I''m not a Calvinist, but this is by far the best critique I've heard from a Calvinist on an opposing view. You did a great job allowing Mike to present his own argument and responding to it without distorting what he said. This is exactly the kind of healthy "iron sharpening iron" that the Church needs. I would love to see you do a response video like this to one of Soteriology101's videos. You have proven that you are willing to be challenged and are open to being corrected by God's Word (opposed to man's opinion/private interpretation). Whether or not you end up agreeing with him, I think you will at least be challenged and I can tell you enjoy being challenged. That's a great quality for a Christian to have. Enjoying being challenged means you're not just out to prove you're right, but you're also actively seeking correction because you genuinely want to be corrected if you are wrong. That's how we should all strive to be. God bless you, brother!
Faith is a gift. Not just in Eph, but also Romans 12. How does one believe? How does one "place faith"? By being born again. The work of God, in John 6. Faith isn't a work, IS the Calvinist position. And, yes, if you're making a decision to believe in Jesus (again, how does someone believe?) as an act of the independent will of man, then you're doing something.
Yes, Faith is a gift. But what scripture says we lost our ability to have faith because of Adam's sin? Again, that is a super imposed belief from Calvinism.
@glenncook8140 rom 8:5-8, 1 Corinthians 2:14 tell about the depravity of man that makes salvation a choice that is not ultimately depedant on the will since the will is of course fallen. On the other hand can you show where in scripture that though humankind has been conceived in sin following the sinful traits back to Adam and therefore already condemned as Paul says that somehow there is still an ability to come to faith
This was a really good video, you did well being honest and respectful. I'd love to see Mike respond to this video, or possibly even better have a direct conversation live, doesn't even have to be a debate, just you two talking about some stuff
Thank you so much for the comment and the kind words! And yeah, I would LOVE to have Pastor Mike on to talk about this stuff, but I doubt it would ever happen and even if it did - I think I would be too star struck to even be able to have a conversation with him 😂
I'll be interested to watch this. I remember going through those videos several years back, and I felt his arguments weren't the best and I actually eventually became Calvinist because I did deeper reading into the passages he addressed.
Funny how this all works. Mike Winger and Leighton Flowers brought me out of Calvinist thinking. That said, I'm so bored by the conversation that I hardly pay attention to it anymore. If you're sharing the Gospel and growing in sanctification, I'm very disinterested in even knowing where you stand on the matter, let alone debate it.
I agree that it is funny how this all works. For a long time I delayed watching anything that Mike had to say about Calvinism, because I too - not that I was bored by it, but I just wanted to learn about other things and grow in the knowledge of God in other areas. I was pretty set in my reformed theology, so I too lost interest whenever I saw the debate spark up somewhere. Just to be completely transparent with you, a part of me made this video because I was interested in what Pastor Mike had to say, but also I was hoping the algorithm would draw in some of Mike Winger’s subscribers, because I think his demographic would be interested in my channel’s content (since all I seem to be drawing are Tim Mackie fans, who hate me, and Nontrinitarian “Christians” who also hate me lol). But I couldn’t agree with you more that as long as we are sharing the gospel and growing in sanctification, then who cares where we land on this subject? Amen!
You seem to insinuate that God sending Jesus to die on the Cross and raised Him from the grave is not enough involvement to draw all men to Him. Jesus said that if He is lifted up, He'll draw all men unto Himself. Drawing all men does not mean all men will come. Just because we have a sin nature does not mean that we don't have the ability to respond positively to the Gospel. Remember what John 20:31 says, "but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." Also, Ephesians 1:4 says "...even as he chose us in Him, before the foundation of the world..." Do not impose the calvinist teaching that you read it as "he chose who would be in Him". Let the scripture drive what you believe verses letting your belief drive how you interpret scripture. Calvinism only works if you believe the TULIP first and then interpret scripture accordingly. I'm enjoying your channel.
Regarding the question at 41:27 there is one instance that comes to my mind that would demonstrate this very thing happening. In Acts 2 when Peter is preaching to the Jews, he says in verse 23 “this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, YOU crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.” He reiterates this again in verse 36 that they were the ones who crucified Jesus. And then these same people are the ones who were “cut to the heart” and asking what they must do to be saved (v. 37). Pretty interesting to think about.
You bring up another good point! I don’t doubt that some of the Jews that were yelling to crucify him were also the ones that Peter was preaching to that got saved. But I also think there were some who got saved that weren’t in that crowd and I also think there were some Pharisees, who were saying to crucify him, who didn’t repent and believe from that same crowd. I think Peter is making a more general statement speaking to a crowd of Jewish people and putting the blame on them, since “He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.” I’m not sure if Peter had specific individuals in mind when he said “you” or just preaching to such a large crowd and was aware some in that midst were the ones who set Jesus up to be crucified. Definitely pretty interesting to think about though.
@@colin_priest yep, I agree with you. Peter was addressing the “men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem” (2:14) not specific individuals who literally crucified Jesus. Actually, Peter places the blame for Jesus’ crucifixion on Jews *and* Gentiles…the Jews killed Jesus “by the hands of lawless men.” Another passage is Romans 11. Paul is saying how some of the Jews were hardened by God so that they would have Jesus crucified. But, this was all part of God’s plan because “through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles” (11:11). These are the branches that were “broken off.” BUT Paul says even these broken off branches whom God hardened can be grafted back in…”if they do not continue in their unbelief” (11:23).
Great video! Loved the balanced review and critique. We both share a love for Pastor Winger and his thoughtful and biblical approach. I’ve had an issue with the Calvinist view for years that maybe you could help clear up for me. This might be my immature logic and/or lack of study and understanding, but I find the Calvinist view somewhat lacking proper justice/love/hope/grace. If God determines/predestines everything and man cannot choose God with free will, or ”free choice” as you put it (a phrase which I really like as a compatibilist), then how is it justifiable, or even loving, for God to separate himself from an unrepentant individual for all eternity, if they had no agency to begin with? If man cannot choose God without His intervention and man cannot resist God’s calling, then man is nothing more than a broken robot with the capacity to experience whatever eternal consequence God arbitrarily (Unconditional Election) doles out. It also can imply God is not loving if He chooses to not save everyone, if He has the power to do so. To me, that doesn’t give me hope. To me, that’s not the Good News. To me, that’s not a loving God. With that perspective, I’m confused then by so many scriptures that command us or advise us on what to do. Why even give the 10Cs, if it really doesn’t matter? Why would Jesus say to ”Go and sin no more”? Why would we ”pick up our cross daily”? Why would we be told to ”think on what’s true, honorable, etc.”, if we have no agency? Why are we told to not conform to this world if we ultimately have no control to choose or resist God? It doesn’t make sense to me. I find the Calvinist view brings me so much discomfort. If I am truly one of God’s elect, shouldn’t I be living my life on compelled, unresistant auto-pilot serving the Lord? And if I am not, then does that mean I am not really saved? Maybe you could shed some light on this for me? Thanks and love ya, brother!
A very short response to at least the final questions you posed would be that God ordains the ends as well as the means. Peter, already having been saved, says that "...through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22). This goes to the idea that the events which occur in the life of the believer will not be sunshine and rainbows. More to your point, Paul writes in Romans 7, "15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. This points to the idea that even though we are saved, as Paul was, we will always struggle with the sin inside us. Salvation comes once, but sanctification takes place over a lifetime, both culminating when we are in His presence. Until that time, the sin of the world and of our natures still do battle within us. In addition, I think looking at it as being "compelled" can sometimes cause us to balk as well. Though Paul does in fact use the word as well (2Cor. 5:14), it is used in a positive light, not a negative light. To be driven by the Spirit of God is not a negative thing, but when we use it to assume that we should be robotic in our walk, I think it diminishes the saving power of the cross and the sanctifying power of the Spirit. Blessing in your walk, brother!
@@SheepDog1974 Paul answers precisely that question between Ephesians 1:12; "to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory." (Eph. 1:12)! While Paul specifically was speaking to a group who would have been the "first to hope in Christ," we too partake of that portion when we come to faith in Christ! It's all for His glory He further reiterates that God has prepared this in advance in Ephesians 2:10, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them"
@@thegoldmine4111 so are you his workmanship created in Christ for good works? Why? Good works for what? If only some are elect and others are not... what good is and what purpose does your good works hold? This seems like a redundant statement for Paul to make when you had no agency - a chosen elect before the foundation of the world - So your faith in Jesus serves what purpose? I state these questions, and they sound absurd to illustrate the inconsistency of the Calvinists paradigm.
@@SheepDog1974 it serves the purpose of showing God's redeeming power, not by anything that we did, but by His hand. This is to the praise of His glory, as only He could have brought it about. Also, "seems like" and "are" are miles different from one another.
I like Mark chapter 4, the parable of the sower of seeds. I take that to mean it's very possible for people to make a decision to act on their belief or not. There's a lot of good information in this video from both you and Mike, I have to take it all in, but I still think true faith is a work. it takes a lot in this secular world to study the scriptures and the faith and still keep the faith.
First timr listener, I appreciare your humble and gracious attitude on this topic, and I love the quality id your presentation. You clearly are not taking this lightly. That said, I think you are still misunderstanding the non-calvinist position and that is causing you to not actually argue against the position well. 1) Mike Winger is NOT an Arminian and neither is the vast majority of non-calvinists throughout history. Arminianism is a distinct systematic with distinct tenets and Winger does not hold those tenets. You present a false dichotomy (unintentionally I am sure) when you make this a Calvinist vs Arminian debate. 2) You have conflated the work of God in drawing people to salvation with God's control in Salvation. All non-calvinists believe thay God draws people. All non-calvinists believe that God grants repentance. All non-calvinists believe that God elects and predestines. All non-calvinists believe that God has ordained and orchestrated at least some events to occur. However, this does not make the Calvinist case that God controls everything. There is literally no verse anywhere that states that God controls, determines, ordains, or decrees all things. 3) You have read Joshua to mean that because Israel was unable to obey God, that therefore all sinners are unable to come to God. The Bible says nothing of the sort. It simply means Israel would be unable to do anything until they had a deliverer that would enable them to live holy lives. That deliverer has come. He has drawn all men unto himself when he was lifted up. 1 Timothy 2:1-8 is abundantly clear that all have been ransomed by the King. We apply the King's work of salvation by confessing our inability to save ourselves with our mouths and believe in our hearts that Jesus the King is Lord. This is something that is not too difficult to do (Deut 30:11-19).
Hey man! Haven’t got to watch the whole video but something I don’t understand about Calvinism is obedience. How do Calvinist reconcile the fact that their obedience makes no difference in someone else’s salvation? So I can live a life of sin and it makes no difference because my treasures are already in heaven and I can gain no more, I have no blood on my hands like Paul because it’s not up to me, I do not need to choose to serve one master over the other because the decision was already made for me. Sorry I know this is a loaded question but just wondered. Also sorry for all the hate you get bro this is a great channel and I believe your obedience is bringing or will bring people to Christ!
Your questions are always spot on, my friend. Also thank you for the kind words. Many times I’ve wanted to give up making videos because I feel like I’m not making a positive impact on the Kingdom, but comment like yours helps me to want to continue on! I’m going into work soon but I will answer your question!
Sounds good man, thank you! Hopefully one day you will be able to do UA-cam full time and although that opens another world of challenges it’s always great to work from home and see your wife and kid throughout the day!
So to answer your questions…I think you’re conflating justification and sanctification. For me, I believe man cannot be saved apart from God choosing, drawing, sending the preacher, sealing, and regenerating. The reason for that is because mankind will not come to God because they hate God and love their sin. Another way to say it is the natural man is able to respond to God’s call, but is unwilling. In other words, mankind has already responded to God = refusal. Jesus said “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.” BUT once we repent and believe, by God’s grace, the Christian is given a new heart with new desires so that, not only can he now choose righteousness, BUT he wants to! So the sanctification process, although still a work of God, I believe is more synergistic. But do our choices make a difference? If we are obedient or disobedient, does it affect God’s overall plan for the world? I’m not sure. Paul says in Romans that through Israel’s disobedience, salvation came to the Gentiles. That’s an interesting verse. But the way I’ve always kind of looked at it was…let’s pretend there are 10 people that God is gonna save. And He gives you the choice to either be a part of all 10 getting saved, none, or anywhere in between. No matter what, those 10 people will get saved, but whether you’re a part of it or not is up to you. God will just find someone else to share the gospel with them. So whether I’m obedient or not, doesn’t change God’s outcome BUT I will still be held responsible for my choices. I know that’s kind of silly but that’s how I reconciled God’s sovereignty and my responsibility in my head prior to being reformed (and still kind of now if I’m being honest 😂).
@@colin_priestI appreciate the response man. Something I notice though is that you bring it back to people being totally depraved. Could it be possible that when God test us, then He chooses to withhold His knowledge until we choose? Abraham and Isaac’s sacrifice for example. This is where God says “Now I know” meaning He did not know until Abraham made his decision. I would put that with the command or test for all men to repent everywhere and God waits for us to make our decision till He counts it as righteousness or not.
I’m still not convinced by mikes argument against limited atonement from 1 John. Here’s why…At 17:02 Mike actually quotes 1 John 2:2 incorrectly. It’s subtle, but it makes a huge difference. The text says Jesus *is the propitiation* for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. Mike reads it as Jesus *has propitiated* for the whole world. 1 John 2:2 doesn’t say that Jesus has propitiated (past tense) the sins of the whole world, it says Jesus is the propitiation for the whole world…meaning Jesus is the only way of salvation for the whole world. No one can be saved in any way other than through him. If you want your sins propitiated, Jesus is the only propitiation, not for ours-Christians- only, but also for the sins of the world.
You make a really good point. A buddy of mine also challenged me by asking, “What’s the definition of propitiation?” Which would seem like a contradiction if Jesus was a substitute for those who place their faith in Him, but then also made payment for everyone? That doesn’t make sense. So yeah, definitely still wrestling with this passage for sure. But I appreciate your input!
Actually, the Calvinist perspective is the biblical perspective, but nobody knows what God knows, and it's foolish to think we have salvation figured out.
So you make a distinction between faith and salvation. Faith is Salvation. For faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Jesus says "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." By faith we understand that the worlds were framed...by faith Noah being warned of things not yet seen...". THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED, that is the faith of Christ, the Doctrine of Christ, the words of eternal life...and faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So faith and salvation are one and the same thing. Since faith is the substance and evidence - it is how we know Christ and the Father.
@ 15:14 Limited Atonement (or Definite Atonement) is Christ being the perfect High Priest. He makes a once for all sacrifice for a people that have been given to Him by the Father. His sacrifice is what cleanses us. Through faith, (not BECAUSE of faith) does His sacrifice become the propitiation (full satisfaction) of our sins. For the rest of eternity, He stands as our High Priest, interceding for the people He made His sacrifice for. If Christ is the High Priest for those in hell, His sacrifice is ineffective and is merely a suggestion. That His blood is NOT the full satisfaction of the sins of those in hell. Because if "man's free will choice" supersedes the blood of God Himself, God being murdered gets put on the back burner, behind "man's free will choice". Limited Atonement (or Definite Atonement) is Christ being the perfect High Priest.
How does man's free will choice supersede Christ's sacrifice if God is intentionally saying that it is not too difficult to choose the life that is offered?
@@troymulberry9434 Jesus Christ is the perfect High Priest. You avoided this entirely, highlighting "man's free will". God gave a people to Jesus and not one drop of blood is wasted on those He doesn't intercede for. He made His sacrifice for His people. That is why Jesus Christ is the perfect High Priest.
@@WordWiseMinistries oh I see what you are saying now. It is a strange idea that "perfect" = not wasted when what the author of Hebrews is saying is that Jesus is the perfectly moral or lawful sacrifice. You seem to have redefined perfect to mean "exact" and that is a very anachronistic meaning. The Bible never uses "perfect" in that sense that I am aware of. Additionally, I find it really strange to think of Jesus' blood as being wasted instead of sacrificial. What is more sacrificial than a rejected gift? The very fact that people reject the sacrificial love of God (Matthew 5:43-48) is what makes it ultimately sacrificial. God doesn't just love those who love him back. He knowingly loves even those who reject him! And what more sacrificial way to show that perfect love than to knowingly give it to those who reject him? I read that verse to make Cheist's sacrifice EVEN GREATER when it is rejected! Why in the world would you read it as "wasted"? I don't see how this has anything to do with man's free will one way or the other.
@@troymulberry9434 You are correct that Jesus Christ made the perfect sacrifice. Christ's sacrifice was the full satisfaction (propitiation) for our sins, for those who believe (trust) in Him. Also, His sacrifice was for His people that were given to Him by the Father, not for everyone. Thus, no one can reject His sacrifice. It was Christ's sacrifice to the Father, not to His people. So it is impossible for anyone to reject.
With the "plea" remember contextually Paul was talking to the people of Corinth who did once believe but were straying from it, when it comes to presenting the Gospel Jesus says if someone doesn't want to accept the Gospel to wipe the dust off your sandals and move on, however Paul was pleaing to those who had accepted the gospel but started moving away. Now for the "person not accepting the gospel" there's another possibility besides they weren't chosen, they aren't meant to accept the gospel YET, the Bible explains that everything has a time and place and God has a plan for everything and everything has a time, we preach so that we plant seeds that God grows I always disliked the argument that God chose those who would choose him, that ultimately takes away the statements that God alone is the author of salvation, and it kind of begs the question, how does someone choose God? The Bible clearly states "no one seeks for God everyone has turned away" so by our natural state we reject and "choose not to choose" so ultimately God is the one who chooses who is saved, and if God chooses those who would choose God then that would also mean we're saved by our works
It seems you are falling it to the logical fallacy that is any thought, desire or action of man is required by God to be saved that man saves himself. God being the author of salvation can also fit a non-calvinist definition of sovereignty. The definition for a sovereign ruler in any language outside of a determinist frame work is the one who has the ultimate authority to make the laws and judge accordingly. God writes/authors the expectations for salvation and judges is by them. If you read all of the occurrences of the word SEEK in scripture, you get a very different picture than the one drawn by calvinism isolated Romans 3 from its original quotes (2 nearly identical Psalms written about the fool the rejects God) and what the rest of scripture says on the subject. Scripture says that God SEEKS humble and contrite hearts. Even the “elect” are broken before regeneration, so in Calvinism God is really SEEKING the elect and making them humble and contrite, but that is not what it says. If you just let it mean what it says, and God SEEKS the humble and contrite heart, and we both agree that He judges correctly, then how can that heart the boast about being saved? Jesus says REPEATEDLY that if you want to gain your life you must lose it. To surrender to realize you do not have the power get what you want or stay alive on your own, but again coming to a place of declaring yourself bankrupt somehow becomes a work or potential boast. Again, scripture say humble yourself and be healed, not be healed/regenerates and be made humble.
@@jeffreybomba I'm going to try this again because my comment didn't go through, I don't even understand what you think I think from your first point, second while yes God "seeks the humble" he is the one who humbles people, for example the book of Job one of the main points made, is that God draws out pride that is within a person and he crushes that pride, Moses he wasn't always humble, he wanted to do things his own way, he didn't want to do what God wanted and he would constantly be frustrated and angry and impatient. His humility was something taught to him, similarly the same with the book of Jonah Us as creatures born in sin we are naturally filled with pride and are against God And here Psalm 14:2-3 ESV [2] The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. [3] They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one. And Romans constantly talks about the depravity of human beings and finally, when I say "author of salvation" I don't just mean he dictates what saves a person, it also means HE IS THE ONE WHO SAVES, Isaiah and so many of the Old Testament testifies to this repeatedly
@@livingtoaster1358 And Job was already a believer. They again. Instead of just reading the passage you are i strength Calvinism into it. Yes, He is the one that saves. Roman’s 5:2 says that faith precedes the grace we no stand in, that would be the grace of salvation. Just because someone professes faith does that save? NO! As I stated , God judges the heart, and He saves who He jussie’s as having faithYou quote from Psalm 14 says they BECAME corrupt, just like Romans 1 does, not born corrupt.
And you skipped the whole point of my reference, “The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” And like I said, this Psalm says they became like this not born that way. Context kills Calvinism.
@@livingtoaster1358 So you are telling me the God SEEKS the lost (of course He just SEEKS the lost) then He regenerates them maiming the HIMBLE, INDWELLS them, and though He is TABERNACLING IN THEM, He continues to SEEK them. You really need to read ALL of the SEEK passages. They talk about how the understood, they rejected, the BECAME (not born) DEAF and BLIND, and they don’t SEEK God. The only time scripture does not specify that people BECAME blind, is during Jesus’s ministry when people who have already seen prophesied miracles, are spoken to in parables so they can’t see so the cross will be accomplished, and then after many of them DO come to faith. You probably will not want to read all the BLIND/DEAF passages either, or you will just keep ignoring that parts that contradict Calvinism.
I actually get a headache when Mike tries to explain Calvinism. He interprets it wrong almost every time, and also always has a mocking tone. Faith, which is something we gone solely through the regenerating from the Holy Spirit, isn’t something we say is a work. We are predestined to be drawn, to be regenerated, and then justified by Christ. Faith isn’t a work, the same way repentance isn’t a work. It’s an outward expression from what God did inward. If Mike feels so confident that Calvinism isn’t the appropriate lense we need to apply when reading his word, then I will respectfully disagree, but do not think by twisting something slightly and then smiling about it proves a point.
@@DFSLJCthis is a confusing comment. Which doctrine are you referring to? The Reformed theological ideas such as Calvinism? Or the ideas that go against such theology? I don’t think of Arminianism as the doctrine of Demons, I have plenty of brothers in Christ who disagree with me and I always remember George Whitfield and John Wesley when I become discouraged. What I WONT have is someone coming up with a weak argument and then pseudo mocking each other. It’s just not Biblical to do that.
In all seriousness...No. Leighton knows nothing about what Calvinists actually believes. At least that's what I tell myself. If he does know, and is actually just straw manning the position for the last 10+ years, then I think he is kinda a perpetual liar (I don't want to believe that, but it's the only other conclusion). He endlessly misrepresents Calvinism and is extremely bad faith, and even if he is ignorant, and not lying, he is minimally not trying hard to steel man his opponent (and has been lacking here for years).
I think it is more about how time itself works. Does the future and past continue to exist? I think I have a definite future and past and God is absolutely sovereign over all of it, but in his sovereignty he delegated our ability to choose to us yet knows what we will choose in the future because he is outside of time and his plan already has our choices factored in. With delegation, it can be removed or overridden as needed. Like those that sear their conscience with countless evil and God hardens their heart to his salvation through Christ. Stay humble folks and appreciate God's gift and those without it, plead with him to have it. In effect we make our choice and all those that do choose heaven through Christ are already with him in eternity. Everyone reading this is already either before the thrown in worship and love or suffering in hades in hatred and torment. Our fate was sealed on the first sunrise yet at the same time we chose that fate. A mystery...that is a result of God not being in time. The bottom line is that we don't know our fate, we have to work out our salvation with fear and trembling and share the gospel with all who will hear it, let the mystery be known when we can ask him directly.
We don't know our fate? That is rather distrubing, and not at all what Scripture teaches. If we are in Christ, we are a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). We are in Christ if we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead. "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." (Romans 10:9-11) We can be quite assured of our ultimate future, provided we continue in the faith. (colossians 1:21-22). God is not a god of confusion, but declares the end from the beginning. He has plainly taught what is expected of us, and He sent his Son to die for us, and to be raised, that who so ever believes in him - the Son - shall not perish, but have everlasting life. It's not a very difficult checklist.
Great video! Thank you for your fair and thoughtful treatment - the internet, and the kingdom at large, needs more of this. Another point in favor of the Calvinist understanding of what it means that "God is patient toward you, not willing that any should perish" that I think helps clarify the text: the question being asked is "Why hasn't Jesus come back yet?" The answer is, "Because God is not willing that any should perish." If "any" means anyone, of all humanity, period, and there isn't a fixed, specific number of the elect, then the logic of Peter's statement would mean that Jesus would never come back, because when He does, some will perish, and He is not willing that should happen. The idea that "any" means "any of you, the elect" actually makes sense of the context, whereas the alternative makes Peter say something we know he can't be saying.
Think about this, why do you say things like "working your way into heaven"? Where does the idea that we are going to heaven or hell come from? What about the resurrection? What if the idea of us going to heaven is not correct? Will it change your outlook on what the gospel is and how you work out your own salvation (romans)? Salvation, the way I see it, is righteousness. You can try to be righteous on your own, through your works, but it will not be enough, for we all fall short of the goodness of God, or you can believe the gospel, show God that you truly believe with your actions (works) (also known as submitting your life to Jesus), and He will grant this to you as righteousness through your faith (like Abraham). This is grace. You do not earn salvation/righteousness, it is an unmerited gift from God that you receive through faith (which requires action otherwise it is dead). The righteous live by faith. And what do we get? Not to go to heaven, but eternal life through bodily resurrection when God raises everyone on the day of judgement. And what about those that do not believe? Eternal torment? Think about where that concept comes from as well (it's likely the same influence). I would say that those that do not believe will not inherit the kingdom and eternal life, but eternal destruction, second death, one that you will not be raised from because you are no more. Why do I think this? The jews, and many other cultures/religions of the day, believed that when we die, we go to a resting place. The jews called it Abrahams bosom, Jesus called it paradise, the greeks called it hades. This is where we will be resurrected from, this is where Jesus went when He died, but after judgement, if righteousness is not imputed to us through Christ, we will cease to exist. Just the way I understand it, which I believe is closer to the way the bible teaches it, but I am not infallible and very well could be wrong. If I believe that my good works, done in faith to show God, and just as importantly to those around me, that I truly do believe what he has promised he will deliver, is wrong, then I see no harm in it. If I believe that my good works prove to myself that I am truly saved, or that My good works earn me salvation, then there is harm done, for I will never be assured, and I can never do enough. Only God knows a mans heart, let Him be the judge.
I think you’re mostly right. Those things were done as fruits of the Holy Spirit right? We can’t really know anyone’s heart like you just said, but those can be good indicators of someone who is a born again believer being convicted of themselves. I never said good works are a bad thing, they are definitely necessary. But, they are the after effect of righteousness being imputed to us and the Holy Spirit sanctifying us
@@philipdumas4435 Likely yes about the fruits of the Spirit in cooperation, though good works are also performed by secular people, and many of them with good intentions as well, so something else to think about. The Spirit is a helper, not a doer. Cheers,
The idea of heaven and hell come from the Bible. Paul talks a lot of heaven. “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.” Jesus talks a lot about hell. “In that place there will be weeping and gashing of teeth. They’ll be cast into the outer darkness. These will go away into the eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” John sees a vision of the second death, which is the lake of fire, and in the lake of fire are the devil and his angels, and anyone who did not believe in Jesus and in that place they’ll be tormented day and night, forever and ever. I do agree that the new heavens and the new earth in our resurrected glorified bodies are not the endgame or the goal or even the purpose of the gospel. I even say that in this video 38:47 that those are perks of the gospel, but not the main point. What is eternal life? Eternal life is knowing the one true God and Jesus Christ, whom he sent. I totally agree that salvation is about being free from sin and obtaining a righteousness that only comes from Christ.
Islam Religion is the complete way of our life. ◄ Revelation 22:9 ► Verse (Click for Chapter) New Living Translation But he said, “No, don’t worship me. I am a servant of God, just like you and your brothers the prophets, as well as all who obey what is written in this book. Worship only God!” American Standard Version And he saith unto me, See thou do it not: I am a fellow-servant with thee and with thy brethren the prophets, and with them that keep the words of this book: worship God.
I don't understand why people have a problem accepting the sovereignty of God, while also accepting the free will of humanity. Scripture very clearly supports both of these things. We are called to choose Jesus, while God has hardened hearts and chosen an elect. We are both called to choose, and yet we are chosen. This is not a complicated issue lol I don't know why people think they have to choose between the 2.
Because, your notion of God decreeing the hardening of one's heart so that they are unable to respond, believe, accept etc... And then subsequently condemn them to hell - is not consistent with the scripture, nor is it the character and attributes of God
@@SheepDog1974 you are speaking as if I'm a Calvinist, which I am not, because they do adamantly argue against free will which seems to me to be so clearly taught in scripture. But it's equally foolish to argue against God's sovereignty. He most definitely did harden hearts in scripture, you cannot argue against that and be true to scripture. I believe it's more complicated than "God just doesn't want this person in heaven" which is what Calvinists seem to believe, but it definitely happens, which is exactly why I say that I can't understand why people can't reconcile humanities free will with God's sovereignty. You all act like you can only choose 1, and I find that ridiculous
@@gabrieldietz1866 you may find it ridiculous but I cannot see God intentionally "hardening" anyone. The hardening we read about in scripture, is God's "giving one up over to their desires". This is a judicial hardening. Otherwise your line of thinking is no different than a calvinists... That God decrees evil and sin by preventing someone from their choice. It's absurd.
@@SheepDog1974Exodus 4:21 God says to Moses that "I will harden Pharaohs heart", Exodus 7:3 again God says "I will harden Pharaohs heart" Exodus 9:12 says "and the Lord hardened Pharaohs heart" Exodus 10:1 says "go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart" Romans 9:18 says "so then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires" Deuteronomy 2:30 says "But Sihon king of Heshbon was not willing for us to pass through his land; for the Lord your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, in order to deliver him into your hand, as he is today." I could keep going with this all day lol there is countless scripture that refute what you are saying, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. God is sovereign, he can do as he pleases with the pottery that he created. He can soften some and harden others, and it is still good, because He is the one who did it. That's what it means to be sovereign. That doesn't mean free will doesn't exist, because I can find countless scripture that support it, it just means that people have to learn to reconcile God's sovereignty with humanities free will
@@gabrieldietz1866 Gabriel, I am familiar with all the calvin proof texts. Could Pharoah have changed his mind? Was he unable to? Or was he NOT willing to change his mind? He's the King of Egypt, the worlds epitome of power in that age. In God's omniscients he knew that Pharoah would not yield to Moses... But God did not coerce Pharoah... He gave him 10 plaques to change his mind. I see a merciful, patient and loving God, NOT wanting ANY to perish. But the end result proves Pharoahs disobedience. Notice Ex 4:21 God says " I will" future tense... It's not until 9:12 that God judicially hardens (gives Pharoah up to his desires of his will) ...same applies for King of Sidon. Your reading and understanding of Romans 9 is incorrect. Paul is admonishing the Jewish people, that God has chosen to reveal himself to the gentiles and that God can love anyone despite their blood line. The context of Paul's quote is ex 33:15 - God has mercy in mind ... Calvinism reads a negative inference that God's wrath is being offered to whom he wills. The question Moses possesses to 33:16 is the mercy and compassion God has for His people (Jewish people). The point Paul was making in Romans is that God chose Isaac not Esau for his divine blood line... This is not a salvific choice, Esau made that choice all on his own. Our lenses and presuppositions make a difference. Again, God is abounding in love gracious and compassionate slow to anger who relents from sending calamity.
I''m not a Calvinist, but this is by far the best critique I've heard from a Calvinist on an opposing view. You did a great job allowing Mike to present his own argument and responding to it without distorting what he said. This is exactly the kind of healthy "iron sharpening iron" that the Church needs. I would love to see you do a response video like this to one of Soteriology101's videos. You have proven that you are willing to be challenged and are open to being corrected by God's Word (opposed to man's opinion/private interpretation). Whether or not you end up agreeing with him, I think you will at least be challenged and I can tell you enjoy being challenged. That's a great quality for a Christian to have. Enjoying being challenged means you're not just out to prove you're right, but you're also actively seeking correction because you genuinely want to be corrected if you are wrong. That's how we should all strive to be. God bless you, brother!
I would highly recommend you going to Soteriology 101 and listen to Dr. Leighton Flowers.
Faith is a gift. Not just in Eph, but also Romans 12.
How does one believe? How does one "place faith"? By being born again. The work of God, in John 6.
Faith isn't a work, IS the Calvinist position.
And, yes, if you're making a decision to believe in Jesus (again, how does someone believe?) as an act of the independent will of man, then you're doing something.
Yes, Faith is a gift. But what scripture says we lost our ability to have faith because of Adam's sin? Again, that is a super imposed belief from Calvinism.
@@glenncook8140 it's the narrative to the entirety of scripture, but okay.
@glenncook8140 rom 8:5-8, 1 Corinthians 2:14 tell about the depravity of man that makes salvation a choice that is not ultimately depedant on the will since the will is of course fallen. On the other hand can you show where in scripture that though humankind has been conceived in sin following the sinful traits back to Adam and therefore already condemned as Paul says that somehow there is still an ability to come to faith
Hebrews 11:6. I suppose you would suggest that "who is being drawn near"... But that's not what is written
This was a really good video, you did well being honest and respectful. I'd love to see Mike respond to this video, or possibly even better have a direct conversation live, doesn't even have to be a debate, just you two talking about some stuff
Thank you so much for the comment and the kind words!
And yeah, I would LOVE to have Pastor Mike on to talk about this stuff, but I doubt it would ever happen and even if it did - I think I would be too star struck to even be able to have a conversation with him 😂
I'll be interested to watch this. I remember going through those videos several years back, and I felt his arguments weren't the best and I actually eventually became Calvinist because I did deeper reading into the passages he addressed.
Funny how this all works. Mike Winger and Leighton Flowers brought me out of Calvinist thinking. That said, I'm so bored by the conversation that I hardly pay attention to it anymore. If you're sharing the Gospel and growing in sanctification, I'm very disinterested in even knowing where you stand on the matter, let alone debate it.
I agree that it is funny how this all works.
For a long time I delayed watching anything that Mike had to say about Calvinism, because I too - not that I was bored by it, but I just wanted to learn about other things and grow in the knowledge of God in other areas. I was pretty set in my reformed theology, so I too lost interest whenever I saw the debate spark up somewhere.
Just to be completely transparent with you, a part of me made this video because I was interested in what Pastor Mike had to say, but also I was hoping the algorithm would draw in some of Mike Winger’s subscribers, because I think his demographic would be interested in my channel’s content (since all I seem to be drawing are Tim Mackie fans, who hate me, and Nontrinitarian “Christians” who also hate me lol).
But I couldn’t agree with you more that as long as we are sharing the gospel and growing in sanctification, then who cares where we land on this subject? Amen!
I loved your video! Can you do a video about double versus single predestination? I think I believe in double, but I don't know for sure.
You seem to insinuate that God sending Jesus to die on the Cross and raised Him from the grave is not enough involvement to draw all men to Him. Jesus said that if He is lifted up, He'll draw all men unto Himself. Drawing all men does not mean all men will come. Just because we have a sin nature does not mean that we don't have the ability to respond positively to the Gospel. Remember what John 20:31 says, "but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." Also, Ephesians 1:4 says "...even as he chose us in Him, before the foundation of the world..." Do not impose the calvinist teaching that you read it as "he chose who would be in Him". Let the scripture drive what you believe verses letting your belief drive how you interpret scripture. Calvinism only works if you believe the TULIP first and then interpret scripture accordingly.
I'm enjoying your channel.
Excellent comment
how is "he chose us in Him, before the foundation of the world" NOT election? You're the one reading your theology into this.
Regarding the question at 41:27 there is one instance that comes to my mind that would demonstrate this very thing happening. In Acts 2 when Peter is preaching to the Jews, he says in verse 23 “this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, YOU crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.” He reiterates this again in verse 36 that they were the ones who crucified Jesus. And then these same people are the ones who were “cut to the heart” and asking what they must do to be saved (v. 37). Pretty interesting to think about.
You bring up another good point!
I don’t doubt that some of the Jews that were yelling to crucify him were also the ones that Peter was preaching to that got saved. But I also think there were some who got saved that weren’t in that crowd and I also think there were some Pharisees, who were saying to crucify him, who didn’t repent and believe from that same crowd.
I think Peter is making a more general statement speaking to a crowd of Jewish people and putting the blame on them, since “He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.” I’m not sure if Peter had specific individuals in mind when he said “you” or just preaching to such a large crowd and was aware some in that midst were the ones who set Jesus up to be crucified.
Definitely pretty interesting to think about though.
@@colin_priest yep, I agree with you. Peter was addressing the “men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem” (2:14) not specific individuals who literally crucified Jesus. Actually, Peter places the blame for Jesus’ crucifixion on Jews *and* Gentiles…the Jews killed Jesus “by the hands of lawless men.”
Another passage is Romans 11. Paul is saying how some of the Jews were hardened by God so that they would have Jesus crucified. But, this was all part of God’s plan because “through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles” (11:11). These are the branches that were “broken off.” BUT Paul says even these broken off branches whom God hardened can be grafted back in…”if they do not continue in their unbelief” (11:23).
Great video! Loved the balanced review and critique. We both share a love for Pastor Winger and his thoughtful and biblical approach.
I’ve had an issue with the Calvinist view for years that maybe you could help clear up for me.
This might be my immature logic and/or lack of study and understanding, but I find the Calvinist view somewhat lacking proper justice/love/hope/grace. If God determines/predestines everything and man cannot choose God with free will, or ”free choice” as you put it (a phrase which I really like as a compatibilist), then how is it justifiable, or even loving, for God to separate himself from an unrepentant individual for all eternity, if they had no agency to begin with? If man cannot choose God without His intervention and man cannot resist God’s calling, then man is nothing more than a broken robot with the capacity to experience whatever eternal consequence God arbitrarily (Unconditional Election) doles out. It also can imply God is not loving if He chooses to not save everyone, if He has the power to do so.
To me, that doesn’t give me hope. To me, that’s not the Good News. To me, that’s not a loving God. With that perspective, I’m confused then by so many scriptures that command us or advise us on what to do. Why even give the 10Cs, if it really doesn’t matter? Why would Jesus say to ”Go and sin no more”? Why would we ”pick up our cross daily”? Why would we be told to ”think on what’s true, honorable, etc.”, if we have no agency? Why are we told to not conform to this world if we ultimately have no control to choose or resist God? It doesn’t make sense to me.
I find the Calvinist view brings me so much discomfort. If I am truly one of God’s elect, shouldn’t I be living my life on compelled, unresistant auto-pilot serving the Lord? And if I am not, then does that mean I am not really saved? Maybe you could shed some light on this for me? Thanks and love ya, brother!
A very short response to at least the final questions you posed would be that God ordains the ends as well as the means. Peter, already having been saved, says that "...through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22). This goes to the idea that the events which occur in the life of the believer will not be sunshine and rainbows. More to your point, Paul writes in Romans 7,
"15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.
This points to the idea that even though we are saved, as Paul was, we will always struggle with the sin inside us. Salvation comes once, but sanctification takes place over a lifetime, both culminating when we are in His presence. Until that time, the sin of the world and of our natures still do battle within us. In addition, I think looking at it as being "compelled" can sometimes cause us to balk as well. Though Paul does in fact use the word as well (2Cor. 5:14), it is used in a positive light, not a negative light. To be driven by the Spirit of God is not a negative thing, but when we use it to assume that we should be robotic in our walk, I think it diminishes the saving power of the cross and the sanctifying power of the Spirit. Blessing in your walk, brother!
@@thegoldmine4111a thoughtful response but you ignored the obvious question ❓ if we have no agency then what is the purpose of sanctification?
@@SheepDog1974 Paul answers precisely that question between Ephesians 1:12; "to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory." (Eph. 1:12)! While Paul specifically was speaking to a group who would have been the "first to hope in Christ," we too partake of that portion when we come to faith in Christ! It's all for His glory
He further reiterates that God has prepared this in advance in Ephesians 2:10, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them"
@@thegoldmine4111 so are you his workmanship created in Christ for good works? Why? Good works for what? If only some are elect and others are not... what good is and what purpose does your good works hold? This seems like a redundant statement for Paul to make when you had no agency - a chosen elect before the foundation of the world - So your faith in Jesus serves what purpose?
I state these questions, and they sound absurd to illustrate the inconsistency of the Calvinists paradigm.
@@SheepDog1974 it serves the purpose of showing God's redeeming power, not by anything that we did, but by His hand. This is to the praise of His glory, as only He could have brought it about. Also, "seems like" and "are" are miles different from one another.
I like Mark chapter 4, the parable of the sower of seeds. I take that to mean it's very possible for people to make a decision to act on their belief or not. There's a lot of good information in this video from both you and Mike, I have to take it all in, but I still think true faith is a work. it takes a lot in this secular world to study the scriptures and the faith and still keep the faith.
First timr listener, I appreciare your humble and gracious attitude on this topic, and I love the quality id your presentation. You clearly are not taking this lightly. That said, I think you are still misunderstanding the non-calvinist position and that is causing you to not actually argue against the position well. 1) Mike Winger is NOT an Arminian and neither is the vast majority of non-calvinists throughout history. Arminianism is a distinct systematic with distinct tenets and Winger does not hold those tenets. You present a false dichotomy (unintentionally I am sure) when you make this a Calvinist vs Arminian debate.
2) You have conflated the work of God in drawing people to salvation with God's control in Salvation. All non-calvinists believe thay God draws people. All non-calvinists believe that God grants repentance. All non-calvinists believe that God elects and predestines. All non-calvinists believe that God has ordained and orchestrated at least some events to occur. However, this does not make the Calvinist case that God controls everything. There is literally no verse anywhere that states that God controls, determines, ordains, or decrees all things.
3) You have read Joshua to mean that because Israel was unable to obey God, that therefore all sinners are unable to come to God. The Bible says nothing of the sort. It simply means Israel would be unable to do anything until they had a deliverer that would enable them to live holy lives. That deliverer has come. He has drawn all men unto himself when he was lifted up. 1 Timothy 2:1-8 is abundantly clear that all have been ransomed by the King. We apply the King's work of salvation by confessing our inability to save ourselves with our mouths and believe in our hearts that Jesus the King is Lord. This is something that is not too difficult to do (Deut 30:11-19).
Hey man! Haven’t got to watch the whole video but something I don’t understand about Calvinism is obedience. How do Calvinist reconcile the fact that their obedience makes no difference in someone else’s salvation? So I can live a life of sin and it makes no difference because my treasures are already in heaven and I can gain no more, I have no blood on my hands like Paul because it’s not up to me, I do not need to choose to serve one master over the other because the decision was already made for me. Sorry I know this is a loaded question but just wondered. Also sorry for all the hate you get bro this is a great channel and I believe your obedience is bringing or will bring people to Christ!
Your questions are always spot on, my friend.
Also thank you for the kind words. Many times I’ve wanted to give up making videos because I feel like I’m not making a positive impact on the Kingdom, but comment like yours helps me to want to continue on!
I’m going into work soon but I will answer your question!
Sounds good man, thank you! Hopefully one day you will be able to do UA-cam full time and although that opens another world of challenges it’s always great to work from home and see your wife and kid throughout the day!
So to answer your questions…I think you’re conflating justification and sanctification.
For me, I believe man cannot be saved apart from God choosing, drawing, sending the preacher, sealing, and regenerating. The reason for that is because mankind will not come to God because they hate God and love their sin. Another way to say it is the natural man is able to respond to God’s call, but is unwilling. In other words, mankind has already responded to God = refusal. Jesus said “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.”
BUT once we repent and believe, by God’s grace, the Christian is given a new heart with new desires so that, not only can he now choose righteousness, BUT he wants to! So the sanctification process, although still a work of God, I believe is more synergistic.
But do our choices make a difference? If we are obedient or disobedient, does it affect God’s overall plan for the world? I’m not sure. Paul says in Romans that through Israel’s disobedience, salvation came to the Gentiles. That’s an interesting verse.
But the way I’ve always kind of looked at it was…let’s pretend there are 10 people that God is gonna save. And He gives you the choice to either be a part of all 10 getting saved, none, or anywhere in between. No matter what, those 10 people will get saved, but whether you’re a part of it or not is up to you. God will just find someone else to share the gospel with them. So whether I’m obedient or not, doesn’t change God’s outcome BUT I will still be held responsible for my choices. I know that’s kind of silly but that’s how I reconciled God’s sovereignty and my responsibility in my head prior to being reformed (and still kind of now if I’m being honest 😂).
@@colin_priestI appreciate the response man. Something I notice though is that you bring it back to people being totally depraved. Could it be possible that when God test us, then He chooses to withhold His knowledge until we choose? Abraham and Isaac’s sacrifice for example. This is where God says “Now I know” meaning He did not know until Abraham made his decision. I would put that with the command or test for all men to repent everywhere and God waits for us to make our decision till He counts it as righteousness or not.
Do you think God didn’t know what Abraham was going to do? Just curious.
I’m still not convinced by mikes argument against limited atonement from 1 John. Here’s why…At 17:02 Mike actually quotes 1 John 2:2 incorrectly. It’s subtle, but it makes a huge difference. The text says Jesus *is the propitiation* for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. Mike reads it as Jesus *has propitiated* for the whole world. 1 John 2:2 doesn’t say that Jesus has propitiated (past tense) the sins of the whole world, it says Jesus is the propitiation for the whole world…meaning Jesus is the only way of salvation for the whole world. No one can be saved in any way other than through him. If you want your sins propitiated, Jesus is the only propitiation, not for ours-Christians- only, but also for the sins of the world.
You make a really good point.
A buddy of mine also challenged me by asking, “What’s the definition of propitiation?” Which would seem like a contradiction if Jesus was a substitute for those who place their faith in Him, but then also made payment for everyone? That doesn’t make sense.
So yeah, definitely still wrestling with this passage for sure. But I appreciate your input!
Actually, the Calvinist perspective is the biblical perspective, but nobody knows what God knows, and it's foolish to think we have salvation figured out.
So you make a distinction between faith and salvation. Faith is Salvation. For faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Jesus says "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." By faith we understand that the worlds were framed...by faith Noah being warned of things not yet seen...". THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED, that is the faith of Christ, the Doctrine of Christ, the words of eternal life...and faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. So faith and salvation are one and the same thing. Since faith is the substance and evidence - it is how we know Christ and the Father.
@ 15:14
Limited Atonement (or Definite Atonement) is Christ being the perfect High Priest.
He makes a once for all sacrifice for a people that have been given to Him by the Father.
His sacrifice is what cleanses us.
Through faith, (not BECAUSE of faith) does His sacrifice become the propitiation (full satisfaction) of our sins.
For the rest of eternity, He stands as our High Priest, interceding for the people He made His sacrifice for.
If Christ is the High Priest for those in hell, His sacrifice is ineffective and is merely a suggestion.
That His blood is NOT the full satisfaction of the sins of those in hell.
Because if "man's free will choice" supersedes the blood of God Himself,
God being murdered gets put on the back burner, behind "man's free will choice".
Limited Atonement (or Definite Atonement) is Christ being the perfect High Priest.
How does man's free will choice supersede Christ's sacrifice if God is intentionally saying that it is not too difficult to choose the life that is offered?
@@troymulberry9434
Jesus Christ is the perfect High Priest.
You avoided this entirely, highlighting "man's free will".
God gave a people to Jesus and not one drop of blood is wasted on those He doesn't intercede for. He made His sacrifice for His people. That is why Jesus Christ is the perfect High Priest.
@@WordWiseMinistries oh I see what you are saying now. It is a strange idea that "perfect" = not wasted when what the author of Hebrews is saying is that Jesus is the perfectly moral or lawful sacrifice. You seem to have redefined perfect to mean "exact" and that is a very anachronistic meaning. The Bible never uses "perfect" in that sense that I am aware of.
Additionally, I find it really strange to think of Jesus' blood as being wasted instead of sacrificial. What is more sacrificial than a rejected gift? The very fact that people reject the sacrificial love of God (Matthew 5:43-48) is what makes it ultimately sacrificial. God doesn't just love those who love him back. He knowingly loves even those who reject him! And what more sacrificial way to show that perfect love than to knowingly give it to those who reject him? I read that verse to make Cheist's sacrifice EVEN GREATER when it is rejected! Why in the world would you read it as "wasted"?
I don't see how this has anything to do with man's free will one way or the other.
@@troymulberry9434
You are correct that Jesus Christ made the perfect sacrifice. Christ's sacrifice was the full satisfaction (propitiation) for our sins, for those who believe (trust) in Him.
Also, His sacrifice was for His people that were given to Him by the Father, not for everyone. Thus, no one can reject His sacrifice. It was Christ's sacrifice to the Father, not to His people. So it is impossible for anyone to reject.
With the "plea" remember contextually Paul was talking to the people of Corinth who did once believe but were straying from it, when it comes to presenting the Gospel Jesus says if someone doesn't want to accept the Gospel to wipe the dust off your sandals and move on, however Paul was pleaing to those who had accepted the gospel but started moving away. Now for the "person not accepting the gospel" there's another possibility besides they weren't chosen, they aren't meant to accept the gospel YET, the Bible explains that everything has a time and place and God has a plan for everything and everything has a time, we preach so that we plant seeds that God grows
I always disliked the argument that God chose those who would choose him, that ultimately takes away the statements that God alone is the author of salvation, and it kind of begs the question, how does someone choose God? The Bible clearly states "no one seeks for God everyone has turned away" so by our natural state we reject and "choose not to choose" so ultimately God is the one who chooses who is saved, and if God chooses those who would choose God then that would also mean we're saved by our works
It seems you are falling it to the logical fallacy that is any thought, desire or action of man is required by God to be saved that man saves himself.
God being the author of salvation can also fit a non-calvinist definition of sovereignty. The definition for a sovereign ruler in any language outside of a determinist frame work is the one who has the ultimate authority to make the laws and judge accordingly. God writes/authors the expectations for salvation and judges is by them.
If you read all of the occurrences of the word SEEK in scripture, you get a very different picture than the one drawn by calvinism isolated Romans 3 from its original quotes (2 nearly identical Psalms written about the fool the rejects God) and what the rest of scripture says on the subject. Scripture says that God SEEKS humble and contrite hearts. Even the “elect” are broken before regeneration, so in Calvinism God is really SEEKING the elect and making them humble and contrite, but that is not what it says.
If you just let it mean what it says, and God SEEKS the humble and contrite heart, and we both agree that He judges correctly, then how can that heart the boast about being saved? Jesus says REPEATEDLY that if you want to gain your life you must lose it. To surrender to realize you do not have the power get what you want or stay alive on your own, but again coming to a place of declaring yourself bankrupt somehow becomes a work or potential boast.
Again, scripture say humble yourself and be healed, not be healed/regenerates and be made humble.
@@jeffreybomba I'm going to try this again because my comment didn't go through, I don't even understand what you think I think from your first point, second while yes God "seeks the humble" he is the one who humbles people, for example the book of Job one of the main points made, is that God draws out pride that is within a person and he crushes that pride, Moses he wasn't always humble, he wanted to do things his own way, he didn't want to do what God wanted and he would constantly be frustrated and angry and impatient. His humility was something taught to him, similarly the same with the book of Jonah
Us as creatures born in sin we are naturally filled with pride and are against God
And here
Psalm 14:2-3 ESV
[2] The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. [3] They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
And Romans constantly talks about the depravity of human beings and finally, when I say "author of salvation" I don't just mean he dictates what saves a person, it also means HE IS THE ONE WHO SAVES, Isaiah and so many of the Old Testament testifies to this repeatedly
@@livingtoaster1358 And Job was already a believer. They again. Instead of just reading the passage you are i strength Calvinism into it.
Yes, He is the one that saves. Roman’s 5:2 says that faith precedes the grace we no stand in, that would be the grace of salvation. Just because someone professes faith does that save? NO! As I stated , God judges the heart, and He saves who He jussie’s as having faithYou quote from Psalm 14 says they BECAME corrupt, just like Romans 1 does, not born corrupt.
And you skipped the whole point of my reference, “The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” And like I said, this Psalm says they became like this not born that way. Context kills Calvinism.
@@livingtoaster1358 So you are telling me the God SEEKS the lost (of course He just SEEKS the lost) then He regenerates them maiming the HIMBLE, INDWELLS them, and though He is TABERNACLING IN THEM, He continues to SEEK them.
You really need to read ALL of the SEEK passages. They talk about how the understood, they rejected, the BECAME (not born) DEAF and BLIND, and they don’t SEEK God.
The only time scripture does not specify that people BECAME blind, is during Jesus’s ministry when people who have already seen prophesied miracles, are spoken to in parables so they can’t see so the cross will be accomplished, and then after many of them DO come to faith. You probably will not want to read all the BLIND/DEAF passages either, or you will just keep ignoring that parts that contradict Calvinism.
I actually get a headache when Mike tries to explain Calvinism.
He interprets it wrong almost every time, and also always has a mocking tone.
Faith, which is something we gone solely through the regenerating from the Holy Spirit, isn’t something we say is a work.
We are predestined to be drawn, to be regenerated, and then justified by Christ.
Faith isn’t a work, the same way repentance isn’t a work. It’s an outward expression from what God did inward.
If Mike feels so confident that Calvinism isn’t the appropriate lense we need to apply when reading his word, then I will respectfully disagree, but do not think by twisting something slightly and then smiling about it proves a point.
There is no right interpretation of it other than as a doctrine of demons.
@@DFSLJCthis is a confusing comment.
Which doctrine are you referring to? The Reformed theological ideas such as Calvinism? Or the ideas that go against such theology?
I don’t think of Arminianism as the doctrine of Demons, I have plenty of brothers in Christ who disagree with me and I always remember George Whitfield and John Wesley when I become discouraged.
What I WONT have is someone coming up with a weak argument and then pseudo mocking each other. It’s just not Biblical to do that.
@@philipdumas4435ok
You shold watch Soteriology 101 with Dr. Leighton Flowers. He knows a lot oabout Calvinism. God bless
In all seriousness...No. Leighton knows nothing about what Calvinists actually believes. At least that's what I tell myself. If he does know, and is actually just straw manning the position for the last 10+ years, then I think he is kinda a perpetual liar (I don't want to believe that, but it's the only other conclusion). He endlessly misrepresents Calvinism and is extremely bad faith, and even if he is ignorant, and not lying, he is minimally not trying hard to steel man his opponent (and has been lacking here for years).
I think it is more about how time itself works. Does the future and past continue to exist? I think I have a definite future and past and God is absolutely sovereign over all of it, but in his sovereignty he delegated our ability to choose to us yet knows what we will choose in the future because he is outside of time and his plan already has our choices factored in.
With delegation, it can be removed or overridden as needed. Like those that sear their conscience with countless evil and God hardens their heart to his salvation through Christ. Stay humble folks and appreciate God's gift and those without it, plead with him to have it.
In effect we make our choice and all those that do choose heaven through Christ are already with him in eternity. Everyone reading this is already either before the thrown in worship and love or suffering in hades in hatred and torment. Our fate was sealed on the first sunrise yet at the same time we chose that fate. A mystery...that is a result of God not being in time.
The bottom line is that we don't know our fate, we have to work out our salvation with fear and trembling and share the gospel with all who will hear it, let the mystery be known when we can ask him directly.
We don't know our fate? That is rather distrubing, and not at all what Scripture teaches. If we are in Christ, we are a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). We are in Christ if we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead. "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." (Romans 10:9-11)
We can be quite assured of our ultimate future, provided we continue in the faith. (colossians 1:21-22). God is not a god of confusion, but declares the end from the beginning. He has plainly taught what is expected of us, and He sent his Son to die for us, and to be raised, that who so ever believes in him - the Son - shall not perish, but have everlasting life. It's not a very difficult checklist.
@@scotthackenbruch2357 Not knowing if a particular person will confess Jesus is Lord before they die is what I mean.
Great video! Thank you for your fair and thoughtful treatment - the internet, and the kingdom at large, needs more of this. Another point in favor of the Calvinist understanding of what it means that "God is patient toward you, not willing that any should perish" that I think helps clarify the text: the question being asked is "Why hasn't Jesus come back yet?" The answer is, "Because God is not willing that any should perish." If "any" means anyone, of all humanity, period, and there isn't a fixed, specific number of the elect, then the logic of Peter's statement would mean that Jesus would never come back, because when He does, some will perish, and He is not willing that should happen. The idea that "any" means "any of you, the elect" actually makes sense of the context, whereas the alternative makes Peter say something we know he can't be saying.
Really good point! Thanks for the insight!
Also thanks for watching and your kind words. It really means a lot to me 🙂
Think about this, why do you say things like "working your way into heaven"? Where does the idea that we are going to heaven or hell come from? What about the resurrection? What if the idea of us going to heaven is not correct? Will it change your outlook on what the gospel is and how you work out your own salvation (romans)?
Salvation, the way I see it, is righteousness. You can try to be righteous on your own, through your works, but it will not be enough, for we all fall short of the goodness of God, or you can believe the gospel, show God that you truly believe with your actions (works) (also known as submitting your life to Jesus), and He will grant this to you as righteousness through your faith (like Abraham). This is grace. You do not earn salvation/righteousness, it is an unmerited gift from God that you receive through faith (which requires action otherwise it is dead). The righteous live by faith.
And what do we get? Not to go to heaven, but eternal life through bodily resurrection when God raises everyone on the day of judgement.
And what about those that do not believe? Eternal torment? Think about where that concept comes from as well (it's likely the same influence). I would say that those that do not believe will not inherit the kingdom and eternal life, but eternal destruction, second death, one that you will not be raised from because you are no more.
Why do I think this? The jews, and many other cultures/religions of the day, believed that when we die, we go to a resting place. The jews called it Abrahams bosom, Jesus called it paradise, the greeks called it hades. This is where we will be resurrected from, this is where Jesus went when He died, but after judgement, if righteousness is not imputed to us through Christ, we will cease to exist.
Just the way I understand it, which I believe is closer to the way the bible teaches it, but I am not infallible and very well could be wrong.
If I believe that my good works, done in faith to show God, and just as importantly to those around me, that I truly do believe what he has promised he will deliver, is wrong, then I see no harm in it. If I believe that my good works prove to myself that I am truly saved, or that My good works earn me salvation, then there is harm done, for I will never be assured, and I can never do enough.
Only God knows a mans heart, let Him be the judge.
I think you’re mostly right.
Those things were done as fruits of the Holy Spirit right? We can’t really know anyone’s heart like you just said, but those can be good indicators of someone who is a born again believer being convicted of themselves.
I never said good works are a bad thing, they are definitely necessary. But, they are the after effect of righteousness being imputed to us and the Holy Spirit sanctifying us
@@philipdumas4435 Likely yes about the fruits of the Spirit in cooperation, though good works are also performed by secular people, and many of them with good intentions as well, so something else to think about. The Spirit is a helper, not a doer.
Cheers,
The idea of heaven and hell come from the Bible.
Paul talks a lot of heaven. “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Jesus talks a lot about hell. “In that place there will be weeping and gashing of teeth. They’ll be cast into the outer darkness. These will go away into the eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.”
John sees a vision of the second death, which is the lake of fire, and in the lake of fire are the devil and his angels, and anyone who did not believe in Jesus and in that place they’ll be tormented day and night, forever and ever.
I do agree that the new heavens and the new earth in our resurrected glorified bodies are not the endgame or the goal or even the purpose of the gospel. I even say that in this video 38:47 that those are perks of the gospel, but not the main point. What is eternal life? Eternal life is knowing the one true God and Jesus Christ, whom he sent. I totally agree that salvation is about being free from sin and obtaining a righteousness that only comes from Christ.
Who does it say will be tormented forever?
Is being a citizen of the kingdom of heaven mean that we are going to heaven?
Islam Religion is the complete way of our life.
◄ Revelation 22:9 ►
Verse (Click for Chapter)
New Living Translation
But he said, “No, don’t worship me. I am a servant of God, just like you and your brothers the prophets, as well as all who obey what is written in this book. Worship only God!”
American Standard Version
And he saith unto me, See thou do it not: I am a fellow-servant with thee and with thy brethren the prophets, and with them that keep the words of this book: worship God.
That’s not Jesus speaking if that’s what you think. That’s the angel that Jesus sent to John.
I don't understand why people have a problem accepting the sovereignty of God, while also accepting the free will of humanity. Scripture very clearly supports both of these things. We are called to choose Jesus, while God has hardened hearts and chosen an elect. We are both called to choose, and yet we are chosen. This is not a complicated issue lol I don't know why people think they have to choose between the 2.
Because, your notion of God decreeing the hardening of one's heart so that they are unable to respond, believe, accept etc... And then subsequently condemn them to hell - is not consistent with the scripture, nor is it the character and attributes of God
@@SheepDog1974 you are speaking as if I'm a Calvinist, which I am not, because they do adamantly argue against free will which seems to me to be so clearly taught in scripture. But it's equally foolish to argue against God's sovereignty. He most definitely did harden hearts in scripture, you cannot argue against that and be true to scripture. I believe it's more complicated than "God just doesn't want this person in heaven" which is what Calvinists seem to believe, but it definitely happens, which is exactly why I say that I can't understand why people can't reconcile humanities free will with God's sovereignty. You all act like you can only choose 1, and I find that ridiculous
@@gabrieldietz1866 you may find it ridiculous but I cannot see God intentionally "hardening" anyone.
The hardening we read about in scripture, is God's "giving one up over to their desires". This is a judicial hardening.
Otherwise your line of thinking is no different than a calvinists... That God decrees evil and sin by preventing someone from their choice. It's absurd.
@@SheepDog1974Exodus 4:21 God says to Moses that "I will harden Pharaohs heart", Exodus 7:3 again God says "I will harden Pharaohs heart" Exodus 9:12 says "and the Lord hardened Pharaohs heart" Exodus 10:1 says "go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart" Romans 9:18 says "so then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires" Deuteronomy 2:30 says "But Sihon king of Heshbon was not willing for us to pass through his land; for the Lord your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, in order to deliver him into your hand, as he is today."
I could keep going with this all day lol there is countless scripture that refute what you are saying, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. God is sovereign, he can do as he pleases with the pottery that he created. He can soften some and harden others, and it is still good, because He is the one who did it. That's what it means to be sovereign. That doesn't mean free will doesn't exist, because I can find countless scripture that support it, it just means that people have to learn to reconcile God's sovereignty with humanities free will
@@gabrieldietz1866 Gabriel, I am familiar with all the calvin proof texts.
Could Pharoah have changed his mind? Was he unable to? Or was he NOT willing to change his mind?
He's the King of Egypt, the worlds epitome of power in that age.
In God's omniscients he knew that Pharoah would not yield to Moses... But God did not coerce Pharoah... He gave him 10 plaques to change his mind.
I see a merciful, patient and loving God, NOT wanting ANY to perish. But the end result proves Pharoahs disobedience.
Notice Ex 4:21 God says " I will" future tense... It's not until 9:12 that God judicially hardens (gives Pharoah up to his desires of his will) ...same applies for King of Sidon.
Your reading and understanding of Romans 9 is incorrect. Paul is admonishing the Jewish people, that God has chosen to reveal himself to the gentiles and that God can love anyone despite their blood line. The context of Paul's quote is ex 33:15 - God has mercy in mind ... Calvinism reads a negative inference that God's wrath is being offered to whom he wills. The question Moses possesses to 33:16 is the mercy and compassion God has for His people (Jewish people).
The point Paul was making in Romans is that God chose Isaac not Esau for his divine blood line... This is not a salvific choice, Esau made that choice all on his own.
Our lenses and presuppositions make a difference. Again, God is abounding in love gracious and compassionate slow to anger who relents from sending calamity.