Just a note to those of you who feel a burning desire to comment on this video or other videos on my channel-If you wish to assert that Calvinism is nothing but warmed-over Manichean Gnosticism, please be ready to show some identity between the views of Calvinism and Gnosticism. Similarity of language used does not demonstrate that those views are even similar. Additionally, you need to be ready to state my views to my satisfaction before commenting on what I believe, and finally, if you claim that there is no basis for Calvinistic beliefs in Scripture, please be ready to offer an exegesis of disputed passages that will demonstrate that you are right, and we are wrong. Proof-texts ripped from their context will not be considered. If you can’t obey these rules, keep your Godless comments to yourselves.
When do you know that a calvinist cannot defend their position? When they say that they're being misrepresented. Obviously they either answer this way because they haven't read Calvin or Jonathan Edwards or because they know that their calvinistic position it's in defensible.
@@felixquintana5527 I say Calvinists are being misrepresented because we are. I have read both Calvin and Edwards along with the Canons of Dort and the Philadelphia Confession of faith, all of which represent our views accurately. I am quite confident that I can defend all that we claim to believe but I cannot defend views I do not hold.
I subbed earlier today because of a Romans video. Saw this title just now and un-subbed because of the ridiculousness of the title. Decided to listen to see if it had any value or a good argument. Then I realized you’re being sarcastic. Then subbed again. One of my favorite videos on Calvinism is “Amazing Grace, The History and Theology of Calvinism”. Totally explains Calvinism, Palagianism, Semi-Palagianism, Arminianism, monergistic/synergistic controversy, Augustine, Calvin, Pelagius, Erasmus.
Are there any Calvinists or Reformed apologists that share their own observations of the effects of the Calvinist debates among Christians? What are the purposes of the debates vs. the common results? I have never heard of Arminianism or Calvinism until going to a reformed church. I see the attempt to bring correction to mainstream Christianity, but I also see a lot of endless sectarian arguments, knowledge puffing up, and vain philosophies as Paul warned against in his letters like Corinthians, Colossians, and Timothy.
T.L. Brown, I believe the greatest benefit of debates is to clarify the issues that have been so badly clouded by the kind of misrepresentation and outright lies that I am talking about here. I think you would find that Dr. James White and others like him would give the same answer. It is a sad commentary on the average Pastor that people can sit under their teaching and remain ignorant of these important issues. It is our duty to give a reasoned defense of God's truth. If all we are talking about are "vain philosophies" then such debates are a complete waste of time. Such is not the case in the Calvinism/ Arminianism debate. BTW, I liked the Paul Washer video on your Channel.
Thank you for your response. I did see a video of James White rebuking some zealous Calvinists over their treatment of non-Calvinists. He called out those giving themselves over to pride and arrogance in their defense of Reformed doctrine. It happens in all kinds of denominations. Yes, I think Paul Washer gave a really good warning to the Church concerning what is around the corner for believers. Then we will see the separation of true believers from the false ones.
T.L. I certainly agree that Calvinists can act in an unseemly manner. Still, I think non-Calvinists tend to be far more vitrolic and willing to misrepresent their opponents' view.
Whether it is mostly non-Calvinists who do it or not, that I am not sure of. If one disagrees with Calvinism they are usually told they don't understand it. Are there any former Calvinists who debate Calvinists?
T.L. , Supposedly, former Calvinists do debate Calvinists. I have yet to hear one of them who gives any evidence that he ever truly understood the issues involved in the debate. Just check RU-vid to find out how many Calvinists who are labeling non-Calvinists as members of a wicked, satanic, or demonic cult and that we are lost and hate the God of the Bible. You may find a few Calvinists who do that, but you will seldom find a non-Calvinist on RU-vid who doesn't. And if you listen to what these people claim Calvinists believe, it is clear that either they have no understanding of what we believe or they are deliberately misrepresenting our views.
The Calvinists are in error but as long as they trust Jesus as their savior, they are our brothers and sisters. I really think we need to be praying for them.
To say that Jesus DID NOT die for the sins of ALL humanity is heresy within itself. This statement is false, which means these people are practicing a false gospel. And this is just ONE fallacy in their doctrine. Be careful about who you desire to be your brothers.
@@Brotheral-pb1oj I agree with you that Jesus died for all; however, there are proof texts that seem to point in the direction of Calvinism. They are our brothers in Christ, they proclaim Jesus as Lord. I don't call Calvinists "heretics", I say that they are in error.
@jpwministries I feel you, and I agree that my labeling calvinists heretics, may sound somewhat harsh. But calling them heretics seems mild compared to the malevolence they ascribe unto the Loving Merciful and Gracious God of our existence. To deny the fullness of the atonement of Christ, and to assert that God deliberately chooses whom He will save and deliberately chooses whom He will damn, goes beyond heresy. There's only " GOOD NEWS " for the" ELECT "! Everyone else has no hope of salvation. That's abject madness! Calvinists are ascribing to God the character of a " fleshly " man and are attempting to use Absolute Sovereignty as an excuse to justify their claims. God does as He pleases, not what pleases Calvin and Augustine.
@jpwministries How can the calvinist doctrine be in error, and anyone who holds to it be your brother. When you say error, do you mean false, half false, 3/4 false, or you don't mean false. Maybe you mean they are in error but not enough to be labeled false. To say that Jesus DID NOT die for the sins of ALL humanity is a deliberate assertion, that is not written in scripture in any form. Which is an outright contradiction of scriptures, and also changes the biblical narrative of Whosoever will believe will not perish. We're talking about a different gospel now, which is not another , but a perverted gospel. Paul spe aks of this in 2nd Corinthians chapter 11. They are in error but they are still our brothers? Not everyone that calls me Lord Lord will enter.
Unfortunately, most modern churches today do believe that what the Bible says about God's salvation program wherein God the Father chooses before the world existed those He foreknew, not based on their works or deeds, and predestined them to salvation based solely on God's good pleasure according to His will, and the Son was given by the Father these same people to redeem by His propitiatory death and resurrection, and that at God's appointed time the Holy Spirit resurrects the elect person's spirit to life so that the living spirit operates its spiritual eyes and ears to understand the Bible, develop a faith in God that leads to repentance and conversion from sin, and that God's Spirit indwells each of His elect as a Precious Stones in His everlasting Temple that together, Jew and Gentile becomes a Holy Nation, the Body of Christ that will one day be glorified with Christ in the New Heaven and New Earth, is a wicked heresy. Satan rules today in most churches and on the internet.
How different is Calvinism from “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas....” ? Was Calvin crucified for you? Were you baptised in Calvin's name? (1 Corinthians 1:11-13) The fact that Calvinism divides Christ and Christians for whom Christ died proves that this is the doctrine of men, not of Christ.
@desmondgichuru4929 Yet another expression of prodigious ignorance. Calvinists are not followers of Calvin. I prefer to call myself a soteriological monergist. Calvinism is simply a nick-name for those who believe what the Scriptures teach. And whether you like it or not truth divides. If you are unwilling to believe all that the Scriptures teach, I am most happy to be divided from you.
@@TheBereanVoice Wow! Ok. As The "Berean" Voice you could have given a scripture citation; no response to 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 either. Calvinism's Webster dictionary definition includes in part "followers of Calvin." Calling people who disagree with you ignorant is a poor substitute for being a true Berean. Scripture instructs us to "test everything" and "...in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves", right? And, I shouldn't accept your doctrine without being a good Berean myself, right? Also, "Christians" is the proper nickname for those who believe what the Scriptures teach (see Acts 11: 26).
@@TheBereanVoice Wow! Ok. As The "Berean" Voice you could have given a scripture citation; no response to 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 either. Calvinism's Webster dictionary definition includes in part "followers of Calvin." Calling people who disagree with you ignorant is a poor substitute for being a true Berean. Scripture instructs us to "test everything" and "...in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves", right? And, I shouldn't accept your doctrine without being a good Berean myself, right? Also, "Christians" is the proper nickname for those who believe what the Scriptures teach (see Acts 11: 26).
@@desmondgichuru4929 If you are ignorant, you are ignorant. I don't know of another way to say that. I didn't say you are stupid, You can't fix stupid. You can fix ignorance. The reality is that "Calvinists" is not a name we have chosen for ourselves. It is a name given to us by our theological opponents. Paul called the Galatians to whom he wrote "stupid" because they had fallen into a state of stupor. I would be quite happy if you were willing to text everything, but I doubt you are. Is it your view that everyone who calls themselves "Christian" truly is a Christian? If not, further clarification is needed. The issue in Corinth was not that people were adopting theological labels but that they were following individuals because of personality or apparent success or some other reason. All these men had the same doctrine. And yes, Webster's dictionary is wrong. One of the reasons for our differences is the propensity of modern Christians to define biblical words using an English dictionary. Perhaps it will come as a surprise to you, but one does not need to choose between being called a Christian and being callled a Calvinist. If people believed the Scriptures, all would be Calvinists.
@desmondgichuru4929 I have to confess that I don't understand your accusation that "Calvinism divides Christ and Christians for whom Christ died." No one believes Calvin was crucified for us or that we were baptized in Calvin's name. That is just a stupid statement.
Its undeniable!!! Now let me quote Calvin: “...at whatever time we are baptised, we are washed and purified once for the whole life...we must...recall our baptism...so as to feel certain and secure of the remission of sins...it wipes and washes away all our defilements” (IV: xv, 3). Again: “God in baptism promises the remission of sins, and will undoubtedly perform what he has promised to all believers. That promise was offered to us in baptism, let us therefore embrace it in faith” (IV: xxv, 17). And, “We have...a similar promise given to the fathers in circumcision, similar to that which is given to us in baptism...the forgiveness of sins and the mortification of the flesh....We deny...that...the power of God cannot regenerate infants....Let God, then, be demanded why he ordered circumcision to be performed on the bodies of infants...by baptism we are ingrafted into the body of Christ (1 Cor xii.13). [Therefore] infants...are to be baptised...” (IV: xv, 22; xvi, 3, 4, 8, 10, 17-32). I give these quotes in What Love Is This? on pp. 41, 388, 430, among others, and I hold Calvin to these statements. This is a Catholic [3] dogma, yet it was carried over into many “reformed” churches and remains there today. Furthermore, Calvin never tells of the moment that he renounced the false gospel of Catholicism [3] and believed the true gospel. He extols the sacraments, says they can be performed only by the clergy (including Roman Catholic [3]), and accepts infant baptism by a Catholic [3] priest as efficacious. If he ever renounced Catholicism [3]’s false gospel, when did this occur? And how could he have, considering that he banned from Geneva(1537) and persecuted the Anabaptists who, though raised Catholics, believed the biblical gospel and as a result were born again and baptized as believers? The fact that Calvin was only baptized once-as an infant-and that he persecuted as heretics those who were baptized as believers, contradicts entirely what you think the quotations you cite mean. Moreover, one of the two charges (brought to the court by Calvin himself) for which Servetus was burned at the stake was his rejection of infant baptism for salvation [2]. Calvin goes into great detail justifying this charge against Servetus and repeatedly scorning Servetus for rejecting the efficacy of infant baptism for salvation [2]. Please read again pages 79-85 of What Love Is This? where I cover the subject thoroughly.
ss la77, Your error here is the assumption that so-called Calvinists are followers of Calvin and subscribe to everything he said, wrote, or did. You should know that 1. The term Calvinists was not taken by Calvinists themselves but by their theological opponents, and 2. that the term "Calvinism" is simply shorthand for soteriological monergism. The marvel is not that Calvin was wrong about many issues. The marvel is that he was correct about so much. I agree there were many areas in which he should have further distanced himself from the RC system of belief and practice rather than finding another reason for continuing to believe and practice them. I am aware of Calvin's views in these areas and, as a Baptist, would disagree with them. What I am arguing against in this video is the widespread practice of misrepresentation, and I believe such misrepresentation occurs on all sides of the debate. I have no problem with honest disagreement on these issues, but I have not yet found a rabid anti-Calvinists who accurately represented the views set forth in the Canons of Dort 1619. There are even many soteriological monergists who do not accurately represent those views.
@sl-8784 Certainly you must know that Calvinists do not believe everything Calvin wrote, don't you? The term "Calvinist" simply refers to a person who is a soteriological monergist.
Why are you Calvinists always such puffed up @$$holes? Nothing but head knowledge, pride and an extreme desire to be a condescending a$s to every other Christian that has brains enough to see through Calvinism’s perversion of the Gospel.
Is he serious or joking? 😅 This is the first video I've watched of that gentleman. Because I totally disagree with that statement and others. I was watching a video in which a Christian was showing videos of how famous atheists are lying and misrepresenting Christianity for the "good cause", and clearly this way of defending a worldview is just...I don't know what to say, how can even someone believe that it's right to do it...
The question the anti-Calvinist can't answer: Person A chooses for God and spends eternity in the bliss of heaven. Person B chooses against God and spends eternity in a very uncomfortable place. The question: _What is the characteristic/quality that is present in A but absent in B that provides for A to make the infinitely better choice than B?_ In your answer, you should avoid begging the question. For instance, if you say that A was more contrite than B, we shall simply ask you why this was so. So we don't want a cause which is the result of another cause: we want the root cause. Commensurately, we don't want a cause which implies some sort of meritorious quality in A that is not present in B. Good luck with your endeavour to answer the question from your anti-Calvinist perspective. You'll need it.
@@TheBereanVoice The question actually can't be answered from the anti-Calvinist perspective, which therefore shows that Calvinism is correct: one is regenerated by the sole will and activity of God, John the Baptist's regeneration in the womb of Elisabeth being a prime example.
@@lawrence1318 The answer to the question is "it is of Him [God] that you are in Christ Jesus. . ." and "Who makes you differ from another and what do you have that you did not receive? Now, if you received it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?"
@@lawrence1318 " @TheBereanVoice No you are circumventing the question by redefining the terms of reference." Just like the Reformers! You fight among yourselves even and cannot agree even on Calvinism. Clearly this is GREEK PHILOSOPHY! Not Christian doctrine.
Did you happen to mention keeping your congregation in total ignorance in regards to church history? Quote such men as Charles Spurgeon, or George Whitefield, and refer to such works as Pilgrim's Progress, Matthew Henry's Commentary, and Foxes book of Martyrs, but conceal as much as possible the fact these authors and preachers were heretics. Never sing Amazing Grace or Rock of Ages, as your people may discover the authors of such hymns were ardent Calvinists who would most certainly expose your theological deficiencies and maybe even warn you of eternal damnation unless you repent of them.
The problem is that many of these people seem to want to keep people ignorant in regard to everything having any biblical or theological content. They refuse to debate, ostensibly because they are too busy "winning souls." The reality is, they know that a debate on real issues would expose the lies they tell in an effort to promote their unbiblical doctrine.
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD. Joshua:24:15
@barnabasalbonetti2536 Are you so obtuse that you don't understand that the verse you quoted does not demonstrate anything contrary to what Calvinists believe? It is a shame that you wasted your time in typing it and my time in reading it? No one denies that sinners are free to choose and able to choose anything they prefer at any given time. That said, you probably need to understand that the choice set before the Israelites was not between Yahweh and false gods but between two groups of false gods.
@TheBereanVoice I believe we have choice. I used that to show that we are to choose. You see, calvinist believe they are born again with no choice and are regenerated before they believe. I simply believe when we hear truth, then we believe and put our faith in Christ and then we are born again. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Ephesians:1:13 After we believe! Just like the Israelites when they were brought out of Egypt. All of them were chosen as one. But not all believed even though they witnessed everything. Moses gave them all a choice then too. And the ones that didn't choose the Lord fell. There is choice all in the scriptures!
@@barnabasalbonetti2536 No it wasn't. It was between "the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell:" Those are all false gods. Calvinists do not deny that sinners have a choice. For that reason, showing verses in which a choice is set before sinners demonstrates nothing that we do not believe.
Oh man this is great! You must’ve taken this playbook straight from the psychobabble king Kevin Thompson (Beyond the Fundamentals). This exact playbook was used against me and my associate pastor a few years back, and Kevin Thompson was the tool used by several people in my previous church to try and destroy us even going so far as creating absurd videos about “stealth Calvinism” in our city. They had no desire to discuss the Bible; instead they sought to destroy our credibility by calling us deceptive. Men like Kevin Thompson are narcissistic and have no desire to know the truth. Thank you for this great piece of satire revealing the true nature of their agenda.
I learned it was heresy because I was raised with the scriptures. I grew up in a post Lutheran non denominational church... I came to find that many teachings were not what scripture taught. I found myself in other ministries that taught unbiblical things. I eventually was attracted to some Calvinist teachers because of their refutation of prosperity preachers... which I found is a tactic they use to entice people. I found that their teachings are vastly different than scripture. I found the Calvinist to be the worst in regard to their twisting of scripture. They tie with Catholics. I believe that most Protestants are still Catholic and that Calvinists are .. well... either really stupid or lying. Nice clickBait video though! We have the scriptures and we can read them to see that Calvinism is false.
Jonathan, Perhaps you can give me examples in which you think our doctrine differs from what the Scriptures teach. I am not interested in a list of proof-texts ripped from their context. What I am asking for is exegesis that actually deals with pertinent passages.
@@TheBereanVoice This is the kind of reply that proves you are following and worshiping a system of Greek Philosophy. Perhaps go back and learn all over again what it means to be recognized as a disciple of Christ. Do you remember? What did Jesus say? They will know you are my disciples (not "that you are Calvinists") by your love for one another. You must rethink what you are inordinately joined to in your affections. Is it Christ or is it Calvin?
People do not want to give up any part of Gods salvation. They want something to do with it. Do a word search, (seeks) no man seeks after God! None seek God! That means none. No one comes to Jesus unless the father draws them. Everyone the father draws comes, everyone that comes is kept. So who is in hell? Those that God did not draw!
Maybe it's like the doorway, on the door it says "whosoever will" when a person has gone through and looks at the door from the other side it says " you were chosen from the foundation of the earth" .
That understanding makes nonsense of the text I think. It robs the sayings of their meaning in an uncalled for way, there is nothing in the text in support of that understanding
@jsharp9735 Your lack of understanding of Calvinistic teaching has nothing to do with what Calvin taught and what Calvinists actually believe. With all the heretical teaching from people like Leighton Flowers and his ilk, it is no wonder that you people are hopelessly confused about our doctrine. If Calvinists believed what Flowers claims, I would have rejected Calvinism long ago but thankfully he doesn't even come close.
Without Calvinism, how can we enjoy beating our wives and shoving people into the mud? Since it's all predestined in the first place: “Creatures are so governed by the secret counsel of God, that nothing happens but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 3) “Thieves and murderers, and other evildoers are instruments of divine providence, being employed by the Lord himself to execute judgments which he has resolved to inflict.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 5)
Veil, First of all, decreeing that an action will occur does not involve causing that action or excusing that action when it is perpetrated by wicked men. The sovereignty of God and human responsibility are doctrines that we must not separate. Second, the comforting truth that Calvin was teaching was is that even when evil men act wickedly, it is not without divine purpose to bring glory to God and eternal good to his people. The alternative is a world filled with random acts of meaningless and purposeless evil. But thanks for stopping by and illustrating the point I was making in the video.
@@TheBereanVoice I thought God predetermined all things Good and bad? You can't say just the Good, you have to include the evil that men do as well. Its called inconsistent when you just pick and choose what God predetermines and what he does not.
@@jamestomas7333 _"I thought God predetermined all things Good and bad?"_ That's a common misconception, bordering on strawman, of what Calvinists confess. The word used by Calvinists is "decreed" or "ordained," not "predetermined" and those don't convey the same idea at all. For example, the Westminster Confession says this in Chapter 3.1: "God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established." Now most people who don't care about representing views they disagree with fairly and accurately will read the first half, substitute "ordain" with "exhaustively determines" or some similar concept and skip reading the rest. But Calvinists are clearly asserting that: 1) God is not the direct cause (author) of sin, nor does what God ordains makes him so. 2) Creaturely free will is established by what God ordains. 3) The freedom and contingency of second causes is established by what God ordains. Sadly, many "Christians" today would rather not take correction and present arguments that accurately portray the view they disagree with and would rather exaggerate or outright lie to make Calvinism look as bad as possible.
@@oracleoftroy Exactly. They get a superficial strawman understanding of Calvinism and refuse to abandon it. They always misrepresent it and refuse to acknowledge the scriptural basis for Reform theology.
The Word of God is not an all-you-can-eat buffet of choosing this and ignoring that. Only Satan says, "God doesn't love you!" Even as a filthy sinner, Christ died for me; didn't hate me.@elusive4072
I was LOST sir, but the day I saw and said who Christ IS and what He did for me (overwhelming) hit me so deep and changed everything I thought and believed, so drastically… it both broke me inside and healed me at the same time! I started sobbing so hard over my sin, knowing that He suffered such a great price to forgive ME??? Even ME??? My life would never be the same. It was a very very powerful and it literally changed me and that good work He started in me permanently changed my heart and mind. Even my family mocked me. I am saved and secure BECAUSE of JESUS CHRIST, who sealed me when I died to my pride and confessed JESUS CHRIST IS LORD! I surrendered to Him.
Praise God He made you alive in Christ so that you would believe and repent. You are absolutely right that God saves the most wretched sinners... not the proud and boastful... that is the antithesis of calvinism and Christianity in general. Love your story brother, now go share your story and the gospel with everyone you can. Don't hide your lamp under a bushels, but pull it out and let it shine bright so that our Savior might be praised throughout the world. Blessings
Obviously we don’t need to study or think and just mindlessly agree with our Calvinist brethren - since they are on the internet, of course... Despite that, I must yet strongly disagree with Calvin’s followers because I was predestined to understand that Calvinism is a robotic mentality, and that by free will (given me by a Sovereign God), I chose to study the Biblical response which doth determine it is indeed heretical and cultic bunkum.
Interesting comment. I would not encourage anyone to mindlessly agree with anyone. If you are serious about your belief that Calvinism is a robotic mentality, you are illustrating exactly what I have said about misrepresentation. That is far from a Calvinistic concept. The Sovereign God did indeed give you a "free will" in the sense that we understand that term. You cannot form any legitimate opinion about that doctrine unless you begin to understand it at least slightly. I agree with you that if it taught a robotic mentality it would indeed be cultic and in grave error. I would encourage you to read my books and interact with them. You can find them at www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply of reading your material. However, I am a staunch advocate of the provisional, traditional reading of Scripture and have indeed given this “in house” debate quite the legitimate scrutiny (as far as a theological degree bears witness). I fear we are at odds and must agree to disagree on this issue.
@@cherokeegypsy2617 I would like you to read a book I just wrote, titled "The Grace that Saves." I am afraid many of you may have been badly misinformed. You can find my books at www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver.
@@TheBereanVoice we only need to read the word. What you are disingenuous about is that the 'free will' of calvinism is freely doing that which you are determined to do by a flesh that is totally unable to believe.
What everyone keeps referring to as "Calvinism" is more properly the Gospel of God's free and sovereign grace. It does not come from John Calvin, or Augustine. It is taught throughout the Scriptures from Genesis through Revelation. The reason the religious world hates it is because it takes salvation completely out of the creature's hands and properly places it in the hands of God almighty. God the Father chose His people, Christ agreed to be the Mediator of the covenant, the Savior of His sheep, and the Spirit of Grace agreed to give them spiritual life and become the Author of their sanctification. God's will, not man's will, is the cause of salvation. God gets the glory, ALL of the glory. Everyone for whom Christ died will be saved, not a single one will be lost. The Lord Jesus is the Victor! He wears the crown, and if He were to lose one of His own, He would lose His honor.
@Pond3r Thiz I just don't understand why they support this doctrine. Do you think that most of them are doing it deliberately to mislead people? This sarcastic video really makes me wonder. Also, why would God want to create a robot race and then say we are made in His image? I just don't understand.
" For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of ALL MEN, ESPECIALLY of those who believe. These things command and teach." 1Tim. 4:10 So the atonement is not LIMITED to ONLY the elect??? AMAZING! But to ALL MEN.....wait for it....but ESPECIALLY to those who have CHOSEN to believe?? This verse ALONE could sink " limited atonement".
I discovered the gospel of grace at age 58. I know God just gave it to me. No way, now how was I going to do it. The Bible study, preaching and prayer night are sublime.
Exactly. You Heard the word, believed and were saved. Rom 10-9: Confess with your lips Jesus is Lord and BELIEVE in your heart He was resurrected from the dead and you will be saved. Unless someone has a book of Holy Caveats, I don't see any mention of an elect group in there.
It is the gospel of Christ that is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believes, there is no gospel of grace, we are save by grace through faith. Grace is the unearned Favour, or unmerited Favour of God.
@@EugeneHolley-rc6ry Correct. Grace is unearned. We must confess with our lips Jesus is Lord is the only "action" required. (Rom 10:9) We cannot give enough, pray enough, suffer enough or beg enough. "For by grace you have been saved THROUGH FAITH, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, NOT OF WORKS, lest anyone should boast." God sent His sone to die. It is the blood and resurrection that FULFILLED the law. Now, ANYONE that believes on Jesus will be saved.
The Eternal Truth, Perhaps I confused you by responding to too many of your assertions at once. Why don't you begin by simply explaining to me what you mean by the phrase "free will" and tell me what Calvinists deny about "free will."
""free will" : the ability to act outside of a predetermined fate. Responsiblity (response ability) Man has responsiblity to obey God. Its written right in the scriptures. That is why we are punished for not doing so! It is common sense. You cant punish an invalid for not being able. Thats cruelty. Man has the ability to obey the law: Deut 30:11 Man has the ability to obey the gospel: Romans 10:8 We used our free will to disobey the law. ALL of us. That is why we are cursed. If we use our free will to disobey the gospel, we will remain cursed.
@@TheJCFan Brilliant display of profound ignorance. You have made outrageous statements that clearly indicate that you have no clue what the issues are in this entire debate. Romans 8:7 clearly states that though we all have the responsibility to be subject to God's law, those who are in the flesh [Those who do not have the indwelling Spirit] are not subject to it and are not able to be subject to it. If by free will you mean the ability to choose what we desire most at any given time, we would agree that we have that ability. It is the lack of desire to do what God commands that is the problem. Inability results from a lack of desire. Since that is the case, ability would have to include proper desires toward God. It is those desires that sinners lack. No desire, no ability. Though I would not use the word "fate" it is impossible for anyone to act contrary to what God has decided will occur in His world. That does not mean that He has caused the free choices and actions of His creatures. If you imagine that Deut 30:11 even hints at the idea that sinners are disposed to be obedient to God, you are irremediably confused.
@@TheJCFan You might wish to read what Calvin actually wrote on this subject before you demonstrate your abysmal ignorance any further. "We see, therefore, how God throws off that false reproach from himself with which the children of Israel taunted him, saying, that they perished by his immoderate rigor, and could find no reason for his severity against them. He announces, on the other hand, that the cause of death rested with themselves; and then he points out the remedy, that they should amend their life, not only in outward appearance, but in sincerity of heart: and at the same time he testifies of his willingness to be entreated; nay, he meets them of his own accord, if they only repent heartily and unfeignedly. We now understand the Prophet's meaning. We said, that we are admonished in this way, that if we desire to return to God we must begin at the beginning, namely, renewal of the heart and spirit; because, as Jeremiah says, he looks for truth and integrity, and does not value outward disguises. (Jeremiah 5:3.) But it may seem absurd for God to exhort the Israelites to form their hearts anew: and men badly trained in the Scriptures erect their crests under the pretense of this passage, as if it were in the power of man's free will to convert himself. They exclaim, therefore, either that God here exhorts his people deceitfully, or else that when alienated from him we can by our own movement repent, and return into the way. But the whole Scripture openly refutes this. It is not in vain that the saints so often pray that God would renew them; (Psalm 51:12, and very often elsewhere;) for it would be a feigned and a lying prayer, if newness of heart were not his gift. If any one requests of God what he is persuaded that he has already, and by his own inherent virtue, does he not trifle with God? But nothing occurs more frequently than this mode of entreaty. Since therefore, the saints pray to God to renew them, they doubtless confess that to be his peculiar gift; and unless he moves his hand, they have no strength remaining, so that they can never rise from the ground. Besides, in many passages God claims the renewal of the heart as peculiar to himself. We noticed that remarkable passage in the eleventh chapter of this Prophet, (Ezekiel 11:19,) he will repeat the same in the thirty-sixth chapter, (Ezekiel 36:26, 27;) and we know what Jeremiah says in his thirty-first chapter, (Jeremiah 31:33.) But Scripture is everywhere full of testimonies of this kind, so that it would be superfluous to heap together many passages; nay, if any one denies that regeneration is a gift of the Holy Spirit, he will tear up by the roots all the principles of piety. We have said that regeneration is like another creation; and if we compare it with the first creation, it far surpasses it. For it is much better for us to be made children of God, and reformed after his image within us, than to be created mortal: for we are born children of wrath, corrupt and degenerate; (Ephesians 2:3;) since all integrity was lost when God's image was removed. We see, then, the nature of our first creation; but when God re-fashions us, we are not only born sons of Adam, but we are the brothers of angels, and members of Christ; and this our second life consists in rectitude, justice, and the light of true intelligence. We now see that if it had been in man's free will to convert himself, much more would be ascribed to him than to God, because, as we have said, it was much more valuable to be created sons of God than of Adam. It ought, then, to be beyond all controversy with the pious that men cannot rise again when they are fallen, and turn of themselves when alienated from God; but this is the peculiar gift of the Holy Spirit. And the sophists, who in all ways endeavor to obscure God's grace, confess that half the act of conversion is in the power of the Holy Spirit: for they do not say that we are simply and totally converted by the motion of our own free will, but they imagine a concurrence of grace with free will, and of free will with grace. Thus they foolishly represent us as cooperating with God: they confess, indeed, that God's grace goes before and follows; and they seem to themselves very liberal towards God when they acknowledge this twofold grace in man's conversion. But God is not content with that partition, since he is deprived of half his right: for he does not say that he would assist men to renew themselves and to repent; but he attributes the work to himself entirely: I will give you a new heart and a new spirit. (Ezekiel 36:26.) If it is his to give, it follows that the slightest portion of it cannot be transferred to man without diminishing something from his right. But they object that the following precept is not in vain, that men should make for themselves a new heart. Now their deception arises through ignorance, from their judging of the powers of men by the commands of God; but the inference is incorrect, as we have said elsewhere: for when God teaches what is right, he does not think of what we are able to do, but only shows us what we ought to do. When, therefore, the power of our free will is estimated by the precepts of God, we make a great mistake, because God exacts from us the strict discharge of our duty, just as if our power of obedience was not defective. We are not absolved from our obligation because we cannot pay it; for God holds us bound to himself, although we are in every way deficient."
@@TheBereanVoice And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. 2 Timothy 2:24-26 ESV
@@toplobster1040 So stop being quarrelsome. I have mustered all the kindness I can find to endure these charlatans who are butchering God's truth. Paul said that he wished that those who are troubling God's people with their false doctrine would emasculate themselves. I am with Paul.
it is interesting that your video got 2 times the views of one of the best books on Calvinism, aw pink the sovereignty of God, just think about it, people hate the truth, unless God changes a man's heart we hate God and His word, this is the natural state of man, just from the title people want to listen to this and find ways to debate against Calvinism, not saying ur against Calvinism but the title i am guessing people clicked on this because they dont like Calvinism
@paulfowler981 You are clearly right. People hate Calvinism, and it is for that reason so many have clicked on this video. The reason they hate Calvinism is either that they don't understand it or because they hate the God who has revealed Himself in Scripture. I suspect it may be a combination of both.
I noticed that one of the hymns you played on your channel, "Guide me o Thou Great Jehovah" was written by a "Heretic" named William Williams. But then I suppose you were only interested in the tune.
There ARE people who have come to reject Calvinism through careful and honest biblical study and reflection. I understand this is "click bait" but you can't say that there aren't real objections to Augustinian philosophy.
No, there are not real objections to biblical Calvinism. Most in our day in the apostate SBC have simply decided to impose their synergistic views on the Scriptures and imagine that they have offered real arguments. There is nothing about Gnostic views, though using similar terminology, that remotely resembles Calvinistic doctrine. According to the Manichaens, a person could cease to be a hearer and become one of the elect. That is not even similar to Calvinism. According to Manicheanism, there were two gods, one evil and one good. Try to find that idea in Calvinism. The Manicheans believed the good god enlightened people so that they could have self-knowledge and make their way back to the Pleroma. Apparently you missed the comment I have pinned here. Take your Leightonism and shove it.
And we do not depend either on Calvin or Augustine or "Agustinan philosophy." People like Leighton Flowers who claim they have "come to reject Calvinism through careful and honest biblical study" have clearly never understood what Calvinism is.. I can demonstrate everyone of the soteriological doctrines I believe from a careful exegesis of clear biblical texts
@@TheBereanVoice "Shove it?" Wow brother, I was just trying to have an open and honest dialogue. If I've offended you, please forgive me. Good luck to you and blessings.
Oliver Ronquillo I would have been happy to have had an open and honest dialogue with you but you closed that door by your ridiculous comment about Augustinian philosophy as if our views have not come from the Scriptures but from Augustine.
I have been listening to and searching for, arguments against calvinism, so as to see if I could be moved from my position. That is how I found your video. I have seen over and over, just what you went over in your video, and have become even more sure, and more thankful to our Lord, for His wonderful word! Wonderful job on this video.
Thank you for commenting. Carnal people will always hate God's truth. We should expect nothng else. When anyone studies the Scriptures seriously, they can come to no other conclusion but that God must save and God alone.
So, Jesus died only for a select people and ensured the rest of His creation (peoples) would never see any chance of salvation? Jesus died for the world, not for just some people here and there. You, sir, are the carnal one. Only Satan would say, "God loves you but NOT that person!" @@TheBereanVoice
I just found this video and loved it. What a great case study of Arminians and Calvinist in the comments section. The Arminians bring no legitimate proof texts to bare and completely miss the sarcasm. I guess I just have a “fat bottom”. 😂 yes…. Just overlook all of Scripture and Arminianism will make sense. How DARE a Calvinist bring in actual Scripture into a debate. Sadly I have had this debate many times. I grew up in an Arminian church that preached against Calvinism… but then I actually read the word of God … and Reformed my thinking.
Read my book, "A Faulty Compass" and see how much I have avoided Scripture and appealed to philosophy. You can find it at www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver. If an "interpretation" is man-centered, it isn't an attack to identify it as such. All Synergists systems are by definition "man-centered.
It’s bound to minister to lost people seeking Jesus. So loving, humble, inviting, and full of hope. Like all critical sarcasm is. Very sad actually. Only funny to a calvanist who is proud:(
Best way to argue with a calvinist is don't. If they want to know the truth they will find it themselves. If they want to be convinced they are right they will do just that. Pray for them
Predestination and election are both inseparable from the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery of the Gospel. The first doctrine that any true Bible teacher must learn is the doctrine of Christ. When The Lord manifests Himself to His People ? You do not choose to believe , You do believe! Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatest of His Power towards US who believe, according to the working of His Mighty Power. You must be taught again the doctrine of Christ. For they shall call His name Jesus, for He shall save His People from their sins. The way of the truth is being evil spoken of, All in the name of John Calvin.
Randall Seiver what needs to happen is to drop "Calvinism" from our vocabulary. It stumbles many people and it is an offense to the gospel. We are talking about the One Holy Faith of Scripture, and its doctrines.
I can’t see how it would work for anyone that was needing to hear the good news of Jesus Christ who died to save the world. This is filled with pride and absolutely disgusting. It doesn’t represent love at all for this lost world. Calvinism is such a proud and arrogant belief. It thinks it can tell us what God meant when he said words like whosoever, whoever, all, etc. I think God means what he says and says what he means. We don’t need a man to tell us what God couldn’t figure out how to tell us. He is very clear in his word. He is not dumb. He doesn’t need Calvinists to interpret for us. We can see with our own eyes and understand with our own brains what God wanted to tell us. Anyone can understand that the gospel is to save anyone who believes and that invitation is for the whole world because Jesus did not come to judge the world but to save the world. God is love. Love, not pride. God is love. John 3:16-17
I’m one of those odd Christians that believes in predestination and universal reconciliation. So I can walk around with zero fear of this life or the next through the love of Jesus. He’s got the whole world in His hands
John, When I see the people you follow on your channel, I take that as the hightest of compliments. If your heros would stop lying about our views, the world would be a better place.
Randall Seiver I listen to all views and judge it by the light of scripture and anything that makes Jesus Christ the author of sin is heresy. I've listened to both sides of the argument for a number of years and have come to the conclusion that both Calvinism and arminianism are false doctrines. I follow Jesus Christ not men.
And Calvinists don't make Jesus Christ the author of sin. That is stated quite clearly in our confessions. And we don't follow men either. If you think Calvinists believe God causes or leads anyone to sin, you have clearly misunderstood our views.
John N, Please read this from the WCF. God from all eternity did by the most and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
Assuming that Calvinism is true, the question then arises as to how the Calvinist knows that he or she is one of the elect whom God has predestined to go to heaven and not one of the reprobate whom God has predestined to go to hell. Indeed, many of the early Puritans died in agonizing fear that they might not be one of the elect after all. One of the English Puritans wrote an article asking just how far a reprobate could go in the profession of the gospel and still be a reprobate. The conclusion drawn was that a man might the best he knew how repent and believe the good news, and show in his life all of the fruits that Scripture says are the sure sign of a genuine believer, yet still be a reprobate bound for hell. The pastoral implications here are horrendous.
Joseph Alleine wisely wrote, "First prove your conversion, then never doubt your election. Whatever God's purposes may be, I am sure His promises are true." God has promised to pardon and justify all who believe. That is all we need to know. Since only God's elect will believe, if our faith is genuine, there is no reason to doubt that God intended to save us.
@@skafan89 T&L I'm wondering if you would like to be taken to task AGAIN sir... You're sloppy, indeed, ignorant understanding of things somehow emboldens you to be even more ignorant... and arrogantly so. i do have dear methodist friends and you do a disservice to call yourself Methodist, because of an insufficiency or inadequacy in concern for Truth and rigor which goes to why your denomination is sliding down the path to self-destruction and self-refuting liberalism. Indeed, all of your material is self-evidently sliding down that same path of self refutation. But then for you to outright slander someone without historical depth of knowledge but only surface-level Wikipedia understanding... Is itself again self-evident, and it now goes into the realm of reprobation. That horrible word that you refuse to acknowledge... But this is out of concern for you (and anyone who's displays such characteristic self-falsification because - that's what reprobation is. It is self-falsification of the worst order and kind to the worst ultimate end. This is a loving thing for you to examine yourself and apparently you have no one to love you, but I'm going to anyway. Therefore, examine yourself to see if you're in the faith and not just slandering with some kind of feces-slinging nonsense. You are quite brash in your blathering ...hopefully you can straighten yourself.. but wait a minute... that's the very heart of the need of election - that we can't straighten ourselves so the gracious prayer would be that you are among that number who realizes that all men are going to Hell by default not that they have the free will to choose. This is the nonsense folklore of making a "deal with the devil". If we have a free will, then it's truly up to us, therefore we don't really need God -congratulations Pelagius. I do want to withhold further push back in the hopes that you understand that the coarseness of my address to you is to try to shake you out of this mantra-drven trance. But your Servetus error necessitates calling you out... These were bloodthirsty times when people were being burned at the stake and gutted for their rigorous belief and love for God rather than the loose liberalism of contemporary mockery such as your main line affiliation. In reality, Calvin warned Servetus for his own good in a loving way that I'm trying to do for you at this very moment... Not that Calvin had any lost love for Servatus because indeed, we are to be offended when people's deviation leads to the inevitable heresy that negates Christ's value in sacrifice, and therefore is the hatred of God himself... Yet you stand back and make half-witted assertions that have no basis in understanding... Again, that's what reprobation specifically looks like. That God ordains the ends and the means for saving someone which is the only reason I'm going to this length with you. Otherwise, if I were hyper-calvinist I would just let you to your own idiocy. But not doing so is what love really looks like, and indebted love for Christ himself. There still may be hope for you. You need to beg God .... that is the only hope.
Bob, Thanks for the question. I would be considered by many to be a Calvinist which is defined by a doctrinal statement called the Canons of Dort. You can find those Canons online if you wish to find out what I believe. If you wish to understand what I believe by listening to the grand majority who are talking about Calvinistic doctrine on RU-vid and other places, you will likely become even more confused. I would invite you to watch my RU-vid series titled "Burning Straw Dummies." Those videos should help answer your questions. I would also invite you to visit my author's page at Amazon.com. www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver
Did Calvin Kill or agree to Kill people? Never! not the painful dead of burning or the sword. Geneva or Switzerland. Servetus was the only one ever that Calvin was sideling involved with. However, it was not the 21st.cent. It was the 16th. On 4 April 1553 Servetus was arrested by Roman Catholic authorities, and imprisoned in Vienne. He escaped from prison three days later. On 17 June, he was convicted of heresy, and sentenced to be burned with his books. However, he escaped. Meaning to flee to Italy, Servetus inexplicably stopped in Geneva, where Calvin and his Reformers had denounced him. On 13 August, he attended a sermon by Calvin at Geneva. He was arrested after the service and again imprisoned. Nicholas de la Fontaine played the more active role in Servetus's prosecution and the listing of points that condemned him. Calvin could not have stopped it. He tried to change burning to beheading but they would not listen to him. Calvin, for the record, showed more pastoral concern for Servetus than anyone else connected with the episode. If it would have entirely depended on Calvin, Servetus would not have been executed, It was the City council that pushed his execution. At his trial, Servetus was condemned on two counts, for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism, specifically, Modalistic Monarchianism, or Sabellianism. and Servetus had said, about infant baptism "It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity at these days a serious heresy. As Servetus was not a citizen of Geneva, and legally could at worst be banished, the government, in an attempt to find some plausible excuse to disregard this legal reality, had consulted other Swiss Reformed cantons (Zürich, Bern, Basel, Schaffhausen). We have to place all this in the 1400 - 1500 and not in the 20th. Century. Besides the Catholic church, there were only the Waldensians founded by Peter Waldo in Lyon around 1173 In 1520 they joined the reformation with William Farel who became good friends with Calvin. Calvin wrote commentaries on the whole Bible except Revelations. This while no complete work was available. What was available was mostly short portions and spiritual. Calvin was a very passionate person and never did agree to kill people for what they believed, he wanted people to be saved and come to Chris as their Savior. That is why he worked so hard to spread the Gospel. Preaching every day.
Determining that he will not restrain these evil actions but permit them to occur in his universe is not and need not be causal in nature. It should be clear that God had determined long beforehand to use Judas in the grand drama of redemption, but he needed to do nothing to cause his treachery.
@@duncescotus2342 Did God cause Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles and the people of Israel to crucify Jesus? God's predetermination made it certain to occur, but the cause was in the wicked hearts of those who crucified Jesus. All God needed to do to bring it to pass was to remove the restraints of His common grace and permit these wicked men to act according to their fallen natures. Thomas Watson wisely commented, "God has a hand in the action where sin is, but no hand in the sin of the action."
@@duncescotus2342 I don't think I stated that determination does not determine. That God has determined to use the sinful actions of wicked people to accomplish His good purpose does not mean that He is the cause of those sinful actions. The cause of sin is never in God. It is always in the sinner.
@@TheBereanVoice Determination implies causality, not necessarily a single cause however. A determination such as you describe is not honest. No theologian, philosopher, physicist or high schools student worth a grain would say something so proudly paradoxical and shifty with such scientific language. We may have a paradox on our hands, yes, and the universe is full of them, wave/particle duality of light for example, but here is the one at hand: 1. God is omniscient, knowing what will happen, every possible outcome 2. God does not determine every possible outcome, even what he knows will happen That's a honest paradox, such as every theologian has had to wrestle with. You Calvinists merely use double talk and then hopeless equivocation when backed into a corner: God "uses" human sin... That kind of thing. A God who does so is of questionable character, though exceptionally thrifty. However, we can defuse the problem by starting with the basics. God is NOT one person, but three, all in mutual submission and harmonious but unique personhood, including that faculty we call will. The second person retains BOTH human and divine natures into future perpetuity. If he had a human nature as the Logos in past perpetuity is fun to think on, but not necessary to pin down. Therefore in "God" is TWO natures, and we reflect that, being created in his image, especially the Christian who is said to partake in the divine nature. Many things that can be said of the Christian do not apply to the natural man, but some do. Adam did not lose the image of God in the fall though it was besmirched. Adam retained free will. If he had no free will he could not have sinned. So sin does not utterly efface the divine image. We start there, with a sound anthropology, just as the Bible starts. We do not jump into 16th century obsessions right away. Or 17th in your case. We also do well to note the cosmology of Genesis. The first duality: heaven and earth.
Jude is using several metaphors to describe apostate false teachers. The metaphor he is using in verse 12 is that of barren trees. Not only were they born spiritually dead [incapable of bearing spiritual fruit], but now, they are like trees that have been uprooted, [they have made a confession of faith in Christ but have now openly confessed that they have rejected the truth they had professed to believe], thus they are described as "twice dead."
@@TheBereanVoice Okay, thank you for your answer, but how does the fact that they were dead and without fruit mean that they never bore any fruit or were brought back to life? How can anything be twice dead without living, dying, being brought back and then dying again?
Consider the following from an Eastern Orthodox Christian! -------- The missing doctrine in the Calvinist system of predestination and Protestant debate is God's loving Grace which is "God working in us" to enable us to be free to receive or reject God's love for us all! Philippians 2:12-13; Titus 2:11; 1 Timothy 2:3-6 Jesus is truly God and truly man! The Bible is about the love of Jesus Christ for all! John 3:16; 1 John 4:8 Believers are predestined to be like Jesus Christ! Ephesians 1:4; Romans 8:29 We are predestined in Christ, saved in Christ, justified in Christ, united in Christ, sanctified in Christ, glorified In Christ, adopted in Christ, chosen and elect in Christ when we believe in Christ who is God's beloved Son and the only chosen ONE! Luke 9:35; Ephesians 1:4, 13; Romans 9-11 These riches in Christ are a result of our freely repenting and being faithful to Christ, which we can only do by the grace of God which is "God working in us!" 1 Corinthians 15:10 Apart from Jesus we can do nothing! John 15:5 But God loves us all and wants us all to be saved! 1 Timothy 2:3-6 Jesus in love, willingly died for all in order to raise from death to conquer death, sin, and the devil for all! Hebrews 2:9, 14-15; 1 Corinthians 15:22; Colossians 1:20 But we are not forced to love God! John 11:35 God's grace, which works in us, who are dead in sin, enables us to choose to love God and be saved! John 6:65; 12:32-33 But the choice to love God remains in us! John 7:17 The order is: 1) Enabling Grace! John 6:65 2) Our freedom to repent and be faithful to Christ! Acts 17:30-31 3) Being united and made alive with Christ! John 20:31 What the Calvinist system does not have is God's Grace "working in us to enable us," to be free to choose to be in Christ! Philippians 2:12-13; John 6:65 The Calvinist system cannot answer why Adam was created very good and created in God's image and likeness with a "mysterious free will" and Adam lived in a perfect environment and had the Spirit of God and yet Adam disobeyed God! Why? The Calvinist belief that God predestined some to go to hell and they are given no grace to freely believe is not the God of the Bible. God foreknew all those who would believe in His Son by God's grace! God predestined them to be like Christ! Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 1:4-5 God did not determine who would believe in Him and who would not! God’s foreknowledge does not cause man’s choices! To choose Christ and receive Christ's love for us will be heaven. To reject Christ and Christ's love for us will be the experience of hell! Judas rejected the love of Christ for Judas and it led Judas to commit suicide! The predestined reprobates in the Calvinist system never have a chance to experience the love of God! This is injustice! John 3:16 Calvinism is not the God of the Bible!
Of course reprobates have a chance [opportunity] to repent everytime they hear the gospel. That they refuse to repent is neither the fault of God nor of the gospel.
You wrote, "The Calvinist belief that God predestined some to go to hell and they are given no grace to freely believe is not the God of the Bible." You do understand that we do not beleive in equal ultimacy right? According to your view, no one is given grace to freely believe. Is it not your view that sinners don't need grace to freely believe? Not only are Calvinists unable to answer the question regarding Adam''s ability to sin, but that is a mystery for everyone. We must only believe that for God's purpose of grace and redemption, He created Adam mutable so that he might sin.
@@TheBereanVoice help me out...wouldn't hearing the gospel be God drawing them to himself? I have heard many calvinists including James White use this verse as a proof text for the elect - that they are the ones drawn. So, is your contention that the drawn reprobate eventually be regenerated to belief?
@@TheBereanVoice A couple of questions 1. You, speaking for calvinism do not believe God sends people to hell? 2. So you, again speaking for calvinsim, claim that Adam alone was given 'free will' to sin for God's purpose of grace and redemption? 3. Adam was perfect, why give him 'free will' to sin so the fall would happen so his sin could - which could have been completely avoided - could bring about grace - sin that had to be paid for by His Son's horrific suffering and death.? Talk about making no sense....
Tonya Perry, As stated in the description, this is a satirical look at the unscrupulous methods of rabid anti-Calvinists. I am not sure what you intend to say by saying that God said "who-so-ever will." The reality is that nowhere in the Scriptures do we find God saying "whosoever will." What we do find is God saying "the one desiring." Everyone desiring to be put right with God in God's way will certainly be declared righteous based on Jesus' redemptive work. Perhaps you can tell me why you imagine that would be a problem for those who believe salvation is under divine control.
😅 I may not call myself a CALVINIST, but I find no way that the teaching is wrong after I was saved. I could be born again when I discovered I had NO WAY, and that's when I light of the gospel enlightened my heart...not that I chose Jesus, but He chose me. JESUS saved me 100% grace. If i chose Christ, and could hold on to Christ, that would never be grace. Some so-called popular CALVINIST misrepresent Calvinism and so the counter-attack from the anti-group becomes absolute nonsense. 😅 love from north_east india 🇮🇳
Of course I believe in the doctrine of election. If God had not chosen some, Heaven would have none. No one exists in a state of nature who is not in rebellion against God. Had God not chosen to save a people for Himself, all would have perished in wicked rebellion against Him. What we do not believe, I am talking about White, R.C., Washer etc. and none of us believe in equal ultimacy [positive positive predestination. not positive/negative predestination.] You do know that Dr. Lloyd-Jones, one of whose sermons you have posted on your channel, was an avowed Calvinist, right?
@berean voice. I don’t have a channel. I used to argue with people who believe this. Couldn’t stand talking to people like you. I have been a believer since I was a child and now I’m 45. Asked God to show me what the truth was in His word not through calvanism or any other persons opinion. It took several years but I was reading John 6 like you quoted. A light went off and that light shed light on a lot of other scripture. I’m now as you are and people argue with me or debate I should say. The best thing that came out understanding the truth is understanding what true Grace is. It really took a level of judgment I had for unbelievers away. Thank you for you video
@berean voice. I don’t have a channel. I used to argue with people who believe this. Couldn’t stand talking to people like you. I have been a believer since I was a child and now I’m 45. Asked God to show me what the truth was in His word not through calvanism or any other persons opinion. It took several years but I was reading John 6 like you quoted. A light went off and that light shed light on a lot of other scripture. I’m now as you are and people argue with me or debate I should say. The best thing that came out understanding the truth is understanding what true Grace is. It really took a level of judgment I had for unbelievers away. Thank you for you video
@berean voice. I don’t have a channel. I used to argue with people who believe this. Couldn’t stand talking to people like you. I have been a believer since I was a child and now I’m 45. Asked God to show me what the truth was in His word not through calvanism or any other persons opinion. It took several years but I was reading John 6 like you quoted. A light went off and that light shed light on a lot of other scripture. I’m now as you are and people argue with me or debate I should say. The best thing that came out understanding the truth is understanding what true Grace is. It really took a level of judgment I had for unbelievers away. Thank you for you video
@berean voice. I don’t have a channel. I used to argue with people who believe this. Couldn’t stand talking to people like you. I have been a believer since I was a child and now I’m 45. Asked God to show me what the truth was in His word not through calvanism or any other persons opinion. It took several years but I was reading John 6 like you quoted. A light went off and that light shed light on a lot of other scripture. I’m now as you are and people argue with me or debate I should say. The best thing that came out understanding the truth is understanding what true Grace is. It really took a level of judgment I had for unbelievers away. Thank you for you video
A couple years ago I got serious about studying and understanding the Bible. As my understanding increased the more I realized how terrible my biblical knowledge was. I was really disturbed because I grew up in Truest Calvinism/Reformed, not just on Sunday but every day. So you'd think growing up in such a pure religion I'd know the Bible, but it was pretty much opposite. I knew all the favorite Calvinist theologians from the past and what they said and how they interpreted the Bible. But as I increased in understanding I also increased in questioning all parts of Calvinist philosophy. I also now understand how and why many Bible passages are ignored and why the OT was so central to the religion.
Baltic, I would be interested in knowing what Scriptures your version of Calvinism/Reformed church ignored and why you say the OT was so central to the religion. I don't make it a practice to ignore any Scripture and I believe the NT Scriptures are central even though Jesus made it clear that he is the central message of the OT Scriptures.
@@truth7416 I couldn't help noticing that you omitted the following part of the quotation from the institutes--"when the godly think of all these things they have ample sources of consolation. For, as it belongs to the lord to arm the fury of such foes and turn and destine it at pleasure, so it is his also to determine the measure and the end, so as to prevent them from breaking loose and wantoning as they list." Nothing here about God forcing sinners to sin and then judging them for what He forced them to do. We simply don't believe that. It is not my fault that you have been exposed to an aberrant form of "Calvinism" but you have been greatly deceived.
@@truth7416 That God has chosen to use the wicked designs and desires of evil men to accomplish His good purpose in no way implies that He causes ["forces"] the evil of their actions. He does not need to cause or force sinners to perpetrate the evil that is resident in their fallen hearts.
It would appear to me that there is a mystery about salvation. Speaking of myself, I know I did not simply believe the gospel, it was hidden. A man witnessed to me and showed me Eph.2:8,9. I read it, thought about it, and a revelation of God's grace came to me, and I was born again. For the last few years after watching debates, and reading on the subject, I still cannot bring myself to believe the atonement is limited, and that people who are not chosen cannot be saved. Therefore the only logical conclusion is they were created by the Lord to go to hell. I've heard the arguments that it is for His glory. Calvin wrote they are doomed from the womb to the tomb. It is supposed to be their fault for not believing, but they are born to reprobation?? This does not sound right nor scriptural, and most saints have a natural reaction of repulsion, and disgust to such teaching from the holy Spirit. It grieves the Spirit to hear such teaching. When I witness to people, I will ask them if they are Christians, Almost all Catholics say, I'm a Catholic. Why do they not say I am a Christian? So when I hear Calvinism, I know where the priority lies. It is in a man's commentary of his interpretation of scripture. I am a Christian. I read the scriptures as a Christian. It seems to me that Augustine and Calvin were sincerely trying to put forth an explanation of the Mystery of salvation, but like all men on this side of the resurrection, we fall short. Chosen before the foundation of the world, His servant, Peter
@ChaplainPeter1 Perhaps you need to learn what the so-called doctrine of limited atonement actually states. The Canons of Dort make it clear that no sinner will ever perish because the redemptive work of Christ lacked sufficient value to save them. Anyone who truly believes not only can but certainly will be pardoned and justified based on the all-sufficient work of Christ. Nothing about God's decree prevents any sinner's salvation. Of course, we are Christians. "Calvinists" is only theological shorthand for one who is a soteriological monergists. Of course, it is the sinner's fault if they continue in their rebellion against God. God did not cause that rebellion even though He determined to permit it. Sinning is a choice for which we are responsible. We are all born doomed. That is what Eph. 2:3 means when Paul states that we were by nature [this term is used consistently in the New Testament to refer to what a person is by birth] children of wrath [deserving of wrath] just like the rest of mankind. You may not like the teaching of Romans 5:12-19, but if you understand Paul's argument, the passage can only mean that Adam's one act of transgression has been imputed to all who are united to him by birth. Paul's point is that just as Adam's transgression guaranteed the condemnation of all who continue in union with him, so Christ's obedience guarantees the justification and final glorification of all who are in Him through faith. Adam stands as a TYPE of Christ. In what way is that true? It is true in that both stand as representative heads of their respective peoples.
LOL amen brother! Been there and done that with the Arminians. They cherry pick texts and get emotional and give you personal stories and anecdotes instead of scripture. Good job. I have downloaded it. God bless.
Very clever. You had me going for about 2 minutes there till I saw what you were doing. Why not just come out and say you're a Calvinist and that you are defending Calvinist doctrine? That would be the honest, transparent thing to do, instead of clickbaiting people into watching your video then flipping the script on them? Doesn't make me warm to Calvinists or Calvinism, to be honest.
I'll have to start referring people to this video Randy. So expect some more thumbs down, haha. I never would have guessed you could be such an astute troll. This really does hit the nail on the head. I think a large part of the problem is many Calvinists do a poor job of expressing Calvinism, and sometimes they are wrong about key points; but, Randy, you do an excellent job with it.
So you say Calvinism aka Reformed Doctrine is a wicked heresy. Reformed doctrine is the most hated doctrine in the world because the it proves in Scripture that God is Sovereign and Man is not. That God does what He Wills with His own Creation regardless of Man's Plans for himself are. That God is the Judge of Man according to God's Righteousness and not according to Man's Wisdom. I love the Reformed Doctrine because I know that my Salvation doesn't depend on My feeble efforts, but Christ's Mighty Work. And He finished it on the Cross.
@@randym.7238 That makes more sense. Yeah, your comment is located in response to mine, rather than as its own comment, and that's why I asked. Thanks for answering. The All-Sovereign God bless you, Randy.
@@TheBereanVoice These jerks are God's precious children.. you come across like your above them.. if it's a bind for you, why not just quit.. go evangelise on a street corner.. or spend your time with the more educated discerning type.. maybe your burning out.. I dont know.. but I make tge guys comment right.. soften up a bit maybe.. I'm sure there was,a tine when you didn't know what you feel you know now.. if you got demeaned and spoken to with condescension.. how would you of felt.. I realise it can be frustrating.. but maybe you could be that guy who shows a Lil kindness and compassion.. the video content us great.. if you don't like the comments.. turn em off.. but belittling people isn't nice 😢
Calvinism is a system that has been honed razor sharp by its adherents for a long time. This man has studied it well. His satire however smells of the exact misrepresentation of the opposition's view, that he seems to disdain. Not a very Christian way to go about the debate.
This video is an absolute masterpiece. The misrepresentation of the anti-calvinists is actually one of the biggest arguments for Calvinist. The only way the can refute Calvanist is to misrepresent it.
Just as an exercise, Let's say that we have a free will and can choose or reject Jesus. Our salvation depends totally on us and our choice we decide to make. God looking ahead in time can see that you will make the decision for Christ and so will I, but Mark and Tammy will reject the plan of salvation. If God sets time in motion with that knowledge, he is condemning Mark and Tammy and choosing to save you and me. The fact is, God is choosing to save some and loose some either way you look at it. It is God's choice regardless.
20july1944 that question isn't answered in the bible exactly Romans9:27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved. Can you re-phrase the question I don't understand what you mean by that.
20july1944 that is a good question and it's something that the Christian religion in general has to deal with regardless of denomination as to why God would create ppl he knows will go to hell. I see two options either the evil and suffering that happens has no purpose & no meaning or the evil & suffering that happens has a purpose & meaning. The Bible does address this question and there are resources available to look further into this it's called "theodicy" If sin did not enter the world God couldn't have shown his justice or his mercy or his grace in such a powerful way, it was the plan from the before the world began. 1peter1:20 He (Christ) was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake (Also rev13 says the lamb slain before the foundation of the world) Also here in Romans 9 we see something of the reasons why God endures with or allows evil in order to show his justice, Grace & power. Romans 9:22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory- 24even us whom he has called The act of sin is evil in itself because it comes out of an evil heart but God uses those things to work everything towards his own purposes. Joseph said to his brothers "what you meant for evil God meant for good" To believe the evil in this world is simply random meaningless suffering is no better off than being an atheist imo. Rom8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. Eph1:11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will. John MacArthur has a good teaching on this I think it's called "the problem of evil"
20july1944 I would say the ultimate purpose of man is to glorify God either in his justice or in his grace & Gods ultimate purpose is to bring glory to himself.
@@kingofkings4794 Have you never read the things Jesus said to his enemies who twisted God's truth they way you people do? You wouldn't think He was very Christlike either. At least I am joyous when I make fun of you people.
@@TheBereanVoice You people, you knowing about me whatsoever! Are you bearing a public false witness against me! I forgive you brother! I love you too!
I can’t get past an eternal decree. If God first decrees blasphemy of the Spirit. That means the decree is his word. So through Jesus he decrees Satans Blasphemy. All Gods actions or decrees must be facilitated by the Spirit. So you have God in a occult or secret decree decreeing ( by the word) blasphemy of the Spirit, then the Spirit initiating or fascilitating that. How is this not ( not linguistically but practically ) swopping God for Satan and just calling him God. Either Satan authors lies or God does.
@granthollandvideos You seem to be completely ignorant of what the Scriptures mean when they talk about God's decree. God neither causes or approves of all that He has decreed. What you seem to ignore is that God has determined to permit only those things for which He has a good purpose. His ultimate purpose is to make His glorious attributes known and then to bring spiritual and eternal good to His people.
@@TheBereanVoice so I must just trust your internet reply about Gods sovereign decisions. Except sovereign in no language means determined . I must accept you saying God decrees good and bad , but that’s not the cause of stuff because he decrees a second cause. I must accept you saying we have a will even if God decrees first second third or fourth decree. I must accept sin is rebellion against his secret will that he doesn’t will. Trying to use different verbs and adjectives surely doesn’t change the real meaning of language . Just as a God decreeing evil doesn’t change from Satan into God just because Calvin says so . I think once you make Gods decree the “ first thing”” of evil , it surely doesn’t matter how much you try to back out of that position. Jesus has already called that tree bad and it’s fruit bad . The author and father of lies can only be Satan, the author as James says of our sin is our own list . You can’t blame God , make him Satan, then call him God
@@granthollandvideos NO. You need to listen to what Calvinists believe and not to what others claim Calvinsts believe. Everything you have written simply show the prodigious depth of your ignorance. I have never known a Calvinist who believed sovereign meant determined. You have not learned that idea from Calvinists. We believe sovereign means ruler and in God's case absolute and supreme ruller. 1 Chronicles 29:10-14 is a good description of what we mean when we say God is sovereign. I truly don't have the time or the inclination to respond to ridiculous comments like yours. If you wish to respond to something we actually believe, I will be happy do discuss it with you but I can't respond to ridiculous comments like yours.
@@TheBereanVoice Only love my friend ,, no problem and no Judgement. Just remember think of Jesus words on the Mount. He looks at the heart for evil. The being that decrees evil ( “decree “ is another word for “ the word “ of God) So you have Jesus from God by the Spirit and word speaking the “start of evil from his heart . It makes no difference to the nature of that being weather he “ wants “ that evil or not. It would make that being Satan according to Christianity as described by Christ in the mount. A well can’t produce both good and bad water. Make the tree either good or bad. it is my argument that it makes no difference how distorted TULIP is you can’t get past the S. When Satan plants an idea in the mind it is one of the most powerful things in the universe. We reason with him , truly thinking this originated from reason in ourself. But I understand the “ Ellect” feel they have a special awakening of the spark of knowledge. All this swooping God for Satan, and on top they declare themselves unable to loose their salvation. The brilliance is absolutely remarkable…
@@granthollandvideos If you weren't so ignorant, you would know that Calvinists don't believe God is ever the proximate cause of evil. Perhaps you can tell me what you think the Scriptures mean when they state that God INTENDED for good what His creatures intended for evil, or how the wicked machinations and actions of evil men have been predetermined without God causing those actions. You truly need to learn the difference between "decreeing" and "causing" If God caused people to sin and then condemned them for sinning , He would not be the God of the Bible
I see this guys sarcastic defense of Calvin and his ISM. John 6:64 also says that Jesus already knew who would believe him or not. So God foreknows who will accept or reject Him. He doesn’t randomly send people to hell as you guys claim. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is patient toward you not wishing that any should perish but ALL should reach repentance. . 1 Tim 4:10 The living God who is the savior of ALL men. Romans 8:29 For those He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus’s Christ. ..2 Cor 5:15 For one died for ALL. . Calvin first created his own doctrine then cherry picked the Bible to try and justify it rather than using scripture as a basis to explain GODS doctrine.
Randall Seiver ..When I find Calvin’s name written in the Bible, then I might consider his doctrine a little more, until then, I’ll just focus on Jesus.
And yet another misrepresentation. You have proven your ignorance once again by supposing that Calvinism involves following John Calvin. Anyone who has any understanding of theological terminology whatsoever knows that "Calvinism" is only a nick-name for soteriological monergism. We try to use simpler terms so people like you will understand them.
If you would ever like to engage in a serious discussion of these issues, laying aside your prodigious ignorance of the subject, I would be happy to discuss it with you.
Here's Verses 14 & 15 of 2 Cor 5 : 14 For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; 15 and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf. Paul states it twice, He died for ALL. No cherry picking here. Yes, he says, therefore we all died.. without Christ we're all dead in our sins, of course. Wait, there's more .. 1 John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the WHOLE WORLD. John 3:16 16 “For God so loved the WORLD, that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life .. The Bible states that WHOEVER believes in Him, not just the calvinists. You can defend calvin if you want. I wont do it.
I am not defending Calvin and have no desire to do so. Let me just ask you one question concerning Jesus' death from our view. Can you state what you understand our view to be on the subject?
@@sa-oz8gu No, what I am saying is that James was not suggesting that unregenerate sinners take the initiative in seeking or drawing near to God. Doing so is still their responsibility though they have absolutely no desire to do so in a state of nature.
@@sa-oz8gu No. God doesn´t disable anyone. God is never the proximate cause of sin and rebellion. Read Chapter three of the Philadelphia Confession of faith.
What did you find out standing about it? Did it feed your pride as a Calvinist that has no love for the lost that needJesus? Or are you encouraged that it spread the good news of the gospel that saves anyone who believes? This video is hideous and filled with pride ...would turn off anyone that needs to learn about Christ. Focused on the wrong mission... we need to focus on the great commission given to us by Jesus to spread the good news of the gospel to the world.
What you need to acknowledge is that there are clear statements of Scripture that tell us that God determined beforehand that sinners would perform acts that are clearly condemned in the Bible. God has intended the wicked actions of evil men to bring about good for his people. He has done nothing to cause their wicked actions; he has had no need to do so.
Literally everyone agrees with this except for Calvinists!!!! Calvinism requires a non-libertarian account of free will or Compatibilism. This means that God determines our actions by causing them and this is somehow “free”. I would say God only determines our wicked actions in that he allows them to happen. This is not really determinism. Also, I’m fine to say there is a point where a person becomes so wicked that God does determine their actions in order to bring about a greater good like Pharaoh but it is not as if he determines people to Hell or Heaven as Evil Calvinism would lead. This is literally what I get from James White, not from ignorant people on the internet.
@@michaelsayad5085 No, Calvinists do not believe that God causes the sinner's wicked actions. That is simply a prodigious misrepresentation that has likely come from the heretic, Leighton Flowers.
@@TheBereanVoice I have met many Calvinists who believe he does. It's not just Leighton Flowers. They say they don't but when you probe them on their beliefs it becomes clear that they do. What is it exactly that you believe as a Calvinist?
@@michaelsayad5085 If they believe God causes the sinner's wicked actions, they are not Calvinists. It doesn't matter that they call themselves Calvinists. That is simply not what Calvinists believe. If you would like to know what I believe, either read my books www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver or watch my videos on youtube [the Berean Voice].
I came to find out that grace comes through faith in Romans 4:16, Eph 2:8, Titus 2:11 that the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.
nobody not one person become a Calvinist by studying the Bible for themselves. Either they had heavy influence by Calvinists preachers growing up or being taught the evil doctrine.
I was offended by God's sovereignty, just like most well-meaning brothers and sisters in Christ. I just had to come to terms with the fact that God doesn't have to be accountable to anyone or justify Himself with me. God's sovereignty is part of His Holiness. Period.
@@TheBereanVoice Well I believe I have free will to sin or not, I choose not to sin. Yet occasionally stumble, then I choose to repent ASAP. Christ found me dead, then He regenerated me, then when He did, I willingly gave my life to Him, without even knowing the verse that says I'm not my own, but I am the property of His own. Now I know much more about the free will of man and the small part I play in His glory. I also have free will to believe that most if not all true Christians that happen to be Arminian pretty much practice the Reform doctrine, unbeknownst to themselves. So I'll do my utmost not to destroy them. If I did I would be destroying my own biblical knowledge as well. The handle "Calvinism" for me is a bit of an oxymoron in that since the Reformation after Calvin exposited the bible with thousands of pages, of exposition, there were many men that contributed to true doctrines of grace. Being the fact that Calvin was known as a walking bible and always being placed as the chair of the many Synods, the Reformed theology became known as "Calvinism". Jacobus and his band of followers left the Council's and became known as Arminians. My guess is most Evangelicals were not labeled Arminians, even though they followed Arminius. Some of the Arminians have a bad taste about Calvin as well as false info. about him. This is why sometimes I don't reveal my Doctrine, depending on the situation. I suggest, anyone that wants to gain in understanding of God's Word since the "Reformation" go into a deep dive study of the protest from the beginning. Start with the life of Calvin by Steve Lawson there's a few video's on Utube that for me are astounding. Anyway as usual I went on too long. I truly enjoyed your video. Thank you and bless you.
I think you should take your own advice. Most I heard on this presentation is a batch of proof texts. Many are being hurt by your religion. I encourage you to take a good look at the ramifications of the teaching.
What an idiot. There were no proof-texts. No wonder you people have trouble interpreting Scripture. I am not responsible for the remifications of any biblical teaching. If Flowers and his ilk would stop lying and twisting the Scriptures to suit their own pitiful views. people would not be hurt by anything we teach. The Provisionists simply don't like the God who has revealed Himself in Scripture. It is clearly better to have a god who says "how high" when someone says "jump,"
For God so Loved@@TheBereanVoice that He gave His One and only Son. And if @TheBereanVoice believes in Him, @TheBereanVoice will have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn @TheBereanVoice, but that @TheBereanVoice through Him might be saved. This simple Gospel message is pure and without ambiguity. God gave a gift to this world, His precious Son. It is my choice to accept this gift or not. This is not rocket-science. Only under the Calvinist deception are verses like this unclear. World is not world...all is not all...whosoever is not whosoever. I know what Calvinism teaches as I came out of a cult as well. Not all people who claim the name really believe what Calvin taught.
@TheFinalJigsaw It depends on how one defines Calvinism. If it is defined as most anti-Calvinist define it, I would be against it. If it is defined by the Canons of Dort, I am for it. What I am arguing for is accurate representation of Calvinistic views [and of the other side as well].
John MacArthur was asked by a woman in some sort of forum, to explain how it is Jesus came for the world, yet there's only few that are saved. Why would He come for the world. John cleared his throat and repeated the question. That's what someone does when they are buying time.
Chambers Charles Torrance, I am not clearing my throat. First, that was not the question she asked. But, let me respond to your question. The word kosmos almost never carries the idea of everyone without exception. Had it been God's purpose to save everyone without exception, He would save everyone without exception. Jesus came to save sinners from every nation and not only from the Covenant nation of Israel and He has accomplished the work the Father gave Him to accomplish. The question concerned the free offer of the gospel and the fact that sinners cannot believe and repent apart from Divine enablement. If God left sinners to the decision of their sinful wills, no one would respond positively to the gospel. but that has nothing to do with the sincerity of God's free offer of mercy. The problem is never God's unwillingness to save all who repent and believe. The problem is that sinners universally would refuse God's free offer of mercy apart from God's salvific work in the application of redemption as well as in the accomplishment of redemption.
@TheBereanVoice God bless brother. I live in Belarus and I am a member of a pentecostal church of 2000 members. As you can guess I am the only one here who believes in doctrines of grace. Everytime I explaine to them what you just said about men's will been enslaved to their sinful desires and they cannot choose for God. They say it's heresy. I don't know why they can't comprehend it when it's clear in the Bible.
People don't decide Calvinism is a heresy because of appeals to authority and ubiquitous resources all over the internet...that would would be a description of Calvinism! lol
@@TheBereanVoice Ah yes before they had the internet they had persecution of dissenters to their gnostic philosophizing, and then before that...Oh wait, before that they didn't exist. It's a shame that it took Christians so long to realize that theistic determinism was a Christian doctrine! It's funny that when I paraphrased your own words and said that it more described (current) Calvinism than the Trad view, you don't deny it but you reply by going straight to a weak appeal to historical authority.
@@zerospacer I believe in biblical authority not in historical authority. You cannot show me a single point of correspondence between the Gnostics and Calvinists. Additionally, only a soteriological synergist would our doctrine as "theological determinism." You need to understand that philosophical determinism is not an issue we care to debate.
It is to you and your ilk that I was referring when I spoke about misrepresentation. Perhaps you should spend less time commenting on issues you clearly don't understand and more time studying. I am pretty sure that isn't going to happen since you people seem to be lazy and enjoy simply repeating garbage you have heard from other lazy people.
I have absolutely no doubt that Calvinism is often misrepresented by those who reject it. Of course, it is altogether unnecessary to do that. All I need to do is read the Bible using the critical thinking skills that God gave me, to understand the character of God. Having read through the Bible multiple times, carefully studying all scriptures that SEEM to suggest that God chose who to save and who to damn, I can reject Calvinism with confidence. But I do understand and appreciate your futile effort to ridicule those who disagree with you.
Richard, Thanks for your comment. Apparently, you have misunderstood my effort here. It was not to "ridicule those who disagree" with me, but to ridicule those who are either too lazy to study the issues or too dishonest with the issues to state them accurately. I understand that, given your presuppositions as you read the Scriptures, you can only arrive at your conclusions. This is why I wrote "A Faulty Compass." I would suggest that you read it and interact with it. Too often this debate has been about conclusions when it should have been about presuppostions. If you would like to discuss these issues further, may I suggest that you visit my blog at www.truthunchanging.wordpress.com
A sinner is one who has failed to conform to God's revealed truth, both general and special. A believer is a sinner who has accounted God to be faithful to fulfill His promises. They can't be interchangable since not every sinner has believed God's promises.
When Jesus said that He did not come to save the righteous but sinners He was referring to those who in their own estimation were righteous. Jesus came to save those who by grace freely acknowledge their falleness before God. I am fairly confident that you imagine that what you have written here makes sense but you are mistaken.
A believer - someone who by their own free will acknowledges they are a sinner in need of a Savior and believes Christ died - took on the penalty for their sin, rose again, defeating death for them - is saved. That person is still a sinner - a repentant sinner.
Dr Fat Bottom! I love it!! hahaha ---- I remember Rich Pierce having to explain that to Dr. White on his radio show. Thank you on a serious note - I am browsing your Amazon store now :)
All of your points, good Sir, apply with equal if not greater force to the un-studied "echo-chamber" utterly distorted slings by anti-Catholics against Catholicism. He who wishes to criticize and offer strong opinions should first study, actually and fully study, the topic, pray, contemplate, study some more, and then open one's mouth with humility and charity of mind and heart. Then, then, we might actually begin to first put on Christ, in purporting to explain him to others.
I'm sure you do like provoking stupid reactions from your inferiors, you've got to hand it to so many protestants, they're very much into hating on each other and at the same time feeling holier than thou. Oh yes once saved always saved, you can do no wrong. God bless you
Anti-calvinism is wicked. God is sovereign in salvation not man. Calvinism gives God all glory for salvation even for the faith we receive salvation by.God grants faith as a gift of grace. Anti calvinism boasts and takes credit for faith. Anti-calvinism is evil.
