Yes, Pastor Chris. Jesus’s prayer is for all who God gives to Jesus. I suspect Leighton would agree. But who is given? Those whom God chose before the foundation of the earth? No. It does not say that. It says, “…those also who believe in Me (Jesus) through their (Apostles’) word.” If the Apostle John wanted to teach the Calvinistic perspective of unconditional election, wouldn’t this have been a good place to say so? But that is not what is taught here.
Hello i know this is an old post and your comment is very insightful but what do we do with vs 24. Father i want THOSE you have given me to be with me . Has Jesus transitioned back to the apostles in vs 24 or his he speaking of all believers?
Excellent analysis you're one hundred percent right and obviously so. Even Chuck Smith, Mike Winger, Greg Laurie, Greg kokul and Dr Cooper and Frank Turek totally expose and disagree with Calvinism. Thank you for your comment, studiousness and knowledge.
Quite honestly pastor, no matter what verse Leighton shares with you, as a calvanist, you will misinterpret it. Jesus died for the sins of the entire World. World means exactly what it says. Those who receive Christ, John 1:12, are saved. Those who do not believe in Him are lost, John 3:18. It's that simple pastor.
@A Pastor’s Thoughts But the question is, Where they choosen to beilive or did they beilive because they chose to beilive? Scripture never speaks of a certain grace needed to beilive. Rather Paul, in Romans 1:14 says the Gospel is the power of God to Salvation. The gospel is that strong. You do not need pre faith regeneration as a Calvinist would suggest. In Genisis 3 when God was dishing out the punishment for the fall, why didn't God ever say to Adam and Eve that they are now dead like a dead man and can not beilive? We are given the grace of choice.
@@BookNerdPURATIN. Jesus, sheep choose to believe because they are his sheep and because the Holy Spirit births them again from above. The Holy Spirit produces faith. Gal 5. Not the flesh or mind of a man.
@aletheia8054 For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. Through faith. It is a gift Through faith. That's the key. We must have faith
My problem with Calvinism is that it makes God responsible for the Evils in our World instead of Prideful People willfully rejecting God's Provision in Christ.
Verse 20 says that the world may believe.. Believe is faith. It's not saying so that the world may be judged. What on earth are you talking about ? Shocking commnetary!
The word pistis (believe) often denotes true faith in the book of John, but not always. It depends on the context. At the end of chapter 2 we have a people said to believe (pistis) in Jesus, however, is said in the next verse to not “entrust” himself to them. The word translated as entrust is pistis again, so it could be read as, “Jesus did not believe in their belief. Saying that what the people believed was superficial, it wasn’t a belief that saves. What did they believe? We are told in chapter 3 when Nicodemus comes to Jesus. Nicodemus said, “we believe you are a teacher sent from God”. That’s not saving belief, they did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of God. That’s doesn’t exactly solve your issue though, because what is believed in John 17:21 by the world is the truth, that Jesus is who he claimed to be. But, that belief doesn’t constitute salvation by itself, as we know that even demons believe Jesus is the Son of God. That, along with Jesus already praying for everyone who will believe in the prior verse, and the eschatological theme of the section, provides the context for seeing the world here as the world of unbelievers seeing the unity of those who belong to God and knowing that the Jesus they rejected is who he claimed to be. Thanks for watching!
In John 3:16 the world is so bad that in order for redemption to be accomplished the Son of God would need to come and die on the cross. “World” is negative even when spoken of as loved by God.
I disagree. There are many times, even most of the time where the " world" has an obvious negative connotation to it. This is not one of them. It' s more of a " neutral " position. Sin is an obvious problem in men that are in the world. But the use of the word " world" can be neutral or just to quantify. And Also for example the following verse. There's nothing negative about the use of " world" here. Only saying that Christ Glory pre-existed creation. John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. Also, I've just came across your video's recently, but I've already seen you are guilty of doing some of the same things you accuse Flowers of. But please tell me how John 17:5 is negative. I have an idea how you might answer,but I will wait and see ; maybe you will see John 17:5 as a " neutral" use.
@@1027MissBear I said there are some instances, very few if any, in which the word kosmos (world) is used in a neutral sense within the book of John. But yes, world even in 17:5 can be seen as negative. It still represents that which is at odds with God. I don’t take issue with viewing world in 17:5 as neutral though. The main point of the verse is to note the pre-existent Jesus and not really to speak of the world in particular.
@@1027MissBear thanks for watching by the way! Stick around, I have a lot coming up, and my goal is to continue improving production quality as I move forward. All with hopes of edifying the body of Christ!
@@chrisharris9710I will,but one thing I request is that you slow down the playback just a little more. I learn a lot through debate. But I would be careful brother to listen to more of Leighton's videos before critiquing them. You've accused him of positions he doesn't hold or asked him to affirm things he already has affirmed. Just like I missed you saying some "world" statements are neutral until a careful re-listening. In Christ!
Verse 20 " so that" makes it evangelistic. May they also be in us so that the world may be believe. May belive but they also may not believe...that's not every knee shall bow. The text is very clear Leighton is spot on.
You have the syntax wrong. Easy to do though. The “so that” is what is called a hina clause in Greek, it’s a purpose clause. What we find in that clause is not expression of doubt, rather the opposite. It can be read as the world will believe Jesus is who he claimed to be because of the unity of all believers. Think of it like this statement, “I am cooking, so that the homeless may eat.” In that I am not saying maybe the homeless will eat and maybe they won’t, I am saying that the reason I am cooking is that the homeless will eat. There isn’t doubt, it is the purpose of my cooking. Hope this helps! And thanks for watching!
Where do those who come to faith reside until they come to faith? Answer: the world. The world is full of people who will come to faith. Jesus even prays they “may” come to faith. That doesn’t sound so certain. Why would He pray for it if it’s bound to happen? Why would anyone pray for anything to happen if it’s all predetermined? Also, why would you set up a straw man about God’s omniscience for Leighton? Why would you ask if God needs to “look through the corridors of time” to see who will believe? Don’t you believe God is transcendent and omniscient? God cannot learn anything or find anything out. That point confused me. Thanks!
People are called out of the world, yes, but that is not what Jesus is praying for when he mentions the world in John 17. He has already included in his prayer everyone who would come out of the world (his Apostles and everyone who would believe the Gospel message they have). The world in this context is contrasted with the church (the unified people of God), and therefore represents wickedness and evil. Christ praying for the unity of the body and the vindication of himself is consistent with the means by which things come to be. That doesn’t effect the eternal plan of God. I wasn’t suggesting Leighton believes God’s foreknowledge comes from “looking into the future”. My question pertains to what it means for God to know a thing. It’s a tough question that cannot be answered. However, we can say negative things about it, such as, “whatever is meant by God knowing it does not mean he knows as we know, and it does not mean his knowledge is acquired, and it does not mean his knowledge is dependent upon contingencies outside of himself”. I didn’t get into that topic, just made a passing remark. Thanks for watching!
You are asking us to just swallow your claim of the last part being eschatological as well as world being a negative connotation. Just saying something doesn’t make it so. Could there not be a category of believers that come to believe that Jesus came from the Father due to the oneness of the believers, just as Jesus prayed? Your saying all become believers because of the apostles words, but Jesus’ prayer for the world is that they would believe as a result of the oneness of those who have come to believe because of the apostles words.
Right?! Pastor Chris would have us believe Jesus’s prayer for those who would believe thru the words of the Apostles and disciples was not evangelistic. He instead imports Isaiah’s quote in Romans about every knee bowing to & every tongue confessing Christ into Jesus’s prayer. Not sure that’s what Jesus or Paul had in mind.
I’m not asking you to just swallow anything. It’s not at all controversial to say that kosmos is never used in a positive connotation in the book of John, nor is it controversial to say the latter part of the High Priestly Prayer in John 17 is eschatological. Thanks for watching!
@@chrisharris9710 with respect brother, that’s simply gaslighting. That reply is essentially saying, “I’m not asking you to swallow anything, but you should because nothing I said was controversial.” Or in other words, “what I’m saying is widely accepted by all Christian’s”. Do you deny the potential of you being wrong about your eschatological claims and perhaps there is another category of believers from the world that believe as a result of the oneness of the believers as Jesus prayed for?
@@chrisharris9710 It seems like you are missing the point. Leighton is not arguing against the fact that 'world' is always spoken of in the negative or that John 17 is eschatological. He is responding to the many Calvinists that use this passage 'as a slam dunk to Calvinism' that they say proves unconditional election. He is pointing out that many Calvinists teach that Jesus is only praying for the 'elect' in this passage. You, like many Calvinists, however, miss his point of contention by arguing against a point he is not making which a type of red herring. Respectfully, sir, please try to understand his point in your future videos.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 John 17 does point to a Reformed view of soteriology. It points to the fact that the Father gives the Son a people and that people comes to the Son through faith in the Gospel. Chapter 6 has already seen that nobody comes to the Son unless granted by the Father, and that all the Father gives will come to the Son, so in the high priestly prayer of chapter 17 Jesus is praying for the unity of the people of God and their future glorification.
This is very helpful. A learned Calvinist who is cordial and thoughtful, critiquing our perspective. Thank you for doing this. Iron Sharpening Iron is hopefully what’s happening in these dialogues 🙂
28:30 Wow. Leighton completely ignores the rest of the passage on purpose in order to make his argument. Another example that Leighton is a twister of Scripture.
I don’t think he intended to read the whole Bible. No matter what video everyone stops reading. You guys missed Dr Flowers point because you are to focus on defending Calvinism
Hi Pastor Chris. Thanks for doing this video. I would agree with you that world is either negative or neutral in John. However, where neutral (such as John 3:16) is it not also evangelical? I always keep an open mind about eschatology. But do you have any commentaries that you know of that holds your eschatological view here? I have never heard that before. Granted, that just because there may not be any commentary that agrees with your eschatological take in John 17 (unless you know of one), may not mean it cannot be the case. As for verse 24, based on the context, the simplest obvious connection could be (based on nearest context principles) that those whom Christ was speaking of in 22-23, might also be the same as 24. The difference? In 22-23 Jesus is praying for the disciples glory in Him and unity on earth. Then, (as high priest) He prays for them (the same) to be with Him thereafter. Now we might think it strange that Christ would pray for a need for those whom the Father gave Him to also be present with Him in paradise, heaven, eternal state. This would seem naturally already provided by the Father as a natural outflow of those who love Him on earth. This prayer is known as the "high priestly prayer." So in that context, Christ praying that those that know Him on earth also be included in heaven after (as high priest and divinity--having been with the Father before the foundation of the world highlighting this fact) is Christ literally praying that those who love Him on earth may also be with Him in heaven...a priestly prayer of Christ. If the context is primarily governed by this priestly official prayer of Christ, then using this context to expand into end times or broaden theological implications as they may relate to future believers may not be as central to the context of the significance "at that time even" and importance of Christ fulfilling a high priest prayer. Understood in this context, it would make sense that verses 23 and 24 are the same group. Because on one hand, as high priest, Christ is thanking the father for the disciples earthly blessing as well as high priest (and deity) asking the Father to also bless them in eternal glory. Because of Christs initial pronounced work of what He came to do (as focus), and not so much that Christ came to fulfill our theological notions, the simplest direct reading would have 23 and 24 as the same group under the context of His ministry as the focus MORE than secondary potential soteriological theological derivatives we might pull from such statements. In this view, verses 25 and 26 would also be the disciples which fits perfectly in a closing bracket. "These have known that you have sent me," would BEST be those that knew that practically at that very time. And as contextually convincing as verse 25 points soundly to those who would witness Him physically at that time, would provide a sufficient parameter suggesting that if we have read this far (verse 25) it would include everything in context along the way also before it. I hope that makes sense in a way. Blessing's brother. And thanks for the encouragement to look at these passages a bit more even if we might see differently.
A. W. Pink agrees with my take. He comments that verse 23 is referring to when “God’s elect have all been gathered together in one”…. You presented quite a bit here though. Thanks for the well thought out and articulated comment. Perhaps I will engage with it in a future video. Thanks for watching!
J. C. Ryle and Matthew Poole are among others that, while not articulating precisely as I have, understand verse 23 to be contrasting the entire elect or church or body of Christ with the world of unbelievers.
Thomas Aquinas also relates verse 23 to eschatology, he takes a different route than I do, saying the world represents the world of believers, saying that by that time the evil of the world will know via clear signs. I don’t agree with Thomas, but nonetheless he sees this as eschatological in theme.
Verse 25 these indicates he is talking about the apostles in the present time...these know me...he is not talking about future believers cause he is speaking in present tense. These already know me! I made known to them( past tense) He clearly is talking about apostles Jesus is not saying these WILL know me!!
Why don't you go back to Vs.20? Where He is speaking about those of us who will believe on Him through what the Apostles teach? Messes your narrative up, doesn't it?
@barryclevenger7456 no because verses 24 and 25 are not about you and me. 26 I have made you[e] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”
@barryclevenger7456 yes verse 20 does but What part of verses 24 thru 26 we are included? We can pray for more than one person/people in one prayer. It's too obvious he was praying for his disciples in 24 thru 26. 24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world. 25 “Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me. 26 I have made you[e] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”
Where its confusing is 16:00 mark. If God has causually determined believers before the foundation of the world then why does Jesus care that the world may believe that the father sent him?If the world(lost reprobates) cant believe then why must God prove to them he sent Jesus to love only the ones God predetermined to love?.this to me is the real issue. Example: judas on judgement day will see that God did not love him and predetermined him to hell to fulfill his will and reformers still say God is love??? 👉🤯
6:42 I sense a tad bid of spite and anger with Leighton with this commentary. Notice also, Leighton does not exegete the Scriptures, he inserts his own dialogue into the passages to make his point. He is completely reading into the Scriptures through his lenses of hatred toward Calvinist doctrines.
Im Reading through this section in John myself. If you read from the preceding chapter you would naturally read it as per this video‘s explanation imo. There is something unwholesome about the anti Calvinist obsession of LF - and it shows here. His theological lymbic system is in full swing and he would have to find a way to snap out of it.
@@matt_h_27 I hope you respond and don't go silent. Or even worse flat-out deny the truth of Calvinism that I presented using quotes from John Calvin himself and various other prominent calvinist leaders.
@@aletheia8054 I've seen him swap words in passages, to change the plain meaning to support his view. In Ephesians 1:4, he changed "to be holy and blameless", which was plainly written on the screen, to "to become holy and blameless," completely missing that we are declared holy and blameless when we are justified, having the righteousness of Christ applied to our account. He also misses that justification, sanctification, and glorification are all part of salvation. (A Christian can accurately say, "I am saved, I am being saved, I will be saved.") He treats sanctification as if it is separate from salvation, which leads him to conclude that God doesn't choose us to be saved until we are already saved. It's nonsense. (See his "Ephesians 1 DeCalvinized" video) His word games are clouding the clearly written Scriptures.
Good exegetical work. I don't believe that Leighton is deliberately deceptive. I believe he is sincere in what he believes but he has a template in his mind and he has to eisegete to get scripture to fit it.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 he will change the words “not believe “to “refuse to believe”. He has a lot of little deceptive tricks like that. He has spent a lot of time rigging up those tricks. It’s the same thing people like Kenneth Copeland do. Some people have a talent for conning others.
Wow, Pastor Chris Harris, your video here offers such a bad eisegesis that I’m shocked a pastor at any level believes it or would offer it. Jesus himself said God did NOT send His son into the world to condemn the world, but to SAVE the world through him-same book, same Savior speaking the words. Jesus’ intention in this part of his High Priestly Prayer is indeed that the lost throughout the world would be reached so as to be saved. I’m tempted to say something like “Turn in your degree, do not pass go, do not collect $200”, but I’m still struck how any pastor could miss the whole point of Jesus and God’s Word to try and assert your hypothesis in this video.
Scripture: "according as God Hath dealt to every man the measure of faith"... to use to receive Christ (Acts 17:30-31) Calvinism: "God gives the gift of faith to some"... the randomly pre-chosen elect in eternity past, whom will irresistibly be coerced into turning to Christ.
Acts 17:30-31 doesn't say that so you misquoted and/or wrongly referenced whatever it is you're referencing. Perhaps you're alluding to Romans 12:3 where Paul is speaking only of believers when he speaks of the measure of faith God has assigned. This is clear from the surrounding verses. So are you adding and removing things from the bible to make your point? Come on...
@@mikelyons2831 God doesn’t give a measure of faith to everyone. Faith is the fruit of regeneration, just as repentance is the fruit of regeneration. This is not something given to everyone. It’s by God’s sovereign, gracious choice.
@@matt_h_27 Scripture; Jesus would leave the 99 to save the 1 Calvinism: You've either been randomly pre-chosen/pre-ordained/predetermined to irresistibly be saved or to be an arbitrary vessel of wrath, because God created you with a will that will only choose to sin, you can't choose HIM despite HIM sending HIS Spirit to convict the WORLD of sin & righteousness. HE didn't create you with a free moral agency to have genuine fellowship, Koinonia, personal relationship with HIM, c'mon everyone wants a spouse that they have to give a potion to for him/her to want to love them ... 👿 Don't you realize some will be randomly pardoned & some are doomed before the womb...& that brings God glory don'tcha know.
I think it’s fairly clear in the video. Leighton contends that “those given by the Father” refers only to the original disciples. But if he would have “kept reading” he would have had to deal with Jesus saying everyone in the Son is given by the Father. I think he stops reading in verse 22, only 3 verses from the end of the prayer, and verse 24 states all believers are given by the Father.
The Fathers teaches everyone that God exists. Through the creation! Not one will have the excuse that they do not see God exists, being understood from observing the Creation Romans1: 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. The Father is not the saviour, that is the role of the Son, The Messiah, The Lord Jesus, The Christ! Those that then desire God , they are taught by the Father as this verse shows: and the Father sends them that believe that God exists to the Son. It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. John 6:45 So when Jesus said that: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. John 6:44 It is simple saying that the Father makes all men aware that God exists and sends those who respond to the Father to Jesus. BUT! not all men will respond even though they have no excuse. They know God exists but they made their choice. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools Romans 1:21-22 Paul verifies this to Timothy: 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. 1 Timothy 2 : 3-6 The Holy Spirit comes into play in a special personal way only once a person whom the Father sends to the Son for salvation is born again. Those who willingly desire to be right with God. Those who Repent and are Baptized. The Holy spirit indwells the Christian as counsellor and guide. John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. (Such as deformed 5-point Calvinism.) JESUS John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life Truth in love
The Greek word world is kosmon. That’s where we get our cosmetics. It means an orderly arrangement. And all that is in the world is the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life. Every time you see the word world in John 17 just insert these words … Orderly arrangement, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life . Doing that and understanding the other Greek words will help to figure out what Jesus is talking about .
You should know better than to make this about the scriptural text. You simply disagree with Mr. Flowers's interpretative presuppositions he brings to the text. I disagree with yours. At issue is a disagreement about worldview and not about the biblical text.
@@chrisharris9710. I take your reply as a misunderstanding of my comment. The impression you wish to give is simply that your interpretation of the text is better than Mr. Flowers. He has covered these texts and these topics in multiple writings and videos. You simply disagree with his interpretation of the text, but, in my opinion, give the misleading impression that the d Disagreement is about the text rather than the interpretation of it. That's my only point.
@@tellingtruthexperiencingli9355 of course we have differing presuppositions, but in the video I pointed out grammar and leaving out part of the text itself. Ironically, Leighton was saying Calvinists need to keep reading, while he stops one verse short of messing his thesis up on who the given from the Father are. So, I don’t know what you mean by interpretation, in that yes we have some interpretational differences, but again, I made my case according to grammar, by following antecedents.
@@chrisharris9710 . Your presupposition is that your interpretation is the grammar is objective and therefore not based in making subjective interpretations of the grammar itself. There is more then one way to interpret grammar. I've studied Greek and had to make interpretative decisions based on the grammar.
@@tellingtruthexperiencingli9355 Yes. And the difference between flowers and me is that flowers believes he meticulously determines himself to believe by the power of himself. I believe that God through the Holy Spirit meticulously determines me to believe by the power of God That’s the difference
Excellent work. Way more patient with him than I could have been. I would have bristled so strongly at some of his false claims about how a Calvinist would see the text, that I would have simply called him a malicious liar and walked away.
Same. To God there is no difference between knowing beforehand and determining something to come to pass beforehand. After all, God is the only one who can stop something or cause something to come to pass. If it comes to pass, it goes without saying that God predetermined that it WOULD, in fact, come to pass, for His good purpose. Otherwise it would not come to pass. Why Leighton Flowers is still making videos and people are still watching them is quite sad. I hope he has a real job because he doesn't deserve to be compensated for the "theology" he puts out. Every time I hear him, I want to make my own UA-cam channel just to counter his ridiculous content.
@@matt_h_27 Myopic Matthew is a good choice for your youtube channel. Jeremiah 19:5 . Myopic Matt , rid your filthy lens of reformed/calvinist crud and begin to see a new. Your choice.
The bible is full of verses that tell you who are to be saved. The weak, the humble, the repentant, the faithfull..etc too many verses to quote. None thou says they are randomly chosen for no reason before they were even born against their sinful nature to believe Or to humble themselves or to repent or.to be saved for no reason!! Also, Calvinsim gives man more power than he has. It portrays God as one who is scared and worried if he really gives man limited free will, man might cause some damage to God's sovereignty. As if man is equally omnipotent as God!! Calvinism also gives the reprobate /sinner an excuse on a golden platter. He is a victim yet condemned to hell for no fault of his own. He simply was not chosen.
He preaches libertarian freewill. Libertarian free will is basically the concept that, metaphysically and morally, man is an autonomous being, one who operates independently, not controlled by others or by outside forces. According to the Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion (InterVarsity Press, 2002),
Faith in someone else's work. That's exactly what the bible teaches. Make the distinction. Faith and works are not the same! By faith you have been saved. Not of works shoudl no man boast. That dichotomy is as clear as daylight.
Jesus says the same thing in John 10 about the sheep who he has not brought into the fold yet that the father has already given him. And about them being one and together. Self worshipers don’t like this because it cuts their imagined self will to “choose Jesus” by the power of them self out of the deal.
You added the part that the father has given him the cheep that are not of this fold in John 10. Earlier in the chapter he says I am the door. No one comes in unless thru me ( Jesus ). He follows ot by saying I am the Shepard. There is no mention of the father. Brother this was a classic read your doctrine into the text and you recorded it in your comment.
@aletheia8054 yes it happened later on in a different conversation. He also said I and the father are one. No one can snatch them from the father's hand ( God's hand ) The point is that the audience were Jews. The Jews didn't know the trinity. God fearing Jew had to be naturally drawn by the father ( God ). Simmiliraly, God fearing Gentiles who didn't know Jesus also had to be drawn by God ( the father ) first. Cornelius was a God-fearing man who prayed and gave alms. God ( the father ) heard his prayers and sent him an angel to go see Peter. Peter told him about the Son ( Jesus ). He believed!! He was drawn by the father. That's the context. The father did not arbitrarily just choose people by name before the foundation of the world to go to Jesus. That's inserting a false doctrine into the text.
@aletheia8054 yes in a different conversation later on the chapter but the point is the sheep are Jews who the son wasn't revealed to yet who were God fearing. They came to the son because he has the same voice as the father ( God ). Any other interpretation is adding to the text.
I can't listen to Leighton for more than a few minutes without wanting to throw up, but if you're going to play Leighton, playing him at 2x speed to get through it as quickly as possible is a good strategy.
@@daddada2984 “Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.” Proverbs 12:1 “Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you; reprove a wise man, and he will love you.” Proverbs 9:8
Yes, Pastor Chris. Jesus’s prayer is for all who God gives to Jesus. I suspect Leighton would agree.
But who is given? Those whom God chose before the foundation of the earth?
No. It does not say that.
It says, “…those also who believe in Me (Jesus) through their (Apostles’) word.”
If the Apostle John wanted to teach the Calvinistic perspective of unconditional election, wouldn’t this have been a good place to say so? But that is not what is taught here.
Well said
Hello i know this is an old post and your comment is very insightful but what do we do with vs 24. Father i want THOSE you have given me to be with me . Has Jesus transitioned back to the apostles in vs 24 or his he speaking of all believers?
@@gwine2nine52 - I would say the answer is in vs. 20, “…those who believe in Me through their (Apostles) word…”.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 ok i got busy at the moment i will get back later. Thanks for response
1 John 2:2 makes Limited Atonement impossible.
Sorry but, i think leighton read the bible correctly. Just saying. Not trying to be rude or pick sides. God bless you.
Excellent analysis you're one hundred percent right and obviously so. Even Chuck Smith, Mike Winger, Greg Laurie, Greg kokul and Dr Cooper and Frank Turek totally expose and disagree with Calvinism. Thank you for your comment, studiousness and knowledge.
Quite honestly pastor, no matter what verse Leighton shares with you, as a calvanist, you will misinterpret it. Jesus died for the sins of the entire World. World means exactly what it says. Those who receive Christ, John 1:12, are saved. Those who do not believe in Him are lost, John 3:18. It's that simple pastor.
I agree that those who accept are saved and those who reject are lost!
Thanks for watching!
@A Pastor’s Thoughts
But the question is,
Where they choosen to beilive or did they beilive because they chose to beilive?
Scripture never speaks of a certain grace needed to beilive. Rather Paul, in Romans 1:14 says the Gospel is the power of God to Salvation. The gospel is that strong. You do not need pre faith regeneration as a Calvinist would suggest.
In Genisis 3 when God was dishing out the punishment for the fall, why didn't God ever say to Adam and Eve that they are now dead like a dead man and can not beilive?
We are given the grace of choice.
@@BookNerdPURATIN. Jesus, sheep choose to believe because they are his sheep and because the Holy Spirit births them again from above.
The Holy Spirit produces faith. Gal 5. Not the flesh or mind of a man.
@aletheia8054
For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.
Through faith. It is a gift Through faith. That's the key. We must have faith
@@BookNerdPURATIN Right. Through the faith that the Holy Spirit produces.
Gal 5:22. The Bible just literally says so.
Thanks for exposing Leighton and his agenda against predestination. The truth continues to be revealed! 🎉
Leighton has EARS to hear, but HEARS not.
My problem with Calvinism is that it makes God responsible for the Evils in our World instead of Prideful People willfully rejecting God's Provision in Christ.
That’s a common, but not necessary objection.
Verse 20 says that the world may believe..
Believe is faith. It's not saying so that the world may be judged.
What on earth are you talking about ? Shocking commnetary!
The word pistis (believe) often denotes true faith in the book of John, but not always. It depends on the context. At the end of chapter 2 we have a people said to believe (pistis) in Jesus, however, is said in the next verse to not “entrust” himself to them. The word translated as entrust is pistis again, so it could be read as, “Jesus did not believe in their belief. Saying that what the people believed was superficial, it wasn’t a belief that saves. What did they believe? We are told in chapter 3 when Nicodemus comes to Jesus. Nicodemus said, “we believe you are a teacher sent from God”. That’s not saving belief, they did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of God.
That’s doesn’t exactly solve your issue though, because what is believed in John 17:21 by the world is the truth, that Jesus is who he claimed to be. But, that belief doesn’t constitute salvation by itself, as we know that even demons believe Jesus is the Son of God. That, along with Jesus already praying for everyone who will believe in the prior verse, and the eschatological theme of the section, provides the context for seeing the world here as the world of unbelievers seeing the unity of those who belong to God and knowing that the Jesus they rejected is who he claimed to be.
Thanks for watching!
Brother , you say John never uses the word " world" but in a negative sense.
John 3:16 How is that a negative sense?
In John 3:16 the world is so bad that in order for redemption to be accomplished the Son of God would need to come and die on the cross. “World” is negative even when spoken of as loved by God.
I disagree. There are many times, even most of the time where the " world" has an obvious negative connotation to it. This is not one of them. It' s more of a " neutral " position.
Sin is an obvious problem in men that are in the world. But the use of the word " world" can be neutral or just to quantify.
And Also for example the following verse. There's nothing negative about the use of " world" here. Only saying that Christ Glory pre-existed creation.
John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Also, I've just came across your video's recently, but I've already seen you are guilty of doing some of the same things you accuse Flowers of.
But please tell me how John 17:5 is negative.
I have an idea how you might answer,but I will wait and see ; maybe you will see John 17:5 as a " neutral" use.
@@1027MissBear I said there are some instances, very few if any, in which the word kosmos (world) is used in a neutral sense within the book of John. But yes, world even in 17:5 can be seen as negative. It still represents that which is at odds with God.
I don’t take issue with viewing world in 17:5 as neutral though. The main point of the verse is to note the pre-existent Jesus and not really to speak of the world in particular.
@@1027MissBear thanks for watching by the way! Stick around, I have a lot coming up, and my goal is to continue improving production quality as I move forward. All with hopes of edifying the body of Christ!
@@chrisharris9710I will,but one thing I request is that you slow down the playback just a little more. I learn a lot through debate. But I would be careful brother to listen to more of Leighton's videos before critiquing them. You've accused him of positions he doesn't hold or asked him to affirm things he already has affirmed. Just like I missed you saying some "world" statements are neutral until a careful re-listening.
In Christ!
16:07 Every true Christian can be assured of being included in this prayer.
This prayer has nothing to do with the Church. ua-cam.com/video/reFl6rSa5ug/v-deo.html
Verse 20 " so that" makes it evangelistic. May they also be in us so that the world may be believe.
May belive but they also may not believe...that's not every knee shall bow. The text is very clear Leighton is spot on.
You have the syntax wrong. Easy to do though. The “so that” is what is called a hina clause in Greek, it’s a purpose clause. What we find in that clause is not expression of doubt, rather the opposite. It can be read as the world will believe Jesus is who he claimed to be because of the unity of all believers.
Think of it like this statement, “I am cooking, so that the homeless may eat.”
In that I am not saying maybe the homeless will eat and maybe they won’t, I am saying that the reason I am cooking is that the homeless will eat. There isn’t doubt, it is the purpose of my cooking.
Hope this helps!
And thanks for watching!
But the homeless have the choice not to eat whatever you cook
@chrisharris9710 yes it's why you're cooking to begin with.
Where do those who come to faith reside until they come to faith? Answer: the world. The world is full of people who will come to faith. Jesus even prays they “may” come to faith. That doesn’t sound so certain. Why would He pray for it if it’s bound to happen? Why would anyone pray for anything to happen if it’s all predetermined?
Also, why would you set up a straw man about God’s omniscience for Leighton? Why would you ask if God needs to “look through the corridors of time” to see who will believe? Don’t you believe God is transcendent and omniscient? God cannot learn anything or find anything out. That point confused me.
Thanks!
People are called out of the world, yes, but that is not what Jesus is praying for when he mentions the world in John 17. He has already included in his prayer everyone who would come out of the world (his Apostles and everyone who would believe the Gospel message they have). The world in this context is contrasted with the church (the unified people of God), and therefore represents wickedness and evil.
Christ praying for the unity of the body and the vindication of himself is consistent with the means by which things come to be. That doesn’t effect the eternal plan of God.
I wasn’t suggesting Leighton believes God’s foreknowledge comes from “looking into the future”. My question pertains to what it means for God to know a thing. It’s a tough question that cannot be answered. However, we can say negative things about it, such as, “whatever is meant by God knowing it does not mean he knows as we know, and it does not mean his knowledge is acquired, and it does not mean his knowledge is dependent upon contingencies outside of himself”. I didn’t get into that topic, just made a passing remark.
Thanks for watching!
You are asking us to just swallow your claim of the last part being eschatological as well as world being a negative connotation. Just saying something doesn’t make it so.
Could there not be a category of believers that come to believe that Jesus came from the Father due to the oneness of the believers, just as Jesus prayed?
Your saying all become believers because of the apostles words, but Jesus’ prayer for the world is that they would believe as a result of the oneness of those who have come to believe because of the apostles words.
Right?! Pastor Chris would have us believe Jesus’s prayer for those who would believe thru the words of the Apostles and disciples was not evangelistic. He instead imports Isaiah’s quote in Romans about every knee bowing to & every tongue confessing Christ into Jesus’s prayer. Not sure that’s what Jesus or Paul had in mind.
I’m not asking you to just swallow anything. It’s not at all controversial to say that kosmos is never used in a positive connotation in the book of John, nor is it controversial to say the latter part of the High Priestly Prayer in John 17 is eschatological.
Thanks for watching!
@@chrisharris9710 with respect brother, that’s simply gaslighting. That reply is essentially saying, “I’m not asking you to swallow anything, but you should because nothing I said was controversial.” Or in other words, “what I’m saying is widely accepted by all Christian’s”.
Do you deny the potential of you being wrong about your eschatological claims and perhaps there is another category of believers from the world that believe as a result of the oneness of the believers as Jesus prayed for?
@@chrisharris9710 It seems like you are missing the point. Leighton is not arguing against the fact that 'world' is always spoken of in the negative or that John 17 is eschatological. He is responding to the many Calvinists that use this passage 'as a slam dunk to Calvinism' that they say proves unconditional election. He is pointing out that many Calvinists teach that Jesus is only praying for the 'elect' in this passage.
You, like many Calvinists, however, miss his point of contention by arguing against a point he is not making which a type of red herring.
Respectfully, sir, please try to understand his point in your future videos.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 John 17 does point to a Reformed view of soteriology. It points to the fact that the Father gives the Son a people and that people comes to the Son through faith in the Gospel. Chapter 6 has already seen that nobody comes to the Son unless granted by the Father, and that all the Father gives will come to the Son, so in the high priestly prayer of chapter 17 Jesus is praying for the unity of the people of God and their future glorification.
I noticed one major difference between calvinism and other points of view. The former believes in almighty God and latter believes in almighty man.
This is very helpful. A learned Calvinist who is cordial and thoughtful, critiquing our perspective. Thank you for doing this. Iron Sharpening Iron is hopefully what’s happening in these dialogues 🙂
28:30 Wow. Leighton completely ignores the rest of the passage on purpose in order to make his argument. Another example that Leighton is a twister of Scripture.
“Leighton completely ignores the rest of the passage on purpose…” ?
Wow! You know Leighton’s heart and motivations?
Biased at all?
I don’t think he intended to read the whole Bible. No matter what video everyone stops reading. You guys missed Dr Flowers point because you are to focus on defending Calvinism
Hi Pastor Chris. Thanks for doing this video. I would agree with you that world is either negative or neutral in John. However, where neutral (such as John 3:16) is it not also evangelical? I always keep an open mind about eschatology. But do you have any commentaries that you know of that holds your eschatological view here? I have never heard that before.
Granted, that just because there may not be any commentary that agrees with your eschatological take in John 17 (unless you know of one), may not mean it cannot be the case. As for verse 24, based on the context, the simplest obvious connection could be (based on nearest context principles) that those whom Christ was speaking of in 22-23, might also be the same as 24. The difference? In 22-23 Jesus is praying for the disciples glory in Him and unity on earth. Then, (as high priest) He prays for them (the same) to be with Him thereafter.
Now we might think it strange that Christ would pray for a need for those whom the Father gave Him to also be present with Him in paradise, heaven, eternal state. This would seem naturally already provided by the Father as a natural outflow of those who love Him on earth. This prayer is known as the "high priestly prayer." So in that context, Christ praying that those that know Him on earth also be included in heaven after (as high priest and divinity--having been with the Father before the foundation of the world highlighting this fact) is Christ literally praying that those who love Him on earth may also be with Him in heaven...a priestly prayer of Christ.
If the context is primarily governed by this priestly official prayer of Christ, then using this context to expand into end times or broaden theological implications as they may relate to future believers may not be as central to the context of the significance "at that time even" and importance of Christ fulfilling a high priest prayer. Understood in this context, it would make sense that verses 23 and 24 are the same group. Because on one hand, as high priest, Christ is thanking the father for the disciples earthly blessing as well as high priest (and deity) asking the Father to also bless them in eternal glory. Because of Christs initial pronounced work of what He came to do (as focus), and not so much that Christ came to fulfill our theological notions, the simplest direct reading would have 23 and 24 as the same group under the context of His ministry as the focus MORE than secondary potential soteriological theological derivatives we might pull from such statements.
In this view, verses 25 and 26 would also be the disciples which fits perfectly in a closing bracket. "These have known that you have sent me," would BEST be those that knew that practically at that very time. And as contextually convincing as verse 25 points soundly to those who would witness Him physically at that time, would provide a sufficient parameter suggesting that if we have read this far (verse 25) it would include everything in context along the way also before it.
I hope that makes sense in a way. Blessing's brother. And thanks for the encouragement to look at these passages a bit more even if we might see differently.
A. W. Pink agrees with my take. He comments that verse 23 is referring to when “God’s elect have all been gathered together in one”….
You presented quite a bit here though. Thanks for the well thought out and articulated comment. Perhaps I will engage with it in a future video.
Thanks for watching!
J. C. Ryle and Matthew Poole are among others that, while not articulating precisely as I have, understand verse 23 to be contrasting the entire elect or church or body of Christ with the world of unbelievers.
Thomas Aquinas also relates verse 23 to eschatology, he takes a different route than I do, saying the world represents the world of believers, saying that by that time the evil of the world will know via clear signs. I don’t agree with Thomas, but nonetheless he sees this as eschatological in theme.
Verse 25 these indicates he is talking about the apostles in the present time...these know me...he is not talking about future believers cause he is speaking in present tense. These already know me! I made known to them( past tense) He clearly is talking about apostles
Jesus is not saying these WILL know me!!
Why don't you go back to Vs.20? Where He is speaking about those of us who will believe on Him through what the Apostles teach? Messes your narrative up, doesn't it?
@barryclevenger7456 no because verses 24 and 25 are not about you and me.
26 I have made you[e] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”
@@Jebron_G Verse 20 has already included us.
@barryclevenger7456 yes verse 20 does but
What part of verses 24 thru 26 we are included?
We can pray for more than one person/people in one prayer. It's too obvious he was praying for his disciples in 24 thru 26.
24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.
25 “Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me. 26 I have made you[e] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”
@@Jebron_G But verse 20 includes us with His disciple. Has not the Father gave us to His Son?
Where its confusing is 16:00 mark. If God has causually determined believers before the foundation of the world then why does Jesus care that the world may believe that the father sent him?If the world(lost reprobates) cant believe then why must God prove to them he sent Jesus to love only the ones God predetermined to love?.this to me is the real issue. Example: judas on judgement day will see that God did not love him and predetermined him to hell to fulfill his will and reformers still say God is love??? 👉🤯
6:42 I sense a tad bid of spite and anger with Leighton with this commentary. Notice also, Leighton does not exegete the Scriptures, he inserts his own dialogue into the passages to make his point. He is completely reading into the Scriptures through his lenses of hatred toward Calvinist doctrines.
He ACCUSSES Calvinists all the time of not reading further on, and he DOES the identical same thing. Verse 20 does not exist for him.
You might like Grace and truth ministries with Pastor Jim Brown
@@aletheia8054 Thanks.
Im Reading through this section in John myself. If you read from the preceding chapter you would naturally read it as per this video‘s explanation imo.
There is something unwholesome about the anti Calvinist obsession of LF - and it shows here. His theological lymbic system is in full swing and he would have to find a way to snap out of it.
this is a superb example of gaslighting. You hear, but you understand nothing. typical Calvinist.
I disagree with your assessment of course.
Thanks for watching!
Do you care to expound upon your accusation? Critical statements with no substance help no one.
@@matt_h_27 most calvinist just go silent when they don't have a scriptural response.
@@jameshoyt3692
Try me
@@matt_h_27 I hope you respond and don't go silent. Or even worse flat-out deny the truth of Calvinism that I presented using quotes from John Calvin himself and various other prominent calvinist leaders.
This post is not helpful
What is not helpful? I’m confused as to what you are meaning.
Leighton’s hermeneutic is very simple: Calvinism can’t be true.
That’s exactly right
@@aletheia8054 I've seen him swap words in passages, to change the plain meaning to support his view.
In Ephesians 1:4, he changed "to be holy and blameless", which was plainly written on the screen, to "to become holy and blameless," completely missing that we are declared holy and blameless when we are justified, having the righteousness of Christ applied to our account. He also misses that justification, sanctification, and glorification are all part of salvation. (A Christian can accurately say, "I am saved, I am being saved, I will be saved.") He treats sanctification as if it is separate from salvation, which leads him to conclude that God doesn't choose us to be saved until we are already saved. It's nonsense. (See his "Ephesians 1 DeCalvinized" video) His word games are clouding the clearly written Scriptures.
Good exegetical work. I don't believe that Leighton is deliberately deceptive. I believe he is sincere in what he believes but he has a template in his mind and he has to eisegete to get scripture to fit it.
great video. this is exactly what Leighton does all the time. He talks alot and deceives alot. its just not ignorance, He knows what he is doing.
Yes. He’s a Con man
Please give one example of how Dr. Flowers is being deceptive.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 I’ve got two examples on my channel.
@@yvonnedoulos8873 he will change the words “not believe “to “refuse to believe”.
He has a lot of little deceptive tricks like that. He has spent a lot of time rigging up those tricks.
It’s the same thing people like Kenneth Copeland do. Some people have a talent for conning others.
@@aletheia8054 - Thank you. What channel?
Wow, Pastor Chris Harris, your video here offers such a bad eisegesis that I’m shocked a pastor at any level believes it or would offer it. Jesus himself said God did NOT send His son into the world to condemn the world, but to SAVE the world through him-same book, same Savior speaking the words. Jesus’ intention in this part of his High Priestly Prayer is indeed that the lost throughout the world would be reached so as to be saved. I’m tempted to say something like “Turn in your degree, do not pass go, do not collect $200”, but I’m still struck how any pastor could miss the whole point of Jesus and God’s Word to try and assert your hypothesis in this video.
Thanks for watching! And try to not hold back so much next time you comment. 😉
Yes. Save the lost. The lost sheep. Goats aren’t lost. They’re were there supposed to be. 0:37
Scripture: "according as God Hath dealt to every man the measure of faith"... to use to receive Christ (Acts 17:30-31)
Calvinism: "God gives the gift of faith to some"... the randomly pre-chosen elect in eternity past, whom will irresistibly be coerced into turning to Christ.
Thanks for watching!
Acts 17:30-31 doesn't say that so you misquoted and/or wrongly referenced whatever it is you're referencing. Perhaps you're alluding to Romans 12:3 where Paul is speaking only of believers when he speaks of the measure of faith God has assigned. This is clear from the surrounding verses. So are you adding and removing things from the bible to make your point? Come on...
@@matt_h_27 Yes... the scripture quote was from Romans. Then the Acts quote was to reference why HE gives a measure of faith.
@@mikelyons2831 God doesn’t give a measure of faith to everyone. Faith is the fruit of regeneration, just as repentance is the fruit of regeneration. This is not something given to everyone. It’s by God’s sovereign, gracious choice.
@@matt_h_27 Scripture; Jesus would leave the 99 to save the 1
Calvinism: You've either been randomly pre-chosen/pre-ordained/predetermined to irresistibly be saved or to be an arbitrary vessel of wrath, because God created you with a will that will only choose to sin, you can't choose HIM despite HIM sending HIS Spirit to convict the WORLD of sin & righteousness. HE didn't create you with a free moral agency to have genuine fellowship, Koinonia, personal relationship with HIM, c'mon everyone wants a spouse that they have to give a potion to for him/her to want to love them ... 👿 Don't you realize some will be randomly pardoned & some are doomed before the womb...& that brings God glory don'tcha know.
What's your point??
I think it’s fairly clear in the video. Leighton contends that “those given by the Father” refers only to the original disciples. But if he would have “kept reading” he would have had to deal with Jesus saying everyone in the Son is given by the Father. I think he stops reading in verse 22, only 3 verses from the end of the prayer, and verse 24 states all believers are given by the Father.
@@chrisharris9710 And you honestly believe that if he continued reading he couldn't deal with that thought?
@@gregoryrelationshipcoach9229 it’s not “a thought”, it’s what the text says, both contextually and grammatically. 🤷🏻♂️
@@chrisharris9710 yes. But you really believe that would not be able to deal with that text?
@@gregoryrelationshipcoach9229
Of course flowers would find a way to get out of it
John 3:16. God so loved the “WORLD”
If you don’t think world is positive (the elect) then Jesus died for the rebrobates, all of them.
The word “so” is an adverb not an adjective.
The Fathers teaches everyone that God exists. Through the creation! Not one will have the excuse that they do not see God exists, being understood from observing the Creation
Romans1: 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
The Father is not the saviour, that is the role of the Son, The Messiah, The Lord Jesus, The Christ!
Those that then desire God , they are taught by the Father as this verse shows: and the Father sends them that believe that God exists to the Son.
It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. John 6:45
So when Jesus said that: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. John 6:44
It is simple saying that the Father makes all men aware that God exists and sends those who respond to the Father to Jesus.
BUT! not all men will respond even though they have no excuse. They know God exists but they made their choice.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools Romans 1:21-22
Paul verifies this to Timothy: 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. 1 Timothy 2 : 3-6
The Holy Spirit comes into play in a special personal way only once a person whom the Father sends to the Son for salvation is born again. Those who willingly desire to be right with God. Those who Repent and are Baptized. The Holy spirit indwells the Christian as counsellor and guide. John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
(Such as deformed 5-point Calvinism.)
JESUS John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life
Truth in love
The Greek word world is kosmon. That’s where we get our cosmetics. It means an orderly arrangement. And all that is in the world is the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life.
Every time you see the word world in John 17 just insert these words …
Orderly arrangement, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life .
Doing that and understanding the other Greek words will help to figure out what Jesus is talking about .
You should know better than to make this about the scriptural text. You simply disagree with Mr. Flowers's interpretative presuppositions he brings to the text. I disagree with yours. At issue is a disagreement about worldview and not about the biblical text.
I take it you didn’t watch the video? I explain his missteps in the text itself, such as leaving out the last few verses.
@@chrisharris9710. I take your reply as a misunderstanding of my comment. The impression you wish to give is simply that your interpretation of the text is better than Mr. Flowers. He has covered these texts and these topics in multiple writings and videos. You simply disagree with his interpretation of the text, but, in my opinion, give the misleading impression that the d
Disagreement is about the text rather than the interpretation of it. That's my only point.
@@tellingtruthexperiencingli9355 of course we have differing presuppositions, but in the video I pointed out grammar and leaving out part of the text itself. Ironically, Leighton was saying Calvinists need to keep reading, while he stops one verse short of messing his thesis up on who the given from the Father are. So, I don’t know what you mean by interpretation, in that yes we have some interpretational differences, but again, I made my case according to grammar, by following antecedents.
@@chrisharris9710 . Your presupposition is that your interpretation is the grammar is objective and therefore not based in making subjective interpretations of the grammar itself. There is more then one way to interpret grammar. I've studied Greek and had to make interpretative decisions based on the grammar.
@@tellingtruthexperiencingli9355
Yes. And the difference between flowers and me is that flowers believes he meticulously determines himself to believe by the power of himself.
I believe that God through the Holy Spirit meticulously determines me to believe by the power of God
That’s the difference
Nope, thanks.
Excellent work. Way more patient with him than I could have been. I would have bristled so strongly at some of his false claims about how a Calvinist would see the text, that I would have simply called him a malicious liar and walked away.
Kaleb, are you a calvinist?
Same. To God there is no difference between knowing beforehand and determining something to come to pass beforehand. After all, God is the only one who can stop something or cause something to come to pass. If it comes to pass, it goes without saying that God predetermined that it WOULD, in fact, come to pass, for His good purpose. Otherwise it would not come to pass. Why Leighton Flowers is still making videos and people are still watching them is quite sad. I hope he has a real job because he doesn't deserve to be compensated for the "theology" he puts out. Every time I hear him, I want to make my own UA-cam channel just to counter his ridiculous content.
@@matt_h_27 Myopic Matthew is a good choice for your youtube channel.
Jeremiah 19:5 .
Myopic Matt , rid your filthy lens of reformed/calvinist crud and begin to see a new. Your choice.
@@truthseeker5698 speaking of names, you should definitely change yours
@@matt_h_27 Matt, cease being a good cultist and try to be more original.
That tulip you’ve got is toxic and limiting your ability. Your choice .
Flowers is teaching another Gospel, a very dangerous one that lifts up man as having his own works in his salvation.
Ad Hominen indicates failure to refute the topic. Capitulation!!
The bible is full of verses that tell you who are to be saved. The weak, the humble, the repentant, the faithfull..etc too many verses to quote. None thou says they are randomly chosen for no reason before they were even born against their sinful nature to believe Or to humble themselves or to repent or.to be saved for no reason!!
Also,
Calvinsim gives man more power than he has. It portrays God as one who is scared and worried if he really gives man limited free will, man might cause some damage to God's sovereignty. As if man is equally omnipotent as God!!
Calvinism also gives the reprobate /sinner an excuse on a golden platter. He is a victim yet condemned to hell for no fault of his own. He simply was not chosen.
He preaches libertarian freewill.
Libertarian free will is basically the concept that, metaphysically and morally, man is an autonomous being, one who operates independently, not controlled by others or by outside forces. According to the Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion (InterVarsity Press, 2002),
Faith in someone else's work. That's exactly what the bible teaches. Make the distinction. Faith and works are not the same! By faith you have been saved. Not of works shoudl no man boast. That dichotomy is as clear as daylight.
@aletheia8054 man is created by God free to make up his mind. That's evident in every page of the bible.
Jesus says the same thing in John 10 about the sheep who he has not brought into the fold yet that the father has already given him. And about them being one and together.
Self worshipers don’t like this because it cuts their imagined self will to “choose Jesus” by the power of them self out of the deal.
You added the part that the father has given him the cheep that are not of this fold in John 10.
Earlier in the chapter he says I am the door. No one comes in unless thru me ( Jesus ). He follows ot by saying I am the Shepard. There is no mention of the father. Brother this was a classic read your doctrine into the text and you recorded it in your comment.
@@Jebron_G John 10:29 My Father, *which gave them to me* is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
Oops
@aletheia8054 yes it happened later on in a different conversation. He also said I and the father are one. No one can snatch them from the father's hand ( God's hand )
The point is that the audience were Jews. The Jews didn't know the trinity. God fearing Jew had to be naturally drawn by the father ( God ). Simmiliraly, God fearing Gentiles who didn't know Jesus also had to be drawn by God ( the father ) first.
Cornelius was a God-fearing man who prayed and gave alms. God ( the father ) heard his prayers and sent him an angel to go see Peter. Peter told him about the Son ( Jesus ). He believed!!
He was drawn by the father.
That's the context.
The father did not arbitrarily just choose people by name before the foundation of the world to go to Jesus. That's inserting a false doctrine into the text.
@@Jebron_G You tried to correct me and say that it didn’t say the father gave them in John 10. But it does.
@aletheia8054 yes in a different conversation later on the chapter but the point is the sheep are Jews who the son wasn't revealed to yet who were God fearing. They came to the son because he has the same voice as the father ( God ). Any other interpretation is adding to the text.
I can't listen to Leighton for more than a few minutes without wanting to throw up, but if you're going to play Leighton, playing him at 2x speed to get through it as quickly as possible is a good strategy.
I want to throw up listening to calvinist or reformed.. God ordained or predestined me about it.. hahaha
@@daddada2984 you shouldn’t mock words you don’t understand. The Bible uses predestined and ordained.
@@matt_h_27 maybe God predestined or ordained me to mock the words i dont know.. that is the logic of calvinism. So don't judge me or correct me.
@@daddada2984
“Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.”
Proverbs 12:1
“Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you; reprove a wise man, and he will love you.”
Proverbs 9:8
@@matt_h_27 amen.
But why discipline or reproof if God ordained & predestined things?