Leighton, even though we may have disagreements on major issues such as free will, I still consider all who believe in Christ my brothers and sisters. May God bless you.
@@fredmiller6166 yes. Just like some Christians emphasize the oneness of God , others emphasize His triunity. God gifts us different emphasis at different times as needed for our spiritual upbringing
The Calvinistic Kingdom of God has Jesus preaching the Word which is received by men, then Satan removes the Word sown in their hearts, according to God's immutable decree. Yet, Jesus states, a kingdom divided against itself will not stand.
@@aletheia8054 a Calvinists church would preach unconditional election and limited atonement and irresistible grace. So if satan is even able to remove the word from their hearts it’s only because they were not predestined to election by God’s immutable decree.
those who are calvinistically inclined read into texts things that are not there. they are amazing eisegetes seeing total depravity and determinism in both the bible and early church fathers.
In Institutes Book 1 Chapter 18 Section 4, Calvin reads Jeroboam into Hosea, fabricating a contradiction so that he can address it with his deterministic view.
@@a.k.7840 Andrew it is a sad day when you have to shore up your theology with fabricating the scripture. that is called scripture twisting warned by Peter in 2 Pet 3:16
The thing about human beings is that we really do have free will… And the thing about our free will is that it is a bit unstable. God on the other hand is completely stable in his free will. His choices are always good. His will which is free is always righteous. He is the rock of ages. We on the other hand are really a bit unstable so far as our Will is concerned, but it is completely free. We must rest in that stability in Christ.
the Gospel (by way of analogy ) is like an arrow who's tip is laced with regeneration, faith, and Grace ....Man cannot change his depraved condition but depraved man can still reason in the physical world; this is why the verse in Isaiah 1:18 says through reason God makes a crimson heart become white as snow. Through reason one hears the gospel message .... all spiritually dead men have reason. Grace is irresistible, but the Gospel message is not ....The responsibility of man is to not resist the reasoning of the gospel, this is where his free will cooperates with the message of the Gospel. Through reason we either allow the message to penetrate our heart or resist it by not allowing it to penetrate our heart. This is why the Bible says when you hear the message of the gospel do not harden your heart (Heb 3:15), in other words do not suppress the truth in ungodliness against the voice of God that you are hearing in the Gospel (romans 1:18), it is wickedness to do so ....So, as one is hearing the Gospel, if they do not permit it to penetrate the heart through reason and supress the truth they are basically putting a shield up against the arrow of the gospel....How can then they receive regeneration , faith , and Grace if they resist the message ? They can't , and thus die in their sins going to Hell ...However, if that same person does voluntarily allow reason to dictate his heart and then permits it to remain soft the arrowhead of the gospel will penetrate into the heart like an antidote ....On that arrowhead will be first regeneration, which begets faith, which begets grace, wich then gives birth to salvation and in that order ...When the seed (which is the gospel ) gets into the soil (good soil is the soil of a soft heart) then the lord does all the work from there from beginning to end .....After salvation the work continues and brings it to completion until physical death.....It's up to God how many opportunities one will have to not harden their heart. Maybe after the 2nd or 3rd hearing of the gospel in its entirety the person will finally let the truth of the gospel in, but realize too that none of It is the work of man ....Not resisting is not a work, it is a passive permission ...God does not predetermine us to or away from salvation. He knows in his omniscience who will and who won't resist the gospel, and consequently knows who He will and who He won't gift with regeneration , faith , and Grace. In fact he knew this before the foundation of the world, because He is omniscient, omnipresent , and omnipotent.....I see God's sovereignty always active in controlling all biological aspects of man the universe and laws of nature keeping all atoms and cells and matter in order, but He at the same time, voluntarily relinquishes control over the moral aspects of his creation, and allows evil to happen on this earth and in the material universe. This occurs simply because He has postponed all judgement till after death and will make all things right at the end of the age. But His supervisory control over all moral aspects of the universe are still effective and under His total control so as to not allow total destruction of the universe by man in his sinful state. He allows a limited amount of evil through satanic agents having limited free reign to reac a limited amount of havoc through wars , natural disasters , crimes , sickness , famines u name it. To our eyes it may seem God is not in control, but when the limits of evil have been reached, God will intervene demonstrating that He is still sovereign over all ....Non interference in evil does not equate to loss of control or loss of Sovereignty ....I remind you all, We are still under the curse decreed by God and all evil is part of it. It is allowed by God so that He can use events that are evil and turn it for good (Rom 8:28) for His glory, and overall comprehensive part of his plan in event after event.....predestination is merely communicating to man saying " I know all those who are called who will believe and who are all who will receive and have given them all to the son whom will lose none" (John 6:35-40) All this through non interference and non violation of any of man's free will .....How God knows this, is in the council of God and only He knows how this plays out. This is not revealed to man anywhere in scriptures ...These debates I keep hearing between different factions or camps, are like the friends of Job all with the pretense of assuming they know why God does what He does. In the end when God comes on the scene he gets angry at his friends and does not answer questions, instead asks the questions.....where were you when this or that happened? Hu? Are we so arrogant and full of hubris that we are to meddle into the council of God? Shall the clay answer back and say why did u make me this way ? Are we so foolish as to think that we can understand God's eternal plan better than He does, by categorizing his motives and his thoughts and intents into theological soteriological doctrines? Do we present God as a megalomaniac manipulator rigging the whole system through calvinism making man as a robot or puppet ? Or making God so weak as to say he has not control over man's destiny through Aremenianism? Uuugh!! We humans will never figure it out, because we are linear thinkers. God is not linear or finite. He created time and is outside of time. He is infinite. in Him we live breathe move and have our being (Acts 17:28) God's ways are past finding out. Let's let God be God, and if He says he's love, let's believe it. When He said if and when I am lifted up I will draw ALL MEN to myself (John 12: 32) let's also believe that. God has already drawn everyone to Himself. He already Gave everyone access to Him. He tore the veil from top to bottom. Its up to you now to let God save you, and receive Him, How ???by not hardening your hearts, when you hear the gospel (Good news ) and as a result you will receive the gift of regeneration, faith to believe , and Grace for salvation. All because of His finished work on the cross .....I rest my case 😌
How to be MADE NEW 101: Proverbs 4 7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore GET WISDOM: and with all thy getting get understanding. 8 Exalt her, and she shall promote thee: SHE WILL BRING THEE to honour, WHEN THOU DOST EMBRACE HER. Are you READY for the simplicity that is IN Christ? If not, GET yourself ready 😉...Here it comes: WHEN thou dost embrace the wisdom of God, she will give you understanding, and by understanding, you will RECEIVE FAITH in Christ Jesus, and by faith, you will leave your works at the door and the idols in you will be destroyed and Christ will open the door to God's house and welcome you in, and IN HIM, He will wash you with His blood and seal you with His Spirit MAKING YOU A NEW MAN, and by the blood of the Son and His Spirit, you will be presented PERFECT in Him unto the Father as a NEW CREATURE 😁...and that new creature is instructed to PUT ON the full armor of God and WALK IN THE WISDOM OF GOD towards them that are OUTSIDE of the body of Christ to enable them to EMBRACE HER so they are able to receive faith in Christ Jesus TOO! P.S. YES, even your enemies, walk towards them TOO! Colossians 4:5 “Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time.” Simplicity.
I'll never understand why so many people stigmatize what scripture plainly says to the extent that they mindlessly parrot talking points about man saving himself just because he did what God wanted him to do in the first place. If you're one of those people who claims that man can't chose to believe or else it means he some how saved himself or assisted in his own salvation, I'd like you to do something for me. LIVE CONSISTENT WITH THIS ARGUMENT AND START TAKING THE CREDIT FOR EVERY GIFT YOUR LOVED ONE(S) GIVE(S) YOU! You won't though.
Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
@@fredmiller6166 Really? Tell me ONE thing that you believe because sat down, compared everything and then *CHOSE* to believe either one of them. You can't. Because at the time you believed, you simply believed. You didn't choose, and THEN believe. You believed, THEN you chose. And you will always believe first, THEN choose what you already believe.
"... of course a Calvinist would say ... we don't believe in coercion either, because coercion would be acting against your will. We believe that God changes our nature so that we are willing, so that we want to come, and so that's not coercion." Except, _if that were true,_ then He would still be changing our nature *_against our will._* So it would *_still be coercion._*
I struggle a little bit to see the threat of Hell as not being coercion. Like, "Believe in Me, or you'll I'll cause you to burn for eternity." Sure, you can have free will to choose to follow God or not, but often I think it's because people either think there really is no Hell and they're all going to Heaven or they don't think Hell is really that serious.
@@aletheia8054 so he was in hell there literally? Was the poor man literally in Abraham's bosom? Let's talk about Jonah and the whale. He said he was in the belly of hell in the fish which was surrounded by water. Explain that
@@aletheia8054 another thing that scripture in Luke says nothing about the rich man doing anything bad and likewise the beggar didn't do anything good. One was rich and the other poor so why would one go to literal hell to be burned?
@@aletheia8054 and I'll leave you with this.... Why is the word "hell" translated from 4 different words? Each word hell is translated from means something different. I won't say which words you can look that up yourself
I recommend looking the website catenabible, it has commentaries from the Church Fathers. Read the passages Calvinists use like John 6:44: No man can come to me, except the Father who has sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. Now look what John Chrysostom (AD 407) said about this: The Manicheans spring upon these words, saying, that nothing lies in our own power; yet the expression shows that we are masters of our will. For if a man comes to Him, says some one, what need is there of drawing? But the words do not take away our free will, but show that we greatly need assistance. And He implies not an unwilling comer, but one enjoying much succor. Or look what Tertulian said about Isaiah 45:7 which sometimes is translated in way that looks like God creates "evil": Now (like many other persons nowadays, especially those who have a heretical proclivity), while morbidly brooding over the question of the origin of evil, Marcion’s perception became blunted by the very irregularity of his researches. When he found the Creator declaring, “I am he that creates evil,” Marcion had already concluded from other arguments that satisfy only twisted minds that God is the author of evil. So Marcion now applied to the Creator the figure of the corrupt tree bringing forth evil fruit, that is, moral evil, and then presumed that there ought to be another god, after the analogy of the good tree producing its good fruit. Accordingly, finding in Christ a different disposition-one of a simple and pure benevolence, differing from the Creator-Marcion readily argued that in his Christ had been revealed a new and strange divinity; and then with a little leaven he leavened the whole lump of the faith, flavoring it with the acidity of his own heresy. - "Against Marcion 1.2" TLDR: the heretics were the ones interpreting this passages as Calvinists do today. I am not calling Calvinists heretics, but I am saying they should pause to think that the Early Church did not think of these passages remotely as they do now, and the Early Church was even activelty speaking against such interpretations.
@@Tron4JC and why do you think that contradicts provisionism? That has been stated many times by Dr Flowers and others. I think you should learn more before making more incorrect statements.
@@Tron4JC you are the one who stated that Chrysostom wouldn’t fit into provisionism.. I disagreed because we believe we need Gods grace. What Calvinist fail to do is understand terms.. we don’t hold nor does it seem Chrysostem is holding to effectually grace… you can ask dr flowers yourself.. but I believe from all I have heard from him that I am correct and you have it wrong yet again…
@@Tron4JC I don’t remember seeing you say prevenient grace.. just that he would not fit because of his view of assistance of Gods grace. Which again we all need. you can still affirm provisionism which just means you believe that God has provided the means of salvation for all who would believe by faith. So again why would chrysostem not fit? Based on what you posted it doesn’t say anything about prevenient grace.. just grace.
Why would any Christian turn to namely Catholic " church fathers"? They followed their path. We have ours. Daniel 12:4 and also verse 9 tells Daniel to "shut up the words and seal the book until the time of the end". These "church fathers" would have been oblivious to much of these last 2000 years with things like a literal rapture of the bride of Christ and the 70th week from Daniel.
Oh my! You seem unaware of the definition of capital C Catholic. It means universal, so the true Catholic (universal) Church is believers all over the globe, not papists. Your eschatology is terrible, too. In Daniel, it was sealed up, but dispensationals aren't the ones to unseal. Christ is the one to unseal, and he did! The Olivet Discourse and Revelation both say things would happen quickly and within that ("this") generation. But the second coming is still yet future. No secret rapture, no postponed 70th week if Daniel tribulation, no literal millennium. Final judgment and the renewal of all things quickly ensue. But I am comfortable saying Maranatha alongside the pre-tribers 🙌🙏 The time of the end was the end of the Jewish age with the destruction of the temple in 70AD. Modern Israel is not this same Israel btw. (And not fulfilment of prophesy)
@@maggieriegle2949 Even Leighton has to admit that the ECF didn’t get everything right. Theologies have developed and refined over time, in response to new challenges and errors that tries to solve challenges. Regarding eternal security and losing your salvation, they are two sides of the same coin. Perseverance of the Saints require an “elect” to persevere in their faith to be secure. The Arminian thought of losing your salvation is the believers who apostatized forfeit their salvation (until they return to the flock or be treated as an unbeliever).
@@Tron4JC I totally agree. I read the same thing and was shocked at his "scholarly" claims. After I realized that I had to double and triple source all of his claims that I was interested in knowing about. His research is so easily debunkable, it's difficult to see how this guy is not called out. But he is appealing to OSAS Baptists who hate Calvinism. I would almost call Ken Wilson a deceiver because to call him uniformed seems impossible.
@@Tron4JC I totally agree. It's insane. Reading the ECF's for one afternoon or googling them for 5 minutes can refute his claims. I honestly can not see how he can be taken seriously. I love Leighton though, and he is fighting a good fight that needs to be waged. I support him and pray for him regardless.
It’s true,,,,,,lol. The Bible says so!!!!! 🤭 ““You were born a total sinner!” they answered. “Are you trying to teach us?” And they threw him out of the synagogue.” John 9:34 Total depravity! 🤦🏻♂️
I thought the Pharisees commonly believed that if you were born blind that it was because of either your sin or your parents. Makes sense why they would say he was born "entirely in sins." (NASB)
You guys know that I’m being sarcastic, right? The irony how a corrupted pharisee would conclude in an insult that the blind man’s was a total sinner at birth. See the parallel?
Most of the early Christian pastors and other leaders, called the Early Church Father's, are before the Roman Catholic Church was founded, which Protestants date to when Constantine and imperial Rome took over Christendom. So they weren't Catholics, since there were no Roman Catholics, yet. Some people include Augustine among the ECFs, but I believe that confuses the issue, since he was a representative of Rome. Some of the ECFs were those who had learned under the Apostle John, or perhaps knew Barnabas. They tend to have an association with the age of the Apostles, at least to be from the age of those who did. ECFs tend to be closer to the Bibles doctrine's.
@@lindajohnson4204 You have to read and to do your homework better. I wrote that the ECF were catholics and not calvinists (or protestant by any stretch). What do you mean by representative of Rome? Yes, he was a catholic bishop. One of the ealiest ECF is Ignatius of Antioch (about 110 A.D.) he writes to the Smyrnaeans: "Flee from schism as the source of mischief. You should all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ did the Father. Follow, too, the presbytery as you would the apostles; and respect the deacons as you would God’s law. Nobody must do anything that has to do with the Church without the bishop’s approval. You should regard that Eucharist as valid which is celebrated either by the bishop or by someone he authorizes. Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted. On the other hand, whatever he approves pleases God as well. In that way everything you do will be on the safe side and valid.?
@@aadschram5877 I understand that you pre-date the beginning of the Catholic Church back to Simon Barjona being called "Peter" by the Lord, based on his recognition and statement of faith, in who Jesus was. Obviously we do not see that as the beginning of the "Roman" Catholic Church, and see what Jesus told Peter a lot differently than you do. Please do not try to coerce me to join Rome, because there is too much coercion going on online already, and I have been through a lot of it. For some of us, that it is not going to ever happen. I believe anyone whose faith in centered on the person of Jesus, as He is, is saved, which is what He told us, and that we all belong to the same body of Christ, and are all part of the bride. But much in the theology and practice of Rome, is too objectionable to entertain, much less to embrace and believe. It is not negotiable.
@@Tron4JC The phrase _"real presence"_ always throws me. I believe that Jesus is "really present", in the person of the Holy Spirit, whenever two or three are (sincerely) gathered together in His name. I believe that thebread and wine are His body and blood, simply because He said so, but not physically His body and blood. For that, I'm accused of denying "that Jesus has come in the flesh," though I certainly believe He came in the flesh, in being born of a virgin, of having that earthly ministry, of willingly giving His physical life to bear the sins of the world, by letting His enemies have Him put to death, and that He rose from the dead and ascended to the Father, after bring seen by 500 or so witnesses. I believe all that, but supposedly I'm "Antichrist" because I don't accept someone's hyper-literal explanation of the highly symbolic (since He said, holding bread and wine, in the hands of His still-unbroken body, still containing all its blood, "do this in memory of me") bread and wine as His literal, physical body and blood? And the Bible promises that all who believe are saved. Out of three promises of belief and salvation, two omit mention of baptism, but one includes baptism. The one does not make the two inadequate, in fact, the argument that the "baptized" in the third means how we are baptized into Christ by the Holy Spirit is pretty good,. especially when you realize that if there's "one baptism", it would be the one that is done by the Holy Spirit, not the _symbolic_ one with water., which many believers, but at least as many who end up as unbelievers, have taken. If the water baptized us into Christ, there would not be any baptized unbelievers. That reasoning especially applies to infant baptism, where nearly every prominent atheist was baptized as an infant. Obviously something is wrong with that picture.
Beats me. Thomas Jefferson wrote: "It would be more pardonable to believe in no god at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes by Calvin".
We have people here in Tennessee who pronounce it MAC-Ma-hon. And although I'm not sure which is correct, we have a pretty Scottish-derived population. My family has people named MAC-key, but in "The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie", it's pronounced "Mac-KIE" (rhymes with "eye").
If calvinist view is debatable then are you saying that whom He foreknew and predestined was Christ in us. His purpose for all who believe in Jesus Christ and not individually before the foundation of the world. Free will?
@@aletheia8054 Yes, and once He chose us, we have a choice to obey or not. Do a Biblical study and compare what Scripture says about obedience and disobedient.
@@aletheia8054 Well, all mankind is under a curse of death because we've been born into sin. Those who hear the Gospel command to repent, stop sinning and accept Jesus as LORD of their life will be saved. Those who rebel against the Gospel message and continue being Lord of their own life will suffer eternal punishment.
@@aletheia8054 He chastens and scourges us because he loves us. If we refuse His correction, we are facing eternal punishment. If we humble ourselves and turn from our corrupt, wicked and evil ways, we walk on tje path of life and peace and fellowship with ABBA, Father God.
@@aletheia8054 Eternal death for all who refuse the holy antidote of the blood of Jesus. And by our choice to obey, we don't have to be chastened and scourged any further.
@@aletheia8054 Who said deny the blood? You speak with confusion believing we must always be scourged without ever coming to obedience and maturity. Please, tell me how you came to faith in Jesus and what it means to be born again.
Cuz the Bible isn’t the end all be all, man put together the Bible. They were just letters and a council put these letters together and called it the Bible.
@@nazinas21 The canon of scripture was determined by general consensus, not by decree. There is a false claim that the Council of Nicea established the canon of the New Testament, but even quick research will suffice to disprove that idea. A simple test involves seeing how many copies of NT texts were produced as distinct from copies of spurious texts. Gnostic material, for example, wasn't suppressed; people just didn't accept or copy it, while the NT texts were very popular and thus were widely copied.
@@VicRibeiro777 Good to know. How is anyone supposed to know this unless they've seen the longer version? Why make a "short" without sufficient explanation of what the heck they're discussing? LOL-- it's like trying to make sense of a controversial verse taken out of context.
Conversation with a Calvinist: Does faith alone save? Yes. But you say repenting of sin is also required? Yes. So it's not faith alone? Yes, it is, because faith and repenting of sin are two sides of the same coin. So repenting of sin and faith are the same thing? No. So you don't believe in faith alone? Yes, it's still faith alone.
@@aletheia8054 read what I said, not what you wanted me to say. I was responding to the position of most Calvinists that repenting of sin is required for salvation. Where does the Bible say say? If it does teach that, then why were Jesus and the Apostles giving people false hope in these verses (John 1:12, 3:16, 3:18, 3:36, 5:24, 6:29, 6:47, 11:25, Ephesians 2:8-9, and many more)? Also, where does the Bible say that faith always produces works. I know you Calvinists love James 2, which teaches a dead faith doesn’t accomplish anything (written to saved people). It doesn’t contradict Romans 4:5.
You do realize that the Epistle of Clement, Epistle of barnibus, and the Epistle of Polycarp was scriptural authority in the 1st and 2nd century church. They had no "Bible" till around 400ish give or take. They had manuscripts they all read. Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John. Iranious was a disciple of Polycarp.
This is a short clip pulled out from a longer video answering Calvinists who attempt to teach that the early church fathers supported Calvinistic theology.
@@Soteriology101 if you read The institution of Christianity. Calvin says Augustine had it right and all the chruch Father has it wrong. Calvin mentioned Augustine around 90 times in his book.
@@victormiller1334 Yes, the canon of scripture was decided upon in a church council in the 300s sometime, after YEARS of examination and debate. The letters of Clement and Barnabas were rejected, along with a lot of other stuff.
Leighton, reading the Church Fathers is dangerous for Protestantism. It was precisely this video 3 years ago that lead my to turn to the Church fathers in justification of libertarian free will that lead my to the Catholic faith. I challenge you: look for your Baptismal theology in the first 1,500 years of church history. You will not find it.
This question is laughable but think about it. After the last disciples died, how can we believe anything about church history? Couldn’t care less what people thought after 100 AD lol
The flesh is totally depraved, it WILL only sin because it is made of the earth and CRAVES that which is made of the world, A.K.A. The wisdom of the world. THANK GOD, He also gave us a spirit that CRAVES the wisdom of God or we would be "doomed from the womb" only to sin continuously 😰...thank you, God ☺ The question is which one of the TWO options WILL you satisfy? Keep in mind that we ARE A LIVING SOUL clothed in the flesh that craves sin with a spirit that craves the wisdom of God. Now, WILL you EAT the wisdom of the world to serve the will of the flesh? Or, WILL you EMBRACE the wisdom of God and serve the will of the spirit? God is a wise God and LIMITED us to TWO options so that we can't use "confusion" as an excuse...there are only TWO options for goodness sake, therefore, if you are confused that means you are serving the will of the flesh because only the wisdom of the world comes to you SERVED WITH a dash of confusion. PLEASE, if you are confused that is your cue to GO FROM your foolish companions and WALK with the wise so that ye may be wise and understand the will of God. Let me inform you that Paul USED the HOLY SCRIPTURES to persuade men to TURN from DEAD idols unto the LIVING God. I wonder if he used THESE eyeopening scriptures to persuade them: Proverbs 14:7 "GO FROM the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge."👀 Proverbs 13:20 “He that WALKETH WITH wise men shall be wise: but a COMPANION of fools shall be destroyed.”👀 Seriously, PEOPLE OF THE EARTH who were finely created by a wise God that KNEW to give us the ability to REASON between TWO options...WHEN WILL YOU be wise and CONSIDER the wisdom of God which is able to make thee wise unto salvation?🤦♀ Ugh. Psalms 94:8 “UNDERSTAND, ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise?” Proverbs 2:6 “For the LORD GIVETH wisdom: out of HIS MOUTH cometh knowledge and understanding.” Proverbs 4 5 GET wisdom, GET understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of MY MOUTH. 6 Forsake her not, and she shall preserve thee: love her, and she shall keep thee. 7 Wisdom is the principal thing; THEREFORE GET WISDOM: and with all thy getting GET UNDERSTANDING. 8 Exalt her, and she shall promote thee: SHE SHALL BRING THEE to honour, WNEM THOU DOEST EMBRACE HER. 1 Corinthians 3:18 “Let no man deceive HIMSELF, If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.” I am instructed not to LET a man deceive himself, so I am SERVING you correction to enable you to LET yourself become a fool that your eyes may be opened to the deception you SWALLOWED which clouded your ABILITY to REASON...You CAN take the correction or leave it...those are your TWO options to CONSIDER? Reason: the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic. Consider: think carefully about (something), typically before making a decision.
