Please, help me! Send that message to John Piper: Hi, John! Peace and Grace from the Lord Jesus for your life. Dear John, my name is Ciro, I am married and I live in a city by the name João Câmara, in the State of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil. I was the Christian conscience in 2019 in Campinas Grande, where you ministered the Word of the Lord. I wish I could have met in person, but it was not possible. I longed to be able to meet Billy Graham in life, unfortunately it was not possible. And, in the same way, I would like to meet you personally. This will probably not be possible, as I have no money to go to the United States. Either way, I wanted to be able to share my joy in the Lord for having the opportunity to hear his ministry that day. If possible, I would like you to send me a message from your own hand so I can keep it and show it to my children. Perhaps English was not better, because I don't know English and it was translated from the google translator. Thank you in advance and may the Lord God continue to bless you and your family.
No such thing as free will 15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification. 20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:15-23, NASB)
I grew up in a pentecostal/evangelical church. In my 30's I started reading the bible for myself, I was struck by how different Jesus was from what I was taught, and I saw the sovereignty of God and became a calvinist in my living room, reading my bible.
I'm happy you've been reading the Bible for yourself brother, but the reality is that there are many who will also say that doing the same thing actually led them AWAY from Calvinism. I'm not saying I disagree with Calvinism, and I'm not saying I agree with it, either. All I'm saying is that what you presented is irrelevant from whether or not Calvinism is actually true.
@@TheThirdApology Well, as I said, scripture was what informed my view. I didn't come on here to give arguments for calvinism. I was just stating what happened with me.
I do believe that the umbrella of God's Grace is larger than the umbrella of correct doctrine. Of course, there are limits, but if one trusts in Jesus to save them from the just punishment due to their own sin, they will be saved ... even if they are not Calvinists.
I always find it funny when people say "Calvinism" as if it was not the same doctrines taught by the Apostles and the early church. NONE of the Reformers added something that was not already written in Scripture and known by the saved "wheat/sheep" ---------
I just have a problem with your first sentence. It seems like a contradiction. if doctrine is truth, and God's grace is true, then the umbrella of God's grace is exactly the size of correct doctrine.
@SBUL Lis .. Then you SHOW them the SCRIPTURES that contradict that silly notion and you ASK them whether they will believe what some man told them of the "Word of God". ---------------- If they REJECT the Scripture for the teachings of man. Then you have seen their "fruit" and you do not continue to cast "pearls before swine". --------------------- The Bible does COMMAND us to "love" all men by preaching the True Gospel of Repentance to all men. However the Bible also COMMANDS us to (a) identify those preaching false doctrines and (b) rebuke them and (c) if they refuse to repent then EXPEL them from the church. ---------------------
No doubt this video will result in arguments and accusations in the comments section sadly. We should celebrate what unites us rather than looking to have arguments with our brothers and sisters. Christianity is much bigger than Calvin or Aminius (and Luther as well). Peace, love and hop to you all.
Yup, it's rare to see a peaceful debate on the issue. It's especially sad to read the accusations and insults that are thrown around. I get ashamed when I consider how this looks to observing unbelievers. Grace and peace to you.
Yup that's why we stick to what the Bible says. Calvin and Luther may have gotten some things right but "For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 ESV bible.com/bible/59/1co.1.11-13.ESV Jesus is our only hope. Not Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Calvin or Luther.
DND... Not if you believe what the Bible says. The Bible says teachers of false doctrines like Arminianism are showing the "fruit" of being unsaved "tares" in the church. AND the elders rare COMMANDED to rebuke these teachers of false doctrines and EXPEL them from the church if they do not repent. --------- But those are JUST the BIBLE'S rules... You are free to make-up whatever rules you want. -----------
I mean... not really, that kind of hinges on whether calvinism is true or not, because if it is then it's not up to you lol. Compatibalism is just illogical
martypython what do you mean. If it wasn’t predestined, God wouldn’t be omnipotent, yet at the same time, if we didn’t have free will, we could not love him.
@@Dah_J, I could not understand what do you mean... =>> Predestination is not the requisite of Omnipotence... God could still be Omnipotent without predestining people....
No it isnt. There is no predestination in the bible. It simply is a bad translation of προώρισεν. It means pre-Origin, not pre-destination. It means a prechosen-Beginning, not prechosen-end. God determines the times and places we all come about and have our being, So That we might each seek Him and find Him. (Acts 17:26-27) This is not a hard or shocking teaching. Second, every time election or προώρισεν is used in the bible it NEVER refers to salvation, or union with God. It ALWAYS refers to being selected as part of a Corporate Group, or for a particular Role in which you will make God's Glory known. This is why is says in Romans 11:28 "that as far as the gospel is concerned the Jews are cursed, but as far as Election is concerned they believed for the sake of the fathers." The bible teaches a free will position. The bible teaches that election and salvation are very different things. The bible teaches that the Jews are elect and that gentiles become part of that elect family through faith. The bible teaches that Jews and Gentiles who have repentant belief in Jesus as Christ, Lord and Savior have salvation- which is that you know God and the Son who he sent. (John 17:3)
We are saved by Grace alone =Sola Gratia Through Faith alone= Soli Fide In Christ Alone=Solus Christus Revealed in Scripture Alone=Sola Scriptura To the glory of God Alone= Soli Deo Gloria
“I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” (John 16: 33) NIV. Amen.
JC Bible study... how about this one? ------------------ Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent. -----------------------------
Gotta love the comments about 'just read your Bible, & enough with the debates'. If you actually do read the Bible, you discover important concepts can legitimately be seen from multiple viewpoints.
Grace was the provision of a way to accept salvation, you's are overthinking it. And taking the grace way past just provision. Whats the intelligence and beauty of a creation that you pre-determined to love you before hand?
It is by God’s Grace that He turns us into Christians, not Calvinist. If you call yourself under any other name, you need to read the Corinthian letters. “Is Christ divided?”
“I am of Paul, I am of Apollos... [I am of Calvin]” It really is missing the point. We need to keep our eyes on Jesus. Obey his Word, written and spoken. Develop intimacy with the Holy Spirit. Walk in purity and love in charity. Be zealous towards good works. His grace will guide us into all truth. How foolish and divisive to spend so much time splitting doctrinal hairs, forming camps on either side. How wise it would be to simply confess that we don’t know it all but that we have entrusted our lives to the One who does, not because He has answered every burning question, but because His presence has satisfied the deepest longing of our souls and has redeemed our lives from the kingdom of darkness. People seem to forget that we know the Lord experientially, that He’s not just the product of correct doctrine. Don’t mean to be condemning but these debates have caused so much division among us, drives me crazy. Knowledge puffs up, love edifies!
Brother word for word exactly how I see this. Even the scripture you quoted. Praise God that he has opened th eyes of His people. Ultimately I believe the day will come when God will bring ultimate unity amongst His saints. Until that glorious day we continue living by Faith in The Son of God!
That's the whole point around this aroused discussion. In thr middle of it all, they misses the point: Christ! Just look at Him, Know Him, trying to be like Him living like He did... That's sounds easy. But, i'm starting to see whats going on: the people are no willing to give up 'their on' opinion, as i saw above. "My douctrine is the right one. Because it's exactly what Bible says. See? They think they wrote the Truth in there, but no, they didn't. Yet, we can and must take what's there to live correctly. God bless us all up to the day.
Amazing video! Its like a God sent gift because ive literally been discussing this topic with one of my close friend ! Glory to God for pastor John.. so much wisdom to give !
I'm pretty much a hard line Arminianist, however Calvinists are brothers who don't preach a different gospel so it's not a doctrinal debate to spill blood over. I myself have been guilty of getting overly caught up in this debate
Jag... you are PRETENDING child. Christ either paid for the sins of "His Sheep" or He paid for the sins of all those who spend eternity in the Lake of Fire paying for their sins (again) Which is it?
Wise Virgin I buy a harmonica for my friend’s birthday and give it to him. He rejects it because he hates harmonicas. The fact that he rejected the harmonica doesn’t mean I didn’t buy it for him. Good thing we don’t have to rely on Calvinist logical fallacies and instead have God telling us in the Bible that Jesus died for the sins of all the world, not just the elect. 1 John 2:2
@@IAmisMaster .... but that is a FALSE ANALOGY because it is built upon a STRAWMAN argument that says Christ PAID for the sins of everyone ever born and (1) the Bible NEVER teaches that notion and (2) if Jesus already PAID for the sins of every man they they are PAID. Then why will most of humanity have to PAY for those (same) sins AGAIN in the eternal Lake-of-Fire? The Bible says we PAY for every idle word... it never says we PAY twice. -------------------- You are pretending the ATONEMENT did not accomplish EXACTLY what God planned (to save all of "His Sheep") so that pretense creates a STRAWMAN that is easily destroyed. ------------------------- Now try this: The Bible says God HATES some men before they are born (Jesus did not PAY for their sins) -------------------------- The Bible says God CREATES some men to be "vessels of mercy" and other men to be "vessels of destruction". (Jesus PAID for the sins of the vessels of mercy but NOT for the sins of the vessels of destruction) --------------------------- The Bible says God is the Potter and HE ALONE has the right to make out of one lump of clay a "vessel of honor" and to make out of another lump of clay "vessels of dishonor" (Jesus PAID for the sins of those made for honor and did NOT PAY for the sins of those made for dishonor) ------------------------------------------- Let me tell you a little story from John 6. In that chapter Jesus explained to His disciples that NO MAN can ever come to Him unless the Father FIRST "draws" them, and ALL MEN that the Father draws "shall come" to Him... and He shall lose NONE of His sheep. Now, when the disciples realized that Jesus was teaching salvation by ELECTION (God's word not mine) then MANY of the disciples immediately abandoned Him. -------------------------- Now the QUESTION is: Why in the world would any disciple abandon the Son of God? And the answer is simple child... they (like most men today) did not want a salvation plan where GOD must act first BEFORE they can be saved. They wanted a salvation where THEY act first... where THEY can do something to be saved... where THEY can be in control of when and where they are "indwelt"... that is delusional. ----------------------------------- www.5thKingdomofHeaven.com -------------------------------------
Wise Virgin How do you explain away 1 John 2:2? It clearly does teach Jesus died for non-Christians. It’s not a false analogy. The Bible describes salvation as a gift. Romans 6:23. You have a wrong conception of salvation. Gifts can be rejected, and if you reject what Jesus paid for, you don’t receive the benefit. Simple. Wow, you really misinterpret those verses. The disciples who left Jesus after he preached did so because of his teaching about eating his flesh. It had nothing to do with some bizarre inference to Calvinism. Non Calvinists also believe God draws people first, so you are fighting a strawman.
@@IAmisMaster ... First.... 1John 2:2 does NOT teach that Jesus died for non-Christians. ---------------------- The passage simply say the same as John 3:16... Jesus died for BOTH Jew and Gentile. Remember child... BEFORE Jesus came God was ONLY saving Jews (God only "loved" Jews) AFTER Jesus came God was saving BOTH Jew and Gentile (God "loved" both Jew and Gentile) ---------------------- Jew + Gentile = world It does NOT = everyone ever born. It ONLY equals Jew and Gentile (that is the world) ---------------------- Secondly... when you read Romans 6 then IMMEDIATELY go read Romans 9 THEN (and only then) can we have a BIBLICAL discussion about salvation or the CONTEXT of Romans 6 -------------------------------- No child... the disciples that abandoned Jesus did so because He taught NO MAN can come to Him unless the Father FIRST "draws" them. ------------------------------- They (like Roman Catholics today) had NO CONCEPT about Jesus being the "body" or the "blood" or the "living waters" or ANY NUMBER of "meat" in the Scripture... because (like you) they could not even accept the "milk" of election. ----------------------------------
The debate is important when it is handled right; in other words, when we go to the Bible to see if doctrines are true or not by searching and studying it (2 Timothy 2:15, Acts 17:11). Calvinism and Arminianism has such baggage to it due to the objections more so than the doctrines. This is the reason many Calvinists call non-Calvinists Arminians when many Christians have no clue what that title means. And many non-Calvinists jump right into the comment section and give their emotional objections about the five points without (not always, but many times) addressing the Bible verses that the points are derived from. And a quick side note, neither the Calvin, Arminius, or their followers came up with the five points of Calvinism. It was the followers of Arminius that began with five points and their was much Biblical debate for months to show whether those points were true or not. The counter points to those five points would later get an acronym TULIP, that was later coined in either the late 19th Century or early 20th Century (No one seems to know when that came about). The bottom line, the debate is actually about how we are saved. Is it of God alone or is it of God and our decision? Either view will reveal what you think of God's attributes, particularly His sovereignty (Isaiah 46:9-11, Proverbs 16:9, 21:1, Daniel 4:34-35, Acts 2:23, Romans 9, etc.), or man's sinful nature (Romans 3:9-20, 8:5-8, Ephesians 2:1-3, Jeremiah 17:9, 1 John 3:4, John 3:19-20, etc.). And either view (many times) effects the way you evangelize and defend your faith. In many ways, it is important.
Personally, I think both Calvinism and Arminianism are wrong as a whole, but the truth is in between the two extremes. The whole debate between them serves absolutely no purpose but to cause more division in the Church. Christ commanded us to follow his teachings, pass them on to others, and make disciples of all nations, not argue about who is right.
@@jayjay-bz3rr I cannot condone a systematic belief that relies upon eisegesis and mistranslations in order to prove their point. I speak of Calvinism in particular. Thus far, every Calvinist I have spoken with has done the same thing when confronted with verses that refute Limited Atonement, such as 1 John 2:2 and others. They will change the greek from what it says to claim that it implies something entirely different that cannot be supported by the context. Case in point, in 1 John 2:2, they add the phrase "of the elect" after "whole world" or claim that it is implied when nothing in the context supports such an implication. Calvinists especially do this nearly everytime they are confronted by the greek term "pas" which means "all", such as in Titus 2:11.
Hi Brother, Have you read about Arminianism? Usually people have very wrong ideas about what it teaches. Can you describe what are the points you disagree with?
Thanks John. Hearing the Words of our Lord, makes my heart relize its all Him. He keeps me. You see, I was dead , dead, dead, in my sin. He came and did it all. Its all Him.😊
C S Lewis is free with God. This issue has been resolved and explain by God's wisdom. The simplicity of answer to this is imbarrassing. I don't know why people cannot accept that we do not and cannot understand everything. This is faith. I hope this helps. Love one another.
AM.... the BIBLE says that teachers of false doctrines must be EXPELLED from the church... so WHY in the world would you pretend that we cannot see the "fruit" of false gospels - or "wolves in sheep's clothing? ---------------- Are you making up your OWN gospel as we speak? ---------------
@@onyebuekearinola482 ... What was well said? The Bible says we are to identify and EXPEL false teachers from the church because they are unsaved tares and children of Satan and sheep's in wolves clothing... but you say "well said' to the idea that it does not really matter what someone preaches. Amazing. ------------------
Joshua Theo Wise Virgin Our job is not to separate the wheat from the tares, that’s up to Jesus. We have no authority to say who makes it and who doesn’t. That attitude kinda flies in the face of the gospel. We are to love one another as Jesus loves us. We need to help correct one another but there should be no sound of superiority over one another. We are all God’s children. And to say with certainty that Lewis is “burning in hell” right now misses his life’s work. Mere Christianity was, in a way, his way to faith, how the logic and reasoning of this world ultimately made no sense without a creator. And his other works? I think they speak for themselves- especially the Narnia ones. C.S. Lewis never claimed to be THE source of knowledge of the Bible, in fact in Mere Christianity he often mentions how he feels unqualified in many matters to fully give his opinion. Just as with many people, Lewis was on a spiritual journey and on his way he tried to help as many people as he could. Ultimately I believe Jesus wants people who declare their allegiance to Him and not to other things. Based upon his writings I would have to say he was allied with Christ, even if he didn’t have a proper sense of doctrine in all matters. We will never know this side of heaven if he will actually be there but I have a tremendous amount of hope. Have a good day. 😀
As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" Jesus answered, "It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man's eyes with the mud and said to him, "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam" (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing. The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, "Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?" Some said, "It is he." Others said, "No, but he is like him." He kept saying, "I am the man." So they said to him, "Then how were your eyes opened?" He answered, "The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, 'Go to Siloam and wash.' So I went and washed and received my sight." They said to him, "Where is he?" He said, "I do not know." They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, "He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see." Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others said, "How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them. So they said again to the blind man, "What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?" He said, "He is a prophet." The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight and asked them, "Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?" His parents answered, "We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself." (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.) So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, "Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner." He answered, "Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see." They said to him, "What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?" He answered them, "I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?" And they reviled him, saying, "You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from." The man answered, "Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing." They answered him, "You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?" And they cast him out. Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" He answered, "And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?" Jesus said to him, "You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you." He said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him. Jesus said, "For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind." John 9:1-22, 24-39 ESV bible.com/bible/59/jhn.9.1-39.ESV
I try to let the text speak for itself but to break it down salvation is a work of the Lord. Works are a result of salvation not the cause as evidenced by this story.
Is foreknowledge, freewill, grace and soteriology of any importance? Yes indeed. These questions will always abound in the hearts of any true reformer. The resting place is in Christ alone, by faith alone to the glory of God alone. 🙌🏽
I don't disagree, but Calvinism is hugely philosophical as well. For example, coming to conclusions that if Christ died for someone and they went to hell then that would be their sins being paid for twice and yet having very simple Bible verses stating "Christ tasted death for every man" and then choosing to agree in favor with the philosophical conclusions instead of obvious scripture.
@@eddiesprain8243 I agree firmly with you that the doctrine of so-called Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption is unbiblical. And I agree with you also that the Calvinist argument for Limited Atonement that you refer to is far too simplistic. What the Bible says must be allowed to take precedence over reasoning. It is true that when we are trying to understand biblical teaching, reasoning forms a valid part of the process. We not only read various passages to see what they have to say, but we also use reasoning to try to draw inferences from what we read. Both these things are legitimate. However, the former is by far the more important. Because the Bible is from God, it infallibly teaches us what is true in all that is of importance for life and faith. By contrast, our ability to understand things is weak and inconsistent, and we should recognise that as a fact. So when we find that the Bible teaches something, but we can’t understand how it can be true, we should side with Scripture over our own ability to understand. There are many five-point Calvinists who have got things exactly the wrong way round in this area. They can’t understand how unlimited atonement fits with other things they believe. So what they should do is question those other things, or conclude that things fit together in a way that they can’t understand. But instead, they exalt their own ability to understand above biblical revelation, and they end up denying what the Bible teaches. What they need to do instead is lose confidence in their ability to understand, and allow Scripture to speak freely. Basically, the Bible teaches that Christ died to provide atonement for all human beings, and somehow this must fit into the grand theological scheme of things, whether or not we can understand how.
I am non denominational, and Calvinism vs Armenianism was never something I’d ever even heard of until I began to stumble across the reformed content online while studying other things. I don’t really get why everyone gets so worked up over this. My thoughts are that the gospel should be preached to everyone and we should make disciples. Whether they chose by free will or they were predestined by God is immaterial and I think not worth worrying about as long as essential doctrine is believed. HOW people are saved is not nearly as important as THAT people are saved, and Jesus only commands us to concern ourselves with THAT people are saved.
Not true. If the how didn't matter, why did the Apostle Paul comment and teach so much about God's "electing" and "choosing" and "predestining" of believers? He chose Israel. The Bible is replete with teaching on His sovereignty, and that includes His sovereignty over salvation as well.
I am a Baptist minister of the Gospel of the Grace of God. To deny the Grace of God is to deny the truth of the Cross. Not trying to defend Calvin, the truth of scriptures will do that. One who is of works for salvation has not heard the gospel of their salvation. Sad but the truth. Lord Bless
We need to share the Gospel so those that choose to believe and have eyes to see and ears to hear can be saved by Gods grace and mercy though his work on the cross. God does harden some hearts and grabs some supernaturally but that is his sovereign right to do. We need to be thankful for the salvation God has given to us freely and stop worrying about how and to whom. All the glory to God be given.
Thanks very much John wonderfully explained. 1 Corinthians 1 verse 29 - 31 ; 29 That no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God - and righteousness and sanctification and redemption - 31 that, as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the Lord."
I don't agree with Calvinism (Monergism), however, I do agree that perpetually debating Calvinism vs. Arminianism is fruitless. However, I also agree that the doctrines and theologies that we believe have great effect on us. I also agree that C.S. Lewis had a philosophy > theology manner of reasoning.
Well it's just because you're missing one important point: As R.C. Sproul said, the salvation is a Monergism (since you we're dead! Not partially, but fully dead! Ephesians 2) but after you're Saved, the Sanctification is a Sinergism between you (with a new nature, a renewed mind and a will that's binded to Christ!!) And The Holy Spirit that does The Work in YOU! ANY OTHER doctrine is understandable, just not Biblical
@@marius-9333 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. ~1 Corinthians 5:22 (ESV) Christ died for all of Adam's dead race, not just a limited fraction of Adam's race. This is biblical restoration of free will by prevenient grace; inclusivist (universally accessible), synergistic salvation.
@@DownwardsRising ok, let's play along then: So, you're saying that for those who die and went to hell Jesus's Sacrifice was unable to save them? Was inefficient for them? So Jesus's death for them was in vain? That's what you're saying?
@@marius-9333 Eternal hell is the second death, not the first. How can there be a second death if there is not a second life? Jesus' sacrifice gives second life to all, and is able to save everyone from the second death, not just a few, as claimed by "limited atonement." Nevertheless, it also sets in front of all the choice of death and life. Let us choose life!
I am neither a Calvinist or an Arminian. My God neither controls every aspect of a person's life down to the minute details nor does He sit back on high, disinterested in His creation as we duke it out amongst ourselves. My God is a living God that interacts with His creation, engaging in relationships with His people as they walk through life together.
At the heart of this challenge is God’s sovereignty!! Both sides recognize the fact that He (God) is the essence of reality, thus, sovereign over all that He has created, however, differ on a perception on how that reality is displayed and what that looks like. Both sides believe they are right, and they celebrate that perception, all the while looking to the other side of the church aisle wondering how they could ever disagree. At which point God looks upon His people! What’s His perspective and what is His thoughts?
It is not calvinism or Armenianism or provisionism or right theology but the GRACE OF GOD that saves us. Our conversion of being born again is what saves us. Ordo Salutis is the contention and the debate.
4 ปีที่แล้ว +8
It’s alllllll of God x God calls, God awakens, God provides, God effects and God secures.
Im only a year young in the Lord and really not sure about a lot of things but when i read stuff like your comment there it makes me spontaneously shout "Praise the Lord!"
@@tonyt5218 Hello brother Robert! Your message is encouraging! Glad to know God has opened your spiritual eyes to believe in Him. Be confident that His Spirit will faithfully teach u into all truth! God bless u!!!
4 ปีที่แล้ว +2
@Tony T 🙌 Praise the Lord, saved wretches like us ))) Blessed Brother Blessed ) th-cam.com/video/dk5s1ai5JAk/w-d-xo.html
Short answer to why I am not a Calvinist: 1 Corinthians 1:10 "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" To all those who call themselves Calvinists I would echo Paul's question, Was Calvin crucified for you? If anyone thinks this approach is frivolous I would reply two things: 1) that I also have a long answer, covering the many unbiblical aspects of Calvinistic doctrine. And 2). I have personally experienced the hurtful divisive effects of a prideful loyalty to Calvin that eclipsed a common fellowship in Christ. There is an individual, a brother in Christ, who has severed all communication with me because he could not convert me to Calvinism. We had discussed various aspects of "tulip theology" but our last communication was a conversation in which I brought up Calvin's involvement in the execution of Servetus. My friend angrily defended Calvin even though one of the "heresies" for which Servetus was burned at the stake was opposition to infant baptism, a charge for which I would be guilty and subject to execution if i had lived in Calvin's Geneva. Historian Bernard Cottret summarizes Calvin's argument in a syllogism based on a lost letter: "Socrates is a man, and therefore mortal; Servetus is a heretic, and therefore combustible." Cottret also cites a letter from John Calvin on Servetus that says: "One should not be content with simply killing such people, but should burn them cruelly." I forget who it was that asked, "How could a follower of Christ the Lamb act like such a cruel and ravenous lion?" P.S. I'm not an Arminian either.
it's funny how narrow minded we are...both predestination/election/ and free will among others are clearly stated in the Bible... it just shows how carnal we religious people really are,each looking at the opposite side of the same coin
It's both. No one knows exactly how salvation works. To claim they know the formula for how God works in people's lives and how salvation is found is not correct. Neither Calvinism nor Arminianism is the right answer. They are simply two different human understandings of a thing so huge and mysterious that there can't be a full answer too for our finite minds
Such statements sounds good and touchy, but ultimately just useless tripe to be honest... Just because we cannot fully comprehend a doctrine does not mean that we cannot rule out something that clearly contradicts it as clearly wrong or unbiblical... In other words, an error is an error and not simply "human understandings". You would not say the same thing regarding Unitarianism and trinitarianism for example... although certainly one cannot fully comprehend the trinity.
@@kb27787 I start with this. All you're about to read comes from a man who wasted years telling people off, correcting their ideas of God, and "always being right". I'm thankful God has humbled me so greatly and also given me amazing people to talk to and the life changing ministries I've been allowed to be apart of that have deeply shaped my understanding of Him. that's fine if you feel that way. But my "useless tripe" came from 14 years of prayer, reading the Word/other sources, and sitting and talking with Theologians and professors of theology. Also came from running a food bank, working with the homeless, and doing years of ministry. This was not a flippant thought I made up in order to appease myself. God cares far more about people than he does their theology. Someone with weak or bad theology will go to heaven with everyone else because they proclaim Jesus Christ at Lord. Theological fights and arguments are not fruit of the Holy Spirit and do not reflect the character of Jesus. This is not touchy anything. It takes far more energy to sit and engage woth those you disagree with than to simply tell them that they are wrong. My experience has been that what each person needs to understand about God is given to them through the Spirit over many years of walking. Patients and kindness will go much further than picking apart their theology.
Kyron... no child. It is NOT true that "nobody knows how salvation works" and it's "both" Calvinism and Arminianism... being a little "lukewarm" there? ---------------
@@tobiassanders3831 no child. It is NOT true that "nobody knows how salvation works" and it's "both" Calvinism and Arminianism... being a little "lukewarm" there?
It's so funny. I came to an understanding of the gospel that ended up being the same as the five points of Calvinism, but without Calvin. It just seemed to be what the Bible was teaching. The when I came across Calvinism I thought that it was just an exposition on how one gets saved that I was surprised anyone would have argued differently. It just seemed so necessary and obvious to me that I could not understand why anyone would disagree with it. Later, I learned that others did not feel this way. I am still surprised at that to this day.
Same. It's not about Calvin. It's about Christ. So many forget that when it comes to this subject and it's because it puts the merit of God's plan for their salvation on Christ, not them. Humanity is prideful and selfish and arrogant wretches! Without God, the choice would have never been good coming from us because it would have been a decision made based upon our desire within our pride and selfishness and arrogant wretchedness.
Same, for me too. I grew up in a church that rarely taught what the Bible said (expository preaching) then when I got old enough to read the Bible and more importantly, think for myself, I could see the sovereignty of God on every page. When I began to ask questions I was told I was wrong, but I believed in what the Bible said (illuminated by the Holy Spirit) more than in the conventional human wisdom of fallen man. For years I had to remain a closet Calvinist, until one day I found Desiring God and the ministry of John Piper. It was the first time I KNEW I wasn't crazy, that there were other people out there who saw what I saw in the Bible, going back at least several hundred years, and I knew what it was called for the very first time, namely Calvinism. Since then I have found good Biblical teachers, mentors, and a local church that will help build up my faith rather in the Lord. Without finding other like minded believers and the online ministry of John Piper and others, I probably wouldn't be saved and where I am today. Praise the Lord for his grace in saving a sinner like me!!
Well I found myself searching out these topics because of this train of thought. 2 Cor 5:15 "And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again." So I think, or maybe the devil in my ear asks, then why aren't all saved? Because you have to believe to be saved I say. then........... John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." and......... Romans 8:29 "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren." The eventual conclusion to all this back and forth thinking is that some are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction and others are vessels of mercy, prepared for glory! Prepared for glory? ARE YOU JOKING! Prepared for Glory? ME ??? So because of all this thinking I've been doing I've thought a lot about when it was that I believed. When did God every call to my heart? It wasn't when my father ran us to the church to get baptized because he was fairly sure the rapture was about to take place. I was 12. I guess he figured better safe than sorry. And no, we don't think we are saved because we got dunked. Myself and sister sat with the pastor of the church who asked us all the questions, and made sure we understood what it was we were doing. And we did. But that's not when I believed. I believed when I was 8. Riding in my fathers truck he had a preacher on the radio talking about heaven. Talking about Jesus Christ, and describing heaven. I'd never heard something like that before. See I've worked this back because if it is God who calls to the heart, then He did to mine that day. My reaction was one of awe, and desire, to be there right then, right that very second that's what I wanted. And that's my desire still. I heard this somewhere. Maybe Piper said it, I don't remember, but it sounded right. But this guy said salvation is a door. A person stands on one side and it says, " whosoever will, let him come ". And if a person does, and they walk through that door, on the back side it says "chosen before the foundation of the world".
the correct answer is no.period.turn the page.all it does is it divides the church with endless arguments.I struggled with this for 10-15 years ,trust me it's an other religious rabbit hole to chase down and find nothing at the end.both party has a point.I believe in both....let's move on
In discussing the differences between the two doctrines it reminds me of the problems physicists encounter with reconciling RELATIVITY and QUANTUM MECHANICS. Their mathematics appear to contradict each other yet BOTH are correct! The solution lies in keeping each in its respective context .RELATIVITY applies to bodies in strong gravitational fields, and with velocities approaching the speed of light; it is deterministic in nature and predictable. QUANTUM MECHANICS on the other hand, governs the very small (sub-atomic) and puts the “OBSERVER” at the center of what is being measured; it is probabilistic in nature and it can only be measured by the law of averages. In the same way CALVINISM appears to side with the deterministic predestination leaving no room for free will; whereas ARMINIANISM puts God as the frame work, but mans free will is center stage. In my own salvation experience I came to realize there is a sort of mixture of both. When I walked down the isle in Oct of 1991 and received Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, I was told by everyone in my congregation that I was saved, Holy Spirit filled, and Born Again. I was told that I should accept that by faith. Coming from a heavy scientific background I was skeptical nonetheless. I didn’t feel any different than I did before, I still felt the urges to sin just like I did before, the only difference is now I knew what I was doing wrong. I kept thinking to myself that there has got to be more to this salvation business than just saying a little prayer; I needed CERTAINTY; I was going to make it my sole purpose in life to find the answer to this utterly important question, after all, you only get ONCE CHANCE at this; once you’re dead you can’t come back to try again. I made up my mind that I was not going to trust my soul to any man and have them digest the Bible for me, just like I had made it my passion to seek out the truth via science, I was now going to put science aside and dive into the scriptures with the same passion and zeal! I wasn’t much for reading the Bible so what I did was I purchased the King James Bible on CD; that way all the wasted time I spent on the road commuting back and forth to work would be used wisely into hearing the Word. So as the story goes it was an hour drive to work, an hour I spent in my car eating lunch out of a small cooler I brought to work, and an hour drive home; that was 3 hours of Word a day and 15 hours of Word a week; that’s a lot of Word!! In three years of this pattern I accumulated not only scores and scores of scriptures memorized, but also ENTIRE CHAPTERS memorized verbatim word for word! I had a lot of scriptures in my head but was still blind as a bat, hence the scripture: “But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Matthew 6:23) It was not till one Saturday morning on March 25, 1995 while alone on the beach in my car listening to integrity Hosana worship music, reading God’s Word, and loving God with all my MIND, HEART, SOUL, and STRENGTH, that the God of the universe took mercy on me and poured out his Spirit into me opening my eyes and revealing his TRUTH. It was the most unimaginably amazing, and frightening thing I had ever experienced. I had always read the Bible as a 3rd person, in other words, this apostle is writing to this other apostle, this scripture doesn’t apply to me; for the first time since I first began getting into the scriptures did I come to the realization that there was no 3rd person; the Bible had become 3-D with the words alive and coming out of the pages and speaking directly to ME! Every scripture every parable I didn’t seem to quite understand was as plain as if I was reading a children’s book! Now the reason I decided to write this long post is because I cannot stress enough the importance of seeking God through his word on your own. Man will lie to you, God won’t. Jesus promised his disciples: “Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8: 31-32) Jesus and his Word are ONE AND THE SAME: If A=B and B=C then A=C A= God the father B=Jesus C= The Word If GOD=JESUS, and JESUS=WORD, then GOD=WORD “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD”. (John 1:1) But guess what… I found out that morning the WORD is also the HOLY SPIRIT!! “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the WORDS that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and they are life.” (John 6:63) “And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the SPIRIT, which is the WORD OF GOD”. (Ephesians 6:17) One must be BORN AGAIN OF HIS WORD!!! “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the WORD OF GOD, which liveth and abideth for ever.” (1 Peter 1:23) That would make the equation for God: GOD = WORDSPIRIT or G=WS My background in science would take me the rest of the way leading me to the revelation that God’s equation is G= WS2 (squared) To GOD be all the glory!!! God bless!! bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000247219/From-Darkness-into-Light.aspx
My reflections are similar with Evon, except for the God equation, which is likely off by unmeasurable magnitudes. God is doing and being more than we can fathom.
"For no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him to me, and at the Last Day I will cause all such to rise again from the dead." - John 6:44. This doesn't settle this fruitless debate, BUT it does tell me that I owe every bit of my faith and subsequent salvation to God and God alone. My sin is my sin. He is not the author of sin, but of salvation. I am no robot, but He does for me what I could never do myself.
If Calvinistic predestination and determinism is true, then you were predestined to believe that way, and so were those who disagree with you. So then no, it's not important if it's true. If it is false, then it's a big deal since it distorts God's character.
No, whatever is true is also important, because the Father seeks for us to worship Him in Spirit and in truth. I need to study the Bible, the whole Bible, and worship God as He reveals Himself to be. Not the God in my fallen mind. That is idolatry. So that doesn't settle the question of which is true, but whatever is true is of primary importance.
@@DaleBoyce2012, Calvinism is NOT true because it is a mixture of 'Biblical Truth and Man-Made Lies'... For instance This STATEMENT of John Calvin is a lie: ''God arranges all things by His sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to Glorify Him by their destruction.'' by John Calvin =>>>> It is also a lie that the elect should be regenerated first, before they can answer the call of God and believe in Jesus...
Here’s how to sum up this argument. Will there be non Calvinist believers in Heaven? Yes. Given that point alone, it isn’t an essential doctrine and can be argued to be more devisive than anything.
Reminds me of a story I heard once about a man who went to heaven. St Peter was giving him a tour of all the mansions, the Streets of Gold, the Pearly Gates, and even showed him where various people congregated according to their denomination in life. When St Peter took him past a dark closed off street, the man asked who was down there. St Peter replied, "This is where we keep the Calvinists. They think they're the only ones up here."
Calvin cops the flak but Arminianism was condemned at the Canons of Dort which predates his writing and also even earlier at the council of Carthage in the 4/5th century, Pelagius was condemend as a heretic by teaching that man's will wasn't totally in bondage to sin, he could choose good and evil. Arminianism is just the same old heresy rising it's ugly head over and over. Man is dead in sin and trespass. Dead people don't choose.
The debate matters because it affects how people see God. Calvinist predestinarianism portrays God divinely foreordaining evil things to happen and selecting only some people to believe 'out of his mere good pleasure' (to use the Shorter Westminster Catechism's phrase) despite having the power to save all. What Calvinists frequently miss in railing at Arminians is that Arminian theology is not focussed on free will but instead on the goodness of God, who offers prevenient grace to all. Sometimes, too, it's a matter of scriptural interpretation. Take for example Ephesians ch1v4-6 - it's sometimes rendered as 'God chose us to be in Christ'. More correctly it's 'God chose us in Christ' - as in, God chose Christ, and us by extension if we are in Christ - 'to be holy and blameless in his sight' - being holy and blameless is what God has chosen for us who believe, and so the verse is not necessarily a proof-text for predestined belief. John Lennox's 'Determined to Believe' is worth reading for more information, along with anything by Roger Olson.
Last point of Calvin....”burn him at stake... off with his head...”? This was a stain on Calvins record. As Christians we can never force our doctrine on people with the use of brutal violent tactics. We are called to peace.
Saanichton, your comment commits the logical fallacy of irrelevant thesis. In other words, the Calvinism-Arminian debate is solely about Biblical doctrine. We need to search and study the scriptures to see if it is true (2 Timothy 2:15, Acts 17:11). But instead of searching the scripture, many debate the character of John Calvin as if he wrote the Bible. The character of John Calvin is irrelevant to the doctrines of the Bible because even the man after God's own heart was a murderer, liar, adulterer, and covetous (2 Samuel 11). It's amazing that we negate the Christian faith of men in the past based on what we think they did while validating our own faith ignoring the many sins we don't even think of or many times repent of.
@@pateunuchity884 I know, get your facts straight! He suggested that perhaps a beheading should replace a burning. No he did not light the match.... I did not say he did.
PSA that these great theologians are not providing 'doctrines of men' that Paul warned against. They are sincerely Christian, trying to connect the dots of Scripture and live as if all of it were true. This is no "I'm with Paul" or "I'm with Apollos" Corinthian infighting. No one is competing with Scripture, they are all attempting to exegete it. But we come to different conclusions. Some of us are going to be more right and wrong than others in the end. We're meant to be like the Bereans, searching the Scriptures daily for truth. This is just an issue you do have to deal with as you read your Bible, and you're lucky to have a wealth of resources from God's historical church to help you come to conclusions and consider arguments you hadn't conceived of before. The important thing is not to go further than what Scripture teaches, but also to go far enough. If you believe Scripture is God's word, you believe that God speaks clearly through it. You may be in a privileged position where you get to just avoid these questions and say "nobody's right" without any honest grappling with what different theologians have had to say. Ministers can't do that and you probably shouldn't either. It's a 21st century secular inclination that makes you want to do that, not a Biblical one.
I’m not a “calvinist” or “Arminian”, i’m a Christian. The desperate and sad attempt to understand everything that comes with being a Christian is destructive to the wider church. God has given us the answers! He has given us salvation! The idea that men can understand something as complex God is ridiculous.
1 John 2:2. Connect the dots of 1 Tim. 2:4 and Ephesians 1:9-11. Then connect the dots of Philippians 2:9-11 to Romans 10:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 12:3. Also 1 Tim. 4:10-11. Colossians 1:15-20. 1 Corinthians 15:20-28 Romans 5:17-18, 11:32-36. John 12:32
You are right on. These guys think they know everything and can delete scriptures that go against what they teach. 1 John 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. Calvinism and arminianism cause division for no good reason. Every preacher would be wise to say what you just said. But there are six words every preacher hates to say. I don't know. I was wrong.
@@sonnymustarseed7034??? Connect what dots? How about you read the Bible in full context and let the Bible interpret itself instead of letting a man tell you what Scripture says? That is why all you have are proof texts and you have no idea what the context of those verses are. I bet (like most of all Calvinists) that you don't even know what the Gospel is. And you claim to be a Christian... you are not. You are in a whole separate religion called Calvinism. You use the same Scriptures but you redefine words and twist verses out of context and meaning to submit to your false doctrines. It is sick. Repent (which means to acknowledge your sin and turn from it)... by the way God wills that all men repent, and believe in the Biblical Jesus... you know, the one who died for all men, especially those that believe!
@@eiontactics9056 I hope you do understand that salvation is NOT based on a theological view point of the word. You’ll find that nowhere in scripture. If God made having perfect doctrine one of the necessities to be saved then we’d all be damned including you. Chances are we all have some false doctrine somewhere in our theology. Humble yourself brother or sister
@@emilianoking9400 The issue is, Calvinism just isn't slightly theological differences. It is an entirely different Gospel that preaches a different Jesus and God. So much so, it is a whole different religion, like Mormonism. We don't go around calling Mormons brothers or sisters, do we? The only issue with Calvinism, is that they don't have their own dedicated Church. Like "Church of Calvinism" or something. They go around in our communities and churches, and people who are ignorant on what Calvinism is, falsely validate them by calling them "brothers" or "sisters".
No one can try hard enough to be saved... for man it is impossible, but for God all things are possible... its all about God and His will.... it has nothing to do with our puny meaningless sinful will..... We have a will but it is far from free..... we go from being enslaved to sin to being slaves of righteousness.... our prideful nature hates that we do not have the ability to assert our "free" will.... that we do not have any control of our salvation.... that we have to leave it in God's hands and His ultimate control for our salvation..... HOWEVER, we want to leave it in God's hands.... because if it wasn't up to God to save us completely because of HIS WILL, then NOBODY would be saved.... you do not want free will..... if we had free will NOBODY would choose salvation!
This is the hardest pill to swallow in the christian community. Election is hated more then eternal security. They do not believe because they are not God's sheep.
Several problems with this one. Whoever provided the Lewis quote...why "Arminianism"? Lewis didn't call it that. How about letting him speak for himself? He described it just fine without need of a label. Dr. Piper; I am COMPLETELY confused by your assessment of Lewis and his approach to this topic. You assert that you have ‘no idea how’ he exegeted the text but that you presume he did. Then that ‘we have to guess’ at how he read his Bible. Even though you ‘presume’ he did exegete the text, you then boldly proclaim that he views the topic philosophically. Do you presume he did expeditious study of his Bible AND he views the topic philosophically…or are you saying you assume he didn’t do his studies ‘properly’ therefore it was philosophical? The only way you have left me to read this is that, since he doesn’t agree with you, he didn’t study properly and therefore views it philosophically. Feel free to correct me. You go on to explain the Biblical basis for your understanding of the soteriological process asserting that Lewis didn’t see the importance of it. Where in that quote does he say that? He simply says that he will not argue it. You dismiss his timelessness reasoning for not arguing the soteriological process ‘philosophy’ but could it be that what he is saying is that your soteriological process is the philosophy and the timelessness of God is DOCTRINE? The only reason you have to cram God into time is to make your process ‘theology’, because without doing so your ‘theology’ loses all of its proof texts and becomes ‘philosophy’. That applies to both sides of the soteriologic debate and THAT is what Lewis is talking about. Not that it isn’t an important question, just an unanswerable one so why be steeped in it? Why let it divide us and cause strife among the brethren? Your PRE, PRE, yes, PRE destined concern is entirely PREsupposition. There IS a reason God uses tensed verbiage in scripture but the only requirement for that reason to apply to soteriology as it relates to God is for your understanding of it to be true. Nothing in any of what you have said requires God to exist in time outside of your need for him to in order to explain your understanding of the salvation process. C.S. Lewis understood the Biblical Doctrine that God transcends time. That isn’t to say anyone (including Lewis) understands what that ‘looks’ like. He just accepted the fact that God exists outside of time and recognized that there was absolutely NO need to bring God into time except to give our minds something to rest on when attempting to understand the incomprehensible.
I’m with Lewis on the issue. Although I see where Piper is coming from, there is no proof of each camp, not without knowing what’s in the Book of Life to determine it, then I think it just an endless debate.
Genesis 2:16 NIV "And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are FREE to eat from any tree in the garden;" What happened to this "FREE" that God spoke about? Why did Adam and Eve sin yet they were not "FREE"?
Except from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. Age of Innocence. Man fell, he chose evil over obedience to God's clear warning. Even in a perfect environment they chose to disobey God. Did He vaporize them? No! He knew the plans He had for them. Jesus dying in our place, for our sins. Praise His holy Name!!!
The debate is overblown when it interferes with following Christ. If the truth could be known I have little doubt the honest people on both sides would have figured it out already. - And I dare say that any honest person will admit there is true merit to each school of thought....Note please: that we all do well to remember Jesus's words John 5:39 -40 "You examine the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those very Scriptures that testify about Me; 40 and yet you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life." .....Let's keep our passion for the true Gospel, our zeal for Jesus, our Love and time spent for His purposes....doing His will,... for His Glory, and yes for our true benefit..... Love to all.
John Piper is right to say that differences between Calvinism and Arminianism are important. And he is also right to say that matters of time don't negate these differences. But there is a huge problem here, which is the implied assumption that Calvinism and Arminianism are the only two options for an evangelical. So many evangelicals seem to have the idea that, on the issue of the relationship between God's sovereignty and human choices regarding salvation, an evangelical will either be a Calvinist, an Arminian, or will be undecided. This is completely wrong, and it misses not just my favourite system on this issue - Molinism - but my second favourite system on this issue as well - Lutheranism! If the issue of how God's choices and human choices fit together is assumed to be a battle between Calvinism and Arminianism, the whole starting point for examining this issue is wrong. It massively over-simplifies the options.
There shouldn't be "options" when it comes to how God interacts with his people. There is ONE true God who has ONE unchanging word. Yes we can never fully understand him, but that doesn't mean we just pick different "options" of how we think God works and call all the options equal. God calls us to know him and understand him as best as we can. We need to do dedicate ourselves to understand him by his word and his word alone. If we believe that there is one truth, then there should only be one truthful interpretation.
@@SteveTheWizard You are absolutely right that there is one true God who has one unchanging word, and that there is one truthful interpretation. And you are clearly implying too that when theological systems contradict each other, they can't both be right, and that is, of course, absolutely right too. But you have misunderstood what I meant by 'options', and to be fair to you I think I could have expressed myself better. When I referred to options, I was simply referring to the point in time before a Christian begins to study the issue of how God's choosing us to be saved and our choosing to be saved fit together. At that point, before examining this issue, it is a mistake to rule out anything without giving it a hearing. There are many evangelicals who start to examine this issue with an assumption that either Calvinism or Arminianism must be correct. So they start their investigation by allowing only two potential options for what is true. And this is a big mistake. I wasn't for a moment suggesting that each theological system is equal or that there are optional ways of interpreting the Bible. There is one truth, and we should seek it. But it is wrong to start with an assumption that either Calvinism or Arminianism must be correct. That is all I meant. But it is a big point, because it is extremely common for evangelicals to make this wrong assumption. See, for example, the title of this video, which seems to suggest that the relevant theological systems in this debate are Calvinism and Arminianism, but there are other systems that are relevant too.
@@maxaplin4204 That makes a lot more sense then, but what is most paramount is that we stick to the theology of the Bible and not a theological system. When I began heavily studying the scriptures I pretty much came to the conclusion of Calvanism before I fully understood what Calvanism was. In fact someone called me one when I was having a discussion about theology even though I never identified as one. That is why we need to make sure we stick to the scriptures when we discuss theology and not rely to heavily on other human interpretations of the scriptures.
@@SteveTheWizard I agree with you, and I can also relate a bit. But if someone would say the exact same thing as you, but found himself embracing or leaning more towards Arminianism instead. How would you interpret that?
@@dist221 Well I would sit down and discuss the scriptures that support Calvinism and the doctrines there in. God calls us to lovingly preach the truth to those in the world. The important thing to remember though is that we are only called to witness, not called to convince. If I do my best to explain the doctrines in the Bible and the other person still doesn't believe/agree with me, then in the sight of God I have done as I have been commanded.
Wrong here John. The difference between you and Lewis isn't a matter of taking biblical sentences seriously. It's to do with exegetical understanding, or how one interprets Calvinisms prooftexts. I side with Lewis. Calvinism is a manichean Gnostic interpretation of the scriptures. The fact that Arminians and Calvinists believe different fundamental truths about God's character should be enough to refute Calvinism, or did God think it was funny to ordain his children to believe different things?? The reason people believe differently is due to freewill, free will to study exegetical methods and to decide on which is the most coherent understanding of the text.
The question is this : is false doctrine OK? I believe Calvin had it right. We are responsible and unable. God is able. It is extremely comforting to me. God will not loose me.
For what it's worth to any Calvinist who reads this: Your theology teaches that we all are sinners deserving of God's wrath. It also teaches that God predestined the elect and the non-elect BEFORE the foundation of the world and BEFORE anyone had done any good or bad. So which is it? Are we guilty sinners deserving of God's wrath or wasn't that really already settled before the foundation of the earth when we were all in fact innocent and had not yet done any good or bad? And don't give me the old potter and clay analogy from Paul in Romans as an excuse to skate by this. These are the kinds of rabbit holes that Calvinism will take you down. I advise you to accept what the Bible says and not what someone like Piper tells you it teaches.
@Jeremy Noel Yes, except that I think you missed my point which is that if God elected certain individuals for salvation and damned the others then it was done before anyone had done anything or had even been born. Calvinists love to point out that none of us deserve God's saving grace because we're sinners...but God made His choice, according to them, before sinners had even sinned or were even created. So in Calvinism you have God damning people to Hell and saving others who, by virtue of not having been created yet, are innocent of anything and everything. Do you understand?
@@TrueLifeAdventures I understand the point you're trying to make, but you're question is nonsensical. You're trying to say that if God elects some to salvation, then, by necessary consequence they are no longer sinners. That's a straw man argument. It's not what any Calvinist would argue. Further, Jesus is the Lamb slain BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF earth. How can this be if Adam hadn't even been created, nor the earth? So that bankrupts your premise of sinlessness before you even start. The "free will" of Adam must be held in tension with this truth. Was the Christ to come, plan A or plan B? The Calvinist is consistent to point out that God elects some for salvation. He does not elect or predestine anyone to damnation. The WAGES of sin is death. The sinner earns damnation for their own actions, their own sin. God is just, for given the sinner what they earned. He's under no obligation to give grace to anyone. God does not elect them to sin or force them to sin. Jesus taught, he who sins is a slave to sin. IE the sin nature or sin desire or man's will to sin. All of which is to disobey God.
@@toddcote4904 I'm not quite sure what it is you're trying to say. Firstly, if God predestined some for salvation before anyone was even created then that decision was not based on them having sinned against Him. They weren't even here to sin. Which also means that God chose not to elect certain people for salvation before they had even sinned and so they are reprobate regardless. Secondly, most translations do not say "...the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world..." but rather "...slain from the foundation of the world." Thirdly, we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God. You become elect through faith in Christ Jesus. Lastly, the Westminster Confession states that EVERYTHING that comes to pass is by decree of God. If that's true, then the sin that people commit can be blamed on God and that's not a good position to take...which many Calvinists do along with the others I mentioned.
Bravo! That was some some world class, grade A sophistry! Calvinism is as phony as a $3 bill & wholly unscriptural. Imagine a loving God who created beings who will be condemned to eternal destruction with no choice of their own in the matter! This is absurd and flies in the face of everything Jesus revealed to mankind about his Father.
One danger I see with Calvinism is the “once saved always saved” mentality. So I can choose to sin with adultery, but have in the back of my mind that I am secure in Christ and that he paid for my sin. Maybe that is why there is so much remarriage adultery in the church today. What passages we can’t ignore are ones like, those who’s names have been blotted out of the Lambs book of life.... work out your salvation with fear and trembling, endure to the end, the 10 virgins all invited, but only 5 made it. David Pawson, says no one can pluck us out of Gods hand, except ourselves. We are not saved until we arrive there with our new bodies. Period. So many will go to hell brainwashed with Calvinism thinking once saved always saved, even as they let sin abound with the cheap grace doctrine. What are they told? ...depart from Me workers of lawlessness, I never knew you. So these may have been believers, but never truly repented from sin nor were they sanctified.
Amen. I can't stand preachers on TH-cam preaching the 'Once saved always saved messages' not only is it a completely incorrect interpretation of the Bible, but it's leading people astray and then giving them a false safety net. Pray for the people ingesting these poised messages. I'm not saying they don't have good intentions, but they're surely decieved. -God Bless
But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified. 1 cor 9:27 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire Mathw 7 :19 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. 22 Consider therefore the kindness(A) and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue(B) in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.(C) Romans 11:21,22 I beleive it can be lost......coz the attribute of God in OT and NT is not changing Only 2 who started of from Egypt made it to canan....God weights hearts.... That attribute is not changing... 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Or do you not know that the unrighteous[a] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,[b] 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God
Saanichton Ministries If we can loose our salvation one that was given to us as a gift from God with promises of the stamp of the Holy Spirit,sanctification and hope for the eternal life in the finished work of Jesus... then we cannot trust God in ANYTHING. This God who cannot be trusted isn’t faithful and that is Not YAHWEH!...
I sometimes reflect on this: When we get to glory it is likely that most believers there will be Chinese, and they won’t ever have heard of most of the theologians we discuss and get preoccupied with.
As a non Calvinist who has watched friends and family members convert to Calvinism, the only thing I've noticed change in their lives is an increase in arrogance and an increase in antagonistic debate. Nothing else has changed.
Everyone goes through that stage when we learn truth and we want to win arguments and it makes us prideful. It means they haven’t really understood the doctrines of grace rightly. But I went through that phase also, but by the grace of God, as I have matured in the faith, the Lord has humbled me. When someone understands the doctrines of grace in their heart, not just their head, it makes us the most humble.
@@hollybooth6946 The Father gave all authority to the Son. If you have to have faith in the Son BEFORE you can get to the Father, how can Calvinism not be another Gospel? *_SCRIPTURE:_* John 14:6 KJV Jesus saith unto him, … *_no man cometh unto the Father, but by me._* *_CALVINISM:_* John 14:6 KJV Jesus saith unto him: … no man cometh unto the -Father- Son, but by -me- the Father.
@Ben Jones Already took it up with Him in His Scripture. No one can know the Father, unless they come through the Son, never the opposite way: Ephesians 1:5 NASB95 He predestined us to adoption as sons *_through Jesus Christ to Himself_* according to the kind intention of His will, Matthew 11:27 KJV All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; *_neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him._*
Respectfully this argument seems to paint calvinists with the broadest of brushes. I certainly am sorry that they seem that way and maybe they are. However, this is like saying every doctor is rude because I met six of them and they were all rude. Or this is like saying all teachers are terrible at their jobs because I didn’t like the ones I had. There is no truth in this it’s just simply your experience with like seven or eight people who are individuals.
Luke 15:17-24 17And when HE CAME TO HIMSELF, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! 18I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, 19And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants. 20And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. 21And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son. 22But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: 23And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: 24For this my son WAS DEAD, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry. So much for being dead and unable to do anything.
Calvinism is most certainly biblical. It's just that it lays out some doctrines that aren't always easy for us in our fallenness to come to terms with.
@@kerriwilson7732 It would be odd to say that, but that's not what I said. Do you perfectly understand all of the teachings of the Bible? Do you perfectly accept w/o hesitation all the "tough teachings" of the Bible?
I'm not really a fan of having labels to the two sides. It's like making teams that naturally compete against each other, as opposed to teammates who work together. That being said, I was drawn to predestination as it emphasizes God's role in running everything. I just really love the subject of placing God above ourselves. When it gets to the point where we are telling people that it's all God's choice, and that they don't play a role in it, and that they are or aren't chosen and that's just that, I really feel we are doing a disservice to God and his role for humanity. Yes, God is sovereign, but we still have a responsibility to do His Will. We also shouldn't use predestination as an excuse to not evangelize to people or judge people who are more on the side of free will. We shouldn't use it as a reason to be like, "Well God's in control, nothing I can do about it". Just study the Word and do what pleases Him. ... and vice versa...
I think I would be terrified to go to bed every night wondering if I was going to be a Christian in the morning. As i ponder my failings and my sin of just that day. Knowing my will is fallen, is not my hope, and is only free to sin.
As an assumed Arminianism from birth (unwilling to believe God don’t choose some), I always thought it was my choice. However, anytime it’s my choice, I then have freedom to waiver and abuse that choice. I can take it for granted. I can come and go in my fervor for my choice. I’ll choose to lose weight until I want some ice cream. However, if I believe (and if it is true) that the creator of the universe actually did choose me, (predestination) then I don’t have a choice. My zeal for serving Him is great(er) and I can rest in his assurance because it was not me that chose him but vice versa. It’s how I’m wired and from that standpoint, I lean towards Calvinism. Calvinism enhances my faith and I can drop the fake pride of ME choosing HIM. Still sorting through this. Either way, I believe Jesus is the Messiah. I love and serve him and abide in him. If I got hit by proverbial bus in an hour, I’ll be at the feet of Jesus.
So-called 'Limited Atonement' is a big mistake. It is true that when Jesus died on the cross, his atoning work was directed primarily towards those who would be saved. But he paid the price for the sins of all human beings. See, e.g., Rom 5:18; 1 Tim 2:1-6; 4:10; Heb 2:9; 2 Pet 2:1-3; 1 John 2:2. In 1 Tim 4:10 Paul says that God is the 'Saviour of all people, especially of those who believe'. This verse is a huge problem for Limited Atonement. 'All people' here must mean all human beings. And Paul would surely not have said that God is the 'Saviour' of people for whose sins Jesus didn't die on the cross and who were firmly on track for hell. Instead, Paul must mean that God is the Saviour of all people in the sense that he provided atonement for everyone. And he must mean that God is especially the Saviour of those who believe in the sense that only they receive the benefits of the atonement. Non-Christians should be told indiscriminately that Jesus died on the cross to atone for their sins. This should be part of the gospel message.
Your sins are either paid for by Christ on the cross or yourself in Hell. So if Jesus saved "everyone" on the cross, even those who reject Him, then there would be no penalty left to pay, but yet they still go to Hell. So Jesus's blood cannot and does not and is not applied to everyone. So He died for the sins of the elect on the cross, all others still have to pay the penalty in Hell. Otherwise their sins will be paid for twice, once by Jesus and again in Hell or everyone goes to Heaven whet they accept Jesus or not, but we know Biblically neither of these things are true. But yes, we don't know who is elect or not so it is not wrong to evangelize everyone and tell them that Jesus died for their sins, because if/when they repent and believe, this becomes true for them.
But that does not work. If Jesus died for the sins of all humanity on the cross, then the sins for all humanity are paid for and all people are saved, regardless of their belief in Jesus. This is universalism and the Bible does not teach this. But if you instead hold that Jesus' death on the cross was for all humanity, but it did not save all humanity, then you are saying that Jesus' work on the cross was imperfect, insufficient, or flawed. This further suggests that Jesus' death was wasted on those who would not believe. The Bible does not teach this either and it sounds almost insulting to Jesus to suggest this. The only way this works is to agree that Jesus died on the cross to glorify his Father in heaven, redeeming creation by calling to himself a people who would glorify God by trusting in Jesus to save them. Jesus' death pays the penalty for those who call on him to be saved. Jesus is the only savior for all humanity, but only by trusting in Jesus to save you does Jesus' death atone for your sin. That is limited atonement.
Not everyone is saved, but everyone is savable. Romans 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness," You are saved through faith, not through mere birth as a human being.
@@neveseven734 There are just so many passages which seem strongly to teach that Jesus paid the price for the sins of everyone. In order not to reach this conclusion, so many unnatural interpretations of passages have to be made that I find it impossible to be convinced. To put it another way, you seem to be putting reasoning above biblical revelation, but when we come to the deep things of the atonement, we must avoid being over-confident in our reasoning. I have written an article on this topic, and in part 2 of the article I answer your objection about sins being punished twice. It can be found here: maxaplin.blogspot.com/2018/11/did-jesus-die-for-everyone-part-2.html
@@curtisquick1582 On the face of it, there is a logic to your argument. However, there is an overwhelming objection to it, which is that in order to hold to Limited Atonement, over and over again we have to take very unnatural interpretations of passages. We have to keep explaining passages away, such as 1 Tim 4:10 that I quoted in my original comment. When it comes to the deep things of the atonement, we need to be wary of being over-confident about our ability to understand the mechanics of it. I have written an article on Limited Atonement, and in part 2 I answer the objection that you make. It can be found here: maxaplin.blogspot.com/2018/11/did-jesus-die-for-everyone-part-2.html
Thorough, good sounding, but he didn't really answer that man's question HAHAHAHA. Calvinists and Arminians always beat around the bush in a convincing way
Glen, I thought Piper defended Calvinism nicely. He did not come out and say Arminianism is heresy But he did contradict each one of their doctrines. -------------
Somehow I can’t be so happy about my salvation and my own bright future while knowing family members, friends and neighbors going to hell because God didn’t choose them. It seems very egoistic to me, I can’t help it.
We should be heartbroken for the lost, whether they are family & friends or strangers. It should lead us to sharing the gospel with them. & in that sharing we should explain the immense joy & hope we have in our future with Christ. Without God there can be no hope in a future. If they reject that it's not God's fault (& that's the hardest thing for non-Calvinists to reconcile, predestination vs man's responsibility)
5IVE POINTS In Calvinism, yes it is God’s choice not to extend saving grace to that person. No praying or preaching the gospel until you’re blue in the face can change that. If everyone starts in the same place, God is showing favoritism in Calvinism and we don’t know the reasons. The gospel isn’t enough in Calvinism.
I understand where you are coming from. But at the same time, to me, it seems more egotistical and self righteous to say that I had the power to choose God over my sin apart from God’s help. When in fact, I have no power to take the first steps toward God and away from my sin apart from Christ, first, choosing me to do so. I was way too in love with my sin to turn from it without the help of God.I view Calvinism as the ultimate form of humility and Christ exaltation. After all, why would Christ choose any sinner to follow Him? Because of his astounding mercy! Anyway that is my thought on it, and I hope it helped.
Not a Calvinist here but I don’t believe that I took the first step. God clearly did. But I don’t see that spiritually dead means totally unable to respond to God‘s calling. I just don’t see that in scripture. If that would be the case why do people like Pharaoh or the Pharisees need to be hardened?
I believe it's both and we can't possibly understand how God works or what He chooses to plan or leave to our free will. But to attempt to stick to one side or the other is human tendency. We can't fully comprehend His ways in this lifetime.
It is so important to know that John Piper takes KEY doctrines of the Bible out of context. All of us must focus on what the Bible says, not what man thinks about the Bible. Compare things spiritual with things spiritual! (1 Cor 2:13) A dispensational view of the Bible comes from the context of the Bible - you cannot divorce time from it without pulling the text out of context. We are saved by grace through FAITH -- don't add to God's words, and don't subtract from God's words! Rom 10:9-10 is a passage that clearly lays out HOW one is saved. Not of works - but one must CONFESS (free will) and accept the free gift of salvation.
Amos, I almost chuckled at the Whitfield statement you quoted, but this is really a serious subject. [THE] question here: is it important whether or not to be either a Calvinist or an Arminian? To be a Calvinist, you must adhere to the writings of not just, but primarily, of Paul the Apostle. To be an Arminian, you must adhere to the [personal] beliefs of Jacob Arminius, beliefs that are not Scripturally based. When we get to Heaven, this question will be totally meaningless as we will know the truth, that is, it is all about God, His Plan, His Purposes, His Will and Desire. We are here only because He wanted someone to not only worship Him, but to fellowship with Him. Questions we have in this earthly lifetime will simply disappear when we see Him.
@@john-robertphillips531 ... Well you did act for "statistical data" to prove "Calvinism" (which is simply Biblical doctrine). There is no such thing as "statistical data" and for you to ask for it was a little strange... don't you think? ------------- You could ask for Biblical support... in which I would say that the Holy Spirit "indwells" you and it "witnesses" with your spirit and it "teaches" you true doctrine. In fact the "fruit" of a saint is that process called "sanctification. ---------------- Now it is true that sanctification produces "fruit" in BOTH your behavior AND doctrine. And it is true the Bible teaches about different results... some people produce thirty-fold and some produce sixty-fold and others produce one hundred-fold... but the reality is that ALL SAINTS have the "proof" that you are looking for BECAUSE of being "indwelt" it is NOT something that is produced as "statistical data"... and for you to use that term was hilarious. ------------------------- I hope that THIS was helpful for you child. It appears that you have not yet been "indwelt" or you would already know this "milk" of the Gospel - how do you expect to learn the "meat"? --------------------------
@@john-robertphillips531 ... I don't think Piper made any claim that can be measured by numbers. You original comment was that Piper claimed Calvinism created true worship. Since there is no way to measure TRUE WORSHIP it is impossible to document when the only "measure" is who claims to be "Christian" (including BOTH wheat and tares in the church) while the TRUE WORSHIP would relate to being part of the ETERNAL CHURCH.... and the ONLY measure of that comes at the resurrection. -------------- Now, it is true that the set of doctrines (which was ALWAYS taught by the saints - long before Calvin was born... but LATER became known as "Calvinism") is the most faithful set of doctrines taught by any major denomination today. And TRUE SAINTS (saved wheat/sheep) are "drawn" to the most faithful denominations or congregations... so, in THAT sense Piper was correct. --------------
He didn't really say why the debate is important. More argued that his view is correct. They are two different questions. We shouldn't devide over this issue.
I’m not a Calvinist, I believe that we only can be saved when we believe in Jesus Christ (that He was YHWH in the flesh) and be baptized in his name. In our small group in church we read a Calvinistic book, though; and I felt uneasy to join the meetings, lately. The book is titled 'The true God of the Bible' and talks in every chapter about one of God's attributes. Although there is already a chapter titled “God is sovereign’, there is another called ‘God elects people’ or so, and that chapter is like 4x longer than all the others in the book. That type of overemphasis is typical for Calvinists, and it shows that there is no balanced view in this belief system. Jesus Christ’s blameless life and his death and resurrection is not the center of their/your theology, but remains only the payment for the elected. Election and ‘Grace’ (which is in fact Disgrace with most of men) are the Center of Calvinism.
Amen. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." It doesnt say "For God loves such group of people", but rather "the world". God bless
I grew up a 5 point Calvinist but when my church fell apart I began attending a non-Calvinist church (after MUCH prayer). I didn’t lose my 5-point beliefs but I gained, GAINED the reality of choice to choose or reject Christ and it is a lifetime of battles against the flesh. It is not one or the other. It is BOTH
Andy... Did Jesus PAY for the sins of "His Sheep" or did Jesus PAY for the sins of everyone ever born and now they have to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire PAYING for those SAME sins (again)... what does the Bible say?
@@david-wildcard God so loved the world... NOW DEFINE WORLD. God so loved the Jew and Gentile (Jew and Gentile = world) Remember child BEFORE Jesus came God was ONLY saving Jews (God ONLY "loved" Jews) AFTER Jesus came God was saving BOTH Jews and Gentiles (God "loved" both Jew and Gentile) Jew + Gentile = world That was not hard
1 Calvinism was preceded by, and primarily inspired by Augustinianism, which on the other hand was an (in)direct product of Manichaeism, a sect, known back then as the pinnacle of Gnosticism and the major opponent of Christianity until Islam assumed this role. Mani's teaching was intended to 'combine', succeed, and surpass the teachings of Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Marcionism, Hellenistic and Rabbinic Judaism and other religions and mystery cults. It reveres Mani as the final prophet after / the reincarnation of Zoroaster, the Buddha, and Jesus. 2 Augustine renounced Manichaeism only shortly after having been threatened with death by the Roman emperorand only after Christianity became the only accepted religion of the state. He then taught some years free will, only to later inch back to their teachings. In his last 18 years he taught variants of the 5 points of TULIP and Double Predestination. Practically every person in the modern era (1500 AD+) who is a determinist, quotes Augustine as source for his belief. It is also not surprising that the Scriptures used by Manicheans are the very same ones used by Calvinists today. It must also be mentioned that Augustine is the absolute key figure in bringing the Apocrypha into our Bibles. He was the very first in 393 AD who approved in his own Council of Hippo the canonicity of the Apocrypha, shortly before the mega codices and later practically all Bibles indeed included those, until Zwingli and Luther separated them again from the Canon. He was one of the first to argue for financial tithing based on Old Covenant law. He further rejected the Genesis account being literal. Christians who took the Creation Story literally were his laughingstock and "looked like idiots among non-Christians because they denied science and reason". He believed in all seven Catholic sacraments (contradicting statements on purgatory, but probably affirming it) and taught that marital sex involving lust is sinful ... 3 Calvinism was absent among Pre-Nicene Christians. Even notable Calvinistic scholar and historian, Loraine Boettner, admitted, "This cardinal truth [Calvinism] of Christianity was first clearly seen by Augustine". For the first ~400 years of Christianity, its teachers, preachers, apostles, evangelists and theologians taught "historic traditionalism" without a deterministic theology. Borrowing from Manichaeism, Augustine brought strong determinism and their precise terminology of the 'elect' into the church (while he had made it within their circles only to be a 'hearer'; possibly also a motivation to create his own fellowship of 'elects'). 4 Calvin absorbed his doctrine primarily from Augustine: "Augustine is so wholly within me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fullness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings." This is why one finds that every four pages written in the Institutes of the Christian Religion John Calvin quoted Augustine. Calvin would deem himself not a Calvinist, but an Augustinian. Christian Calvinist, should they be more likely deemed an Augustinian-Calvinist? As a result, Calvinism in particular is sometimes referred to as Augustinianism. It must also be mentioned that Calvin was an unrepented murderer, a dark episode often downplayed today, as we see e.g. in articles like the one Challies wrote in 2005. Calvin is directly responsible for the first 'heretic' sentenced to it by Protestants, the burning of his long-standing theological opponent, Servetus. He had him arrested while visiting his church and single-handedly provided the points of the indictment. Throughout the trial (of several weeks) he had put the screw upon the Council to pass a death sentence on Servetus and had gained his end (see 'The Right to Heresy - How John Calvin Killed a Conscience: Castellio against Calvin', Chapter 5, Pages 70-84, available for free on Scribd) . It might be true that Calvin had contemplated a mitigation of the sentence (sword instead of slow burning) - but only if Servetus were to purchase this mitigation by a spiritual sacrifice, by a last-hour- recantation to Farel, the friend Calvin sent while 'studying at home' during the execution (a recantation of the 'most abominable sin', of Modalism, the second charge was anti-infant baptism)."
Calvin justified this killing with Old Covenant Law, Lev 24:16. "The one who blasphemes the name of the Lord should be put to death". Instead of repenting, "he boasted of the deed before a silent congregation" when he entered the pulpit the next Sunday. He also spelled out his theologically reinforced vengeance towards his opponents in a personal letter to Farel: “I am persuaded that it is not without the special will of God that, apart from any verdict of the judges, the criminals have endured protracted torment at the hands of the executioner.” 5 Calvinism today is generally undermining the need for evangelism (because it is at odds with election); it converts it into an unloving work without genuine love and motivation. Hyper-Calvinists would in their very strict application of Calvinism go as far as to factually forbid the preaching of the Gospel and the offer of salvation to the non-elect. 6 Rejection of the biblical concept of prevenient grace and free will leading to salvation (Puppet Theology). Mark Driscoll went as far (in the common overemphasis of 'grace') to say that Noah got saved by grace only and that his salvation had absolutely nothing to do with faith or righteousness - directly contradicting the Bible in 'Gen 6:9 ... Noah was a righteous man'. 7 Claim that man cannot respond / consent to God's call unto Salvation! God autonomously determines the desires and choices of people to accept Him ('Unconditional Election' = Random Selection). Claim that Belief is not a pre-condition to Past Salvation (being born again).
8 Propagation of the unbiblical 'Once-Saved-Always- Saved' theology ('Unconditional Salvation'). Regular claim that unrepented sin does not endanger Future Salvation !!!
Bible: Possible shipwreck. (Perseverance of faithful saints) Calvinism: No possible shipwreck. (Perseverance of all saints, Once-Saved-Always-Saved)
Bible: Prevenient grace + response through believer. (Conditional Election) Calvinism: Grace only + no response. (Unconditional Election, Sovereign Grace)
Bible: Jesus came to save the world. He died for all men. (Universal Atonement) Calvinism: Jesus came to save the elect. He died only for the elect. (Limited Atonement)
Bible: Jesus is the Light of the World. Calvinism: Jesus is the Light of the Elect.
Bible: A believer can reject the grace of God. (Resistable Grace) Calvinism: A believer cannot reject the grace of God. (Irresistible Grace)
Bible: Free Will & Predestination. Calvinism: Predestination only. Bible: God shows benevolent love to unbelievers and complacent love to believers. Calvinism: God hates unbelievers and loves believers only.
9 Arminianism, which is closer to God's truth, is their stereotype enemy and part of a strategic system of a false dichotomy. Spurgeon in 'Lectures To My Students' (which I read completely): "I was afraid the people might veer towards Antinomianism (complete denial of laws), an extreme as dangerous as Arminianism".
10 The unbiblical doctrine of Cessationism is particularly associated with Calvinism and only slowly opposed by New Calvinists. Most Calvinists teach that Spiritual Gifts have ceased, very similar to Pharisees who constantly rejected miracles ... and who had also a ...
11 ... very strong emphasis on uniform appearance. 12 Tendency towards spiritual racism. Elitist and often condescending attitude. They very often, if not regularly deem themselves more intellectual than others. Widely influenced by Spurgeon who was a great teacher, but who regularly 'called names' and showed little humility. "Calvinism is the true Gospel, not just a nickname". "Calvinism, then, is the spiritual meat which enables a man to labour on in the ways of Christian service".
I think I get and agree with the core of this but every time Piper says "It's not a question of time" his next (or previous) statement has to do with time ("When I wake up..." "The next day..." "Right now..." etc.)...so I'm not entirely sure he understands the perspective of timelessness as Lewis mentioned it, though I must admit I've met barely a couple pastors that can and they're still fine people that have led many to the Lord. I think Lewis's comment is less completely accurate but less important than focusing on the fact that God is the one who does all things and there is no true power in our hand. Honestly, Armenianism doesn't even align with the concept of timelessness because it requires that God doesn't know what choice we'll make. Timelessness is the primary thing that sold me on Calvinism in the firsts place, Armenianism doesn't make sense logically if you believe the Bible about the qualities of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit...and humans. Aaaaaaanyway haha, I do believe that from our extremely limited perspective, some vague form of Armenianism is right, because we can't see past the moment we live in and, to us at least, it still *appears* as complete choice.
Medigo... Does he understand that Jesus PAID the sins of "His Sheep" or does he imagine Jesus PAID the sins of those spending eternity in the Lake of Fire? ----------------
God loves the non-elect enough to give them what they desire. God is so just that He cannot overlook the sin of the non-elect. God is so holy that He cannot dwell with sin in his presence. Jesus was so obedient, even unto death on a cross, to be the atoning sacrifice for sin for the elect. God is so kind & long-suffering to wait for every sinful elect person to come to faith God is so merciful to elect even 1 sinner to dwell with Him in heaven for eternity! I believe the main sticking point in a non-calvinist view is the gravity of sin & the height of God's holiness!
@@5ivepoints18 The sticking point is the Holiness of God. Saying God deterministically causes all sin does not respect His Holiness. “God loves the non-elect enough to give them what they desire.“ But according to Calvinism, God deterministically caused all their evil desires, and then punishes them for them. This is not holy nor loving, and the Lord is “holy, holy, holy“ and “God is love“, according to the Scriptures.
No. God doesn't hate the 'non-elect', John 3:16. Jesus came not to condemn, we were all condemned already by the law and our sin. God has loved His enemies, including us, that is why we must love our enemies. God is just. All sin must be punished. The wages of sin is death. That any of us would ever find ourselves forgiven is a scandalous miracle. This was done for us. Not to exclude anyone. Whosoever will may come. I'm sure you agree up to this point, but the final deciding action is one we could never do for ourselves. To will. Jesus said that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws him. All praise and glory is deservedly given to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And none to us.
It is a very important discussion because the Calvinists believe in a god who has created billions of souls that he never intended to offer Salvation, that is just not Biblical at all.
Total depravity doesn't take away our "will" but the Bible tells us that our wills are not free, we are either in bondage as a slave to sin, or we are a slave to God. Either way our wills are not "free" that's why depravity is "total" meaning every aspect of our being is fallen, our mind, our heart, our desires, our wills. Even nature itself was subjected to futility because of the fall, and it does not even have a will, free or not. EVERYTHING in creation has been corrupted, no exceptions.
potato psoas And regeneration or the New Birth is what makes this happen. Those whom He sets free are free indeed. No one comes to Jesus against their will (unless the Father in Heaven draws them, and He will raise them up on the last day), their hearts, wills and nature are changed so that they can see and savor Christ.
Elnathan Abraham God is sovereign over his creation. We still make choices and are held responsible for them, but our wills are not free, we are either in bondage and a slave to sin or a slave to Christ, there is not a third option. We indeed act and make choices in the world, but the totality of the results of those choices are not ours. Man makes plans but God determines their steps. Gen 50:20 "You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good" etc etc. God even used the hearts of Pharaoh and the Kings of Babylon and the Assyrians to accomplish His will, and then they too were punished for their actions against Israel. Yes, God gave us dominion over the Earth initially, however we lost that dominion when we fell, and handed the world over to Satan who is now called the "god of this world."
Chris... total depravity does NOT take away "free will" (you are correct) However the "free will" we have (after Original Sin) is to always WANT to sin. We sin by our own "free will" because we have a "sin nature" -------------------
@@neveseven734 ... it is true that (after the Original Sin) mankind became totally depraved. But that does NOT mean they have no "free will". It only means that, because of their "sin nature" they freely WANT to sin. --------- That is the DEFINITION of "Total depravity"... they have a "sin nature" because of the "fall" of Adam. ---------------
I tend to be in the calvinist camp. But at the end of the day only one thing matters do you believe and if you do you will strive to be more Christ like everyday by the grace of God and when you fail and you will. you ask for forgiveness with all you have. And that's the key. Call it predestination or not it really doesn't matter. Every good thing you do comes from God every sin is human nature by the total deadness in sin from the fall. Its that simple.
James... WHICH Gospel are you preaching... (1) The one that says Jesus PAID for everybody and now all you have to do is "accept" that Atonement (2) The one that says Jesus PAID for "His sheep" and the Atonement was "particular" to "His sheep" --------- Those are TWO DIFFERENT Gospels. One can be the True Gospel and the other a False Gospel. So which one are YOU preaching? ---------------
James Lee... which Gospel is essential And which Gospel is non-essential? --------------- Does the BIBLE COMMAND the saved "wheat/sheep" in the church to EXPEL all teachers of false doctrines... or does the Bible say it's just "non essential" what doctrines we preach? --------------------
I don't think the debate Is important. We have bigger issues in the church such as the progressive church and it has infected all denominations with all kinds of filth. Which includes the doctrine of open theism
John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
@@aletheia8054 Christ is talking to his 12 Apostles. The ones He choose. Yet one was a devil. So they were obviously not chosen unto salvation otherwise Judas would have been saved since he was one of the chosen ones. John 6:70 Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” Also Israel was a chosen nation yet only a remnant were saved. So being chosen does not automatically make one saved.
@@mrnoedahl Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Talking to the exact same people there minus Judas.
It depends on what God wants you to do. My job is to keep people out of hell, it doesn't matter if a person go to hell because God doesn't want them or they don't want Him. Just try to keep them out.
Wow I been tackling the same issue... Pre or Mid or Post.. for Calvinism and Arminian is pretty one sided and simple.. but for rapture I am a bit confused..
Jay... it is not a matter whether Calvinism/Arminianism or pre-trip/post trib is the most fierce. The ISSUE is simple. (1) What does the Bible teach (2) What does the Bible teach the saints to DO with false teachers? -------------- The Bible commands the (real) saints to EXPEL all the false teachers above... there is no hierarchy in heresy. They ALL are false teachers because that is the "fruit" of unsaved people. ---------------
No, David A, it's studying the doctrines given by God (2 Timothy 2:15) as part of renewing our minds (Romans 12:2). Logic is given by God and is only bad when it doesn't line up with scripture. Christians aren't supposed to be ignorant; we are called to think. Piper used numerous verses in this video to back up what he was talking about; it would be better to check each one and show that he is misinterpreting them than to make a blanket assertion.
Always plea from ignorance. Apophatic teaching leaves too much unanswered. Study the scriptures and you will notice definitive truths as well as profound mystery.
Calvinism is wrong theology , however it won't lead to eternal damnation but it's a stumble block to evangelism and spiritual growth in life,we have already many stumble blocks to our way to lord and we don't need more stumble blocks
For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things: to Him be glory for ever Amen.
Please, help me! Send that message to John Piper:
Hi, John! Peace and Grace from the Lord Jesus for your life. Dear John, my name is Ciro, I am married and I live in a city by the name João Câmara, in the State of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil. I was the Christian conscience in 2019 in Campinas Grande, where you ministered the Word of the Lord. I wish I could have met in person, but it was not possible. I longed to be able to meet Billy Graham in life, unfortunately it was not possible. And, in the same way, I would like to meet you personally. This will probably not be possible, as I have no money to go to the United States. Either way, I wanted to be able to share my joy in the Lord for having the opportunity to hear his ministry that day. If possible, I would like you to send me a message from your own hand so I can keep it and show it to my children. Perhaps English was not better, because I don't know English and it was translated from the google translator. Thank you in advance and may the Lord God continue to bless you and your family.
Jesus Christ is the savior of the world.i put my trust in Jesus.The holy spirit leads me every moment.
@@bettywesberry8379 Do you believe that holy spirit is a god, part of a god, a third of a god, or the power of our God and Father, Yahweh?
Christians: Is it free will or predestination?
God: Yes
Lol
It is both
16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:16 ESV)
No such thing as free will
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification. 20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:15-23, NASB)
@@ifeanyichukwu3644 So true!
God is sovereign and man is responsible
I grew up in a pentecostal/evangelical church. In my 30's I started reading the bible for myself, I was struck by how different Jesus was from what I was taught, and I saw the sovereignty of God and became a calvinist in my living room, reading my bible.
Amen, same here!!
I'm happy you've been reading the Bible for yourself brother, but the reality is that there are many who will also say that doing the same thing actually led them AWAY from Calvinism. I'm not saying I disagree with Calvinism, and I'm not saying I agree with it, either. All I'm saying is that what you presented is irrelevant from whether or not Calvinism is actually true.
@@TheThirdApology I have yet to hear from anyone in person or on TH-cam who says they were a calvinist who actually understood it rightly.
@@m.d.d4250 Again, that has nothing to do with whether or not it's true. Not saying you're wrong, but your argument is a non-starter.
@@TheThirdApology Well, as I said, scripture was what informed my view. I didn't come on here to give arguments for calvinism. I was just stating what happened with me.
I do believe that the umbrella of God's Grace is larger than the umbrella of correct doctrine. Of course, there are limits, but if one trusts in Jesus to save them from the just punishment due to their own sin, they will be saved ... even if they are not Calvinists.
Curtis Quick amen
I always find it funny when people say "Calvinism" as if it was not
the same doctrines taught by the Apostles and the early church.
NONE of the Reformers added something that was not already
written in Scripture and known by the saved "wheat/sheep"
---------
Correct doctrine is supreme. Tolerating false doctrine is not something we have the option to do.
I just have a problem with your first sentence. It seems like a contradiction. if doctrine is truth, and God's grace is true, then the umbrella of God's grace is exactly the size of correct doctrine.
@SBUL Lis .. Then you SHOW them the SCRIPTURES that contradict that silly notion
and you ASK them whether they will believe what some man told them of the "Word of God".
----------------
If they REJECT the Scripture for the teachings of man.
Then you have seen their "fruit" and you do not continue
to cast "pearls before swine".
---------------------
The Bible does COMMAND us to "love" all men by preaching the True Gospel of Repentance
to all men. However the Bible also COMMANDS us to (a) identify those preaching false doctrines
and (b) rebuke them and (c) if they refuse to repent then EXPEL them from the church.
---------------------
No doubt this video will result in arguments and accusations in the comments section sadly. We should celebrate what unites us rather than looking to have arguments with our brothers and sisters. Christianity is much bigger than Calvin or Aminius (and Luther as well). Peace, love and hop to you all.
You haven’t even fully watched it.. it just came out lol
Just making a prediction because I know how this usually goes down so you're making a mute point really. It's certainly not a LOL situation.
Yup, it's rare to see a peaceful debate on the issue. It's especially sad to read the accusations and insults that are thrown around. I get ashamed when I consider how this looks to observing unbelievers.
Grace and peace to you.
When the thing that divides changes the gospel, our nature and God's character, then there's no ground for unity.
Yup that's why we stick to what the Bible says. Calvin and Luther may have gotten some things right but "For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"
1 Corinthians 1:11-13 ESV
bible.com/bible/59/1co.1.11-13.ESV Jesus is our only hope. Not Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Calvin or Luther.
The bottom-line is, that you can be a Calvinist or an Arminianist and still be saved (Romans 10:9-13). Thank You Only Jesus!
No. You can't be an arminian heretic and be saved.
DND... Not if you believe what the Bible says.
The Bible says teachers of false doctrines like Arminianism are showing
the "fruit" of being unsaved "tares" in the church. AND the elders rare
COMMANDED to rebuke these teachers of false doctrines and EXPEL
them from the church if they do not repent.
---------
But those are JUST the BIBLE'S rules...
You are free to make-up whatever rules you want.
-----------
@@wisevirgin3405 amen sister
I mean... not really, that kind of hinges on whether calvinism is true or not, because if it is then it's not up to you lol. Compatibalism is just illogical
Finally someone spoke out. Thank you dear Christian brother
It’s actually not that hard of a question. It’s simultaneously free will and predestination.
The Clean Gamer Even the provisionists and Arminians believe in predestination. The devil is in having two different definitions for the same word.
The Clean Gamer, It is a debate between two wrong doctrines....
martypython what do you mean. If it wasn’t predestined, God wouldn’t be omnipotent, yet at the same time, if we didn’t have free will, we could not love him.
@@Dah_J, I could not understand what do you mean... =>> Predestination is not the requisite of Omnipotence... God could still be Omnipotent without predestining people....
No it isnt. There is no predestination in the bible. It simply is a bad translation of προώρισεν. It means pre-Origin, not pre-destination. It means a prechosen-Beginning, not prechosen-end. God determines the times and places we all come about and have our being, So That we might each seek Him and find Him. (Acts 17:26-27) This is not a hard or shocking teaching.
Second, every time election or προώρισεν is used in the bible it NEVER refers to salvation, or union with God. It ALWAYS refers to being selected as part of a Corporate Group, or for a particular Role in which you will make God's Glory known.
This is why is says in Romans 11:28 "that as far as the gospel is concerned the Jews are cursed, but as far as Election is concerned they believed for the sake of the fathers."
The bible teaches a free will position.
The bible teaches that election and salvation are very different things.
The bible teaches that the Jews are elect and that gentiles become part of that elect family through faith.
The bible teaches that Jews and Gentiles who have repentant belief in Jesus as Christ, Lord and Savior have salvation- which is that you know God and the Son who he sent. (John 17:3)
We are saved by
Grace alone =Sola Gratia
Through Faith alone= Soli Fide
In Christ Alone=Solus Christus
Revealed in Scripture Alone=Sola Scriptura
To the glory of God Alone= Soli Deo Gloria
John3:16 is the best Bible verse in the Bible ❤️
Does God love the nonelect, Brandon?
@Jeremy Noel Exactly.
@@20july1944 It's simple: they can't. There're things on the Scriptures that remains mistery for us. And that's fine.
If I’m a reprobate what will stop me from destroying my life and ending it all since God doesn’t love me?
“I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
(John 16: 33) NIV.
Amen.
JC Bible study... how about this one?
------------------
Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you,
when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for
a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more
tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.
-----------------------------
Gotta love the comments about 'just read your Bible, & enough with the debates'.
If you actually do read the Bible, you discover important concepts can legitimately be seen from multiple viewpoints.
Great comment. Especially in this very polarized time in history.
George Whitfield said, “We are all born Arminians. It is grace that turns us into Calvinists.”
couldn't have said it better!
@End Times Are upon us explain
Grace was the provision of a way to accept salvation, you's are overthinking it. And taking the grace way past just provision. Whats the intelligence and beauty of a creation that you pre-determined to love you before hand?
It is by God’s Grace that He turns us into Christians, not Calvinist. If you call yourself under any other name, you need to read the Corinthian letters. “Is Christ divided?”
@endtimesareuponus8930not true
“I am of Paul, I am of Apollos... [I am of Calvin]”
It really is missing the point. We need to keep our eyes on Jesus. Obey his Word, written and spoken. Develop intimacy with the Holy Spirit. Walk in purity and love in charity. Be zealous towards good works. His grace will guide us into all truth. How foolish and divisive to spend so much time splitting doctrinal hairs, forming camps on either side. How wise it would be to simply confess that we don’t know it all but that we have entrusted our lives to the One who does, not because He has answered every burning question, but because His presence has satisfied the deepest longing of our souls and has redeemed our lives from the kingdom of darkness. People seem to forget that we know the Lord experientially, that He’s not just the product of correct doctrine. Don’t mean to be condemning but these debates have caused so much division among us, drives me crazy. Knowledge puffs up, love edifies!
Seems like you were reading my Mind! I say almost word for word this exact words daily. (I am of Calvin & Hobbes!)
Brother word for word exactly how I see this. Even the scripture you quoted. Praise God that he has opened th eyes of His people. Ultimately I believe the day will come when God will bring ultimate unity amongst His saints. Until that glorious day we continue living by Faith in The Son of God!
Titus 1:9 says one qualification of an Elder is to defend sound doctrine. Paul spent much of his letters doing the same.
Amen!
That's the whole point around this aroused discussion. In thr middle of it all, they misses the point: Christ! Just look at Him, Know Him, trying to be like Him living like He did... That's sounds easy. But, i'm starting to see whats going on: the people are no willing to give up 'their on' opinion, as i saw above. "My douctrine is the right one. Because it's exactly what Bible says. See? They think they wrote the Truth in there, but no, they didn't. Yet, we can and must take what's there to live correctly. God bless us all up to the day.
Amazing video! Its like a God sent gift because ive literally been discussing this topic with one of my close friend ! Glory to God for pastor John.. so much wisdom to give !
I'm pretty much a hard line Arminianist, however Calvinists are brothers who don't preach a different gospel so it's not a doctrinal debate to spill blood over. I myself have been guilty of getting overly caught up in this debate
Jag... you are PRETENDING child.
Christ either paid for the sins of "His Sheep" or He paid for the sins
of all those who spend eternity in the Lake of Fire paying for their sins (again)
Which is it?
Wise Virgin
I buy a harmonica for my friend’s birthday and give it to him. He rejects it because he hates harmonicas. The fact that he rejected the harmonica doesn’t mean I didn’t buy it for him.
Good thing we don’t have to rely on Calvinist logical fallacies and instead have God telling us in the Bible that Jesus died for the sins of all the world, not just the elect. 1 John 2:2
@@IAmisMaster .... but that is a FALSE ANALOGY because it is built upon a STRAWMAN
argument that says Christ PAID for the sins of everyone ever born and
(1) the Bible NEVER teaches that notion and
(2) if Jesus already PAID for the sins of every man they they are PAID. Then why will most
of humanity have to PAY for those (same) sins AGAIN in the eternal Lake-of-Fire?
The Bible says we PAY for every idle word... it never says we PAY twice.
--------------------
You are pretending the ATONEMENT did not accomplish EXACTLY what God planned
(to save all of "His Sheep") so that pretense creates a STRAWMAN that is easily destroyed.
-------------------------
Now try this:
The Bible says God HATES some men before they are born (Jesus did not PAY for their sins)
--------------------------
The Bible says God CREATES some men to be "vessels of mercy" and other men to be
"vessels of destruction". (Jesus PAID for the sins of the vessels of mercy but NOT for
the sins of the vessels of destruction)
---------------------------
The Bible says God is the Potter and HE ALONE has the right to make out of one lump of clay
a "vessel of honor" and to make out of another lump of clay "vessels of dishonor"
(Jesus PAID for the sins of those made for honor and did NOT PAY for the sins of those made
for dishonor)
-------------------------------------------
Let me tell you a little story from John 6. In that chapter Jesus explained to His disciples
that NO MAN can ever come to Him unless the Father FIRST "draws" them, and ALL MEN
that the Father draws "shall come" to Him... and He shall lose NONE of His sheep.
Now, when the disciples realized that Jesus was teaching salvation by ELECTION
(God's word not mine) then MANY of the disciples immediately abandoned Him.
--------------------------
Now the QUESTION is: Why in the world would any disciple abandon the Son of God?
And the answer is simple child... they (like most men today) did not want a salvation
plan where GOD must act first BEFORE they can be saved. They wanted a salvation
where THEY act first... where THEY can do something to be saved... where THEY
can be in control of when and where they are "indwelt"... that is delusional.
-----------------------------------
www.5thKingdomofHeaven.com
-------------------------------------
Wise Virgin
How do you explain away 1 John 2:2? It clearly does teach Jesus died for non-Christians.
It’s not a false analogy. The Bible describes salvation as a gift. Romans 6:23. You have a wrong conception of salvation. Gifts can be rejected, and if you reject what Jesus paid for, you don’t receive the benefit. Simple.
Wow, you really misinterpret those verses. The disciples who left Jesus after he preached did so because of his teaching about eating his flesh. It had nothing to do with some bizarre inference to Calvinism. Non Calvinists also believe God draws people first, so you are fighting a strawman.
@@IAmisMaster ... First.... 1John 2:2 does NOT teach that Jesus died for non-Christians.
----------------------
The passage simply say the same as John 3:16... Jesus died for BOTH Jew and Gentile.
Remember child... BEFORE Jesus came God was ONLY saving Jews (God only "loved" Jews)
AFTER Jesus came God was saving BOTH Jew and Gentile (God "loved" both Jew and Gentile)
----------------------
Jew + Gentile = world
It does NOT = everyone ever born. It ONLY equals Jew and Gentile (that is the world)
----------------------
Secondly... when you read Romans 6 then IMMEDIATELY go read Romans 9
THEN (and only then) can we have a BIBLICAL discussion about salvation
or the CONTEXT of Romans 6
--------------------------------
No child... the disciples that abandoned Jesus did so because He taught
NO MAN can come to Him unless the Father FIRST "draws" them.
-------------------------------
They (like Roman Catholics today) had NO CONCEPT about Jesus being the
"body" or the "blood" or the "living waters" or ANY NUMBER of "meat" in the
Scripture... because (like you) they could not even accept the "milk" of election.
----------------------------------
The debate is important when it is handled right; in other words, when we go to the Bible to see if doctrines are true or not by searching and studying it (2 Timothy 2:15, Acts 17:11). Calvinism and Arminianism has such baggage to it due to the objections more so than the doctrines. This is the reason many Calvinists call non-Calvinists Arminians when many Christians have no clue what that title means. And many non-Calvinists jump right into the comment section and give their emotional objections about the five points without (not always, but many times) addressing the Bible verses that the points are derived from.
And a quick side note, neither the Calvin, Arminius, or their followers came up with the five points of Calvinism. It was the followers of Arminius that began with five points and their was much Biblical debate for months to show whether those points were true or not. The counter points to those five points would later get an acronym TULIP, that was later coined in either the late 19th Century or early 20th Century (No one seems to know when that came about). The bottom line, the debate is actually about how we are saved. Is it of God alone or is it of God and our decision? Either view will reveal what you think of God's attributes, particularly His sovereignty (Isaiah 46:9-11, Proverbs 16:9, 21:1, Daniel 4:34-35, Acts 2:23, Romans 9, etc.), or man's sinful nature (Romans 3:9-20, 8:5-8, Ephesians 2:1-3, Jeremiah 17:9, 1 John 3:4, John 3:19-20, etc.). And either view (many times) effects the way you evangelize and defend your faith. In many ways, it is important.
Personally, I think both Calvinism and Arminianism are wrong as a whole, but the truth is in between the two extremes. The whole debate between them serves absolutely no purpose but to cause more division in the Church.
Christ commanded us to follow his teachings, pass them on to others, and make disciples of all nations, not argue about who is right.
I AGREE!
I can’t say I’m strongly one way or the other.
Amen man.
@@jayjay-bz3rr I cannot condone a systematic belief that relies upon eisegesis and mistranslations in order to prove their point. I speak of Calvinism in particular. Thus far, every Calvinist I have spoken with has done the same thing when confronted with verses that refute Limited Atonement, such as 1 John 2:2 and others. They will change the greek from what it says to claim that it implies something entirely different that cannot be supported by the context. Case in point, in 1 John 2:2, they add the phrase "of the elect" after "whole world" or claim that it is implied when nothing in the context supports such an implication. Calvinists especially do this nearly everytime they are confronted by the greek term "pas" which means "all", such as in Titus 2:11.
Hi Brother,
Have you read about Arminianism?
Usually people have very wrong ideas about what it teaches.
Can you describe what are the points you disagree with?
Thanks John. Hearing the Words of our Lord, makes my heart relize its all Him. He keeps me. You see, I was dead , dead, dead, in my sin. He came and did it all. Its all Him.😊
C S Lewis is free with God. This issue has been resolved and explain by God's wisdom. The simplicity of answer to this is imbarrassing. I don't know why people cannot accept that we do not and cannot understand everything. This is faith. I hope this helps. Love one another.
@@hamiltonstamper7927 thanks
CS Lewis is burning in hell, not "free with God".
AM.... the BIBLE says that teachers of false doctrines must be EXPELLED
from the church... so WHY in the world would you pretend that we cannot
see the "fruit" of false gospels - or "wolves in sheep's clothing?
----------------
Are you making up your OWN gospel as we speak?
---------------
@@onyebuekearinola482 ... What was well said?
The Bible says we are to identify and EXPEL false teachers from
the church because they are unsaved tares and children of Satan
and sheep's in wolves clothing... but you say "well said' to the idea
that it does not really matter what someone preaches. Amazing.
------------------
Joshua Theo Wise Virgin Our job is not to separate the wheat from the tares, that’s up to Jesus. We have no authority to say who makes it and who doesn’t. That attitude kinda flies in the face of the gospel. We are to love one another as Jesus loves us. We need to help correct one another but there should be no sound of superiority over one another. We are all God’s children. And to say with certainty that Lewis is “burning in hell” right now misses his life’s work. Mere Christianity was, in a way, his way to faith, how the logic and reasoning of this world ultimately made no sense without a creator. And his other works? I think they speak for themselves- especially the Narnia ones. C.S. Lewis never claimed to be THE source of knowledge of the Bible, in fact in Mere Christianity he often mentions how he feels unqualified in many matters to fully give his opinion. Just as with many people, Lewis was on a spiritual journey and on his way he tried to help as many people as he could. Ultimately I believe Jesus wants people who declare their allegiance to Him and not to other things. Based upon his writings I would have to say he was allied with Christ, even if he didn’t have a proper sense of doctrine in all matters. We will never know this side of heaven if he will actually be there but I have a tremendous amount of hope. Have a good day. 😀
As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" Jesus answered, "It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man's eyes with the mud and said to him, "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam" (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing. The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, "Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?" Some said, "It is he." Others said, "No, but he is like him." He kept saying, "I am the man." So they said to him, "Then how were your eyes opened?" He answered, "The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, 'Go to Siloam and wash.' So I went and washed and received my sight." They said to him, "Where is he?" He said, "I do not know." They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, "He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see." Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others said, "How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them. So they said again to the blind man, "What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?" He said, "He is a prophet." The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight and asked them, "Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?" His parents answered, "We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself." (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.) So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, "Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner." He answered, "Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see." They said to him, "What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?" He answered them, "I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?" And they reviled him, saying, "You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from." The man answered, "Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing." They answered him, "You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?" And they cast him out. Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" He answered, "And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?" Jesus said to him, "You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you." He said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him. Jesus said, "For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind."
John 9:1-22, 24-39 ESV
bible.com/bible/59/jhn.9.1-39.ESV
I try to let the text speak for itself but to break it down salvation is a work of the Lord. Works are a result of salvation not the cause as evidenced by this story.
Amen! Thanks for that clear summary. God alone deserves all the glory!
Is foreknowledge, freewill, grace and soteriology of any importance? Yes indeed. These questions will always abound in the hearts of any true reformer. The resting place is in Christ alone, by faith alone to the glory of God alone. 🙌🏽
Faith in Jesus by choice.
@@MichaelTheophilus906faith comes from the Holy Spirit not from your sinful nature
@@MichaelTheophilus906 that which is dead can not hear
@@Crusader926 Yahweh can raise the dead.
@@MichaelTheophilus906 exactly so you only come to faith because the Holy Spirit regenerates your heart of stone into a heart of flesh. Well done sir!
Every time I listen to this I get goosebumps.
Thank you, dear brother, for truth spoken!!
Piper is absolutely right that C. S. Lewis was much too light on exegesis and relatively much too heavy on philosophical reasoning.
I don't disagree, but Calvinism is hugely philosophical as well. For example, coming to conclusions that if Christ died for someone and they went to hell then that would be their sins being paid for twice and yet having very simple Bible verses stating "Christ tasted death for every man" and then choosing to agree in favor with the philosophical conclusions instead of obvious scripture.
@@eddiesprain8243 I agree firmly with you that the doctrine of so-called Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption is unbiblical.
And I agree with you also that the Calvinist argument for Limited Atonement that you refer to is far too simplistic. What the Bible says must be allowed to take precedence over reasoning.
It is true that when we are trying to understand biblical teaching, reasoning forms a valid part of the process. We not only read various passages to see what they have to say, but we also use reasoning to try to draw inferences from what we read. Both these things are legitimate.
However, the former is by far the more important. Because the Bible is from God, it infallibly teaches us what is true in all that is of importance for life and faith. By contrast, our ability to understand things is weak and inconsistent, and we should recognise that as a fact.
So when we find that the Bible teaches something, but we can’t understand how it can be true, we should side with Scripture over our own ability to understand.
There are many five-point Calvinists who have got things exactly the wrong way round in this area. They can’t understand how unlimited atonement fits with other things they believe. So what they should do is question those other things, or conclude that things fit together in a way that they can’t understand. But instead, they exalt their own ability to understand above biblical revelation, and they end up denying what the Bible teaches. What they need to do instead is lose confidence in their ability to understand, and allow Scripture to speak freely.
Basically, the Bible teaches that Christ died to provide atonement for all human beings, and somehow this must fit into the grand theological scheme of things, whether or not we can understand how.
I am non denominational, and Calvinism vs Armenianism was never something I’d ever even heard of until I began to stumble across the reformed content online while studying other things. I don’t really get why everyone gets so worked up over this. My thoughts are that the gospel should be preached to everyone and we should make disciples. Whether they chose by free will or they were predestined by God is immaterial and I think not worth worrying about as long as essential doctrine is believed. HOW people are saved is not nearly as important as THAT people are saved, and Jesus only commands us to concern ourselves with THAT people are saved.
Not true. If the how didn't matter, why did the Apostle Paul comment and teach so much about God's "electing" and "choosing" and "predestining" of believers? He chose Israel. The Bible is replete with teaching on His sovereignty, and that includes His sovereignty over salvation as well.
@@aaronwaggoner8014he taught it for those who consume solid food and are mature in the faith , it is not for those still drinking milk.
I am a Baptist minister of the Gospel of the Grace of God. To deny the Grace of God is to deny the truth of the Cross. Not trying to defend Calvin, the truth of scriptures will do that. One who is of works for salvation has not heard the gospel of their salvation. Sad but the truth. Lord Bless
We need to share the Gospel so those that choose to believe and have eyes to see and ears to hear can be saved by Gods grace and mercy though his work on the cross. God does harden some hearts and grabs some supernaturally but that is his sovereign right to do. We need to be thankful for the salvation God has given to us freely and stop worrying about how and to whom. All the glory to God be given.
Thanks very much John wonderfully explained. 1 Corinthians 1 verse 29 - 31 ; 29 That no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God - and righteousness and sanctification and redemption - 31 that, as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the Lord."
I don't agree with Calvinism (Monergism), however, I do agree that perpetually debating Calvinism vs. Arminianism is fruitless.
However, I also agree that the doctrines and theologies that we believe have great effect on us.
I also agree that C.S. Lewis had a philosophy > theology manner of reasoning.
as does everyone
Well it's just because you're missing one important point:
As R.C. Sproul said, the salvation is a Monergism (since you we're dead! Not partially, but fully dead! Ephesians 2) but after you're Saved, the Sanctification is a Sinergism between you (with a new nature, a renewed mind and a will that's binded to Christ!!) And The Holy Spirit that does The Work in YOU!
ANY OTHER doctrine is understandable, just not Biblical
@@marius-9333
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.
~1 Corinthians 5:22 (ESV)
Christ died for all of Adam's dead race, not just a limited fraction of Adam's race. This is biblical restoration of free will by prevenient grace; inclusivist (universally accessible), synergistic salvation.
@@DownwardsRising ok, let's play along then:
So, you're saying that for those who die and went to hell Jesus's Sacrifice was unable to save them? Was inefficient for them? So Jesus's death for them was in vain? That's what you're saying?
@@marius-9333
Eternal hell is the second death, not the first. How can there be a second death if there is not a second life? Jesus' sacrifice gives second life to all, and is able to save everyone from the second death, not just a few, as claimed by "limited atonement." Nevertheless, it also sets in front of all the choice of death and life. Let us choose life!
I am neither a Calvinist or an Arminian. My God neither controls every aspect of a person's life down to the minute details nor does He sit back on high, disinterested in His creation as we duke it out amongst ourselves. My God is a living God that interacts with His creation, engaging in relationships with His people as they walk through life together.
Are you somehow under the belief that Arminians believe differently?
At the heart of this challenge is God’s sovereignty!!
Both sides recognize the fact that He (God) is the essence of reality, thus, sovereign over all that He has created, however, differ on a perception on how that reality is displayed and what that looks like.
Both sides believe they are right, and they celebrate that perception, all the while looking to the other side of the church aisle wondering how they could ever disagree.
At which point God looks upon His people!
What’s His perspective and what is His thoughts?
It is not calvinism or Armenianism or provisionism or right theology but the GRACE OF GOD that saves us. Our conversion of being born again is what saves us. Ordo Salutis is the contention and the debate.
It’s alllllll of God x God calls, God awakens, God provides, God effects and God secures.
Amen!
Im only a year young in the Lord and really not sure about a lot of things but when i read stuff like your comment there it makes me spontaneously shout "Praise the Lord!"
@@tonyt5218 Hello brother Robert! Your message is encouraging! Glad to know God has opened your spiritual eyes to believe in Him. Be confident that His Spirit will faithfully teach u into all truth! God bless u!!!
@Tony T 🙌 Praise the Lord, saved wretches like us ))) Blessed Brother Blessed )
th-cam.com/video/dk5s1ai5JAk/w-d-xo.html
@ amen!! Bless His Holy Name!
Explained as only Piper could: Clearly, Heartfelt and Empathetic.
Thank you John Piper for your ministry and your faithful service
God bless you always
Trinitarian.
Short answer to why I am not a Calvinist:
1 Corinthians 1:10 "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"
To all those who call themselves Calvinists I would echo Paul's question, Was Calvin crucified for you? If anyone thinks this approach is frivolous I would reply two things: 1) that I also have a long answer, covering the many unbiblical aspects of Calvinistic doctrine. And 2). I have personally experienced the hurtful divisive effects of a prideful loyalty to Calvin that eclipsed a common fellowship in Christ. There is an individual, a brother in Christ, who has severed all communication with me because he could not convert me to Calvinism. We had discussed various aspects of "tulip theology" but our last communication was a conversation in which I brought up Calvin's involvement in the execution of Servetus. My friend angrily defended Calvin even though one of the "heresies" for which Servetus was burned at the stake was opposition to infant baptism, a charge for which I would be guilty and subject to execution if i had lived in Calvin's Geneva.
Historian Bernard Cottret summarizes Calvin's argument in a syllogism based on a lost letter: "Socrates is a man, and therefore mortal; Servetus is a heretic, and therefore combustible." Cottret also cites a letter from John Calvin on Servetus that says: "One should not be content with simply killing such people, but should burn them cruelly."
I forget who it was that asked, "How could a follower of Christ the Lamb act like such a cruel and ravenous lion?"
P.S. I'm not an Arminian either.
And you shouldn’t be “freewill” either
it's funny how narrow minded we are...both predestination/election/ and free will among others are clearly stated in the Bible... it just shows how carnal we religious people really are,each looking at the opposite side of the same coin
All things are created by Him, sustained in Him, and reconciled through Him (Col 1:15-20).
That's true if we were left to our freewill, without hope would we be. Knowing that God gives those up to it.
It's both. No one knows exactly how salvation works. To claim they know the formula for how God works in people's lives and how salvation is found is not correct. Neither Calvinism nor Arminianism is the right answer. They are simply two different human understandings of a thing so huge and mysterious that there can't be a full answer too for our finite minds
Beautifully put.
Such statements sounds good and touchy, but ultimately just useless tripe to be honest... Just because we cannot fully comprehend a doctrine does not mean that we cannot rule out something that clearly contradicts it as clearly wrong or unbiblical... In other words, an error is an error and not simply "human understandings". You would not say the same thing regarding Unitarianism and trinitarianism for example... although certainly one cannot fully comprehend the trinity.
@@kb27787 I start with this. All you're about to read comes from a man who wasted years telling people off, correcting their ideas of God, and "always being right". I'm thankful God has humbled me so greatly and also given me amazing people to talk to and the life changing ministries I've been allowed to be apart of that have deeply shaped my understanding of Him.
that's fine if you feel that way. But my "useless tripe" came from 14 years of prayer, reading the Word/other sources, and sitting and talking with Theologians and professors of theology. Also came from running a food bank, working with the homeless, and doing years of ministry. This was not a flippant thought I made up in order to appease myself.
God cares far more about people than he does their theology. Someone with weak or bad theology will go to heaven with everyone else because they proclaim Jesus Christ at Lord. Theological fights and arguments are not fruit of the Holy Spirit and do not reflect the character of Jesus. This is not touchy anything. It takes far more energy to sit and engage woth those you disagree with than to simply tell them that they are wrong.
My experience has been that what each person needs to understand about God is given to them through the Spirit over many years of walking. Patients and kindness will go much further than picking apart their theology.
Kyron... no child. It is NOT true that "nobody knows how salvation works"
and it's "both" Calvinism and Arminianism... being a little "lukewarm" there?
---------------
@@tobiassanders3831 no child.
It is NOT true that "nobody knows how salvation works"
and it's "both" Calvinism and Arminianism... being a little "lukewarm" there?
It's so funny. I came to an understanding of the gospel that ended up being the same as the five points of Calvinism, but without Calvin. It just seemed to be what the Bible was teaching. The when I came across Calvinism I thought that it was just an exposition on how one gets saved that I was surprised anyone would have argued differently. It just seemed so necessary and obvious to me that I could not understand why anyone would disagree with it. Later, I learned that others did not feel this way. I am still surprised at that to this day.
Same. It's not about Calvin. It's about Christ. So many forget that when it comes to this subject and it's because it puts the merit of God's plan for their salvation on Christ, not them. Humanity is prideful and selfish and arrogant wretches! Without God, the choice would have never been good coming from us because it would have been a decision made based upon our desire within our pride and selfishness and arrogant wretchedness.
It’s funny because the opposite kind of happened to me.
Same, for me too. I grew up in a church that rarely taught what the Bible said (expository preaching) then when I got old enough to read the Bible and more importantly, think for myself, I could see the sovereignty of God on every page. When I began to ask questions I was told I was wrong, but I believed in what the Bible said (illuminated by the Holy Spirit) more than in the conventional human wisdom of fallen man. For years I had to remain a closet Calvinist, until one day I found Desiring God and the ministry of John Piper. It was the first time I KNEW I wasn't crazy, that there were other people out there who saw what I saw in the Bible, going back at least several hundred years, and I knew what it was called for the very first time, namely Calvinism. Since then I have found good Biblical teachers, mentors, and a local church that will help build up my faith rather in the Lord. Without finding other like minded believers and the online ministry of John Piper and others, I probably wouldn't be saved and where I am today. Praise the Lord for his grace in saving a sinner like me!!
Curtis: Do you love the nonelect? You don't think Jesus does.
@@RossTheWretch So why does God make the nonelect? I guess He hates them, right?
Well I found myself searching out these topics because of this train of thought.
2 Cor 5:15
"And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again."
So I think, or maybe the devil in my ear asks, then why aren't all saved?
Because you have to believe to be saved I say.
then...........
John 6:44
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day."
and.........
Romans 8:29
"For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren."
The eventual conclusion to all this back and forth thinking is that some are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction and others are vessels of mercy, prepared for glory! Prepared for glory? ARE YOU JOKING! Prepared for Glory? ME ???
So because of all this thinking I've been doing I've thought a lot about when it was that I believed. When did God every call to my heart? It wasn't when my father ran us to the church to get baptized because he was fairly sure the rapture was about to take place. I was 12. I guess he figured better safe than sorry. And no, we don't think we are saved because we got dunked. Myself and sister sat with the pastor of the church who asked us all the questions, and made sure we understood what it was we were doing. And we did.
But that's not when I believed. I believed when I was 8. Riding in my fathers truck he had a preacher on the radio talking about heaven. Talking about Jesus Christ, and describing heaven. I'd never heard something like that before. See I've worked this back because if it is God who calls to the heart, then He did to mine that day. My reaction was one of awe, and desire, to be there right then, right that very second that's what I wanted. And that's my desire still.
I heard this somewhere. Maybe Piper said it, I don't remember, but it sounded right. But this guy said salvation is a door. A person stands on one side and it says, " whosoever will, let him come ". And if a person does, and they walk through that door, on the back side it says "chosen before the foundation of the world".
the correct answer is no.period.turn the page.all it does is it divides the church with endless arguments.I struggled with this for 10-15 years ,trust me it's an other religious rabbit hole to chase down and find nothing at the end.both party has a point.I believe in both....let's move on
In discussing the differences between the two doctrines it reminds me of the problems physicists encounter with reconciling RELATIVITY and QUANTUM MECHANICS. Their mathematics appear to contradict each other yet BOTH are correct! The solution lies in keeping each in its respective context .RELATIVITY applies to bodies in strong gravitational fields, and with velocities approaching the speed of light; it is deterministic in nature and predictable. QUANTUM MECHANICS on the other hand, governs the very small (sub-atomic) and puts the “OBSERVER” at the center of what is being measured; it is probabilistic in nature and it can only be measured by the law of averages.
In the same way CALVINISM appears to side with the deterministic predestination leaving no room for free will; whereas ARMINIANISM puts God as the frame work, but mans free will is center stage.
In my own salvation experience I came to realize there is a sort of mixture of both. When I walked down the isle in Oct of 1991 and received Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, I was told by everyone in my congregation that I was saved, Holy Spirit filled, and Born Again. I was told that I should accept that by faith. Coming from a heavy scientific background I was skeptical nonetheless. I didn’t feel any different than I did before, I still felt the urges to sin just like I did before, the only difference is now I knew what I was doing wrong. I kept thinking to myself that there has got to be more to this salvation business than just saying a little prayer; I needed CERTAINTY; I was going to make it my sole purpose in life to find the answer to this utterly important question, after all, you only get ONCE CHANCE at this; once you’re dead you can’t come back to try again.
I made up my mind that I was not going to trust my soul to any man and have them digest the Bible for me, just like I had made it my passion to seek out the truth via science, I was now going to put science aside and dive into the scriptures with the same passion and zeal!
I wasn’t much for reading the Bible so what I did was I purchased the King James Bible on CD; that way all the wasted time I spent on the road commuting back and forth to work would be used wisely into hearing the Word. So as the story goes it was an hour drive to work, an hour I spent in my car eating lunch out of a small cooler I brought to work, and an hour drive home; that was 3 hours of Word a day and 15 hours of Word a week; that’s a lot of Word!! In three years of this pattern I accumulated not only scores and scores of scriptures memorized, but also ENTIRE CHAPTERS memorized verbatim word for word! I had a lot of scriptures in my head but was still blind as a bat, hence the scripture:
“But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Matthew 6:23)
It was not till one Saturday morning on March 25, 1995 while alone on the beach in my car listening to integrity Hosana worship music, reading God’s Word, and loving God with all my MIND, HEART, SOUL, and STRENGTH, that the God of the universe took mercy on me and poured out his Spirit into me opening my eyes and revealing his TRUTH. It was the most unimaginably amazing, and frightening thing I had ever experienced.
I had always read the Bible as a 3rd person, in other words, this apostle is writing to this other apostle, this scripture doesn’t apply to me; for the first time since I first began getting into the scriptures did I come to the realization that there was no 3rd person; the Bible had become 3-D with the words alive and coming out of the pages and speaking directly to ME! Every scripture every parable I didn’t seem to quite understand was as plain as if I was reading a children’s book!
Now the reason I decided to write this long post is because I cannot stress enough the importance of seeking God through his word on your own. Man will lie to you, God won’t. Jesus promised his disciples:
“Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8: 31-32)
Jesus and his Word are ONE AND THE SAME:
If A=B and B=C then A=C
A= God the father
B=Jesus
C= The Word
If GOD=JESUS, and JESUS=WORD, then GOD=WORD
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD”. (John 1:1)
But guess what… I found out that morning the WORD is also the HOLY SPIRIT!!
“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the WORDS that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and they are life.”
(John 6:63)
“And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the SPIRIT, which is the WORD OF GOD”.
(Ephesians 6:17)
One must be BORN AGAIN OF HIS WORD!!!
“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the WORD OF GOD, which liveth and abideth for ever.”
(1 Peter 1:23)
That would make the equation for God:
GOD = WORDSPIRIT or G=WS
My background in science would take me the rest of the way leading me to the revelation that God’s equation is
G= WS2 (squared)
To GOD be all the glory!!! God bless!!
bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000247219/From-Darkness-into-Light.aspx
My reflections are similar with Evon, except for the God equation, which is likely off by unmeasurable magnitudes. God is doing and being more than we can fathom.
Such an amazing testimony! Praise God!
"For no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him to me, and at the Last Day I will cause all such to rise again from the dead." - John 6:44. This doesn't settle this fruitless debate, BUT it does tell me that I owe every bit of my faith and subsequent salvation to God and God alone. My sin is my sin. He is not the author of sin, but of salvation. I am no robot, but He does for me what I could never do myself.
If Calvinistic predestination and determinism is true, then you were predestined to believe that way, and so were those who disagree with you. So then no, it's not important if it's true. If it is false, then it's a big deal since it distorts God's character.
No, whatever is true is also important, because the Father seeks for us to worship Him in Spirit and in truth. I need to study the Bible, the whole Bible, and worship God as He reveals Himself to be. Not the God in my fallen mind. That is idolatry. So that doesn't settle the question of which is true, but whatever is true is of primary importance.
@@DaleBoyce2012, Calvinism is NOT true because it is a mixture of 'Biblical Truth and Man-Made Lies'... For instance This STATEMENT of John Calvin is a lie: ''God arranges all things by His sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to Glorify Him by their destruction.'' by John Calvin =>>>> It is also a lie that the elect should be regenerated first, before they can answer the call of God and believe in Jesus...
Here’s how to sum up this argument. Will there be non Calvinist believers in Heaven? Yes. Given that point alone, it isn’t an essential doctrine and can be argued to be more devisive than anything.
@jeremynoel9291yessir
Reminds me of a story I heard once about a man who went to heaven.
St Peter was giving him a tour of all the mansions, the Streets of Gold, the Pearly Gates, and even showed him where various people congregated according to their denomination in life.
When St Peter took him past a dark closed off street, the man asked who was down there.
St Peter replied, "This is where we keep the Calvinists. They think they're the only ones up here."
Calvin cops the flak but Arminianism was condemned at the Canons of Dort which predates his writing and also even earlier at the council of Carthage in the 4/5th century, Pelagius was condemend as a heretic by teaching that man's will wasn't totally in bondage to sin, he could choose good and evil. Arminianism is just the same old heresy rising it's ugly head over and over. Man is dead in sin and trespass. Dead people don't choose.
The debate matters because it affects how people see God. Calvinist predestinarianism portrays God divinely foreordaining evil things to happen and selecting only some people to believe 'out of his mere good pleasure' (to use the Shorter Westminster Catechism's phrase) despite having the power to save all. What Calvinists frequently miss in railing at Arminians is that Arminian theology is not focussed on free will but instead on the goodness of God, who offers prevenient grace to all.
Sometimes, too, it's a matter of scriptural interpretation. Take for example Ephesians ch1v4-6 - it's sometimes rendered as 'God chose us to be in Christ'. More correctly it's 'God chose us in Christ' - as in, God chose Christ, and us by extension if we are in Christ - 'to be holy and blameless in his sight' - being holy and blameless is what God has chosen for us who believe, and so the verse is not necessarily a proof-text for predestined belief. John Lennox's 'Determined to Believe' is worth reading for more information, along with anything by Roger Olson.
Last point of Calvin....”burn him at stake... off with his head...”? This was a stain on Calvins record. As Christians we can never force our doctrine on people with the use of brutal violent tactics. We are called to peace.
Saanichton, your comment commits the logical fallacy of irrelevant thesis. In other words, the Calvinism-Arminian debate is solely about Biblical doctrine. We need to search and study the scriptures to see if it is true (2 Timothy 2:15, Acts 17:11). But instead of searching the scripture, many debate the character of John Calvin as if he wrote the Bible. The character of John Calvin is irrelevant to the doctrines of the Bible because even the man after God's own heart was a murderer, liar, adulterer, and covetous (2 Samuel 11). It's amazing that we negate the Christian faith of men in the past based on what we think they did while validating our own faith ignoring the many sins we don't even think of or many times repent of.
Calvin witnessed to Servetus. He didn’t kill him.
Get you facts straight before you accuse.
@@pateunuchity884 I know, get your facts straight! He suggested that perhaps a beheading should replace a burning. No he did not light the match.... I did not say he did.
@@2timothy23 I think Calvin got ahead of himself. God has obscured His msyteries and judgements which no man can search. Especially sin filled men!
PSA that these great theologians are not providing 'doctrines of men' that Paul warned against. They are sincerely Christian, trying to connect the dots of Scripture and live as if all of it were true. This is no "I'm with Paul" or "I'm with Apollos" Corinthian infighting. No one is competing with Scripture, they are all attempting to exegete it. But we come to different conclusions. Some of us are going to be more right and wrong than others in the end. We're meant to be like the Bereans, searching the Scriptures daily for truth. This is just an issue you do have to deal with as you read your Bible, and you're lucky to have a wealth of resources from God's historical church to help you come to conclusions and consider arguments you hadn't conceived of before.
The important thing is not to go further than what Scripture teaches, but also to go far enough. If you believe Scripture is God's word, you believe that God speaks clearly through it. You may be in a privileged position where you get to just avoid these questions and say "nobody's right" without any honest grappling with what different theologians have had to say. Ministers can't do that and you probably shouldn't either. It's a 21st century secular inclination that makes you want to do that, not a Biblical one.
dox yl Thought that was really well said
I’m not a “calvinist” or “Arminian”, i’m a Christian. The desperate and sad attempt to understand everything that comes with being a Christian is destructive to the wider church. God has given us the answers! He has given us salvation! The idea that men can understand something as complex God is ridiculous.
1 John 2:2. Connect the dots of 1 Tim. 2:4 and Ephesians 1:9-11. Then connect the dots of Philippians 2:9-11 to Romans 10:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 12:3. Also 1 Tim. 4:10-11. Colossians 1:15-20. 1 Corinthians 15:20-28 Romans 5:17-18, 11:32-36. John 12:32
You are right on. These guys think they know everything and can delete scriptures that go against what they teach.
1 John 1:10
I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought.
Calvinism and arminianism cause division for no good reason.
Every preacher would be wise to say what you just said.
But there are six words every preacher hates to say.
I don't know.
I was wrong.
@@sonnymustarseed7034??? Connect what dots? How about you read the Bible in full context and let the Bible interpret itself instead of letting a man tell you what Scripture says? That is why all you have are proof texts and you have no idea what the context of those verses are. I bet (like most of all Calvinists) that you don't even know what the Gospel is. And you claim to be a Christian... you are not. You are in a whole separate religion called Calvinism. You use the same Scriptures but you redefine words and twist verses out of context and meaning to submit to your false doctrines. It is sick. Repent (which means to acknowledge your sin and turn from it)... by the way God wills that all men repent, and believe in the Biblical Jesus... you know, the one who died for all men, especially those that believe!
@@eiontactics9056 I hope you do understand that salvation is NOT based on a theological view point of the word. You’ll find that nowhere in scripture. If God made having perfect doctrine one of the necessities to be saved then we’d all be damned including you. Chances are we all have some false doctrine somewhere in our theology. Humble yourself brother or sister
@@emilianoking9400 The issue is, Calvinism just isn't slightly theological differences. It is an entirely different Gospel that preaches a different Jesus and God. So much so, it is a whole different religion, like Mormonism.
We don't go around calling Mormons brothers or sisters, do we?
The only issue with Calvinism, is that they don't have their own dedicated Church. Like "Church of Calvinism" or something. They go around in our communities and churches, and people who are ignorant on what Calvinism is, falsely validate them by calling them "brothers" or "sisters".
Beautiful GLORY TO GOD PRAISE HIS HOLY NAME
No one can try hard enough to be saved... for man it is impossible, but for God all things are possible... its all about God and His will.... it has nothing to do with our puny meaningless sinful will..... We have a will but it is far from free..... we go from being enslaved to sin to being slaves of righteousness.... our prideful nature hates that we do not have the ability to assert our "free" will.... that we do not have any control of our salvation.... that we have to leave it in God's hands and His ultimate control for our salvation..... HOWEVER, we want to leave it in God's hands.... because if it wasn't up to God to save us completely because of HIS WILL, then NOBODY would be saved.... you do not want free will..... if we had free will NOBODY would choose salvation!
This is the hardest pill to swallow in the christian community. Election is hated more then eternal security. They do not believe because they are not God's sheep.
Thanks Piper, you know I love you! And you have exposed sin in the church at a great cost to yourself. So God bless you :)
Saanichton Ministries, What sin did Piper exposed? Calvinism is a wrong doctrine, probably evil.....
@@josephdurraz8574 Yes, I would ask the same question.. but three years later!
Several problems with this one. Whoever provided the Lewis quote...why "Arminianism"? Lewis didn't call it that. How about letting him speak for himself? He described it just fine without need of a label.
Dr. Piper; I am COMPLETELY confused by your assessment of Lewis and his approach to this topic. You assert that you have ‘no idea how’ he exegeted the text but that you presume he did. Then that ‘we have to guess’ at how he read his Bible. Even though you ‘presume’ he did exegete the text, you then boldly proclaim that he views the topic philosophically. Do you presume he did expeditious study of his Bible AND he views the topic philosophically…or are you saying you assume he didn’t do his studies ‘properly’ therefore it was philosophical? The only way you have left me to read this is that, since he doesn’t agree with you, he didn’t study properly and therefore views it philosophically. Feel free to correct me.
You go on to explain the Biblical basis for your understanding of the soteriological process asserting that Lewis didn’t see the importance of it. Where in that quote does he say that? He simply says that he will not argue it. You dismiss his timelessness reasoning for not arguing the soteriological process ‘philosophy’ but could it be that what he is saying is that your soteriological process is the philosophy and the timelessness of God is DOCTRINE? The only reason you have to cram God into time is to make your process ‘theology’, because without doing so your ‘theology’ loses all of its proof texts and becomes ‘philosophy’. That applies to both sides of the soteriologic debate and THAT is what Lewis is talking about. Not that it isn’t an important question, just an unanswerable one so why be steeped in it? Why let it divide us and cause strife among the brethren?
Your PRE, PRE, yes, PRE destined concern is entirely PREsupposition. There IS a reason God uses tensed verbiage in scripture but the only requirement for that reason to apply to soteriology as it relates to God is for your understanding of it to be true. Nothing in any of what you have said requires God to exist in time outside of your need for him to in order to explain your understanding of the salvation process.
C.S. Lewis understood the Biblical Doctrine that God transcends time. That isn’t to say anyone (including Lewis) understands what that ‘looks’ like. He just accepted the fact that God exists outside of time and recognized that there was absolutely NO need to bring God into time except to give our minds something to rest on when attempting to understand the incomprehensible.
I’m with Lewis on the issue. Although I see where Piper is coming from, there is no proof of each camp, not without knowing what’s in the Book of Life to determine it, then I think it just an endless debate.
Genesis 2:16 NIV "And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are FREE to eat from any tree in the garden;"
What happened to this "FREE" that God spoke about?
Why did Adam and Eve sin yet they were not "FREE"?
Except from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. Age of Innocence. Man fell, he chose evil over obedience to God's clear warning. Even in a perfect environment they chose to disobey God. Did He vaporize them? No! He knew the plans He had for them. Jesus dying in our place, for our sins. Praise His holy Name!!!
The debate is overblown when it interferes with following Christ.
If the truth could be known I have little doubt the honest people on both sides would have figured it out already. - And I dare say that any honest person will admit there is true merit to each school of thought....Note please: that we all do well to remember Jesus's words John 5:39 -40 "You examine the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those very Scriptures that testify about Me; 40 and yet you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life." .....Let's keep our passion for the true Gospel, our zeal for Jesus, our Love and time spent for His purposes....doing His will,... for His Glory, and yes for our true benefit.....
Love to all.
John Piper is right to say that differences between Calvinism and Arminianism are important. And he is also right to say that matters of time don't negate these differences.
But there is a huge problem here, which is the implied assumption that Calvinism and Arminianism are the only two options for an evangelical. So many evangelicals seem to have the idea that, on the issue of the relationship between God's sovereignty and human choices regarding salvation, an evangelical will either be a Calvinist, an Arminian, or will be undecided.
This is completely wrong, and it misses not just my favourite system on this issue - Molinism - but my second favourite system on this issue as well - Lutheranism!
If the issue of how God's choices and human choices fit together is assumed to be a battle between Calvinism and Arminianism, the whole starting point for examining this issue is wrong. It massively over-simplifies the options.
There shouldn't be "options" when it comes to how God interacts with his people. There is ONE true God who has ONE unchanging word. Yes we can never fully understand him, but that doesn't mean we just pick different "options" of how we think God works and call all the options equal. God calls us to know him and understand him as best as we can. We need to do dedicate ourselves to understand him by his word and his word alone. If we believe that there is one truth, then there should only be one truthful interpretation.
@@SteveTheWizard You are absolutely right that there is one true God who has one unchanging word, and that there is one truthful interpretation. And you are clearly implying too that when theological systems contradict each other, they can't both be right, and that is, of course, absolutely right too.
But you have misunderstood what I meant by 'options', and to be fair to you I think I could have expressed myself better.
When I referred to options, I was simply referring to the point in time before a Christian begins to study the issue of how God's choosing us to be saved and our choosing to be saved fit together. At that point, before examining this issue, it is a mistake to rule out anything without giving it a hearing. There are many evangelicals who start to examine this issue with an assumption that either Calvinism or Arminianism must be correct. So they start their investigation by allowing only two potential options for what is true. And this is a big mistake.
I wasn't for a moment suggesting that each theological system is equal or that there are optional ways of interpreting the Bible. There is one truth, and we should seek it. But it is wrong to start with an assumption that either Calvinism or Arminianism must be correct. That is all I meant. But it is a big point, because it is extremely common for evangelicals to make this wrong assumption. See, for example, the title of this video, which seems to suggest that the relevant theological systems in this debate are Calvinism and Arminianism, but there are other systems that are relevant too.
@@maxaplin4204 That makes a lot more sense then, but what is most paramount is that we stick to the theology of the Bible and not a theological system. When I began heavily studying the scriptures I pretty much came to the conclusion of Calvanism before I fully understood what Calvanism was. In fact someone called me one when I was having a discussion about theology even though I never identified as one. That is why we need to make sure we stick to the scriptures when we discuss theology and not rely to heavily on other human interpretations of the scriptures.
@@SteveTheWizard I agree with you, and I can also relate a bit. But if someone would say the exact same thing as you, but found himself embracing or leaning more towards Arminianism instead. How would you interpret that?
@@dist221 Well I would sit down and discuss the scriptures that support Calvinism and the doctrines there in. God calls us to lovingly preach the truth to those in the world. The important thing to remember though is that we are only called to witness, not called to convince. If I do my best to explain the doctrines in the Bible and the other person still doesn't believe/agree with me, then in the sight of God I have done as I have been commanded.
Wrong here John. The difference between you and Lewis isn't a matter of taking biblical sentences seriously. It's to do with exegetical understanding, or how one interprets Calvinisms prooftexts.
I side with Lewis. Calvinism is a manichean Gnostic interpretation of the scriptures. The fact that Arminians and Calvinists believe different fundamental truths about God's character should be enough to refute Calvinism, or did God think it was funny to ordain his children to believe different things?? The reason people believe differently is due to freewill, free will to study exegetical methods and to decide on which is the most coherent understanding of the text.
I love how his respect for Lewis, didn't keep him from speaking about how and why he was wrong.
The question is this : is false doctrine OK? I believe Calvin had it right. We are responsible and unable. God is able. It is extremely comforting to me. God will not loose me.
For what it's worth to any Calvinist who reads this: Your theology teaches that we all are sinners deserving of God's wrath. It also teaches that God predestined the elect and the non-elect BEFORE the foundation of the world and BEFORE anyone had done any good or bad. So which is it? Are we guilty sinners deserving of God's wrath or wasn't that really already settled before the foundation of the earth when we were all in fact innocent and had not yet done any good or bad? And don't give me the old potter and clay analogy from Paul in Romans as an excuse to skate by this. These are the kinds of rabbit holes that Calvinism will take you down. I advise you to accept what the Bible says and not what someone like Piper tells you it teaches.
@Jeremy Noel Yes, except that I think you missed my point which is that if God elected certain individuals for salvation and damned the others then it was done before anyone had done anything or had even been born. Calvinists love to point out that none of us deserve God's saving grace because we're sinners...but God made His choice, according to them, before sinners had even sinned or were even created. So in Calvinism you have God damning people to Hell and saving others who, by virtue of not having been created yet, are innocent of anything and everything.
Do you understand?
@@TrueLifeAdventures
I understand the point you're trying to make, but you're question is nonsensical. You're trying to say that if God elects some to salvation, then, by necessary consequence they are no longer sinners. That's a straw man argument. It's not what any Calvinist would argue.
Further, Jesus is the Lamb slain BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF earth. How can this be if Adam hadn't even been created, nor the earth? So that bankrupts your premise of sinlessness before you even start. The "free will" of Adam must be held in tension with this truth. Was the Christ to come, plan A or plan B?
The Calvinist is consistent to point out that God elects some for salvation. He does not elect or predestine anyone to damnation. The WAGES of sin is death. The sinner earns damnation for their own actions, their own sin. God is just, for given the sinner what they earned. He's under no obligation to give grace to anyone. God does not elect them to sin or force them to sin. Jesus taught, he who sins is a slave to sin. IE the sin nature or sin desire or man's will to sin. All of which is to disobey God.
@@toddcote4904 I'm not quite sure what it is you're trying to say.
Firstly, if God predestined some for salvation before anyone was even created then that decision was not based on them having sinned against Him. They weren't even here to sin.
Which also means that God chose not to elect certain people for salvation before they had even sinned and so they are reprobate regardless.
Secondly, most translations do not say "...the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world..." but rather "...slain from the foundation of the world."
Thirdly, we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God. You become elect through faith in Christ Jesus.
Lastly, the Westminster Confession states that EVERYTHING that comes to pass is by decree of God. If that's true, then the sin that people commit can be blamed on God and that's not a good position to take...which many Calvinists do along with the others I mentioned.
Bravo! That was some some world class, grade A sophistry! Calvinism is as phony as a $3 bill & wholly unscriptural. Imagine a loving God who created beings who will be condemned to eternal destruction with no choice of their own in the matter! This is absurd and flies in the face of everything Jesus revealed to mankind about his Father.
One danger I see with Calvinism is the “once saved always saved” mentality. So I can choose to sin with adultery, but have in the back of my mind that I am secure in Christ and that he paid for my sin. Maybe that is why there is so much remarriage adultery in the church today. What passages we can’t ignore are ones like, those who’s names have been blotted out of the Lambs book of life.... work out your salvation with fear and trembling, endure to the end, the 10 virgins all invited, but only 5 made it. David Pawson, says no one can pluck us out of Gods hand, except ourselves. We are not saved until we arrive there with our new bodies. Period. So many will go to hell brainwashed with Calvinism thinking once saved always saved, even as they let sin abound with the cheap grace doctrine. What are they told? ...depart from Me workers of lawlessness, I never knew you. So these may have been believers, but never truly repented from sin nor were they sanctified.
Amen. I can't stand preachers on TH-cam preaching the 'Once saved always saved messages' not only is it a completely incorrect interpretation of the Bible, but it's leading people astray and then giving them a false safety net.
Pray for the people ingesting these poised messages. I'm not saying they don't have good intentions, but they're surely decieved.
-God Bless
But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.
1 cor 9:27
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire
Mathw 7 :19
21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
22 Consider therefore the kindness(A) and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue(B) in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.(C)
Romans 11:21,22
I beleive it can be lost......coz the attribute of God in OT and NT is not changing
Only 2 who started of from Egypt made it to canan....God weights hearts.... That attribute is not changing...
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Or do you not know that the unrighteous[a] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,[b] 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God
Saanichton Ministries If we can loose our salvation one that was given to us as a gift from God with promises of the stamp of the Holy Spirit,sanctification and hope for the eternal life in the finished work of Jesus... then we cannot trust God in ANYTHING. This God who cannot be trusted isn’t faithful and that is Not YAHWEH!...
Laura Flavier
Thats your imagination
Is that what you would do with the grace of God?? God forbid!!
I sometimes reflect on this: When we get to glory it is likely that most believers there will be Chinese, and they won’t ever have heard of most of the theologians we discuss and get preoccupied with.
As a non Calvinist who has watched friends and family members convert to Calvinism, the only thing I've noticed change in their lives is an increase in arrogance and an increase in antagonistic debate. Nothing else has changed.
Everyone goes through that stage when we learn truth and we want to win arguments and it makes us prideful. It means they haven’t really understood the doctrines of grace rightly. But I went through that phase also, but by the grace of God, as I have matured in the faith, the Lord has humbled me. When someone understands the doctrines of grace in their heart, not just their head, it makes us the most humble.
@@hollybooth6946 The Father gave all authority to the Son. If you have to have faith in the Son BEFORE you can get to the Father, how can Calvinism not be another Gospel?
*_SCRIPTURE:_* John 14:6 KJV
Jesus saith unto him, … *_no man cometh unto the Father, but by me._*
*_CALVINISM:_* John 14:6 KJV
Jesus saith unto him: … no man cometh unto the -Father- Son, but by -me- the Father.
@Ben Jones Already took it up with Him in His Scripture. No one can know the Father, unless they come through the Son, never the opposite way:
Ephesians 1:5 NASB95
He predestined us to adoption as sons *_through Jesus Christ to Himself_* according to the kind intention of His will,
Matthew 11:27 KJV
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; *_neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him._*
Respectfully this argument seems to paint calvinists with the broadest of brushes. I certainly am sorry that they seem that way and maybe they are. However, this is like saying every doctor is rude because I met six of them and they were all rude. Or this is like saying all teachers are terrible at their jobs because I didn’t like the ones I had. There is no truth in this it’s just simply your experience with like seven or eight people who are individuals.
@AVB2Unfortunately, the Arminians have much more Scripture to point to.
Luke 15:17-24
17And when HE CAME TO HIMSELF, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! 18I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, 19And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.
20And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. 21And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son. 22But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: 23And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: 24For this my son WAS DEAD, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.
So much for being dead and unable to do anything.
No! It’s not scriptural ! Stay away from the doctrines of men and silly controversies , as Paul told us !
John Harrington... right? The doctrines of Arminianism is heresy
Calvinism is most certainly biblical. It's just that it lays out some doctrines that aren't always easy for us in our fallenness to come to terms with.
@@tylerpedersen9836 that's an odd thing to say.
'I know Calvinism is scriptural, I just can't understand it because I'm human'.
Seriously?
@@kerriwilson7732 It would be odd to say that, but that's not what I said. Do you perfectly understand all of the teachings of the Bible? Do you perfectly accept w/o hesitation all the "tough teachings" of the Bible?
I'm not really a fan of having labels to the two sides. It's like making teams that naturally compete against each other, as opposed to teammates who work together.
That being said, I was drawn to predestination as it emphasizes God's role in running everything. I just really love the subject of placing God above ourselves.
When it gets to the point where we are telling people that it's all God's choice, and that they don't play a role in it, and that they are or aren't chosen and that's just that, I really feel we are doing a disservice to God and his role for humanity. Yes, God is sovereign, but we still have a responsibility to do His Will.
We also shouldn't use predestination as an excuse to not evangelize to people or judge people who are more on the side of free will. We shouldn't use it as a reason to be like, "Well God's in control, nothing I can do about it". Just study the Word and do what pleases Him.
... and vice versa...
The Word spells out election ❤
I think I would be terrified to go to bed every night wondering if I was going to be a Christian in the morning. As i ponder my failings and my sin of just that day. Knowing my will is fallen, is not my hope, and is only free to sin.
I am immune to emotionnal inflections... I am aware of them...
Too much drama... seriously...
As an assumed Arminianism from birth (unwilling to believe God don’t choose some), I always thought it was my choice. However, anytime it’s my choice, I then have freedom to waiver and abuse that choice. I can take it for granted. I can come and go in my fervor for my choice. I’ll choose to lose weight until I want some ice cream.
However, if I believe (and if it is true) that the creator of the universe actually did choose me, (predestination) then I don’t have a choice. My zeal for serving Him is great(er) and I can rest in his assurance because it was not me that chose him but vice versa. It’s how I’m wired and from that standpoint, I lean towards Calvinism. Calvinism enhances my faith and I can drop the fake pride of ME choosing HIM.
Still sorting through this. Either way, I believe Jesus is the Messiah. I love and serve him and abide in him. If I got hit by proverbial bus in an hour, I’ll be at the feet of Jesus.
So-called 'Limited Atonement' is a big mistake. It is true that when Jesus died on the cross, his atoning work was directed primarily towards those who would be saved. But he paid the price for the sins of all human beings. See, e.g., Rom 5:18; 1 Tim 2:1-6; 4:10; Heb 2:9; 2 Pet 2:1-3; 1 John 2:2.
In 1 Tim 4:10 Paul says that God is the 'Saviour of all people, especially of those who believe'. This verse is a huge problem for Limited Atonement. 'All people' here must mean all human beings. And Paul would surely not have said that God is the 'Saviour' of people for whose sins Jesus didn't die on the cross and who were firmly on track for hell. Instead, Paul must mean that God is the Saviour of all people in the sense that he provided atonement for everyone. And he must mean that God is especially the Saviour of those who believe in the sense that only they receive the benefits of the atonement.
Non-Christians should be told indiscriminately that Jesus died on the cross to atone for their sins. This should be part of the gospel message.
Your sins are either paid for by Christ on the cross or yourself in Hell. So if Jesus saved "everyone" on the cross, even those who reject Him, then there would be no penalty left to pay, but yet they still go to Hell. So Jesus's blood cannot and does not and is not applied to everyone. So He died for the sins of the elect on the cross, all others still have to pay the penalty in Hell. Otherwise their sins will be paid for twice, once by Jesus and again in Hell or everyone goes to Heaven whet they accept Jesus or not, but we know Biblically neither of these things are true. But yes, we don't know who is elect or not so it is not wrong to evangelize everyone and tell them that Jesus died for their sins, because if/when they repent and believe, this becomes true for them.
But that does not work. If Jesus died for the sins of all humanity on the cross, then the sins for all humanity are paid for and all people are saved, regardless of their belief in Jesus. This is universalism and the Bible does not teach this.
But if you instead hold that Jesus' death on the cross was for all humanity, but it did not save all humanity, then you are saying that Jesus' work on the cross was imperfect, insufficient, or flawed. This further suggests that Jesus' death was wasted on those who would not believe. The Bible does not teach this either and it sounds almost insulting to Jesus to suggest this.
The only way this works is to agree that Jesus died on the cross to glorify his Father in heaven, redeeming creation by calling to himself a people who would glorify God by trusting in Jesus to save them. Jesus' death pays the penalty for those who call on him to be saved. Jesus is the only savior for all humanity, but only by trusting in Jesus to save you does Jesus' death atone for your sin. That is limited atonement.
Not everyone is saved, but everyone is savable.
Romans 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,"
You are saved through faith, not through mere birth as a human being.
@@neveseven734 There are just so many passages which seem strongly to teach that Jesus paid the price for the sins of everyone. In order not to reach this conclusion, so many unnatural interpretations of passages have to be made that I find it impossible to be convinced.
To put it another way, you seem to be putting reasoning above biblical revelation, but when we come to the deep things of the atonement, we must avoid being over-confident in our reasoning.
I have written an article on this topic, and in part 2 of the article I answer your objection about sins being punished twice. It can be found here:
maxaplin.blogspot.com/2018/11/did-jesus-die-for-everyone-part-2.html
@@curtisquick1582 On the face of it, there is a logic to your argument. However, there is an overwhelming objection to it, which is that in order to hold to Limited Atonement, over and over again we have to take very unnatural interpretations of passages. We have to keep explaining passages away, such as 1 Tim 4:10 that I quoted in my original comment. When it comes to the deep things of the atonement, we need to be wary of being over-confident about our ability to understand the mechanics of it.
I have written an article on Limited Atonement, and in part 2 I answer the objection that you make. It can be found here:
maxaplin.blogspot.com/2018/11/did-jesus-die-for-everyone-part-2.html
This is a horrible rebuttal by Piper. He says virtually nothing to answer CS Lewis. He completely misses the point on time.
Thorough, good sounding, but he didn't really answer that man's question HAHAHAHA. Calvinists and Arminians always beat around the bush in a convincing way
Glen, I thought Piper defended Calvinism nicely.
He did not come out and say Arminianism is heresy
But he did contradict each one of their doctrines.
-------------
Why do we leave out the synergistic understanding of salvation which was passed down by the Apostles to the early church?
Somehow I can’t be so happy about my salvation and my own bright future while knowing family members, friends and neighbors going to hell because God didn’t choose them. It seems very egoistic to me, I can’t help it.
THIS
We should be heartbroken for the lost, whether they are family & friends or strangers. It should lead us to sharing the gospel with them. & in that sharing we should explain the immense joy & hope we have in our future with Christ. Without God there can be no hope in a future. If they reject that it's not God's fault (& that's the hardest thing for non-Calvinists to reconcile, predestination vs man's responsibility)
5IVE POINTS In Calvinism, yes it is God’s choice not to extend saving grace to that person. No praying or preaching the gospel until you’re blue in the face can change that. If everyone starts in the same place, God is showing favoritism in Calvinism and we don’t know the reasons. The gospel isn’t enough in Calvinism.
I understand where you are coming from. But at the same time, to me, it seems more egotistical and self righteous to say that I had the power to choose God over my sin apart from God’s help. When in fact, I have no power to take the first steps toward God and away from my sin apart from Christ, first, choosing me to do so. I was way too in love with my sin to turn from it without the help of God.I view Calvinism as the ultimate form of humility and Christ exaltation. After all, why would Christ choose any sinner to follow Him? Because of his astounding mercy! Anyway that is my thought on it, and I hope it helped.
Not a Calvinist here but I don’t believe that I took the first step. God clearly did. But I don’t see that spiritually dead means totally unable to respond to God‘s calling. I just don’t see that in scripture. If that would be the case why do people like Pharaoh or the Pharisees need to be hardened?
I believe it's both and we can't possibly understand how God works or what He chooses to plan or leave to our free will. But to attempt to stick to one side or the other is human tendency. We can't fully comprehend His ways in this lifetime.
It is so important to know that John Piper takes KEY doctrines of the Bible out of context. All of us must focus on what the Bible says, not what man thinks about the Bible. Compare things spiritual with things spiritual! (1 Cor 2:13) A dispensational view of the Bible comes from the context of the Bible - you cannot divorce time from it without pulling the text out of context. We are saved by grace through FAITH -- don't add to God's words, and don't subtract from God's words! Rom 10:9-10 is a passage that clearly lays out HOW one is saved. Not of works - but one must CONFESS (free will) and accept the free gift of salvation.
Truth Be Tellin! and Yes, and Amen!
Amos, I almost chuckled at the Whitfield statement you quoted, but this is really a serious subject. [THE] question here: is it important whether or not to be either a Calvinist or an Arminian? To be a Calvinist, you must adhere to the writings of not just, but primarily, of Paul the Apostle. To be an Arminian, you must adhere to the [personal] beliefs of Jacob Arminius, beliefs that are not Scripturally based. When we get to Heaven, this question will be totally meaningless as we will know the truth, that is, it is all about God, His Plan, His Purposes, His Will and Desire. We are here only because He wanted someone to not only worship Him, but to fellowship with Him. Questions we have in this earthly lifetime will simply disappear when we see Him.
I want to see some statistical data from John Piper that backs up is wild assertion about Calvinism creating true worship
John Robert Phillips... read the Bible.
Wise Virgin that is unhelpful
@@john-robertphillips531 ... Well you did act for "statistical data" to prove "Calvinism"
(which is simply Biblical doctrine). There is no such thing as "statistical data" and
for you to ask for it was a little strange... don't you think?
-------------
You could ask for Biblical support... in which I would say that the Holy Spirit
"indwells" you and it "witnesses" with your spirit and it "teaches" you true doctrine.
In fact the "fruit" of a saint is that process called "sanctification.
----------------
Now it is true that sanctification produces "fruit" in BOTH your behavior AND doctrine.
And it is true the Bible teaches about different results... some people produce thirty-fold
and some produce sixty-fold and others produce one hundred-fold... but the reality is that
ALL SAINTS have the "proof" that you are looking for BECAUSE of being "indwelt" it is NOT
something that is produced as "statistical data"... and for you to use that term was hilarious.
-------------------------
I hope that THIS was helpful for you child.
It appears that you have not yet been "indwelt" or you would already know this "milk"
of the Gospel - how do you expect to learn the "meat"?
--------------------------
Piper made a claim that should be measurable by numbers, I would like too see if that plays out. It is not odd to me at all.
@@john-robertphillips531 ... I don't think Piper made any claim that can be measured by numbers.
You original comment was that Piper claimed Calvinism created true worship.
Since there is no way to measure TRUE WORSHIP it is impossible to document when
the only "measure" is who claims to be "Christian" (including BOTH wheat and tares in the church)
while the TRUE WORSHIP would relate to being part of the ETERNAL CHURCH.... and the
ONLY measure of that comes at the resurrection.
--------------
Now, it is true that the set of doctrines (which was ALWAYS taught by the saints - long before
Calvin was born... but LATER became known as "Calvinism") is the most faithful set of doctrines
taught by any major denomination today. And TRUE SAINTS (saved wheat/sheep) are "drawn"
to the most faithful denominations or congregations... so, in THAT sense Piper was correct.
--------------
He didn't really say why the debate is important. More argued that his view is correct. They are two different questions. We shouldn't devide over this issue.
I’m not a Calvinist, I believe that we only can be saved when we believe in Jesus Christ (that He was YHWH in the flesh) and be baptized in his name.
In our small group in church we read a Calvinistic book, though; and I felt uneasy to join the meetings, lately. The book is titled 'The true God of the Bible' and talks in every chapter about one of God's attributes. Although there is already a chapter titled “God is sovereign’, there is another called ‘God elects people’ or so, and that chapter is like 4x longer than all the others in the book. That type of overemphasis is typical for Calvinists, and it shows that there is no balanced view in this belief system. Jesus Christ’s blameless life and his death and resurrection is not the center of their/your theology, but remains only the payment for the elected. Election and ‘Grace’ (which is in fact Disgrace with most of men) are the Center of Calvinism.
Amen. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
It doesnt say "For God loves such group of people", but rather "the world".
God bless
I grew up a 5 point Calvinist but when my church fell apart I began attending a non-Calvinist church (after MUCH prayer). I didn’t lose my 5-point beliefs but I gained, GAINED the reality of choice to choose or reject Christ and it is a lifetime of battles against the flesh. It is not one or the other. It is BOTH
Andy... Did Jesus PAY for the sins of "His Sheep"
or did Jesus PAY for the sins of everyone ever born and now
they have to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire PAYING for those
SAME sins (again)... what does the Bible say?
@@david-wildcard
God so loved the world... NOW DEFINE WORLD.
God so loved the Jew and Gentile (Jew and Gentile = world)
Remember child BEFORE Jesus came God was ONLY saving Jews
(God ONLY "loved" Jews) AFTER Jesus came God was saving BOTH
Jews and Gentiles (God "loved" both Jew and Gentile)
Jew + Gentile = world
That was not hard
@@JM-lf1sl Bingo
1 Calvinism was preceded by, and primarily inspired by Augustinianism, which on the other hand was an (in)direct product of Manichaeism, a sect, known back then as the pinnacle of Gnosticism and the major opponent of Christianity until Islam assumed this role. Mani's teaching was intended to 'combine', succeed, and surpass the teachings of Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Marcionism, Hellenistic and Rabbinic Judaism and other religions and mystery cults. It reveres Mani as the final prophet after / the reincarnation of Zoroaster, the Buddha, and Jesus.
2 Augustine renounced Manichaeism only shortly after having been threatened with death by the Roman emperorand only after Christianity became the only accepted religion of the state. He then taught some years free will, only to later inch back to their teachings. In his last 18 years he taught variants of the 5 points of TULIP and Double Predestination. Practically every person in the modern era (1500 AD+) who is a determinist, quotes Augustine as source for his belief. It is also not surprising that the Scriptures used by Manicheans are the very same ones used by Calvinists today.
It must also be mentioned that Augustine is the absolute key figure in bringing the Apocrypha into our Bibles. He was the very first in 393 AD who approved in his own Council of Hippo the canonicity of the Apocrypha, shortly before the mega codices and later practically all Bibles indeed included those, until Zwingli and Luther separated them again from the Canon. He was one of the first to argue for financial tithing based on Old Covenant law. He further rejected the Genesis account being literal. Christians who took the Creation Story literally were his laughingstock and "looked like idiots among non-Christians because they denied science and reason". He believed in all seven Catholic sacraments (contradicting statements on purgatory, but probably affirming it) and taught that marital sex involving lust is sinful ...
3 Calvinism was absent among Pre-Nicene Christians. Even notable Calvinistic scholar and historian, Loraine Boettner, admitted, "This cardinal truth [Calvinism] of Christianity was first clearly seen by Augustine". For the first ~400 years of Christianity, its teachers, preachers, apostles, evangelists and theologians taught "historic traditionalism" without a deterministic theology. Borrowing from Manichaeism, Augustine brought strong determinism and their precise terminology of the 'elect' into the church (while he had made it within their circles only to be a 'hearer'; possibly also a motivation to create his own fellowship of 'elects').
4 Calvin absorbed his doctrine primarily from Augustine: "Augustine is so wholly within me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fullness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings." This is why one finds that every four pages written in the Institutes of the Christian Religion John Calvin quoted Augustine. Calvin would deem himself not a Calvinist, but an Augustinian. Christian Calvinist, should they be more likely deemed an Augustinian-Calvinist? As a result, Calvinism in particular is sometimes referred to as Augustinianism.
It must also be mentioned that Calvin was an unrepented murderer, a dark episode often downplayed today, as we see e.g. in articles like the one Challies wrote in 2005. Calvin is directly responsible for the first 'heretic' sentenced to it by Protestants, the burning of his long-standing theological opponent, Servetus. He had him arrested while visiting his church and single-handedly provided the points of the indictment. Throughout the trial (of several weeks) he had put the screw upon the Council to pass a death sentence on Servetus and had gained his end (see 'The Right to Heresy - How John Calvin Killed a Conscience: Castellio against Calvin', Chapter 5, Pages 70-84, available for free on Scribd) . It might be true that Calvin had contemplated a mitigation of the sentence (sword instead of slow burning) - but only if Servetus were to purchase this mitigation by a spiritual sacrifice, by a last-hour- recantation to Farel, the friend Calvin sent while 'studying at home' during the execution (a recantation of the 'most abominable sin', of Modalism, the second charge was anti-infant baptism)."
Calvin justified this killing with Old Covenant Law, Lev 24:16. "The one who blasphemes the name of the Lord should be put to death". Instead of repenting, "he boasted of the deed before a silent congregation" when he entered the pulpit the next Sunday. He also spelled out his theologically reinforced vengeance towards his opponents in a personal letter to Farel: “I am persuaded that it is not without the special will of God that, apart from any verdict of the judges, the criminals have endured protracted torment at the hands of the executioner.”
5 Calvinism today is generally undermining the need for evangelism (because it is at odds with election); it converts it into an unloving work without genuine love and motivation. Hyper-Calvinists would in their very strict application of Calvinism go as far as to factually forbid the preaching of the Gospel and the offer of salvation to the non-elect.
6 Rejection of the biblical concept of prevenient grace and free will leading to salvation (Puppet Theology). Mark Driscoll went as far (in the common overemphasis of 'grace') to say that Noah got saved by grace only and that his salvation had absolutely nothing to do with faith or righteousness - directly contradicting the Bible in 'Gen 6:9 ... Noah was a righteous man'.
7 Claim that man cannot respond / consent to God's call unto Salvation! God autonomously determines the desires and choices of people to accept Him ('Unconditional Election' = Random Selection). Claim that Belief is not a pre-condition to Past Salvation (being born again).
8 Propagation of the unbiblical 'Once-Saved-Always- Saved' theology ('Unconditional Salvation'). Regular claim that unrepented sin does not endanger Future Salvation !!!
Bible: Possible shipwreck. (Perseverance of faithful saints)
Calvinism: No possible shipwreck. (Perseverance of all saints, Once-Saved-Always-Saved)
Bible: Prevenient grace + response through believer. (Conditional Election)
Calvinism: Grace only + no response. (Unconditional Election, Sovereign Grace)
Bible: Jesus came to save the world. He died for all men. (Universal Atonement)
Calvinism: Jesus came to save the elect. He died only for the elect. (Limited Atonement)
Bible: Jesus is the Light of the World.
Calvinism: Jesus is the Light of the Elect.
Bible: A believer can reject the grace of God. (Resistable Grace)
Calvinism: A believer cannot reject the grace of God. (Irresistible Grace)
Bible: Free Will & Predestination.
Calvinism: Predestination only.
Bible: God shows benevolent love to unbelievers and complacent love to believers.
Calvinism: God hates unbelievers and loves believers only.
9 Arminianism, which is closer to God's truth, is their stereotype enemy and part of a strategic system of a false dichotomy. Spurgeon in 'Lectures To My Students' (which I read completely): "I was afraid the people might veer towards Antinomianism (complete denial of laws), an extreme as dangerous as Arminianism".
10 The unbiblical doctrine of Cessationism is particularly associated with Calvinism and only slowly opposed by New Calvinists. Most Calvinists teach that Spiritual Gifts have ceased, very similar to Pharisees who constantly rejected miracles ... and who had also a ...
11 ... very strong emphasis on uniform appearance.
12 Tendency towards spiritual racism. Elitist and often condescending attitude. They very often, if not regularly deem themselves more intellectual than others. Widely influenced by Spurgeon who was a great teacher, but who regularly 'called names' and showed little humility. "Calvinism is the true Gospel, not just a nickname". "Calvinism, then, is the spiritual meat which enables a man to labour on in the ways of Christian service".
We should be like more on Jesus teaching not Calvin or Arminian.
I think I get and agree with the core of this but every time Piper says "It's not a question of time" his next (or previous) statement has to do with time ("When I wake up..." "The next day..." "Right now..." etc.)...so I'm not entirely sure he understands the perspective of timelessness as Lewis mentioned it, though I must admit I've met barely a couple pastors that can and they're still fine people that have led many to the Lord. I think Lewis's comment is less completely accurate but less important than focusing on the fact that God is the one who does all things and there is no true power in our hand. Honestly, Armenianism doesn't even align with the concept of timelessness because it requires that God doesn't know what choice we'll make. Timelessness is the primary thing that sold me on Calvinism in the firsts place, Armenianism doesn't make sense logically if you believe the Bible about the qualities of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit...and humans. Aaaaaaanyway haha, I do believe that from our extremely limited perspective, some vague form of Armenianism is right, because we can't see past the moment we live in and, to us at least, it still *appears* as complete choice.
Medigo... Does he understand that Jesus PAID the sins
of "His Sheep" or does he imagine Jesus PAID the sins
of those spending eternity in the Lake of Fire?
----------------
I think it is important.
If God hates the nonelect so much that He creates them with hell in mind, it makes it hard to justify loving them ourselves.
AntiCalvinist+ Loving others, turning the other cheek etc, is for our own good.
@@cristinadriviera8144 so love is just a tool we use on others for our own good and not for their good? First Corinthians 13
God loves the non-elect enough to give them what they desire.
God is so just that He cannot overlook the sin of the non-elect.
God is so holy that He cannot dwell with sin in his presence.
Jesus was so obedient, even unto death on a cross, to be the atoning sacrifice for sin for the elect.
God is so kind & long-suffering to wait for every sinful elect person to come to faith
God is so merciful to elect even 1 sinner to dwell with Him in heaven for eternity!
I believe the main sticking point in a non-calvinist view is the gravity of sin & the height of God's holiness!
@@5ivepoints18 The sticking point is the Holiness of God. Saying God deterministically causes all sin does not respect His Holiness. “God loves the non-elect enough to give them what they desire.“ But according to Calvinism, God deterministically caused all their evil desires, and then punishes them for them. This is not holy nor loving, and the Lord is “holy, holy, holy“ and “God is love“, according to the Scriptures.
No. God doesn't hate the 'non-elect', John 3:16. Jesus came not to condemn, we were all condemned already by the law and our sin. God has loved His enemies, including us, that is why we must love our enemies. God is just. All sin must be punished. The wages of sin is death. That any of us would ever find ourselves forgiven is a scandalous miracle. This was done for us. Not to exclude anyone. Whosoever will may come. I'm sure you agree up to this point, but the final deciding action is one we could never do for ourselves. To will. Jesus said that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws him. All praise and glory is deservedly given to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And none to us.
It is a very important discussion because the Calvinists believe in a god who has created billions of souls that he never intended to offer Salvation, that is just not Biblical at all.
Total depravity does not take away free will
Total depravity doesn't take away our "will" but the Bible tells us that our wills are not free, we are either in bondage as a slave to sin, or we are a slave to God. Either way our wills are not "free" that's why depravity is "total" meaning every aspect of our being is fallen, our mind, our heart, our desires, our wills. Even nature itself was subjected to futility because of the fall, and it does not even have a will, free or not. EVERYTHING in creation has been corrupted, no exceptions.
potato psoas And regeneration or the New Birth is what makes this happen. Those whom He sets free are free indeed. No one comes to Jesus against their will (unless the Father in Heaven draws them, and He will raise them up on the last day), their hearts, wills and nature are changed so that they can see and savor Christ.
Elnathan Abraham God is sovereign over his creation. We still make choices and are held responsible for them, but our wills are not free, we are either in bondage and a slave to sin or a slave to Christ, there is not a third option. We indeed act and make choices in the world, but the totality of the results of those choices are not ours. Man makes plans but God determines their steps. Gen 50:20 "You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good" etc etc. God even used the hearts of Pharaoh and the Kings of Babylon and the Assyrians to accomplish His will, and then they too were punished for their actions against Israel. Yes, God gave us dominion over the Earth initially, however we lost that dominion when we fell, and handed the world over to Satan who is now called the "god of this world."
Chris... total depravity does NOT take away "free will" (you are correct)
However the "free will" we have (after Original Sin) is to always WANT
to sin. We sin by our own "free will" because we have a "sin nature"
-------------------
@@neveseven734 ... it is true that (after the Original Sin) mankind
became totally depraved. But that does NOT mean they have
no "free will". It only means that, because of their "sin nature"
they freely WANT to sin.
---------
That is the DEFINITION of "Total depravity"... they have
a "sin nature" because of the "fall" of Adam.
---------------
I tend to be in the calvinist camp. But at the end of the day only one thing matters do you believe and if you do you will strive to be more Christ like everyday by the grace of God and when you fail and you will. you ask for forgiveness with all you have. And that's the key. Call it predestination or not it really doesn't matter. Every good thing you do comes from God every sin is human nature by the total deadness in sin from the fall. Its that simple.
No! It’s non essential!! Quit trying to divide John!! Go out n preach the gospel!
The Gospel is not non essential.
James... WHICH Gospel are you preaching...
(1) The one that says Jesus PAID for everybody and now all you
have to do is "accept" that Atonement
(2) The one that says Jesus PAID for "His sheep" and
the Atonement was "particular" to "His sheep"
---------
Those are TWO DIFFERENT Gospels.
One can be the True Gospel and the other a False Gospel.
So which one are YOU preaching?
---------------
@@wisevirgin3405 the biblical Gospel is (2)
James Lee... which Gospel is essential
And which Gospel is non-essential?
---------------
Does the BIBLE COMMAND the saved "wheat/sheep" in the church
to EXPEL all teachers of false doctrines... or does the Bible say
it's just "non essential" what doctrines we preach?
--------------------
@@joshuatheo1419 ... Of course
I don't think the debate Is important. We have bigger issues in the church such as the progressive church and it has infected all denominations with all kinds of filth. Which includes the doctrine of open theism
1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
@@aletheia8054 Christ is talking to his 12 Apostles. The ones He choose. Yet one was a devil. So they were obviously not chosen unto salvation otherwise Judas would have been saved since he was one of the chosen ones.
John 6:70
Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”
Also Israel was a chosen nation yet only a remnant were saved.
So being chosen does not automatically make one saved.
@@mrnoedahl He was talking to them for three whole chapters.
@@aletheia8054 that is true.
@@mrnoedahl Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Talking to the exact same people there minus Judas.
It depends on what God wants you to do. My job is to keep people out of hell, it doesn't matter if a person go to hell because God doesn't want them or they don't want Him. Just try to keep them out.
Calvinist vs Arminian debate is not as fierce as Pre Trib vs Post Trib debates. Just my opinion
Wow I been tackling the same issue... Pre or Mid or Post.. for Calvinism and Arminian is pretty one sided and simple.. but for rapture I am a bit confused..
Anjith James Just live a life of readiness.
Odd Fish Sounds good
Jay... it is not a matter whether Calvinism/Arminianism or pre-trip/post trib
is the most fierce. The ISSUE is simple.
(1) What does the Bible teach
(2) What does the Bible teach the saints to DO with false teachers?
--------------
The Bible commands the (real) saints to EXPEL all the false teachers above...
there is no hierarchy in heresy. They ALL are false teachers because that
is the "fruit" of unsaved people.
---------------
Calvinism: pinning God to the mat using logic.
No, David A, it's studying the doctrines given by God (2 Timothy 2:15) as part of renewing our minds (Romans 12:2). Logic is given by God and is only bad when it doesn't line up with scripture. Christians aren't supposed to be ignorant; we are called to think. Piper used numerous verses in this video to back up what he was talking about; it would be better to check each one and show that he is misinterpreting them than to make a blanket assertion.
Always plea from ignorance. Apophatic teaching leaves too much unanswered. Study the scriptures and you will notice definitive truths as well as profound mystery.
Calvinism is wrong theology , however it won't lead to eternal damnation but it's a stumble block to evangelism and spiritual growth
in life,we have already many stumble blocks to our way to lord and we don't need more stumble blocks
The beauty of the Bible is that it supports multiple competing views. Everyone gets to be right.