will. This is why the debate will never end.
And please take note that Dr. Zachariades does not view Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett as “brothers”...He views both as reprobates....The hostility displayed by both representatives of Calvinism is a necessary result of their fatalistic viewpoint...
‘Notice he said feel free to come.’ That gave me a good laugh. I cannot understand why Calvinists are so blind to this. Dr. Flowers you and your partner laid this out so simply and so well, it boggles my mind that Calvinists can’t see it. Is it just actively not listening?
Their problem is if they accept they are wrong on one single point their entire theology falls apart, that is what causes their fingers in the ears "la-la-la-la-la" cult behavior.
John Q. Public I’ve read some of your posts and you’re a lot smarter than I am, so here’s my question; if I were a Calvinist and I was saved by grace through Jesus, I would see a huge contradiction between the love of God who sacrificed Himself for me vs. The hard determinism of my Calvinist doctrine. I would seek an answer to this, listening to people like Dr. Flowers in order to try and find some way that is more biblically sound than my current doctrine to not have to believe in this hard determinism. But I don’t see from any Calvinists even an acknowledgement of that contradiction, let alone try to resolve it. Any thoughts on why that is and how to break through that?
Jay Gee, calvinism is not just a doctrine derived from a hermeneutic. Calvinism is itself a hermeneutic. It's a biblical overview that skews everything. They've been brainwashed to think that they are defending God's glory and that they have a righteous concern, sometimes anger, for God's sake. The consistent calvinist also believes that anyone who is not a calvinist isn't even saved. Why would God predestine His "elect" to have a false doctrine? In their mind, whether they realize this or not, He wouldn't. Therefore heretics are not saved. Brainwashing is extremely difficult to break and they don't believe they hold to a contradiction in the first place.
Hi Jay, can you please explain the contradiction? (Calvinist here). I guess I'm not understanding your question. I fail to see the logical inconsistency between these two things: 1) Christ died for me 2) hard determinism
Starting at 34:14...what an awful analogy. Yes, man chooses his own wife (in most countries), but the woman has free will, as well. She chooses to marry hm or not (in most countries).
I encourage anyone to write down the arguments used in the q & a session and you will Find out the calvinists could not logically answer the arguments Leighton and Jonathan used.
Says Freewill is a myth,yet gets angry if you reject Calvinism as if you have a choice.
Bee Boy haha ... good one
Why all the fury?
Just like R.C. Sproul - teaching that God loves the whole world is a DANGEROUS heresy. Why??? How??
If you are Calvinist there is no “danger”. The elect WILL be saved. The others WILL go to hell. Puny man can not thwart His will.
He could say it’s a heretical teaching I guess if he wanted to. But I fail to see the danger and fuss is God is in control.
Calvinists are constantly tripping over the logical gaps in their theology.
Laura Kakoschke The Bible is a dangerous book. The love of God for all is plain to see on every page.
The very idea that God is just, that He doesn't want anyone to perish, and all that goes with that flies in the face of Calvanism. God gave man dominion over his creation on earth in Genesis. Man was put was in control. Under authority of course but responsible for his actions.
Repeating the the idea that scripture does not say this will not change its plain meaning.
To be a Calvinist one had to believe that Scripture is deceitful on so many levels. It would demonstrate God to be anything but Holy according to His own definition. Something I cannot accept.
That's my question too! I don't understand that crazy Calvinism defender. Was he predestined to act like that? He convinced me even more to be against Calvinism.
We believe in compatabilist free will.
But Libertarian free will = arbitrary choice. Then why are you complaining about anything?
It's interesting how God pre-determined these Calvinists to hopelessly lose this debate and expose their manmade philosophy for what it is...
David Tinson best comment yet!😂
"Man made" Leighton said that free will is assumed in the Bible. That seems man made to me.
Jeswinth Gabriel It’s presupposed in that the authors of Scripture believe in choice and Libertarian Free-will is the ability to do others without being forced to act by external causes. Causal Determinism must also be “presupposed” in order for Calvinism to work.
@@luvminiwheaties Calvinisim is trash
@@luvminiwheaties thankfully I'm not Armenian
Well done, Leighton. My stomach hurt when I heard the Calvinistic position. I was in two churches that taught this and never understood the love of God. I am no longer a Calvinist. It does not hold up to the love of God and His for all to be saved.
When Dr. Zachariades apologized for calling his opponents "brothers" I almost fell out of my chair.
And he believes God determined him to do that
I know is right? Simply stunning.
For everyone wondering about the time* 1:09:05, is the moment when he said it.
The fact that we can even debate over whether free will is real or not is proof that we have free will.
I don’t think the debate should be if we have free will but instead if our free will is influenced by our desires.
@@ShepherdMinistry I think the Calvinists would say you can't know how much your sin nature influences your ability to interpret Scripture. But if you can't even trust your own mind to think critically about a subject then it is pointless to even try. It is the flip side of R.C. Sproul's Reliability of Sense Perception: you have to have certainty about your own mental autonomy with regard to theology (independently of actually believing it and following it) in order to trust that your philosophy is internally self-consistent and consistent with objective reality.
It's not an issue of if we have free will, but rather does the Word of God affirm man's free will, explicitly.
@@paulaten7414 Holy Scripture makes it crystal clear about God offering us free will.
Free will=culpability=sin guilt = need of a savior which
Justifies the existence of Yahoshua Hamashiac/Jesus the Christ because if God is Love and Loves mankind and wishes all to be saved then he would create a way home for autonomous beings, because we are created autonomous we have the ability to choose salvation or to deny the saving grace of God which is simple - TO BELIEVE IN HIM WHO THE FATHER HAS SENT!
we believe by hearing we get a choice even though God wishes that none would perish that the 1 lost of 100 would be found and be saved.
Calvinism theology denies the need of a savior and pronounces a death sentence for the lost which is a spiritual crime.
Repentance and wisdom come quickly for those stuck in bad theology for God desires all to be saved!
I think Dr. Leighton Flowers and Dr. Johnathan Pritchett won this debate if for no other reason then that they conducted themselves in a godly manner. The fruit of the Spirit is evident in their lives. The Calvinist's did not conduct themselves as godly men.
lol, you're funny
The Calvinists are basically Satan worshipers pretending to be Christians.
@@josiahsmailes791 what's funny about Godly fruit?
Did the second Calvinist speaker really say that God orders men to commit adultery (44:15)!
Yikes. I wouldn’t want to defend that argument.
Then he follows up with “choose”
The bible in the 10 commandments says that you shall not bear false witness. This Calvinist is bearing a false witness of God. How full of self, pride and arrogance do you have to be to so forcefully, openly and boldly bear a false witness of an ALMIGHTY GOD??!!!
He's right: I "don't know this god of scripture because [I] CHOOSE the texts that [I] seek to follow." - namely the texts of the ENTIRE REST OF THE BIBLE!
Can you imagine standing before God on the day of judgement and pointing your chubby little finger at Him and telling Him that He ordered you to commit every sin you committed in your life? 😱 Seriously: Lord have mercy, please!
Yeah, I mean even John Piper says that God decrees the raping of children.
All for his glory.
Sounds more like Allah than God of the Bible imo
Yes he did.
These Calvinists literally make the GOSPEL sound like the absolute worst villainous plot in history. I listened to this debate in podcast format and I thought they were just very, very rude. Watching this is something else entirely. Their body language--and body language is about 55% of perceived communication, mind you--is openly hostile, derogatory and capricious. My God, this was horrible to watch. I don't know what spirit they received, but it don't look like the Holy one to me...
David . Greetings Sir. I agree with you. Even though I am no Calvinist, and agree fully with Dr Flowers, I felt very very embarrassed watching this, why? Because of the BAD behaviour of these two men. What would an unbeliever say and think after wstching this? If that's how Christians behave, I want no part of this. So sad. Yes we can disagree very strongly, but we must always behave like gentlemen, and be in the Spirit.
You mean Laurel and Hardy
They quoted far more MEN of the world, both Christian an non-Christian alike, than they quoted scripture. This is a THEOLOGY, not an exegesis of the Bible. And this debate by far demonstrates that. I honestly am awed by how well they represented the flaws of hyper-reformed theology.
Agree..disgraceful behaviour by the calvanists. No sign of the Holy Spirit whatsoever.
You're hilarious...
"These Calvinists literally make the GOSPEL sound like the absolute worst villainous plot in history."
HAHHAHAHAHA
Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is LOVE, JOY, PEACE, PATIENCE, KINDNESS, GOODNESS, FAITHFULNESS..
Yikes.
Well done Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett!!
*_* Yeah....I noticed that too. :S
Man these Calvinists need a chill pill . Not to mention the Holy Spirit.
I just hit the first part of that. Dang, no wonder why people really dislike Calvinists.
@Original O.G. Troll I lived it at a reformed men's retreat. It's messed up.
Its like a self-righteous man is talking...
Stay away from calvinism.
What do you mean? This is the behavior of men who God has chosen to give the full revelation to. How is that not obvious?
And here we see the fruits of calvinism gone too far, hostility that is frothing at the mouth and seeking to sow division among the body of Christ. Those two calvinist opponents should be ashamed of themselves.
Seriously! Their thinly-veiled contempt masquerading as a defense of God's sovreignty was repulsive.
Well put.
Worst debate ever. The spirit of these Calvinists is repulsive. I've heard better Calvinist debate in a better spirit.
Absolutely agree. These two are the absolute bottom of the barrel on the Calvinist side. Both a nasty attitude and shoddy arguments. Someone like James White would make a much better opponent.
King4him - Diary of a Holiness Teacher It has been a rare event and maybe even something I’ve never experienced to debate a Calvinist and not experience vitriol And arrogance and ignorance coming from the Calvinist side.
Not trying to use such a white brush but that’s just been my experience.
WOW......they totally threw me off, I did not expect such hostility. Keep fighting the fight Dr. Flowers!
Non Calvinists: “these Calvinists are our brothers”
Calvinists: “these non Calvinists don’t know our God”
So are you saying that non calvinsts do not attack God of the bible? They even write books attacking God.
Proves the fruit
@@jeswinthgabriel8319 do you have sources that show
Non calvinists supposedly "attacking God"
The Calvinists are correct in saying 'these non Calvinists don't know our God' in the sense that their view of God includes persons being doomed from the womb and the non Calvanists does not...
@@josiahsmailes791 they are right in the fact they make their God to be some tyrant who watches those who he caused to be damned from the womb struggle through life without any hope of being anything other than a puny piece of clay without hope whos entire existence is essentially meaningless
I just listen to the second calvinistic speaker and I just can't stop laughing and wondering what in the world is wrong with him?
"This according to calvinistic history is heresy", said he, and if this happened then in that history I suppose these two gentlemen (Jonathan and Leighton) would be killed on the spot. What a display of hatred. And this is exactly our point: You don't understand God's love!
And if I wanted to imagine how inquisitors looked like, I could well imagine these two calvinistic gentlemen. They would be both judges and executors. There is not a drop of love in them and I am convinced they would have sentenced to death Dr. Flowers without any hesitation.
I conjecture that this is the representative of the same lack of love and charity that was the genesis of John Calvin's vow to have Servetus killed- which he ultimately succeeded in.
I have been immersed in topics related to Calvinism for the past year or so, and I had to take a break because I found myself getting upset that people would believe such foolishness that compromise the holiness of God. It was really frustrating me. I decided to watch this video, and as I listened to these Calvinists, my blood began to boil. They are absolutely arrogant and negative. Additionally, they do not know the Scriptures, and they know very little about presenting arguments and debating.
Its called telling the TRUTH , thats why your hurting. You cant stand it . Listen to the debate between this false teacher leighton flowers and james white and you will see the difference between calvinism and arminiansm , one is biblical and the other is just crap hahhaha
@@cog4808 Hi Bernie, the other is heretical... that doesn't mean we shouldn't love Arminians and not give them the dignity of describing their views as heretical rather than crap.
@@josiahsmailes791 i really belive Leighton Flowers is a false teacher and a devil . There is nothing more wicked in this earth than a false teacher in my view . He must be called out . I do have simpaty for people that listen to Leighton or else i wouldent even bother,,but you are right sometimes i do come across as mean thats because its difficult to love heretics....but i will try
@@cog4808 ty
@@cog4808 " There is nothing more wicked in this earth than a false teacher *_in my view"_* there are 64 instances of εὐθὲς in the old testament... you can find most of them in reading about how the children of Israel _also_ pursued what was right in their own eyes. The most condemning element of your comment is that you blame God for your disobedience!
Is it any wonder that Calvinists and Atheists agree that "there is no free will?"
GAME OVER,
@@jeswinthgabriel8319 why are you assuming that Arminians hate God?
@@tylerworrell4446 that doesn't even make any sense. You do realize calvinism makes God the author of evil.
@@Joshuaadrianjones why we you tagging me? I'm not in support of Calvinism
Actually atheists, much like Christians, don't have a consensus on this topic either
There is no free will. We are a product of our nature. Not even God has free will. He does what he does because its in his nature
“When God created Adam he did not give him free will. He gave them a command, ‘Do not eat from this tree.’”
So God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree but prior to creating them he predestined them to eat from the tree?
The logic and brilliance of Calvinism. Somebody see this guy out.
K V,
How did the Calvinist know that God did not give Adam and Eve free
will?
I agree that God did know
before creation that Adam
and Eve will Fall, But God
did not ordained them to
disobey Him.....
God knew that by their free will they will Fall, but
God created them any way
because
God need man with free will in His Kingdom....
@@52RGD God wants a people that freely choose him. This is why he created a way to redeem us. He covered their nakedness.
Awesome statement thank you
EXECELLENT
How dare you use logic against Calvinists? Great point.
The ability to respectfully disagree with your opponent is a sign of maturity and intellectuality. Therefore, during any debate, dispute, or disagreement always remember that yelling is not a substitute for the intelligent argument. Thus, even if you disagree; do it respectfully!
Peace be with you,
I like how he criticizes his opponents for their tradition, rather than using Scripture (after they both used Scripture to prove their beliefs), then he immediately quotes an unbiblical, uninspired text to criticize those who disagree with him.
I thank God for Leighton Flowers ministry to the Calvinists. Calvinists don't even realize they are fighting God and not serving Him.
My delight is when I hear of a Calvinist coming to Christ.
It gives me hope and encouragement that anyone can be saved if they are truly desiring God.
God calls first! Man either responds or rejects!
God's call to every man is much louder and forceful than any mans rejection of Him will ever be.
That is LOVE! That is Gods desire for all:
This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a
Don't you mean He wants all kinds of men to be saved? 😂 Calvinism is such a mess, they have to add words to the text to fit their theology
@@ImnotaCalvinist All kinds of men would leave out women wouldn't it? A calvinist's love for Calvi-god is like a dead rat floating in your well. It taints everything it touches.
@@truth7416 Amen to that, Amen. I lost a friend over Calvinism, he wants nothing else to do with me because I will not accept Calvinism. We can talk about anything about eschatology , the impassibility of God, Eternal Sonship of Christ etc.. but when it comes to touching the sacred cow of John Calvin he gets so upset and starts insulting me. We were friends for 30years but because I reject Calvinism he no longer wants anything to do with me. Now that to me is cultic brainwashed thinking.
@@ImnotaCalvinist
Remain patient in prayer for him.
This debate is embarrassing for Calvinists.
Thanks for uploading this. I believe Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett represented Traditionalism charitably and with integrity. Dr. Hernandez and Dr. Zachariades were both rude and ungracious.
may be determined them to be rude... at least according to their theology. there are a lot of strawman and anhominem.. and eisegesis...
there’s no debate, God in his sovereignty has given man free will.
it is the Calvinist that does not believe in the sovereignty of God. For they assume His sovereignty has the same limitations as of a man. For a man can only know about what he plans and forces into fruition. God knows His ways and the ways of men are not hidden from Him. Why is it impossible for the Calvinist to believe that God can know everything He didn't will to come to pass before it comes to pass, but allows it because of free will? Why is it that the Calvinist says that if God knows everything there is no free will? Because deep down they compare the power of God to that of a man. They assume that though God is more powerful than a man, He can only know what he plans and forces into being. This is a limited view of God and is not the God of the Bible.
For those who agree with Leighton and are able should become patreons of soteriology101. It is much needed.
Does soteriology 101 evangelise atheists or Mormons or Muslims or Jews or Hindus or is it only calvinists who need salvation?
@@Michael-uk3pj calvinist is the same with Mormons, Muslims ...they have a different God. thus needed to be evangelized.
@@cancer-hq2dp Calvinism has the God of the Bible
@@cancer-hq2dp "The one who does not believe in provisionism is condemned already, because he believed that God is sovereign in salvation!"
Wait that's not right...
@@Michael-uk3pj the Bible of the cults
If you want to de-convert a Calvinist show him this debate, it’s embarrassing
Sonny and Theodore we're very unprofessional and hostile.
True
100%
If they were, such are not debate-influencing tactics that are effective.
Here they are. But i have seen theodore debated michael brown, he was very professional. I dont know why he speaks like this here.
I felt the hatred spewed during this debate infect me, I was enraged by the vile behavior of the two calvinist men. I am myself ashamed of my anger, and words that I often shouted at the TV I was watching this debate on. Good on Dr. Flowers and his colleague, I can only imagine that it must have been difficult to restrain his annoyance, and even outright anger. God please give me the ability to love those who say things I absolutely despise.
I agree, what frustrated me even more than the Calvinists behavior was knowing that they are "Pastors" and don't even affirm the Gospel! Every verse and passage they cited, they perverted and twisted out of context. It saddens me greatly that there are innocent victims who just want to know the Gospel, are being mislead by those fake Christian Calvinists.
I feel ya
You are reinforcing the concept of determinism by your response.
You weren't free to do otherwise.
TS lost the debate in the beginning when he prayed - "Your will, indeed, will be done, and may be done tonight..."... oops... the determinist just made a theological freudian slip confirming he doesn't think God's will "may be done" without his strong freewill contribution.
Good observation! Calvinists are literally walking talking contradictions... it surprises me that anyone would ever fall for it. You literally have to just accept contradictions and lie to yourself until you begin to believe your lies. "We are sola scriptura"... when they literally twist everything in the Scripture to make scripture submit to their Calvinism.
Do Calvanists actually believe that God forces people to sin? Zachariades literally said God commands people to commit adultery when he wants them to. I dont think Calvinists actually believe that do they?
Most Calvinists will say they don't believe that, but when walking their theology to it's logical conclusions, that's exactly what you come to. Most Calvinists will say these guys are "hyper-Calvinists" and don't rightly represent them, but let's be honest, these guys are consistent Calvinists.
nadohe11 exactly!
Wow, insanity.
The consistent ones do. I actually appreciate the honesty of these two declaring God IS the author of sin. Could do without the obnoxious arrogance.
I think James White would say (and I'm trying to be as fair as possible here) that he feels better with the idea that God ordains adultery because it at least then has a sovereign purpose, as God would have a reason for it and would have ordained it according to the council of his will. On free will, adultery is pointless and senseless and he doesn't believe that God would let something like that happen. Summary: For God to allow a senseless rape would be evil, but ordaining it to happen for some higher purpose is not.
If "hard determinism" is true...and every word that comes out of the mouth of Dr. Flowers is predetermined to give God the ultimate glory...why is Dr. Zachariades so angry and his heart so full of bile? If I do come back to Christianity (which I have recently been considering) I hope I never find myself in a camp with James White, Sye Ten Brugencate and Theodore Zachariades. "Love" is what attracts me to the gospel, and I see no love coming from that ilk.
I honestly don't see how anyone can look at Jesus and believe in Calvinism(nevermind the fact that scripture makes it clear that we are responsible for our own choices). When you see Jesus you see the Father. Take a look at Jesus. Come home ♥♥♥
So right @L Morter!
@Jordan Day come home man
Jordon, My testimony is as I read the gospel and the new testament and saw that Jesus Christ is the Judge that paid in full the sins of the world, and I knew that if I rejected His works. I would have no hope and deserve the punishment of Lake of Fire for rejecting the spotless Lamb the took my sins and the sins of the whole world. The goodness and kindness of God will lead to Godly repentance. Pray that you give up your life to Jesus Christ, and it will never been the same.
Jordan Day I met you on a Google chat group before and we were speaking on Greek. Why did you leave Christianity? Thanks
I didn't say either of them were hard determinists. But...I listened to James White's "Dividing Line" program for 6 years (without missing a single episode hosted by him). I know his position well. He may not identify as a "hard determinist" but any distinction he may try to draw is purely semantic.
1:09:11
This kind of attitude is disheartening, especially in light of Scripture, which teaches us that ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble’ (James 4:6). It’s concerning to see how often Calvinism, in certain circles, seems to foster not just theological rigor but also a lack of humility and grace in interactions with others, which is entirely contrary to the spirit of Christ.
1:24:44
There is much to be saddened by in this debate. Like I mentioned before, It is often the case that many Calvinists seem to adopt not just the theology but also the combative spirit of John Calvin himself. We are fortunate to live in an era where free speech and the exchange of ideas are valued, something that was not always the case. May the memory of Michael Servetus remind us of the importance of humility and respect in theological discourse.
That being said, Calvinists often claim to rely solely on Scripture alone, yet consider Jesus’ own words in John 5:40: “Yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.”
The original Greek word used here is ‘Thelete’, meaning ‘you are willing’ or ‘you desire,’ which conveys the idea of willingness or refusal. Essentially, Jesus is saying that the people are choosing not to come to Him for life. Whether it’s translated as ‘you refuse to come’ or ‘you will not come,’ the core meaning remains the same: they are willfully rejecting His offer of life.
As a Calvinist, I feel compelled to apologize and reject the attitude and implications of these men who have now become a festering sore on the face of Calvinism
Calvinism god is controlling them so don't feel sorry,
Or Calvinism god is also controlling to reject your fellow Calvinist?
@@daddada2984 That is not Calvinism, that is determinism.
@@TheGeorgeology whats the difference of Calvinism to determinism?
@@daddada2984 Not only is it determinism... it is like hindu fatalism
So God made the devil fall and temp Jesus Christ just too prove God can't temp himself? God made a grown man rape a child, now an adult, so it's his fault? God put the sinful temptations, anger, last, greedy in our hearts? God's irresistible grace is so powerful even if free will is a thing I can't choose to stay away and he can force himself on me against MY FREE WILL! I am so dead in my sins I could never see, speak, hear God? Though when Adam and Eve ate of the tree and were DEAD could still hear God, speak too God, have relationship with God. Watch Dr. Norman Giesler as I respectfully know without a doubt you will never be able to explain away any of the questions I just brought up without creating a false God, a moral monster who forces people too sin only too then damn them too hell for all eternity. That's not the God of the Bible.
Irenaeus wrote a book called Against Heresies back in the early church to combat heresies of his day. In his 4th book chapter 37-39 he combats a heretical believe that we have no free will.
You did such a good job, brothers Johnathan and Leighton! It was so much better the second time without the weird audio happenings and the missing Q&A and closing statements that were in the temporary UA-cam video.
I LOVED your closing statement, L.F.!
Would that every Calvinist would take the time to listen really closely and THINK about your opening statements as well as all the rest.
This debate was a clear win for the Free Willies over the Robotics, 10 - 0, in content and character.
@lorimayberry3534, you nailed it. Those two Calvinists weren't interested in debating as much as they just wanted to pummel anyone who didn't agree with them. Both of them came across to me as angry and vindictive. I don't think they ever heard a word of Flowers or Pritchett.
100-0
Notice the hostility, this comes from pride, pride goeth destruction, and a haughty look before a fall!!!
Hopefully the Calvinists that watch this video will see how evil Calvinism is and will turn away from it!
Amen. When the second Calvinist at about the 44 minute Mark spoke I almost feel out of my seat because of his words.
@@Search4godstruthhomestead Calvinism is the Gospel and even though the attitude of some Calvinists is not the right one, what they said was the truth. By the way, not even all who call themselves Calvinists know what Calvinism (=the true Gospel) is and not all will be saved. The way is very narrow.
@@ElenaBaumann no, calvinism has lied to you and bewitched you.
@@Search4godstruthhomestead
Yea, that was very evil to say about God, that is making God the author of sin. I would also go onto to say, that he is calling evil good, because in his mind, it was the goodness of God, that made those people commit adultery, not only those poeple, but also made that transgender not only be transgender, but to also shoot up that Christian school, and kill those kids. That is very evil to do, to attribute those evil acts to God.
@@ElenaBaumann
Calvinism is not the gospel at all.
I’m sorry, did he just say God “orders those to commit adultery when He wants to” at the 44:11? Last I checked, number 7 of the 10 commandments was “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. Exodus 20:14.
Is it me, or do these Reformed debaters seem to harp so much on God’s Sovereignty to the neglect of harping on God’s character?
Just because God CAN order someone to do a heinous act of evil because He’s sovereign, doesn’t mean He will. Why? Because doing so would contradict His character, His nature, and His law. Which is absolute.
Debate was a shame, but I really appreciate the comments. Thank you, Calvinist brothers and sisters, for showing the grace that the men in the video did not. I do not share your soteriological views, but appreciate you, and thank you for showing the same mercy Jesus has shown to us all.
"Do you wanna build a straw man?" 🎶 🎶 🎵 To Calvinists.
LOL!
naa diay ka dire bro
I was thinking that wow. Never ending.
Somebody needs to make an Disney adaptation out of this, so we can play when prople like this come.
I could only cringe while listening to these calvinists
Absolutely
Wow I have never heard so much twisting of the scriptures I have noticed that you are not a brother in Christ if you are not a calvinist. Only calvinist are saved 😨 to be called a brother ..
That second guy actually used a prayer as a debate tactic. Out of anything else, THAT is the worst thing that happened here. Shame.
@@brando3342 That made me angry too!
I used to listen to WRETCHED RADIO and started to see the hidden Calvinist Cult leading. Lots of pride!!
boutique imagery me too. A little MacArthur worshipping as well.
boutique imagery
Hey! Me too!!!
Clue - when Todd once mentioned that the torment of the burning sinners from the pit of hell will bring God glory... somehow... in a way we can’t understand...
T Sapp yes and yes!
Same experience here...
Laura Kakoschke Scripture clearly teaches that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11.
Brothers, thank you. Thank you for remaining calm during Dr Zachariades outbursts, as well as his demeanor. I honestly didn't see a single defense for that of determinism, and merely quoting Scripture does not necessitate an answer. Dr Flowers, and Dr Pritchett, it is days like these that I thank you, and others, for providing the Christian audience, with a reading of Scripture that is not only a two-sided debate (Calvinism vs Armininianism), but that there is a solid viewpoint that holds up against the scrutiny of Scripture. Praise God for your ministries, and praise the Lord for these teachings being able to be spread to all.
Darryl Le Roux I find it very annoying that Calvinists always refer to anyone who believes in Salvific Free-Will as an Arminian, when both Flowers and Prichett are Baptist Traditionalists.
I agree
Oh my word. Those calvanists are a disgrace. I downloaded this to my phone to listen to while tiling a customer's kitchen floor. The hostility coming from the calvanists made me literally put down my trowel and pick up the phone to see who these guys were. I simply could not beleive the hostility. And this is supposed to be a Christian debate?? I hope no atheists watched this as they would be laughing there heads off. Sad.
I’m a Calvinist and I’m embarrassed by these guys. They are arguing a hyper Calvinist position and on top of that it’s done with absolutely no love.
Please go watch debates with James White and Michael Brown, Olson and Horton, and the one with Bruce Ware and Schreiner for a more accurate representation of the Calvinist position and they are done with charity and respect.
These guys here need to be rebuked for their hostility and lack of a willingness to reason.
Troy Smallwood
They’re not carefully presenting the position. It’s coming across as hyper Calvinist because they are not defining terms carefully. Their demeanor makes it worse.
Jordan Hartley: As a non-Calvinist, I appreciate you recognizing the lack of Godly love and respect here. I agree that all Calvinist/Reformed don't behave like these two. I watch a lot of these and I was shocked and am left feeling hurt and disappointed. God bless you brother.
Jordan Hartley I'm also a reformed believer and am also disgusted by these guys. They do sound like hyper calvinists to be honest. They're unwilling to reason, unwilling to define terms, unwilling to call the opposing side brothers, their boastful, and haughty. Speaking of the doctrines of Grace without showing it.
I would really like it if you could expound upon this assertion. (" however they took the system to the ultimate logical conclusion") What logical conclusion is that, exactly?
I know better Calvinist scholarship is easy to find...
*However*
The arguments these guys were throwing around are the same pat arguments and assumptions I've heard from many Calvinist's I've engaged with.
So while they presented their arguments in a very repulsive manner, the content of their arguments is just your routine daily dose of standard Calvinist answers you'll hear whenever you discuss soteriology with Calvinists.
Again,I know better arguments and deeper arguments exist.
But I'm also saying what Sonny/ Theodore presented was, in some sense, just an exaggerated version of routine Calvinist lines of argumentation.
Lot's of recycled Calvinist clichés and proof-texts.
Great commentary!! Thank you Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett for a strong argument! I appreciate your wisdom and composure while delivering your stance on free- will- during this debate. I am in total agreement with you both.
If hard determinism is true, then if I were to go beat up my neighbor, after every punch I should say "this is for God's glory" "This is for God's glory" "This is for God's glory". Then when he is reeling in pain, I kick him some more and say "For God is the glory". Then I steal is wallet, and say "For God is the glory".
Okay, now back to my real self, how is this "glorifying" God? And Calvinist who hold to hard determinism wonder why I have a problem with this???
If hard determinism is true, then you wouldn't be responsible for any of your actions. But if soft determinism is true, then you WOULD be responsible for your actions. Your evil actions could then bring glory to God in one of two ways. God would either be glorified in the demonstration of his mercy by forgiving you, or he would be glorified in the demonstration of his wrath by punishing you. So either way, God would be glorified by your evil actions.
Sam there is no such thing as soft and hard determinism only determinism. Saying that determinism is soft and hard is spin doctoring the actual meaning of determinism.
@@philochristos If God is causing it, God IS the responsible party.
@@philochristos If hard determinism is true, then you wouldn't be responsible for any of your actions.
Yeah, you would, because you acted according to your desires, it wouldn't matter if God put the desires into you, either.
@@jahiddle Neither soft nor hard determinism spin doctors the actual meaning of determinism. They are both determinism. Determinism is just the view that antecedent conditions are sufficient to bring about an effect or choice. The difference between hard and soft determinism is in what is doing the determining. In hard determinism, the immediate cause of your actions is blind mechanical forces, initial physical conditions plus the laws of nature, etc. In soft determinism the immediate cause of your actions is your own desires, motives, intentions, etc. That makes a big difference when it comes to to morality. It also makes a difference when it comes to rationality--whether the immediate cause of your belief is merely the motion of molecules in your brain or antecedent reasons, perceptions, etc.
He lost when he said that "it's not sin for God to ordain sin". This is in direct contradiction to the Scriptures where we see that God is not the author of sin.
Author and ordaining are different things. Author means creator whereas ordain means allows. If God didn’t ordain things to come pass that were evil then the cross wouldn’t have happened
This Zachariades guy is a character. I was actually laughing out loud during his first speech. I'm sure even most Calvinists would be embarrassed by him.
REDRAGON12345 I did the same! Lol
@@francefiliault2629 i was laughing too! 😂😂😂
I was cringing so hard I had to pause and come back to it multiple times
I know what you mean, but I wasn't laughing at all. I think he needs to repent of what he said, both in his opening statement and later, when he made a point of retracting how he called his opponents brothers. Shameful, shameful behavior.
Danny DeVito’s Calvinist brother!
When Leighton Flowers mentions Deuteronomy 30:19 it reminded me of a time a few years ago that I quoted that verse to my hyper-Calvinist and he said that Deuteronomy 30:19 was written to the Israelites only. He completely missed the point. In Calvinism everything even the Israelites did or would do was preordained by God. So it's still a disingenuous offer, no matter whom it was written to.
But instead of getting into a fight I decided to move on and went to the book of Joshua where he says choose this day whom you will serve. My hyper-Calvinist reminded me that this too was only written to the Israelites. So I went to the book of Revelations chapter 3 verse 20. It says ... Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
To this my hyper-Calvinist said that it was only written to the early church. That's how he dismissed every verse that clearly says that it is man's not God's choice. So I took my bible and threw it in the garbage and said then I don't need any of that. You see Matthew, Mark and John was most likely written to Jews. Luke and Acts was written to Theophilus. Romans was written to Rome. First and second Corinthians was written to Corinth. Etc. You get my point.
Don't worry throwing the bible away was only an illustration for this Calvinist to see. I don't believe that it's only written for people long ago and far away, so I took it out, wiped it clean because it is my lifeline.
The Calvinist says that a man can freely choose his own bride via his free will but Christ can't choose his bride via his own free will? Does this Calvinist really not have a brain? Seriously the man may freely choose his own bride but SHE MUST SAY YES or the wedding will NEVER happen!!! So yes, Jesus can choose his own bride but he waits for her to receive him and say YES to him.
Excellent points!
Holy smokes…this was crazy. I completely agree with everything Dr. Flowers presented. So thankful. First time I hear someone compare Pharoah’s taking the straw away from the Israelites and punishing them for not performing to how God is presented in Calvinism. I came to that conclusion last year reading through the OT again.
Even though I completely disagree with the determinists here, I do not know any who behave the way they did. It was sad to see/hear. I was a Calvinist for 17 years but revisited it 2 1/2 years ago and came away with a very different view.
It seemed like the Calvinists in this debate did a lot of yelling, philosophical arguments, and didn’t listen very well to the other side. They present things in a way that represents the other side extremely incorrectly. It was a little annoying because it’s immature.
They kept saying we cannot save ourselves…yes! We agree! Listen! Lol
Anyway, enjoyed watching.
Your view of Calvinism is hyper Calvinist (hard determinism). You were never a confessional Calvinist, due to what you say about Calvinism proves so.
You say you were a Calvinist for 17 years yet in all of your videos you get every petal in that little tulip flower wrong.
You show no knowledge of the biblical version of reformed theology.
You may have gone to a reformed church but you apparently learned very little of what they believe or they weren't biblically correct.
@@bucky91361 19 years. What part did I get wrong? Can you give a specific example?
@@AlanaL3 @AlanaL3 sure, at around the 13 minute mark of this video...."In and out of Calvinism Part 2
Compatibalism & T; Total Depravity!" you refer to total depravity and imply that it says "man is incapable of seeking God...". That is the typical misrepresentation of Calvinist thought on Total Depravity.
The Bible doesn't teach that and neither does the T in tulip. The Bible teaches that man does not want to seek God and not that he is incapable of doing it. We are absolutely capable of doing it. It says that he will never seek God because his will is in bondage.
We do what we want at the time we are given a choice. When given the choice we will ALWAYS (Total Depravity) choose to run from God. The Bible teaches, and we believe, that when man is awakened from spiritual death by the Holy Spirit then we run TO God by our own will. Do you see the difference?
In your videos you give the standard anti-Calvinist arguments that those like Leighton Flowers and the guy BTF guy give.
You paint with a very broad brush just like them. You rattle off a long list of objections yet rarely will you delve into a single point and flush out the exegetical meaning of a verse. An example is when you say something about the word "all" or "all men" or "all kinds of men" and off-handedly dismiss the entire package without addressing them one by one. If you sat down with your Bible and exegeted it like you're supposed to, reading from the beginning to the end, you'd see what I'm saying.
Here's my broad brush......My guess is you lived your Calvinist life the same way. I'm guessing you just bought into what they said without doing your own studying. And like me it was difficult to accept that man didn't have libertarian free will. So when the day came that your friend showed you a way out you jumped at it and jumped on the synergistic bandwagon.
I say this in love.....do your own studying. If you have the faith in the Bible that you profess to have and think that it is to be taken for what it says you'd have to put everything aside that says things one way or the other. You have to do your own study. And if you did you would come to the conclusion that God's sovereignty trumps man's choices.
@@bucky91361 So you believe a person whose will is in bondage will never seek God but is capable of seeking God? Do you really believe a person can seek God without God drawing them? You don't sound like a Calvinist. And you believe God's sovereignty trumps man's choices but you still believe a person whose will is in bondage can seek God but won't?
I was reading in a Clarence Larken book this week that we are free moral agents, NOT because we can choose between good and evil, BUT, because we can choose between our will and God's will. I thought that was a fresh take
This is true
As a Calvinist I am ashamed at the two individuals debating my side of the issue. One even retracted calling his opponents “brothers”! If you believe you are arguing a position that Paul would you should strive to do it firmly but also in love. A little humility goes a long way and these men did not appear to have any whatsoever.
@44:14 this debate was over! The yelling man said God wanted a king to commit adultery! If that is Calvinism that is Satanic not scripture!
This has been a very informative debate. Thank you for posting it.
Watching two Calvinists come to a decision in the last few minutes was priceless.
I watched about half of the debate until my stomach was tied up in knots over the behavior of the Calvinist. After the nausea passed I knew I needed to weigh in on the shameful misuse of power behind the mic. Shameful action on the Calvinist part. Reminds me of the Democratic Party.
When was the line drawn on Christianity? These men are to reflect Jesus? I know many Calvinist whom I have great respect. I don’t believe some wrong doctrine will keep them out of heaven. Example of love for Christ is John Piper. I may not agree with his doctrine but clearly I have never encountered the hostility displayed by the Angry Calvinist in this debate.
I think we need to do what the Bible teaches about every man working out their own salvation with fear and trembling. Getting loud and nasty does not make you right. Where was the love your neighbor as yourself in this mess.
Do I believe in backsliding? I do now after watching the murder in the eyes and hearing murder in the voice of the Calvinist. Shameful! Perhaps they weren’t chosen after all. Perhaps they are predestined to, well, not heaven.
Is the god of calvinist same as biblical God, the maker of sin? that doesnt love all? Creates man and put them in hell for "his glory" and his good pleasure. The GOD of the Bible will say NO THAT IS NOT ME..
First Calvinist gets up and starts quoting a non Biblical book, lost the debate right out the gate.
You missed the cross examination? Flowers and Pritchett, had mostly philosophical arguments, and the "Calvinist" had way more scripture.. re watch the debate without a biased, its for scripture sake not tradition.
I watched the whole thing, the Calvinist's were rude and lacked coherent arguments.
You did not watch the whole thing... "Lacked coherent arguments" what part is that.. please make a reference in the video. In the cross exam they were more biblical and straightforward then Flowers & Pritchett.
Lol, I know what I watched. The Bible is so clear on this topic children can learn the truth on their own. Read Jeremiah 18 and Ezekiel 18 then get back to me. If you still think Calvinism is accurate I can't help you.
I did not argue for Calvinism, I simply stated what part of the video was incoherent.. You mentioned the first Calvinist got up and quoting from a non biblical book, yes he did, but then in the cross examination the two Calvinist were way more biblical. I have read both of those books and those verses. Jeremiah 18 The Potter and the Clay and Ezekiel 18 is the Soul Who Sins Shall Die.. What point are you trying to make?
*WARNING: Headphone users!*
WHAT?? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! Eardrums done blasted out at 39:08... 😳😳😵😵
My hearing is kinda bad , so maybe good job , as it was almost at max volume 😅
I read the warning too late..
Now i need to go to hospital because of the second calvinist destroyed my hearing, that i might not listen to his non-existent arguments.
I'm so appreciative the teachings of Dr. Flowers and others alike that stand up against the popularism. I came from a hyper-charismatic background of which I followed for many years as a hypocritical pretender. About 4 years ago, God showed me my true depravity and my need for TRUE faith and repentance. And though I fought against it, I slowly began to agree more and more with the Calvinistic doctrines, as they were the only ones who seemed to be taking faith seriously in this post-modern lukewarm country. But after finding Dr. Flowers teachings, and others like David Bercot, I realized that these verses can be interpreted in both the Calvinist as well as the traditionalist point of view. And when you realize that the Ante-Nicene church fathers did not follow Calvinism, it's very hard to agree with that interpretation. Thank you Dr. Flowers for all that you do, and I would encourage anyone else to make sure and challenge your beliefs. Eat, sleep, and live the Bible, and look at what the early church (0-300 A.D.) believed, and don't just follow what's 'popular' at the moment.
Happy for you. It's encouraging to hear you avoided the cult.
It's what I will call the Calvinist "Schizophrenia double mind syndrome."
The truth is this:
God initiates the knowledge of His existence to every man!
God convicts every man of his emptiness and need something more in their life!
God opens the eyes of every man at some point in their lives where they:
Make their decision to follow Gods leading!
Or make their decision reject Gods leading!
Its foolishness and heresy to follow the devils agent John Calvin who said :
"God arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that
individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death and
are to glorify him by their destruction.( John Calvin Institutes of
Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
This is a doctrine of demons and all who follow this lie are not of God but they are of their father father of lies!
This is Gods truth to mankind.
1 Timothy 2 : 3-6 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants
all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For
there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man
Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people.
Those that don't see this, can't see this, because they have blinded themselves and will not see.
There isn't one thing attractive about the Calvinist god. Hate, destruction,
false salvation by lottery, pleasure in creating and forcing sin on the
World.
Calvin's god actually condemns people to false salvation.
It is forcing you against your will and then making you think it was your idea.
That is the description of rape.
Calvinists convinced of their lottery win, then go out and teach people that they and everyone else have no free will!
How could it be your idea??
It sounds like organized insanity when you are not in the Calvinist organizations.
TRUTH IN LOVE
That is literally my testimony as well! How cool is that!
Ignoring the fact that you're talking about extra-Biblical sources, this is a flawed understanding. First, of course the ante-Nicene fathers didn't follow Calvinism. Calvin followed Scripture and the ante-Nicene fathers views. It didn't exist. Second, the ante-Nicene fathers believed that free will existed within God's will and wasn't truly autonomous. Very much what Calvin, Luther, and reformed theology affirm, while the modern church affirms the humanist perspective that we choose without any outside influence based on our own rationality or emotions. Man cannot rationally choose God, regardless of how wise he is, for he is foolish and wicked in comparison to God.
This man really said, "God orders men to commit adultery." Yet in some mysterious way, God is not responsible for what he's responsible for 🤔.
A = not A ✍️✍️
Ufff that closing statement by Dr Flowers 🔥🔥 glory be to God 🙌🙌
@ 1:28:04 the calvinist lies when quoting and explaining Eph 1.
He says "God's power makes us believe" from that passage.
Eph 1:19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power 20 which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,"
The "power" is not descriptive of our faith, it is certainly not saying God gave us faith by His "power" as the calvinist just said. "Power" is describing the event of Christ being raised from the dead. Calvinists consistently use isolated texts and create an argument from calvinism, not the text itself.
Zachariades: "IS IT CLEAR NOW?! WE DO NOT AFFIRM FREE WILL!!" Whoa, there...
The Calvinists sure seem angry. When we are sure of something and in dialogue with others who disagree yet are willing to listen why would we lose our tempers like this? If faith is a gift of the Spirit then it is something the recipient must choose to receive. A gift is never forced. It is freely received. A good God does not decree evil.
The kind of God we believe in inevitably influences how we act and relate to the world. Because his character is a major part of what we worship.
For those who love the "doctrines of grace" the Calvinists are hopelessly graceless throughout this debate. Shocking lack of decorum, grace and love.
Calling the hellish blasphemies of Calvinism "the doctrines of grace" is not only a lie, but it is itself blasphemous, as Calvinism is nothing but pagan fatalism dressed up in Christianese.
Does he know Dr Flowers is not an Arminian? Something is off here...
@DFS: to people who don't take the time to understand, any non-Calvinist is an Arminian and a semi-Pelagian (read: semi-heretic)
ravissary79 I love your comments...I learn so much from them.
I don't think he cares. Unless you affirm Calvinism, you're either an Arminian, or a semi-Pelagian.
Question for Calvies, how is it just or fair for a Creator to bring a creature into the world with a nature that is wicked to the point it can only do evil and for that Creator to command and expect that creature to do good when he knows they do not have the freedom or ability to do so and then to torment it forever when it doesn't comply? That sounds like the prime example if hatred and evil. Without free will, what makes us any different from animals that are driven by instinct? Why would God hold us to a different standard and expect us to do something we can't do? If that is how the creator rolls then everyone is not guilty of sin but innocent because they don't have a choice in the matter. There can be no accountability.
I have asked a similar question to multiple Calvinists and their answer is usually Romans 9, that God can do whatever He wants to. This is the height of insanity. A holy and just God doing such an unjust thing? Ridiculous in my opinion. Many Calvinists are so bent on defending their theology that they in turn make such ridiculous claims about our holy and just God. They prove their allegiance to be truly to their theology instead of God and His clear word. Sad.
Very good way to put it. Their allegiance is to their systematic.
"Question for Calvies, how is it just or fair for a Creator to bring a creature into the world with a nature that is wicked to the point it can only do evil and for that Creator to command and expect that creature to do good when he knows they do not have the freedom or ability to do so and then to torment it forever when it doesn't comply? "
Actually your question works equally against the classical Arminian position because Arminianism, too, affirms total depravity (sans prevenient grace), or in other words, Arminianism affirms that God brings creatures into the world that are wicked and can only do evil, then asks them to do good. The only difference between Arminianism and Calvinism at this point is that in Arminianism God gives sinners Prevenient Grace which only re-enables them to respond positively to the gospel. But both systems believe men are evil and cannot do any spiritual good.
Remember, our righteousness is as filthy rags in God's sight. This is true for both Calvinism and Arminianism. It is not exclusive to Calvinism.
As for free will, Calvinists do not deny that man has a will. They simply say it is not truly free, but enslaved to sin. Calvinists affirm you can make decisions. Calvinists affirm you can choose anything you want. *The key is the word "want"*. The Calvinist position is that without regeneration, a person will never want Christ, thus, will never choose Christ.
To reiterate, Calvinists believe that since man is made in God's image, man's will works the same as God's will. God only chooses things according to His nature. He is just, holy, righteous, etc. So God only chooses those things. It is impossible for God to choose unjust things, for example.
In like manner, man only chooses things according to his nature (just like God does). Man's (fallen, unregenerate) nature is hostile to God and enslaved to sin and finds Christ foolish, thus, man chooses accordingly. In other words, man will never choose spiritually good things (Such as obeying the gospel and repenting and trusting in Jesus) because those things are contrary to his (fallen) nature. That is why in Calvinism man must first be regenerated before those things are possible (and inevitable)
In other words, since man chooses according to his nature, his nature must first be changed.
So both Arminianism and Calvinism affirm that sinners are hostile to the gospel and will reject it without some kind of divine intervention. For Arminianism, that intervention is "Prevenient Grace" which re-enables man to choose spiritually good things. For Calvinism, that intervention is regeneration itself. Both systems affirm that God must intervene to make it possible for men to believe the gospel. The two systems simply disagree on what that "thing" is.
Hope this helped in some small way. Blessings friend
Excellent questions! I answered the overarching question and then broke down the others.
The overall question asked has a fundamental flaw. You are looking from eternity past and fastforwarding to the end of that person's life and there is no mention of their life and the process which lead them to hell. God creates us and knows our innermost being and thoughts. (Psalm 139:2). We fell in sin when Adam ate. So we are all born evil. The person evil today may repent with their dying breath like the thief on the cross. Don't count anyone out in this life. God saved a murderer like Paul, a coward like Peter, and an adulterer like David. He can save you, your family and your neighbors.
Anyone who puts their faith in Jesus will find Him to be a perfect Savior. John 3:16.
1. How is it fair?
If it was fair God would bring his wrath to bear right now and send everyone to hell. That is what we deserve., (John 3:36). Yet he is showing patience for those He has called to choose him. 1 Timothy 2:4.
2. How can a Creator expect an evil person to do good?
I am going to add this descriptor of, "doing good": repent from sin and be saved through Jesus. John 3:16, 1 John 1:9. An evil person cannot do good unless they change their heart. They hear this command by God to do good, and decide to love God. In one sense we do make a choice. Thst is real. What happens behind the scenes is that God has taken a heart of stone and replaced it with a heart of flesh. ( Ezekiel 36:26). He has drawn that person, John 6:44, and amazingly this happened before the creation of the world. Ephesians 1:4. Question now is, are you one of God's elect children?
3. Without free will what makes us different from animals,?
God has given us spirits. Animals do not have a spirit. We have a will, but it is not free, it is one enslaved to our own sinful desires. Romans 6:6. We all start out not wanting God.
Animals do not sin or rebel. They may kill humans or other animals but this is because of the corruption by a human's choice: Adam.
4. Why would God hold us to a different standard and expect us to do things we cannot do?
We cannot, because we do not want too. We despise God's standard. We love ourselves and our sin. Yet God continues to proclaim his standard to each new person born in time. We do not know who will respond to that standard, or how long they will take in responding.
@@skalapunk your understanding of scripture is nothing more than old gnosticism and manicheism dressed as christianity.
DR FLOWERS , YOU ARE SOOOOO BLESSED TO HAVE THE GIFT OF DISCERNMENT AND THUS UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SCRIPTURES ARE REALLY SAYING TO US 🥰
I think the Calvinists looked stupid. The second guy most definitely practiced the first part of his speech in the mirror
LOL
Yeah, he's definitely nuts.
WOW lol
Don't stoop to their level.
Calvinism is not stupid, it's SATANICAL
45:35 why would God give a command if Adam didn't have a will? If all is determined by God, He wouldn't have to give a command
Mic drop
Nobody told me this was absolute gold. I mean I heard about the funny business but nobody told me it was absolute comedy.
the ease and speed with which sonny damns his fellow brothers to hell just breaks my heart
To be honest the Calvinists were not prepared for this debate. They were completely lost. That`s a shame.
I guess that was predetermined
I'm honestly disappointed with the anger from the Calvinists. Does God tell us to yell at people that disagree with you? In their opening arguments, it's clear they didn't even listen to either of you. They just listed off canned arguments against a doctrine they fear, as it means they are responsible in thought, word and deed.
Apparently it pleases God to make a world of puppets that He can cause to do evil, and somehow not be culpable for that evil.
How can you have _real_ love without *REAL* choice? Love requires choice, it requires self sacrifice. If you turn God into a dualistic God that controls both sides of the Chess board, then he risked nothing by becoming man.
Zachariades said they were not there to debate. A Freudian slip perhaps? His behavior was cringe worthy in my opinion.
Its not just cringe worthy in your opinion
Two men believe in their theology. Two men believe in Gods saving grace when one believes and has faith.
I have a brother who is calvinist and I’ve noticed that he is always angry and judgmental we always get into arguments and he will get mean and he even said our mother was in Hell and she is not my mother loved God and I believe she is with Jesus she loved Jesus and she loved singing praises to God
☹️ Condolences for having to deal with that.
My goodness The two representing the Calvinist view had to have been the most rude, obnoxious so called Christians I've had ever seen! Talk about "noisy gongs"
Trurh. Its raining strawmans;)
This debate with Calvinists is a good example that proves that heat does no necessarily produce light
.
@Carl Peterson, agreed. The reformed side said that the Confession they were holding to was their idea of faith and such. Yet when the Confession affirms human free will, they avoid it and say they trust Scripture!
Dr. Flowers, Just having listened to your opening speech so far........BRAVO!
Yes!...just because some things were determined, that, by no means, means all things were/ are determined. You are just getting better and better!
contemplate yes, he really is. I so enjoyed listening to him so clearly state the truth in this debate. Awesome stuff, Dr. Flowers!
If God "is really behind your choices" as you say, then free will doesn't exist since the fall.
Joe --- Esplain it to us?
Joe:
Do you not have a free will?
Joe, I believe Leighton stated that free will has parameters. Besides, even if I didn't choose what country or state I was born in, my parents and their parents did. Jn 1 shows the dichotomy between the spiritual birth and the birth brought about by "the will of man", which is the physical birth.
I hope you realize that your whole reasoning is based on pure Philosophy. Let's take the argument to the scriptures. The Bible shows that Israel was blinded so that salvation could go the the Gentiles. Israel was given a spirit of stupor to bring about the cross. Besides the fact that God doesn't need to send a spirit of stupor to "totally depraved" people, only Israel was ever said to be blinded and that, temporary. Gentiles were never said to be blinded.
You and all other calvies take the extremely few blindness and "predestination" verses, which in context, pertain to Israel, and you erroneously apply them to the nations. In the new covenant, God is "no respecter of persons". This is said to be the case four times in Acts 10 34, Romans 2 11, Eph 6 9, and Col 3 25. What does "no respecter of persons mean to you? This is in contrast to the one, old testament nation of Israel being favored among nations by God. But what were they "chosen" for....so that every Jew would be saved? No. The baptist told them that just because they were Abraham's children didn't mean much. Paul states that only if you are Christ's are you then children of Abraham and heirs according to the promise.
Israel was chosen to bring forth the Messiah and only those who had the faith of Abraham in her history were saved. Then, certain prophets and apostles were "chosen" within Israel to do certain things of great importance. Once the lamb was slain and the history recorded, whosoever may come and freely drink. Salvation is by faith....not by predestination. God is now no respecter of persons.....exactly the opposite of what calvinism teaches.
Peace
Free-will: the agency to act without force or influence.
I don't see many people walking on their hands or floating into space...
I just watched this through for the first time. I have been in the Calvinistic camp all my life. The Calvinist team came across as smug, unloving and bullish. It was embarrassing. It seemed they came with their mantra, and just kept repeating it. Sad. They agreed to the debate, submitted the 1689 LBCF as their backup, but then showed up on stage saying they believed in no form of free will. So what was the point of them being there? Left a bad taste in my mouth. Sadly, this smugness seems to be too common in the camp. Earnestly contend, yes. But in love.
Did you agree with their views? Their attitudes aside, their views is what I’d be curious to know if you agreed with.
@@AlanaL3 not as settled in my agreement as I once was. I’ve been re-examining some of these foundational perspectives.
@@bmorgan595 that’s always a good thing to do. I did the same 2 1/2 years ago and I no longer hold to any of it. God bless you on your journey:)
@@AlanaL3 Yet you cannot answer why you choose to believe and the unbeliever does not.
@@ShepherdMinistry sure we can. Jesus tells us: “And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil.”
John 3:19 NASB2020
In Romans 1 man that suppresses the truth become darkened: “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasonings, and their senseless hearts were darkened.”
Romans 1:21
Also in Romans 2 it’s presented that different people are pursuing different things: “to those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, He will give eternal life; but to those who are self-serving and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, He will give wrath and indignation.”
Romans 2:7-8
Not to mention the countless co traits between the righteous and the foolish in provers and psalms.
Last I think this scripture can speak to that question as well:
“For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even as I weep, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who have their minds on earthly things.”
Philippians 3:18-19
All we know for sure is that faith comes by hearing the word of God and with the heart an believes. The rest is mysterious. We cannot pretend to understand fully, or draw concrete conclusions that are extra biblical.
“So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.”
Romans 10:17
“for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.”
Romans 10:10
Amen!!
I commend you for keeping your cool for the most part throughout this Leighton.
Appreciate your cordial response Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett.
As an unashamed, full-fledged Calvinist, these Calvinists in the debate did a real disservice to everyone: Fellow Arminian Christians, Calvinism itself, people who are neutral and not sure which category they fit into, people who are neither, and finally and especially the gospel.
dr theodore zacharaides started off well with a great prayer but when he was done launches off like his colleague yelling and screaming like a carnival barker. wthell???
calm down
make your case
i love debates but the 2 Calvinists think if they yell louder they won the debate. NOT !!!
i would not say that morgan about him. im just questioning his actual arguments. im not convinced he knows what free will is.
Truth.
Wow! “I retract...” calling them brothers!? Maybe the Lord will decree more patience, gentleness, and kindness next time. -you know the Fruit of the Spirit.
I agree that the retraction of having called the brothers was very uncharitable, but it was capped off by calling then heretics. I guess they were predetermined to act the way they did, couldn’t help themselves since they don’t have free will.
@@romanus731watch the Brown Vs James White debate on free will.
The second Calvinist, shows no sign whatsoever of being born again. Watching how he behaves---the arrogance, the aggression, the abominable spirit, sounds a lot like Cain in 1 John 3:12...he is trying to hide behind his knowledge. HE can't even call the other two men brothers in Christ---that is not good.
In his effort to use Isaiah 46 to affirm that God "determines the end from the beginning," Dr. Zachariades misquotes scripture. Here is the context:
Isiah 46:10 AMP
"Declaring the end and the result from the beginning,
And from ancient times the things which have not [yet] been done,
Saying, ‘My purpose will be established,
And I will do all that pleases Me and fulfills My purpose,’"
The scripture uses the word "declare" not "determine" as he suggests. The scripture proves that God foreknows and has declared that knowledge since ancient times. There is insufficient evidence stating that He determines all of our choices (especially our decision to give our lives to Jesus). The scripture also affirms that God is at work in the world "establishing His purpose."
Personally, I believe the scripture affirms God works to free us from the bondage of slavery through Jesus. And in so doing brings glory to Himself, drawing all of us, new Christian and old, to Himself. He deepens our understanding of the holistic impact of the gospel, enabling us to build a better future for ourselves and those around us, proving the power of and sharing the Gospel with those in our lives.
Edit: posted this comment before Dr. Flowers astutely pointed this out. You gotta love the guy.
The two calvinist made fools of themselves. I am still researching the topic, and have not definitively picked a side. But these guys were an embarrassment to reform theology.
I pray that you chose wisely 🙏... please tell me you chose to be a Bible Believer and not a Calvinist!
The anger the other side emits is very telling to their error.
"Free will cannot save you" sonny says in his closing remarks. this very statement shows that after clear and profound explanation of the position he (and Calvinists like him) JUST DONT GET IT. JESUS saves. We never said we save ourselves by our free will. This is why the debate will never end.
It's a misrepresentation of the Arminian position by Calvinists.
And please take note that Dr. Zachariades does not view Dr. Flowers and Dr. Pritchett as “brothers”...He views both as reprobates....The hostility displayed by both representatives of Calvinism is a necessary result of their fatalistic viewpoint...
Exactly. Since their god does not love all men they don’t have to love all men.
‘Notice he said feel free to come.’ That gave me a good laugh.
I cannot understand why Calvinists are so blind to this. Dr. Flowers you and your partner laid this out so simply and so well, it boggles my mind that Calvinists can’t see it. Is it just actively not listening?
Their problem is if they accept they are wrong on one single point their entire theology falls apart, that is what causes their fingers in the ears "la-la-la-la-la" cult behavior.
John Q. Public I’ve read some of your posts and you’re a lot smarter than I am, so here’s my question; if I were a Calvinist and I was saved by grace through Jesus, I would see a huge contradiction between the love of God who sacrificed Himself for me vs. The hard determinism of my Calvinist doctrine. I would seek an answer to this, listening to people like Dr. Flowers in order to try and find some way that is more biblically sound than my current doctrine to not have to believe in this hard determinism.
But I don’t see from any Calvinists even an acknowledgement of that contradiction, let alone try to resolve it. Any thoughts on why that is and how to break through that?
See my long post on this thread which is in response to your question.
Jay Gee, calvinism is not just a doctrine derived from a hermeneutic. Calvinism is itself a hermeneutic. It's a biblical overview that skews everything. They've been brainwashed to think that they are defending God's glory and that they have a righteous concern, sometimes anger, for God's sake. The consistent calvinist also believes that anyone who is not a calvinist isn't even saved. Why would God predestine His "elect" to have a false doctrine? In their mind, whether they realize this or not, He wouldn't. Therefore heretics are not saved.
Brainwashing is extremely difficult to break and they don't believe they hold to a contradiction in the first place.
Hi Jay, can you please explain the contradiction? (Calvinist here).
I guess I'm not understanding your question.
I fail to see the logical inconsistency between these two things:
1) Christ died for me
2) hard determinism
This debate reveals what theology does to an individual, discern for yourself who seemed to be suffering from superiority complex.
The fact that the Calvinistic brother retracted his “brother” comment at 1hr:09 shows his disposition towards his fellow brothers in Christ.
Starting at 34:14...what an awful analogy. Yes, man chooses his own wife (in most countries), but the woman has free will, as well. She chooses to marry hm or not (in most countries).
I encourage anyone to write down the arguments used in the q & a session and you will Find out the calvinists could not logically answer the arguments Leighton and Jonathan used.