Why I Began Doubting Calvinism | John Piper's Seashell Sermon  

If you were completely miserable, you didn’t understand the teachings

@@erikdubois2135 Every single time I question anything regarding calvinism I get the exact response..."ya just don't understand calvinism"...wrong I understand it perfectly, it's just bad teaching!!!!

@@erikdubois2135 We became completely miserable because of Calvin and his rubbish we saw the light and the truth They both set you free Enjoy your cage .

@@JOB1925pk no you don’t

@@brendaleehayter8464 what cage? Again, if you were miserable, you don’t understand.

Her husband needs to correct her wrong thinking.

Yes, shes good in acting, emotingeses.

"The problem is people believe what people say the scriptures says" How do you know that you believe what the bible says and not what people say the scriptures says?

​@@heavenbound7-7-7-7By reading the bible and believing what it actually says not what someone claims the Bible says. That's not difficult to understand.

@@tannerfrancisco8759. 2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Sometimes it is hard to understand.

AMEN!!! That’s exactly what the WCG used to be like!!!

There is nothing man or angels can do that will prevent the elect from being adopted in the Body of Christ. Try as you will.

@@ManassehJones Manny, I'm not going to engage with you, there's no point. Been there done that, I'll just talk to the brick on my desk instead. However, for the benefit of others, I will just say it is clear from the mouth of Jesus' and his explanation of the parable of the sower in Luke, it is abundantly clear Jesus did not share your position. It is obvious that Satan attempts to prevent people from being saved... And is successful with some. The specific inference is these people 'could' have been saved otherwise. Which means their salvation was possible, but not inevitable, and prevented by the enemy of our souls. If their salvation were NOT possible by God's unchangeable decree from before they were even conceived in the womb... Satan's efforts are unnecessary, they don't even qualify as a "means" ordained by God to prevent a salvation which was impossible anyway. Redundant is too small of a word to cover that scenario. Jesus says in Luke' 8: 11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

In the end, all will believe the truth, it will be unavoidable. Everyone will confess their absolute and entire dependency on God and bow before Christ. If God can determine at the end that all men will confess the truth… then it is obvious that He is determining that it is not the case right now. So in the end, it is exactly as inevitable as we think.

​@@brentonstanfield5198Once again, the Truth shuts the mouths of Lions and quenches the firey arrows of those who sneek in unawares among the flock trying to make disciples of them Selves.

@@brentonstanfield5198 Sorry Brenton, when you say; “IF” God can determine at the end that all men will confess the truth… “then” it is obvious that He is determining that it is not the case right now.” This is classic question begging. I’m surprised you even said it. But, for the purposes of maintaining your ‘system’, you wrongly assume that if scripture says God determined “A” thing, it proves he is determining ‘All’ things. But that is just a logical fallacy. At the end, when we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ those who are forced to bow are not in the same category as those who responded and obeyed God’s call to humble themselves while they lived. After which they enjoy the grace to receive the manifestation of the promise of salvation which he currently offers to all through faith in Christ.

In Galatians, Paul calls this false gospel accursed. So while believers can be deceived into it, even to the point of aposty, in most cases it neuters the power of the Holy Spirit in believers' lives, minimizing their fruit, hindering their work for the Kingdom, and hindering their spiritual growth. But most Calvinists are not believers to begin with--they are idolaters.

You left out the other following carnal psychological words: nonsequitur, adhominum, negative inference fallacy, strawman, cognitive disodence. You'll find these carnal terms preached by the Apostle Paul throughout all his epistles. Not.

@@ManassehJones I'm not sure i follow you. I mean... all the words you listed above are certainly things i find common in Calvinists and their misrepresentation of scripture.

​@@leonardu6094Not sure what "Calvinists" say, seeing I'm not one. I know that carnal minds use them, to avoid facing Truth them Selves. The sons of God don't use the "wisdom of this world" when instructing in Truth.

​@@leonardu6094You can find these wisdom of the world psychological terms over at Soteriology/Psychology 101 channel, all day, every day. Or, in any Briggs & Meyers mental capitulation institute.

Calvinism is the function of four very consistent fundamental beliefs: (1) God created the world and everything in it and is the ULTIMATE explanation for everything that is and will be. (2) God could have created the world any way that He chose, but DECIDED IN ETERNITY (i.e. outside of Time) to create it this way such that everything that occurs in it is part of His plan for it. (3) Within TIME (i.e. in the world) He is always active bringing about EVERY GOOD THING (including the faith and good works of believers) that is in the world. (4) Within TIME (i.e. in the world) evil is the lack of God's activity such that whenever we see it, we see un-Godliness, and it should compel us to cry out all the more for God to fill this world with His glory. Everything in Scripture can be understood in light of these 4 principles that are taught by Scripture and there is no cognitive dissonance needed to believe it.

Where’s the verses?

@@Christ-is-King- In context.

@@ShowCat1 right , show the Bible verses that set you free.

@@Christ-is-King- "What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his soul." The speaker in this verse, the Lord Jesus Christ, is speaking of a soul "in play," that the destination of the soul is TBD, and that a wrong prioritization of wealth accumulation could be the distraction from genuine introspection that leads to the soul being lost in non-response to the Gospel. The writer of "Chastise thy son while there is still hope" harmonizes with, "if thou beat him with the rod, thou shalt deliver his soul from hell." Again, the destination of the soul of the child, in the mind of the writer of Proverbs, is "in play", there is still hope, and that the parents, by responding positively to the admonition to raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, can provide children instruction, even with a board of education, that will point them in the right direction to make right decision so that their soul shalt be (future tense in Solomon's mind) delivered from hell. "Enter ye in at the straight gate..." The destination of the soul is "in play" in the mind of the Lord. The Lord is not speaking under assumption that the gate (straight or wide) has already been chosen for the listener to the sermon on the mount. Were I an unbeliever that asked if Calvinism is true, and an honest Calvinist affirmed it so, I would respond that I will attempt to gain the whole world, maximize wealth, goods, pleasure (Solomon style), recreation, and entertainment. If one of the elect, I will irresistibly respond to effectual call, be regenerated, then believe, and all this stuff and heaven too. If one of the reprobates, at least in my eternal hopelessness I would enjoy my threescore and ten.

​@@Christ-is-King- That would be impossible in this forum and you know that. Your doctrine will not save you. Calvinist only know god through their doctrine, which is nothing more than religion and not relationship. I wasted 23 years of my life with the doctrine from hell. Augustine was a heretic hunter that turned heretic. Study the origins of Calvinism and you will find that it was birthed from pagan philosophies. If you really want the big answer to your tiny question read The Foundation of Augustinian Calvinism by Dr. Ken Wilson. The book is a synopsis of his scholarly work of his 300.000 word Oxford dissertation. I seriously doubt that you will read it because it is not in the Calvinist echo chamber that you find such solace. I have challenged several Calvinist to read the book and NONE of them would. Their only response was "Ken Wilson just doesn't understand Calvinism." Such a huge subject as this cannot be hashed out on social media. You must study (in depth) the pagan origins and the their misinterpretations of scripture adopted by Augustine and then Calvin. The truth is much bigger than your question and if you really want to know the truth more than anything else then you will pursue it, that is if you are not afraid of finding out that you are wrong. All Calvinist doctrine is taken out of context and therein is the deception. If you are a Calvinist you are waste deep in gnostic, Manichean, stoic heresy. Augustine has done more damage to the body of Christ than anyone in history x 1000. Go ahead, laugh, mock, reticule and belittle if you want to, or you can start a search for the truth. The choice is up to you. Humble yourself and seek the truth. Oh, and by the way, James White will not save you on this one. He claimed to have read the book, but he lied. I can prove it. As he so often does he only shrunk to ad hominem and petty ridicule. and of course he fled back to his Calvinist mantra, "He just doesn't understand Calvinism." It is Calvinist who do not understand Calvinism. Repent and make Jesus your true Lord. When you have read the book I mentioned and many other books on the subject you will see the truth, if you can handle the truth. Then I will discuss the subject with you. I will pray for you.

An "ism" simply describes a perspective. It does NOT automatically mean that one has not read the entire Bible, or that someone did not derive their theology directly from the Bible rightly interpreted, or that they follow only one preacher. For some, they do follow either only themselves or a particular teacher, but that is not usually the purpose behind "ism" terms. For example, "Pelagianism" is a term to describe someone who believe that salvation is all of man. Semi-Pelagianism is a term used to describe someone who believes that salvation is both by God and man together. "Armininism" is a term to describe that salvation is by God based upon the permission and deciding choice of man. "Calvinism" is a term used to describe the view that salvation is all of God and by the choice of God. People tend to fit into certain "ism" categories whether they realize it or not. You can fit into an "ism" category even as a Berean. For example, Trintarianism. Isms are fine so long you use them properly. They are merely quick summary terms used to describe one's overall view.

​@@dpastor6631seriously-- stop. You're demonically deceived. Be free in Jesus' name.

Nobody is denying that? All Christians affirm that.

Of that there can be no doubt. No non-Calvinist or “former Calvinist” properly understands the doctrines.

@@brentonstanfield5198 Please help me to understand the doctrines.

@@brentonstanfield5198 Exactly. The "I am a former Calvinist" followed by a totally wrong description of Calvinism is the typical story.

I haven't met a single Calvinist who understands Calvinism. It's an incoherent and frankly demonic mess of an ideology.

Nah there are many who understand Calvin completely, we are just predestined to reject the God that Calvin presents and accept the scriptures for what it says..you were predestined to be a Calvinist and a reformed theologian and allegorize the word…stay in your lane 😂😂

Or maybe Crosby was playing religious games

Sounds like the Calvinism of John Calvin. And John Piper and John MacArthur and RC Sproul.

@@sorenpx Yup

@@sorenpx well I have no idea what you think those preachers teach on what Calvinism is so I will not address that. I'm asking about the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

Doug, He did know and does know. But He also does not lie, so no, knowing all things does not mean that He makes all things happen. That He lets some things happen that He says He hates (ex: all sin!), it does not mean that He really wabts them to sin, after all. He does not tempt people to sin. So He doesn't make them sin, and He didn't in eternity past, either. Jesus did not lie when He said that if He was lifted up (on the cross), He would draw ALL men. Jesus's drawing is not less than the drawing by the Father in John 6:44. And if He draws them, it is sincere drawing; He means it. So that grace of drawing couldn't possibly be "less effectual" than the Father's, and it couldn't possibly be irresistible.

@@lindajohnson4204 Does the 1689 London Baptist Confession teach that God "makes them sin?"

So the sinner makes an autonomous choice to sin? They are the ultimate cause of/reason for their sinful choices?

What do you mean?

The plain reading of Romans 1-3 is that God’s self-revelation is plain to all men and that all men suppress it and if abandoned by God in that state would spiral down into darkness. Further, it is plain that God has a purpose in this state of affairs, namely, to reveal Jesus Christ so that justification might come through faith in Him and righteousness revealed by faith in Him so that everyone would know the righteousness of God through Christ and Christ alone.

Doubting Calvinism is not doubting biblical teachings.

@@brendaleehayter8464 It is because calvinism is biblical.

God is the one that saves people by the preaching of the gospel. It doesn’t matter who’s preaching

@@aletheia8054then why bother evangelizing? Why go to a foreign mission field and risk your life for someone who’s going to be saved anyway?

@@kevinevans5921 Why bother? To find the elect. That’s why I bother.

@@aletheia8054 why? There going to be found anyway? Calvinism turns into a work based faith, constantly doing things to prove you’ve been “saved by grace”

@@kevinevans5921 They are going to be found through the preaching of the gospel. That’s why I preach it. You don’t understand that?

So god is a puppet master?? Is that what you’re saying?

The seashell story is juxtaposed to the story of two missionaries who in their "retirement" are killed on the mission field. It is the missionaries deaths that are called tragic. Piper rightly points out that the definitions of tragedy given by the world and the Christian are different. Those missionaries are pouring out their lives for Christ. Those two "relaxing in their retirement" are pouring out their lives for themselves. There is nothing ridiculous about pointing that out.

Not all of us receive the same Spiritual gifts.

Lol. Free will is simply the ability to choose between a number of options.

@@AntWoord_YT That’s just choosing. People do that. They don’t do it because of a thing called free will

@@AntWoord_YT - The Bible explains how the will works: Luke 6:43-45: [N]o good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. Jesus even gives a vivid example in John 8: John 8:39-47: They answered him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing the works your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father - even God." Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."

@@brentonstanfield5198 In the Bible, there’s the term will of man and will of the flesh. John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Never is either of those described as free

@@aletheia8054 - Absolutely. A will is just another word for what someone “wants” or “desires” and choosing according to those desires. Biblically, a “free will” is a will that desires what is good and true, with choices that are determined by goodness and truth. That is why “the truth will set you free”.

God is so far from fair it is astounding. The fact that God would graciously and undeservedly give to us Himself… being, his life, his love, his truth, his power… is profound in every possible way. But it is certainly not “fair”. Grace never is.

True. A faith is not logic. Toward the end, people trust their logic and intellect and believe a different god. Our God is Almighty without limitation.

Are you suggesting that Psalm 33 says that when we sin it is God that has fashioned our hearts to sin? And then holds us accountable for it?

@@parkplace741 If it wasn’t for humanity’s logic or intellect, none of us would know anything about God. Why shouldn’t we the mind God gave us to reason and figure out what we believe and why we believe it?

@@brentonstanfield5198 It’s nice that God died for the “elect.” But you can’t argue that it wouldn’t have been more gracious and more loving to provide salvation for everybody. God is love after all. God cared enough to die for everybody (1 John 2:2) (1 Timothy 4:10). And He desires that none would perish, but that all would come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). The only way I see for this verse to be true and the fact that people will go to hell is that God gave us free will, and allows us to accept or reject His salvation.

//For example, Calvinism does not teach that God caused or created our sin, but that such was the direct cause of the genuine actions of the creature, first Satan and then Adam and Eve and right down to every sinner. // Does Calvinism teach that "God ordains whatever comes to pass"? And since people sin is something that comes to pass, God must have ordained such actions, and therefore God is responsible for people sinning and for the fact that they couldn't have done otherwise than what God ordained.

WCF 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……. it goes in to say although God did this , the creatures are still responsible …… Powerful mushroom salads these puritans were chomping down? The wooden pews do uncomfortable they’d agree to anything to finish the documents? …..

@@AntWoord_YT I'll cut and paste a response I left above because it directly addresses your objection... Her description of Calvinism is totally inaccurate. I gave specifics in another post I left prior to this one. For example, no actual Calvinist believes that God forces someone to do evil against their will. No actual Calvinist believes that God's predestining plan means that people are forced to do what they do. Every genuine Calvinist believes that the sin and evil that men and women do is born out of their own sinful desires and choices which they genuinely make from their own heart. Take the "sea shell" sermon by Piper No Calvinist believes that God forced those people to collect shells. They wanted to collect shells because THEY WANTED to collect shells of their own genuine heart affections and nature such that they are literally responsible for before God that wasteful choice. God's plan is not God forcing the creatures to do stuff, as if He boxed them in and they could do no other, rather, that God has the infinite wisdom to ORCHESTRATE those genuine actions of men toward His ends. As Joseph said to his brothers in Genesis, "What you intended for evil, God intended for good." Same event. Men's genuine evil desires and actions born of their own responsible wills (in this case Joseph's brother's selling their brother into slavery). However, USING those genuine actions of His brothers, God orchestrated events NOT to bring about ultimate EVIL, but for the sake of good to preserve many people alive through the saving of grain during the seven years of prosperity before the seven year famine. What she is describing ISN'T the Reformed view, but a distortion and misunderstanding of it - and might I add, a common one. People hear, "God ordains whatsoever comes to pass" and they HEAR "So, we're forced to do whatever He has ordained!" No! That is NOT what is being said What is being said, which truth arises from the Bible, is that God orchestrates His plan NOT by the forced actions of creatures, but by the genuine actions of those creatures. This reveals the staggering wisdom of God, because we think it HAS to be one or the other, either God is totally sovereign OR man is genuinely responsible. However, Calvinism, from Scripture rightly interpreted IMHO, sees that BOTH God is absolutely sovereign AND men are completely responsible for their own genuine actions - AND that only God is able to orchestrate reality so that BOTH are true. The reason actual Reformed folks say "they always get it wrong" is because they always do get it wrong, and this is one of those areas. And I can demonstrate others if you would like?

@@truthseeker5698 Nope. We say BOTH because BOTH God's full sovereignty and man's responsibility are taught in Scripture without resolving the mystery. So, the non-Reformed affirm man's responsibility and reject God's full sovereignty and the determinists affirm God's full sovereignty and reject man's sovereignty. Those two groups reject that God is able to create a universe in which both are simultaneously true, with God orchestrating His plans by means of the genuine actions of His creatures. A perfect example of this is what Joseph said to his bothers, "What you intended for evil, God intended for good." And "God causes all things to work together for good." Not that all things are good, but that God, in His sovereignty is able to orchestrate the genuine evil thoughts and actions of the creature to accomplish His purposes, which is what the Bible actually teaches. So, the Calvinist actually teaches that BOTH are true. That God is fully sovereign and man is truly responsible You claim this is "word salad" but that's because you are assuming that it MUST be one or the other (God's absolute sovereignty OR man's genuine responsibility). You don't allow for the fact that God in His infinite wisdom is able to create a universe in which both are true. Ironically, your claiming that it is "word salad" is actually the argument used by non-Trinitarians against the doctrine of the Trinity. "How can God be both one and three at the same time!" they object. That's irrational word salad, they claim. Those who reject the inspiration of the Scriptures often use the same objection. "How can every word be the inspired word of God AND that the author's of Scripture were using their own vocabulary and thoughts and concerned as they were guided by the Spirit." It mus be either the Spirit OR the human author, not both. That's word salad they would claim! You see, this mystery of God's full sovereignty and man's responsibility is not word salad, just a truth that the Bible repeatedly describes and so the Calvinist affirms both!

@@dpastor6631 The Mystery Pastor who id living with inconsistency. I’m sure you manage your finances with these same claims. Absurd. Logic 101 and and little EQ go a long way. Coherence matters. ,

Uh, on Calvinism we are saved by the work of the trinitarian God our righteousness is imputed to us on the evidence of faith in Christ.

@@brentonstanfield5198 But God's grace is only given to the pre-determined Elect...just like in Islam.

@@lesliewilliam3777 - To be clear, God’s grace is given to everyone all of the time. God gives to all men life, breath, and everything (Acts 17:24-25). But for many, it will be taken away by death. God gives and takes away. However, the grace of salvation (ie the promise of grace forever) is given to those who God chooses.

@@brentonstanfield5198 "To be clear...the grace of salvation (ie the promise of grace forever) is given to those who[sic] God chooses." Thank you for confirming my point that between Calvinism and Islam there isn't much of a difference. So according to you, God, who could choose all, refuses to choose all. How's that make sense in terms of 1 John 4:8. It really comes down to this: The Bible V what you claim.

@@lesliewilliam3777 - There are plenty of differences. Of course, Christianity all of this grace is possible in Christ. Not so in Islam. In Christianity, it is accessed through faith alone. God sees faith in Christ, and on that evidence, he declare men just. In Islam, He looks at the body of works of the person. But we can both play this game. Provisionism is no different from Mormonism because both depend on libertarian free will. On Mormonism, God has “provided a way” and all you have to do is follow that way of your own libertarian free will. So, Provisionism is just like Mormonism. See, we can both play this silly game. Meanwhile, yes, God is love. He gives love to all since He gives men all that they have. You experience His love. His love is not dependent on Him giving you or anyone else love forever.

Dead does not mean inability to accept God’s free gift of salvation.

@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 what can a dead man do?

@@Christ-is-King- A dead man can be blinded by the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4), can have his heart hardened (Exodus 9:12), and can come to his senses and return to his Father (Luke 15:32).

@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 they are dead not because of their sinful acts, but because of their sinful nature. In response to 2 Corinthians For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again, (John 12:39, NASB) "HE HAS BLINDED THEIR EYES AND HE HARDENED THEIR HEART, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES AND PERCEIVE WITH THEIR HEART, AND BE CONVERTED AND I HEAL THEM." (John 12:40, NASB)

@@Christ-is-King- Thank you for question, and for above passage. Verse 2: Dead men can walk. Dead men can indulge the desires of the flesh. Example is the prodigal son: he wasted his substance with riotous living, and the father says he was dead. What happened? He came to himself. AW Pink takes issue with equating the dead in verse 1 above to the physically dead: The physically dead cannot sin nor reject Christ. What can the dead men in Col 3 do? "For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God."

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father *through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ* Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. {1 Peter 1:2} In summary, Through sanctification is separation from the ways of the world, (living in the flesh) walking after Jesus, (in the Spirit / Obedience) and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus, is symbolic of the Atonement, cleansing our record of sin at the Mercyseat, being coverd and justified in His righteousness. It would be irrational to think that way of life is something taking place in a person before they were born and had ever lived. No! if God wanted automatons he could have created them, but what would have been the point of creating them if they were programed to love him from the start?

The question is, what did God set Paul apart for? Keep reading the text and you will see that Paul is not talking about being chosen before he was born for salvation, but for service (VS16). Paul is not declaring in VS15 how everyone is saved, that's reading something into the text that isn't there.

Why did you not make mention of the phrase "in Christ"?

@@larrybedouin2921 Calvinists don't believe sanctification begins when you are unborn (you could point out a few who have claimed so). Sanctification starts when you confess your sins ( you have an understanding of good and evil). The whole point of foreknowledge doesn't mean we are automatons. In part It means that although God is omniscient he has limited his power and hence given us free will. How we use that Free Will has consequences and that's what categorizes us to either be elect or non elect

@@alwaysredirect1780 Yes, my point was that one cannot be sanctified from the foundation of the world, niether can ones sins be covered in the blood of Jesus Christ from the foundation of the world.

I've yet to see any of them allow anyone on to reprove their emotion-egesis interpretations.

Aight, where's total depravity (and by total depravity I mean total inability to believe in the gospel-- even with the Holy Spirit's help) in the scripture?

@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 Old or New Testament?

@@ManassehJones I don't care.

@@sonicgeeksquad4g106 Gimme a name of any of the 66 books in the Bible, and or a name of a Prophet, Apostle, or even Christ Himself. You choose.

It says many are invited not everyone. And few are chosen. White wedding garments have to do with Hebrew customs. I think it’s a reference to garments made white by the blood of Christ. A blood baptism. Free will = ignorance

Word. "Calvin" is indeed their strawman, to avoid first person accountability for their own personal testimony/witness as it alighns with the Holy Writ. They can never answer in the first person, as this puts them on the hot seat.

@@ManassehJones And their boogeymen man too 🫣

@@aletheia8054 The reason why Leighton went with the acronym Pro-Vision-ism is to avoid him personally having to alighn his first person witness/testimony with the Holy Writ. That's why I always call it Leightonism.

@@ManassehJones yep.

Calvin taught God was the "author of" sin. He followed his own "undeniable" thought processes to their undeniable conclusions, but he did not let the Bible stop him from his intellect's wicked conclusion.

@@lindajohnson4204 Thats not what the westminster confession says. Im a staunch reformed and have not even read his institutes. We just share most of our beliefs direct from Scripture. You dont have the right to call non semi pelagians wicked.

@@lindajohnson4204 - Stop. Calvin did not think God was the author of sin: John Calvin: “First, it must be observed that the will of God is the cause of all things that happen in the world; and yet God is not the author of evil.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.169, emphasis mine)

@@lindajohnson4204- John Calvin: “Certain shameless and illiberal people charge us with calumny by maintaining that God is made the author of sin, if His will is made first cause of all that happens. For what man wickedly perpetrates, incited by ambition or avarice or lust or some other depraved motive, since God does it by his hand with a righteous though perhaps hidden purpose--this cannot be equated with the term sin.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.181)

So God calls all to come, but only gives some the ability to come? That is irrational...

This is only a portion of Calvinism because Calvinism does teach clearly that the very reason why they are this way, why sinners are rebelling is because God appointed them such fate from the beginning of time. So, yes, they rebel and refuse to come to God willfully but the reason why they have such nature that does not want God is because it was determined for them to have it before the world was. This makes many people reject Calvinism.

@@nikokapanen82 Her description of Calvinism is totally inaccurate. I gave specifics in another post I left prior to this one. For example, no actual Calvinist believes that God forces someone to do evil against their will. No actual Calvinist believes that God's predestining plan means that people are forced to do what they do. Every genuine Calvinist believes that the sin and evil that men and women do is born out of their own sinful desires and choices which they genuinely make from their own heart. Take the "sea shell" sermon by Piper No Calvinist believes that God forced those people to collect shells. They wanted to collect shells because THEY WANTED to collect shells of their own genuine heart affections and nature such that they are literally responsible for before God that wasteful choice. God's plan is not God forcing the creatures to do stuff, as if He boxed them in and they could do no other, rather, that God has the infinite wisdom to ORCHESTRATE those genuine actions of men toward His ends. As Joseph said to his brothers in Genesis, "What you intended for evil, God intended for good." Same event. Men's genuine evil desires and actions born of their own responsible wills (in this case Joseph's brother's selling their brother into slavery). However, USING those genuine actions of His brothers, God orchestrated events NOT to bring about ultimate EVIL, but for the sake of good to preserve many people alive through the saving of grain during the seven years of prosperity before the seven year famine. What she is describing ISN'T the Reformed view, but a distortion and misunderstanding of it - and might I add, a common one. People hear, "God ordains whatsoever comes to pass" and they HEAR "So, we're forced to do whatever He has ordained!" No! That is NOT what is being said What is being said, which truth arises from the Bible, is that God orchestrates His plan NOT by the forced actions of creatures, but by the genuine actions of those creatures. This reveals the staggering wisdom of God, because we think it HAS to be one or the other, either God is totally sovereign OR man is genuinely responsible. However, Calvinism, from Scripture rightly interpreted IMHO, sees that BOTH God is absolutely sovereign AND men are completely responsible for their own genuine actions - AND that only God is able to orchestrate reality so that BOTH are true. The reason actual Reformed folks say "they always get it wrong" is because they always do get it wrong, and this is one of those areas. And I can demonstrate others if you would like?

@@user-oz5of3rp8i Actually, the major Reformed confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith and the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith believe that all infants who die in their sin go to heaven and are covered in the blood of Christ because they have not reached an age of accountability for their sin nature. For example, from Founders Ministries (a Reformed Baptist ministry), they write this in an article on infants... "Nevertheless, the third paragraph still contains important theological assertions concerning the nature of infant salvation. For instance, infants dying in infancy are “saved by Christ.” Infant salvation is still salvation, and that exclusively by Jesus Christ the Son of God. There is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5). To suggest that any infant is delivered into eternity by any other means than by the finished work of Christ is to deny original guilt and to impugn the Gospel itself." This is why I commented that her description of Reformed theology is wrong, just as your's is. People don't actually check what they THINK Reformed folks think and teach.

@@dpastor6631 Yes, I agree with this part of Calvinism that even though it was God who determined everything to go the way things go, it does not mean that God is forcing somebody to do something against their will. The part of Calvinism I do not agree is that God sovereignly preordained almost all people not just to be born sinful, not just to die sinful but to be hated by God with infinite hatred for that and to be burned alive forever and ever. The issue is that even if people do willfully sin because they want to sin, it is also true that they have no other option but to love and desire their sin because they were born with such nature and they have no ability to desire anything else. So, even if their do sin, they are not to be blamed for their sinful nature that makes them sin.

Sigh. Whenever someone leaves or criticizes Calvinism, then it MUST be because they have never understood it or were never a Calvinist to begin with it, right? Ugh.

Please articulate specifically what she said that is misrepresenting Calvinism. Making vague accusations that "she never understood Calvinism" is incredibly unhelpful and unconvincing. If she said something that is incorrect about Calvinism, then give specifics.

@@GreatLightStudios I already had addressed a couple of the specific points in other comments I posted on this thread, so, I wasn't being vague, you just need to read those comments that were left PRIOR to this comment.

@@AntWoord_YT That's because what I said is factually true. Her description of Calvinism is totally inaccurate. I gave specifics in another post I left prior to this one, you just apparently did not read those other previous comments I left. For example, no actual Calvinist believes that God forces someone to do evil against their will. No actual Calvinist believes that God's predestining plan means that people are forced to do what they do. Every genuine Calvinist believes that the sin and evil that men and women do is born out of their own sinful desires and choices which they genuinely make from their own heart. Take the "sea shell" sermon by Piper No Calvinist believes that God forced those people to collect shells. They wanted to collect shells because THEY WANTED to collect shells of their own genuine heart affections and nature such that they are literally responsible for before God that wasteful choice. God's plan is not God forcing the creatures to do stuff, as if He boxed them in and they could do no other, rather, that God has the infinite wisdom to ORCHESTRATE those genuine actions of men toward His ends. As Joseph said to his brothers in Genesis, "What you intended for evil, God intended for good." Same event. Men's genuine evil desires and actions born of their own responsible wills (in this case Joseph's brother's selling their brother into slavery). However, USING those genuine actions of His brothers, God orchestrated events NOT to bring about ultimate EVIL, but for the sake of good to preserve many people alive through the saving of grain during the seven years of prosperity before the seven year famine. What she is describing ISN'T the Reformed view, but a distortion and misunderstanding of it - and might I add, a common one. People hear, "God ordains whatsoever comes to pass" and they HEAR "So, we're forced to do whatever He has ordained!" No! That is NOT what is being said What is being said, which truth arises from the Bible, is that God orchestrates His plan NOT by the forced actions of creatures, but by the genuine actions of those creatures. This reveals the staggering wisdom of God, because we think it HAS to be one or the other, either God is totally sovereign OR man is genuinely responsible. However, Calvinism, from Scripture rightly interpreted IMHO, sees that BOTH God is absolutely sovereign AND men are completely responsible for their own genuine actions - AND that only God is able to orchestrate reality so that BOTH are true. The reason actual Reformed folks say "they always get it wrong" is because they always do get it wrong, and this is one of those areas. And I can demonstrate others if you would like?

​@@dpastor6631​ you seem to me Tobe misrepresenting Alana yourself. She doesn't say that the couple was forced to collect shells against their will, but simply that what they would do was "already set in stone". On Calvinism, didn't God decree they would want to collect shells more than anything else?

Orthodox

Orthodox. Infants die. If they were not under condemnation then they would not earn the penalty for sin. It is this issue that has made infant baptism (which I disagree with by the way) the near universal report of the church.

Actually, the Orthodox have a different view of original sin. They do not believe in original guilt as the western (Augustinian) churches do. Also, it was not invented until the 4th century, so not Orthodox. We are all affected by Adams sin, but we do not carry his guilt. We are born in a fallen world, separated from God. The Orthodox would say we are sick and in need of a healer, thank God for His Son. Look into the teachings of the Orthodox, it may open your eyes.

@@mikeschaller9233 I didn't mean eastern orthodox. I meant is original sin biblical or not??? If eastern orthodox uphold scripture as final authority over tradition then good for them!

Original sin = Spiritual Death? Biblical or not?

In Greek it says the thinking mind is an enemy of God.

Where are your verses?

But people that go to hell is because what that man did! Because All what that man had done all of his sins and transgression! Not because single ly because god determine it!

Context kills Calvinist proof texts. "Chosen" in this case isn't referring to election or predestination unto salvation. Here's the Calvinists in the parable of the wedding feast (referred to as the remnant) "and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Matthew 22:6‭-‬7

@@tannerfrancisco8759 it’s a Bible verse not a Calvinist verse. I’m not a Calvinist Many are invited but few are chosen is the truth. The chosen are the ones with the proper wedding garment.

Alana does believe in election and predestination. Of course. It’s in the Bible.

And the idea of "no free will" is NOT saying that men do not make genuine choices but that their choices are governed by their own natures and desires and preferences. They will is not detached or "free" from their own nature and desire and preference. Rather, a genuine will acts in agreement with the direction desires by one's own preferences and nature. So, man make genuine choices, it's just that our sin nature is such that we WANT evil God doesn't force anyone to do evil, people do evil because they want to do so. Several helpful books along this line are "The Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther, "The Freedom of the Will" by Jonathan Edwards and "Willing to Believe" by R.C. Sproul. All three are rich with Scripture demonstrating what the Bible says about the will of man.

@@dpastor6631 I can read the Bible. Bondage of the will was good.

​@@dpastor6631RC Sproul and John Edwards weren't even saved. 🤦🏽‍♂️ It should be fairly clear to anyone with the Holy Spirit that these men did not have the Spirit of Christ when reading their works. Both were megalomaniacs, denied the existence of the Holy Spirit, and RC Sproul even said before he died that he had no assurance and if he was wrong about working to earn his salvation (perseverance of the saints) then he'd be going to hell. He was consumed with fear and uncertainty in his last days. John Edwards quenched revival in his church twice until he was fired, but because his idolatrous children went on to continue his legacy of heresy in their indoctrination cults they called seminaries where they taught their revisionist histories and made him the hero of the Great Awakening even though he was literally a hindrance to it.

The entire bible is God implying we have free will and commanding/asking/imploring us to choose to follow Him. I don't know how someone could be so stupid to not see that overarching theme throughout both the old and new testaments--it's the whole point of all of it to inform us so we can choose to believe. "These are written that you may believe..."

@@tannerfrancisco8759 There’s no free will in the Bible. There is human flesh will and Gods will

That is neither here nor there. However, all Christians should have their kids baptized if they take the Bible seriously at all. It's pretty clear in the Bible that the children of Christians are appropriate baptismal candidates.😉

@@signposts6189 The truth and accuracy are always here and there.

Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit) Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then received the Holy Spirit from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church? The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again) Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. Eph 1:13 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, (A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.) Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment) ============ Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says? What did Peter say below? Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text. Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage? Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13) “baptize” KJV Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.) Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5) Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant) How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist? Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ? Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant (CSB) They are physical regulations and only deal with food, drink, and various washings imposed until the time of the new order. (ESV) but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation. (ESV+) but deal only with R5food and drink and R6various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation. (Geneva) Which only stood in meates and drinkes, and diuers washings, and carnal rites, which were inioyned, vntill the time of reformation. (GW) These gifts and sacrifices were meant to be food, drink, and items used in various purification ceremonies. These ceremonies were required for the body until God would establish a new way of doing things. (KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357 (NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation. (NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established. (YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them

@@signposts6189 believing Christian children? Even those who do not know the right from the wrong? Are you including infants?

@@makedisciples8653 I sure am. They're Christian children being raised in the fear and admonition of the Lord. Are they not?

@@Dizerner - Very true. Those are just my perceptions given her own testimony. She has been very open about her prideful attitude as a Calvinist, about feeling chosen, and seeing others as outsiders. On the one hand, I am grateful she was delivered from that pride... the very pride I see in many Calvinists. I think the prideful Calvinist is in far more danger that the otherwise "humble" non-Calvinist. But having said that, I am just pointing out that I don't think it was a total escape. We are all like that in our sin. We escape overt expressions of it... but it comes out in more subtle ways.

​@@Dizerner - Obviously disputing any sense in which you think we call God evil, but peace to you as well.

​@@Dizerner Not true, For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to *all men* *Teaching us* that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, *in this present world* Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of *the great God* and our Saviour *Jesus Christ* {Titus 2:11-12}

@@oldenoughtoknowbetter6473 - It's the same word in Genesis 8:21 that is found in Ezekiel 16:22: And in all your abominations and your whorings you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, wallowing in your blood. The "wallowing in your blood" reference is a reference to Israel "wallowing in its blood at childbirth" from earlier in the chapter (see verses 4 & 5). Clearly, that same word "youth" applies to newborn infants. Which is consistent with all of the other passages I gave and the fact that infants die, and are even included in God's judgment (e.g. they are killed by God in the flood and Israel is ordered to destroy the Canaanite's infants). Indeed, the fact that children need to be TRAINED UP and often have need of using THE ROD to do so, demonstrates that they are fallen and need to be redeemed.

@@Dizerner - The goodness or evil of God is not an extrapolation on my view. It is the starting point. The fundamental assumption that God is good (Goodness itself), and therefore we can do no good without His Spirit within us, or God doing good by us or through us, is the entire point.

What is Galatians 2:18 supposed to be proving?

​@@leonardu6094The "I."

@@ManassehJones What about it? What's your point?

​@@leonardu6094She rebuilt the gospel she once left whilst trying to be justifjed by the true gospel, the faith OF Christ

Youve taken that verse out of context. If you believe that man is has no semblance of living out their own will then making a comment on youtube is meaningless.

😳

Not being satisfied doesn’t wash away all the verses pointing to Gods choosing and election. I hope she finds clarity in the scripture. The scripture is full of verses that is contrary to our flesh. Let us pray for one another and not debate but sharpen and encourage one another. I am willing on this platform to discuss and reference many Bible verses as none were presented in this video.

@@Christ-is-King-- Isn’t it astounding? I have these discussions frequently and the lack of any Scriptural sourcing in the vast majority (besides the few proof texts) is mind blowing. For example, the central tenant of their theology is libertarian free will… and NOTHING. Not a single verse to cite anywhere for what it is and how it works. Not a single one.

@@brentonstanfield5198 this is a good message. Amen ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--gfW-BaTEzY.html

That's a lot of labeling you did there.

@@awesomefacepalm yea because your not a Christian your a work based salvation heretic