How studying the Bible in its original context and languages led me out of my former Calvinistic beliefs. Thanks to @Soteriology101 for having me on the show.
Dr. Joel Korytko - graduated with a PhD from Oxford, and is now an Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies at Northwest Seminary. He’s a Bible scholar who specializes in the Greek Septuagint. --- Small suggestion - I think you could add an ‘ABOUT’ section to your RU-vid channel where you add a small academic bio about yourself - just so people can know who/what they’re listening to.
Thank you for sharing. Listening to people's "in and out of Calvinism" testimonies was and is incredibly healing to me after leaving Calvinism myself. I did not experience the same level of embarrassment for changing my views as you did, but I still felt internally ashamed for having believed such terrible and nonsensical things about God (even if I would not have characterized it that way before). Like you, I also came out of Calvinism because of the text of Scripture, after staying in it for 11 years despite the emotional damage it caused. I thought the Bible taught it so I had to believe it. If I came out due to emotions, I would have left the moment I entered, not stayed in for 11 years. When I finally walked straight through Romans 9 together with looking up the Old Testament references that Paul cites in the chapter, I learned that Calvinism was false. When it was clear to me that the text of Scripture did not teach Calvinism, that's when I left. And like you I also experienced such joy and peace. I finally felt loved by God again and it was easy for me to love God not hard like in Calvinism. I used to take lukewarm showers because hot showers made me think of burning in hell for eternity and made me wonder if God actually hated me and if I would fall away at some point because God had chosen me for hell. Now I can also freely share the gospel and tell everyone "God loves you! Jesus died for you! God wants you to be saved! I know for sure because God loves every person and you are a person, so that applies to YOU!" I could never say that before because I didn't know if it was true whether or not God loved or hated the person I was witnessing to. So thanks again for your interviews and for this channel and sharing your story. God bless!
@salvadaXgracia, I know that Calvinism have some errors in their doctrine but so Arminianism and Provisionism.. Can you please tell me what are their beliefs that you dont't agree and why you don't agree? Thank you...
@@reynaldodavid2913JoThe idea that God chooses people for hell and he does not want them to repent and be saved which is contrary to Scripture. Also the idea that God determines all our sins such that we had no real ability or option to do otherwise.
You have to read the "text" like a Title attorney representing a client interested in making a purchase. Title attorneys don't take sides. They want to know what the text actually says - this is in the best interest of their clients. I agree that it is very hard for us to shed our presuppositions when reading a text.
I was a Calvinist, too, but an unlearned one. I didn't even know what Calvinism was. I just thought that, if God knew everything that would happen, then everything was fated to happen. Eventually, through listening to and reading William Lane Craig, I learned about Calvinism and Arminianism. At that point I became an Arminian. Now that I see that we don't need a partial regeneration in order to respond to the Gospel, I'm a Provisionist.
@@sevencrickets9258 In general, I--along with everyone else--needs to hear the gospel (though not literally everyone, since some will probably be saved by recognizing God in general revelation and seeking to follow Him). Do I especially? No. I have now read much on the subject. I've read the Bible several times. I've read more theology and philosophy of religion than I care to admit. I've thought about this a lot. I am thoroughly familiar with the Gospel.
@@Real_LiamOBryan Sorry. To clarify, what I meant was do people need to hear the gospel to be saved, not you specifically. My question is, if general revelation is sufficient, which you seem to assert here, then why do we need to do mission work? Does everyone equally get their shot at choosing the one true God, regardless of if they hear the gospel?
@@sevencrickets9258 *"To clarify, what I meant was do people need to hear the gospel to be saved, not you specifically."* No. I don't think so. I think that the portions of the scripture that make it sound like that are speaking generally, and I would agree that it is generally necessary to hear the Gospel, but I don't think that it's a one-size-fits-all glove. *"My question is, if general revelation is sufficient, which you seem to assert here, then why do we need to do mission work?"* Because there isn't a high probability of people being saved this way. I liken it to this: if people can be saved from freezing to death by giving them clothes, then why would we need to give them blankets and a means of making fire? It is because sufficient doesn't imply optimal, or even likelihood. *"Does everyone equally get their shot at choosing the one true God, regardless of if they hear the gospel?"* Well, I think that this is a slightly complex question to answer briefly, but I'll try. I believe that God either: (a) created the world such that those whom He foreknew would accept the Gospel were created in situations in which they will, in fact hear the Gospel, and--conversely--that those whom He foreknew would reject the Gospel were created in situations where they either do or do not hear the Gospel, since it does not matter; or (b) God created the world such that those who would accept the Gospel had they heard it are created in a situation where they do, in fact, respond to General Revelation. So, I think that either way "everyone equally get their shot at choosing the one true God, regardless of if they hear the gospel", but only in the sense that God, having the requisite foreknowledge and being supremely just, does not leave anyone in a situation where they have no real chance at salvation. To reiterate, I think that everyone has a fair shot at salvation, but I don't think that it is likely that many will be saved by General Revelation alone; yet, God is perfectly just and, so, He would not leave someone in a situation where they have no real shot, unless He plans to judge them fairly and pardon whatever portion of them would be most just given their heart and actions without having had the opportunity to hear the Gospel. It ought to be noted that there are known cases, if one accepts Biblical teaching, of people being saved without being a "Christian" proper. Christians are those who have enough knowledge to place their faith in Christ and live according to His teachings. Included among those who may be saved without being such a Christian proper, but may be called Christians in some sense (having had the atoning blood of Christ applied to them in atonement for their sins), might be: infants, Old Testament saints not under the Abrahamic or Mosaic covenants (such as Abel, Enoch, Daniel, Noah, Job, Melchizedek, Lot and The Queen of Sheba), Old Testament saints under the Abrahamic or Mosaic covenants, New Testament--pre-Gospel--saints (such as Cornelius, Nathaniel, the two disciples of John the Baptist (John 1:35), etc. And, Romans 1-2 seems to teach that this even applies to those who never hear the Gospel, such as tribal people, isolated on lonely islands somewhere or in some, deep, forest. Romans 1 & 2 make it clear that people's following General Revelation can, perhaps (though it isn't said to be likely), excuse them. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; -- Romans 1:18-20 www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A18-20&version=RSV For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality. All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. -- Romans 2:6-16 www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+2%3A6-16&version=RSV
@@Real_LiamOBryan Well I obviously disagree with you on the gospel issue. Hearing the gospel is critical. General revelation is sufficient for damnation, but not salvation. The gospel, which is the power unto salvation, is to repent and turn to faith in the finished work of Christ. Kinda hard to do that last part if you have never heard of Jesus. I do think it is possible for Jesus to directly reveal himself to people not reached by missionaries, much like what he did with Paul, but that is not the norm. The regular means by which the church grows is through the preaching of the gospel and making of disciples. Regarding the idea that God knows what choices free creatures would make, this sounds an awful lot like middle knowledge. Would you consider yourself a molinist? Can you be both molinist and provisionist?
The idea that the perspective is that of an unbelieving Jew arguing in Romans 9 is correct, and it would have likely been Saul (unbelieving Paul) that would have thought that way. By the time you finish Romans and Galatians, you should also see the Paul realized how unbiblical his previous system of belief was. The idea that the OT was about salvation through the Law was the false teaching of Paul’s day. He pointed out in great detail that no one was ever saved through the Law, and its true intent was to drive everyone to see their need for a savior.
An amazing journey from an amazing man of God! I loved your explanation of Romans 9!!! Don't you love it when God surprises you in His Word and you see something that you had totally missed before?!
The fact is, neither of the guys in this video are Christians. They are both just brute beasts made only to be destroyed, as are all freewillers. "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;" 2 Peter 2:12 KJV "But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves." Jude 1:10 KJV
God never arbitrarily decided he was going to include the goyim as part of Israel. He didn't change the definiton of Israel either. He said from the beginning He was going to include all the nations. It was always His intention. He said He would bless all nations through Abraham (a descendant of Shem from Ur of the Chaldees). When God said He would defeat the serpent through Eve's seed, He meant to do what He said. He made a covenant with Noah. I mean, Hell, the Torah calls Jacob a Syrian. None of the first peoples were Israelites or Jews. They were all goyim too. Israel isn't just an Earthly ethnicity or nation. It's a heavenly idea that transcends bloodlines. It's a union of people in God's Spirit. He used individuals to make a nation, then chose a tribe to bring forth a king. The king was a priest after the order of Melchizedek (another gentile). Without God's preservation of a remnant, He could not have brought forth a Messiah. The Messiah sent His Spirit to us, and we entered a new age of grace. Now we can freely choose to be Israel by the power of His Spirit all around us in this age. It is different now than it was under the old covenant. It's the same God. He always had the same plan. He was always clear about how He was going to do it. It had to be implemented in steps over the ages, but He never arbitraily through His sovereignity redefined Israel. He sovereignly declared from the foundations of the world how it was going to play out. Because of lamb slain from the foundations of the Earth, we are all decreed as WELCOME.
Over more than 25 years of reading and studying the Bible, I came to understand and to reject Calvinism, NOT by reading man, the very thing Paul warns us about, and not by listening to Leighton either (sorry), but by reading the word of God. Calvinists have stated that they were persuaded not by reading the word but rather by reading other works by Calvinists. I now lead Bible study groups, and I am so grateful that I did not go to Bible college and become indoctrinated by one or another of the various and contradictory doctrines of man taught at most of them.
After 30 years of reading and studying scripture, I am 100% convinced of the biblical doctrine of sovereign election (AKA Calvinism). I have never read any of Calvin's works. I "grew up" for the first five years of my Christian walk being influenced by dispensationalist, arminian pastors such as Adrian Rogers, Chuck Swindoll, Charles Stanley, and many others. At that time I didn't even know what dispensationalism or "calvinism" or the argument regarding "free will" vs sovereignty in election. But I KNEW something was wrong. The way these pastors were interpreting scripture was not correct. Then I heard R. C. Sproul and learned about covenant theology. A light came on! Yes, God IS indeed 100% sovereign in election. The only "will" man has is to continually choose his OWN way, away from God! Adam had a clean slate. He was given God's commands to obey. What did Adam do? He went HIS own way! Israel was set apart by God as a "treasured possession." To them ALONE He gave His laws and statutes to (see Psalm 147:19-20) and told them to obey. This was the OLD covenant; "If a man DOES these things he will live by them." What did Israel do? They went their OWN way! "All we like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned HIS OWN WAY." Gentiles, "by nature" were "objects of wrath" (Ephesians 2) because 1. God purposely overlooked their ignorance of Him (Acts 17:30) 2. God purposely did not give them His laws and statutes by which they could have known Him (Psalm 147:19-20) 3. God purposed "allowed them to go THEIR OWN WAY" (Acts 14:16) Which is why as Paul said in Ephesians, they were "Without hope and without God in the world." We know that even in the elect nation of Israel EVERYBODY should have perished. NOBODY should have been spared. But GOD "kept for Himself a remnant" (Isaiah 1:9, Romans 9:29) Yes, the ONLY reason there was a believing remnant was not because of "free will" or anyone "choosing" God, but because GOD SPARED a remnant! And what did God say in Hebrews 8 was the problem with the OLD covenant? Answer: THE PEOPLE! They did not remain faithful (they turned away) So I turned away from them! And How did GOD solve the "people" problem in the NEW covenant so that people never turned away again? Continue reading in Hebrews 8. GOD does a work INSIDE of us, that's how! We find a synopsis of the NEW covenant in Jerimiah 32:40 Notice how GOD solves the problems with the old covenant of people turning away from Him so He turns from them: And I will make (God's work) an everlasting covenant with them, that *I WILL NOT TURN AWAY FROM DOING THEM GOOD* but *I WILL PUT* (God's Action INSIDE of us) My fear in their hearts *SO THAT* (For this very specific purpose) *THEY WILL NOT DEPART FROM ME* Do you see it? God GUARANTEES that 1. People will come to Him. 2. They will never depart! No, you cannot "lose" your salvation if you are truly born again! Read John 6 in this context and you will understand it the way you should! God GAVE the elect to the Jesus and they WILL come to Him! And "no man IS ABLE to come unless the Father draws him" Drawing = they WILL come! There is no such thing as being drawn but not coming to Jesus!
But leaving Romans 9 aside, how does the Bible describe the condition of a lost sinner, and how does the Holy Spirit bring him to Christ? Romans 9 is a difficult passage to understand, but how does that affect TULIP?
It does not. TULIP is the English abbreviation for points of the Cannons of Dort, i.e., the Netherlands. TULIP is not Calvinism but a clear answer to remonstrants.
@robertwheeler1, The condition of the lost sinner is they are Spiritually dead or they lost fellowship with God their Father.. if they are the elect the Holy Spirit will lead them to the truth...
If you want to be taken seriously at all, criticize the ideas and works of the man, not his credentials. I obviously disagree with your comment here, but even if it were a valid criticism, you are not engaging with the actual scholarship of the man. It's a weak position, and you take it because you have no argument, only emotions.
@@apostasiaelegcho5612 Appreciate the agreement. The implication the op is making is that James White went to a degree mill because he is too stupid to get a degree from a real institution. This has been addressed by James White many times, and it is not the case. Perhaps he did change schools, and that may be a fact, but the implication is what I'm disagreeing with. People have been throwing that accusation around for as long as James has been making content.
@@apostasiaelegcho5612 Have you read his dissertation? "The Forgotten Trinity" Go check it out. You can judge the man by his works and not make accusations that he went to a degree mill. I know many people with PHDs from accredited universities. It means nothing. Many of them work in fields that have nothing to do with their "degree" because it is worthless and pointless. Are you aware that James White has taught on the college level. I'll take the witness of the colleges that have employed him over your nonsense. His actions speak louder than your words.
10:55 Calvinism cannot avoid Determinism. Determinism cannot avoid making man of no consequence... I.e, Man does not matter... However, man is made in God's image... and that does matter! Man cannot live 'as if' he does not matter. It is unhealthy on every level, psychologically, spiritually, emotionally, and even physically. Typically, Calvinists do not live or speak consistently with their Determinist doctrine. It's very common to engage in conversations where the non-Calvinist can pick up on it very easily... and the Calvinists hate it when you point it out. It's as-if I were to say abortion was OK... and then have to go back and correct myself has having 'misspoken'. Violating a core principal in one's own speech doesn't happen, even casually. But it happens a lot with Calvinistic Determinists... It must be their mind's way of trying to establish a semblance of sanity for its own survival.🤔 Calvinists usually cannot avoid speaking as if they have a free will while simultaneously maintaining that no one does.
I was a Calvinist till three years ago (or more accurately my journey began 3 years ago) . On Romans 9 I now see it speaking to the issue of the Jews Salvation being based out of being united with Christ; and not because of the place of identity and heritage. I believe there may be other ways to look at that can be good understandings as well.
@robdaly3915, (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." (Romans 9:11-13) Now show me where it says that election is only for the Jews and only when united with Christ.. Did you really read and undetstand Romans 9, or you just heard it from dr. Flowers... Don't you know that when Jacob and Esau were born, Christ was not born yet? So how can Jacob be united with Christ.. Don't you know that dr. Flowers cannot even understand the biblical doctrine of Election and Predestination?
Calvinism in a nut shell… HOW DARE YOU BRING THE CONTEXT OF PAILS QUOTES INTO YOUR UNDERSTANDING. It absolutely amazes me to watch Calvinists and Free Grace teachers battling left and right while they take some of the same basic biblical misunderstandings and then use them to force the bible to match their systems.
@@johndavolta3124 They both use great sounding, biblical terms (Doctrines or Grace, and Free Grace) to describe terrible theological systems. If you read Calvin, and much of reformed theology, they define WORKS as any though, desire or action a man can take, so therefore man can have no part in salvation for it to be by grace. Free Grace takes the same definition or works, reducing saving faith to a mere moment of some surface belief that may very well vanish a second later so as to make it by grace, and then after your saved every thought, desire, or action is still a work that results only in reward. Free Grace insists you can be saved with zero evidence of God working in and through you denying the changing power of the indwelling as being for promise for Jews only. If you listen to a discussion between to PHds on either side, you will hear both commit the same interpretive bamboozles, while accusing each other of heresy for doing so. If you line up all the proof text on both sides, you will see that they both need strong presuppositional lenses to make them work, and the rest of scripture is simply bent to fit. For an example of how bad the Free Grace framework is, I can share a Google Sheet and Doc I am working on in regards to Kingdom theology that may turn into the first you tube video I ever post.
Now, study the Olivet Discourse closer and see how that was all fulfilled in AD 70. It’s great you found your way out of Calvinism. God is not an insecure, control-freak narcissist.
Joel, I would recommend you be cautious with Leighton Flowers. He is hovering dangerously close to Open Theism, which I don't think you espouse. Leighton is not your friend. To him, you are just a credentialed guy that agrees with him in one small area that he gets to add to his arsenal of supposed credibility. I'm assuming you are not a provisionist? If that is the case, I think it would be wise to post some videos giving criticism to that view as well. If you are a provisionist, maybe start working out a systematic of some kind, or a confession of sorts so that the rest of us can see the fullness of the theology in light of all of scripture. I think you are up to the task either way. For now, all I know about provisionism for certain is that the proponents hate calvinism.
I’m guessing you’re a Calvinist who thinks open theists can’t be saved? If so it’s a shame that you’d make an essential out of that. Unfortunately some Calvinists tend to be so hardline on such issues that they condemn and divide over such non-salvific issues. They’ll have to give account to God for causing such strife among brethren. Be careful.
@@OracioSandoval To be an open theist is too disregard the clarity of Scripture. That said, I'm much more concerned about the gospel. If you have the gospel, and some of the foundational Christian doctrines, such as those outlined in the apostles creed, then I don't break fellowship. It is ok to point out that open theism is bad theology. Just like it's ok to point out much of the theology of the RCC is bad. In saying that, I'm willing to admit there are even real Christians in the RCC, in spite of the teaching. What do you divide over? Is Calvinism a dividing line for you?
@@sevencrickets9258 I try to allow Scripture dictate what is essential Christian doctrine as opposed to past creeds or traditions. If Scripture seriously warns about rejecting or affirming certain doctrines, I'm totally on board with that. I think Protestants have fallen in the same trap as the RCC in terms of esteeming post-Apostolic traditions too much in regard to dividing from others. Good to hear you believe there are saved open theists as well as Catholics.
@@sevencrickets9258 From what I gather it's basically the same as "Traditional" Baptist soteriology, just another name for it. Essentially it just says God has provided for the salvation of every person and has granted each person a free will to be able to receive or reject salvation. Nothing too complicated imo. They allow differences of opinion on non-essential issues like open theism, eternal security, original sin, etc.
Greetings again, Dr. Korytko. I'm trying to also understand Calvinism. It seems to me that Calvinist and non-Calvinists have a different definition of Calvinism. I watched your Romans 9 video, and it does seem that your conclusion agrees with other Calvinist, that it is God's sovereign choice as to who belongs to Him. Can you please tell us what your interpretation of Romans 9 was before you had this other experience that changed your view of Romans 9?
His view of Romans 9 is nothing like a Calvinist. The Calvinist says Romans 9 means God chooses individuals for salvation. His interpretation is more in the idea of God can choose what group of people are his. In other words, His people were the law following Jews but now His people are those that put their faith in Jesus.
I think that the problem is that when Calvinists hear any "choice of God" they assume it is talking about individual people's salvation. In Joel's Romans 9 video, if you listen carefully, he is talking about the choices of God about "the plan of salvation". It is an amazing difference when you see it. But until you see it, if you've been introduced to calvinism, it is a very difficult thing to free your mind from.
I'm afraid I'm having difficulty seeing it. I was a Catholic all my life, until recently. I've been searching the scriptures to find my way to a different church. I don't have a "Calvinistic" lens about this. I have fresh eyes and an open mind, heart and soul. I seek to understand and and be part of this group that Romans 9 presents. But I don't see the distinction between His sovereign choice of people versus individuals. If it applies to a group, it follows that it applies to the individuals within that group. I have heard reformed theologist also say that Romans 9 is about God's sovereign choice for salvation. Is there a difference between Calvinist and reformed theology?
Is it that He makes a general sovereign choice? He chooses believing gentiles and believing jews? Dr. Korytko told me that to get in these groups is with faith. So His sovereign choice is conditional on the person having faith?
I don't think you understand Calvinism Joel.. You came out from Calvinism but you don't even explained what are their beliefs that you cannot agree and why you cannot agree... Don't you know that even dr. Flowers cannot understand the biblical doctrine of Election and Predestination?
Calvinism is the worldview where Scripture is infallible and the God of Scripture is sovereign, but you left Calvinism? So? "God is not allowing..." Oh no, the point is that fallen men do not want to come to God and His Christ unless they are regenerated by the Holy Spirit. By the way, J. Piper and J. MacArthur are not calvinists... but that is ok if you wish them to be. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (1 John 2:19)
When I hear about someone story like this, I do tend to feel a little sad. This guy, Joel is obviously a very bright individual. He screwed around for a bunch of of his life and was probably about ready to throw in the towel, and here comes Jesus! Now I’m glad he’s doing better. Don’t get me wrong. But now what we have is someone with a very high intellect, using it on all this nonsense. He could be really contributing to society in a positive way in the sciences, in the social sciences, and education, But no, he spent untold thousands of hours studying this fantasy world. It just strikes me as a real shame.
@davidfayfield65, What? "Joel is obviously very bright individual" He cannot even explained why he came out from Calvinism.. A man with common sense know what Calvinism believe and can explain why is it wrong... But he was not able to explain..
*What The Father has spoken will never change, His promises are still good and our prayers are still answered! Hallelujah!!! But as impossible as this sounds, like so many of the true stories in scripture, our bibles have all been supernaturally changed by Satan in the last several years, right in our homes, in the fulfillment of prophecy. It's being done to prepare for the reign of the antichrist. All languages and all translations have been changed along with concordances, encyclopedias, dictionaries, history books, the original Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Aramaic manuscripts. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls have been changed!* *I'm 71, was saved when I was 10, and have read only the exact same copy of the King James bible my church gave me in 1961. (This does not mean I was a King James onlyist but now I'm glad I never read other ones or I might not have noticed the changes as soon.) I had memorized many scriptures from it through the years. Then in 2014 I started seeing changes in it that I couldn't explain. I had never owned a computer or heard of the Mandela Effect back then. But after being given my first computer in 2016 I finally found out why I had been noticing all of the oddities that I couldn't explain. I then started diligently studying what should actually have been called the "Daniel 7:25 effect". That's where God said He would give the antichrist the power to do this. (Change times and laws, history and scripture) We're seeing many end time prophecies being fulfilled SUPERNATURALLY! This is some of the "lying signs and wonders" God told us He would give the AC power to perform which would even deceive His very elect, if it were possible in 2nd Thessalonians chapter two!* *God said in the end of days, (NOW!) that He would send us a famine for hearing His words in Amos **8:11** and that He would give the antichrist the ability to do this in Daniel 7:25. In Daniel 12:4 & 12:9 He told him to seal his book until the end days. He told John **_not_** to seal his book because the end time is at hand in Revelation 22:10. One of the Greek definitions of ''seal'' in Strongs concordance is “to protect from Satan”. He also told us to “hide His words in our hearts”, which meant memorize, if not word for word at least the essence of what was written, because He knew this was going to happen.* *God commanded us to "prove all things", and people **_better_** obey Him, especially on this subject. I urge you to research this. There are many brothers and sisters making videos about the changes with more proof of what was originally written and I have lots more about this in my playlist 👉 which can be found by typing in (PROOF OF BIBLE CHANGE RESIDUE JUNKIE 1)* 👈 ru-vid.com/group/PLOTw4zBND_NPf66nKUONLoe2MNFLb5LQr *I've continued to stay in God's word by reading what has been documented to be what used to be written and what Satan has been changing. Soon Amos **8:12** will be fulfilled too and we won't be able to find God's word anymore, and the only way it can happen is by not being able to see these videos and PDF written lists of documented changes like the one at (amos)(8)(.)(org)* *May God bless all who read this with eyes to see this incredible faith strengthener, and how close we are to our Saviour's return!!!!* *P.S. Everyone is going to learn about this one way or the other. I'm just trying to keep so many people from hearing Jesus explain it to them at the Gate. If you ask for them at the address on my about page I will send you links for 15 films that absolutely prove the snake bite is the mark. And yt hates me, they won't notify me of replies and won't post my answers so write me at residue junkie in one word at g mail for lots more info yt would never allow you to see.* ❤✝️💪 *P.P.S. YT will not notify me if you reply here so write me at residue junkie in one word at g mail.*
@@deprogrammershepherd1234 You are just way off. At least give some examples. It's not like you have a problem writing an absurd amount in the comment section. You mention strongs concordance, but why would I care what it says when it is subject to change? In fact, how can I even know that what you typed here hasn't changed? Am I even writing this as you are seeing it? God has preserved his words. It's that simple. And no mandela effect nonsense will ever change that.
@@sevencrickets9258 *I'm the one who commented and I gave you a link where there are tons of examples but you probably read it like you did your bible, half a$$.*
@@sevencrickets9258 Residue junkie wrote the comment, and he gave you a link with a mountain of examples so why are you bothering me with your wilfully ignorant remarks?
These kind of experiences always make me scratch my head. Some people have these experiences and of course it was Allah who found me and saved me. Some say it was Jesus. Some say it was fairies in the garden. And some just realize that their point of view changed without any divine intervention. How am I as a nonbeliever supposed to give credibility to any of these particular personal experiences as proof for God? And if God, which God?
You exist. The world continues. Creation itself declares a creator. Your issue is likely not one of needing proof but the implications that God does exist and there is a judgement for sin. But, God paid your debt of sin on the cross. You receive the free gift of forgiveness by having a godward sorrow for your sin and believing that Jesus is the Son of God who died for your sin. We were all made to glorify and enjoy God in holiness, purity and perfect relationship. But as a rabid dog we turned on our master.
@@mcgackaclan9909 no, my issue is that I need proof. Now if it’s proven to my satisfaction that god exists, then I’d have to decide if I wanted to follow this god
@@mcgackaclan9909 well god knows what sufficient proof for me would be. Unless you take the Calvinist point of view and I’m just dead in my Sins and couldn’t hear even if he was screaming
@@mcgackaclan9909 I don’t know what “all this” is. And neither do you . Maybe you’re uncomfortable with uncertainty, of not having the answers. I find it kind of exciting.
