John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath (not might have) everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. ..... take note of tenses
In God's eyes, we are already perfect, already sanctified because of Christ, our proxy, who has paid for all of our sins, past, present, and future. If you've believed in Christ, when God sees you, He sees His son or daughter. Even though we still have the experience of sin in this life, and God still chastens us for sin, this sin can never separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39) because the debt has already been paid by the blood of Jesus. If you've believed even for a moment, you are sealed until the day of redemption no matter what happens in this life! There's true peace in the true gospel! So put on the new man and bear fruit, not to be saved, but out of gratitude for what Christ has accomplished for us! All glory and praise to Him!
I don't know why you call it a 'legal' pardon. legal implies law, but the Bible says 'now one will justified by the law('Rom 3:20). Our justification takes place outside of the Law...outside of the legislative branch of God. Instead, he justifies us as the Chief Executive', or Moral Governor of the world. Gospel justification is not a forensic proceeding, is not done in the court of law.
We are not justified by the law, but we are condemned by it, and thus, a legal pardon is necessary. I don't think the chief executive thought works, that would mean the cross wouldn't be necessary.
@@midimusicforever I do think the thought of God, as Chief Executive administering a pardon does work...and does not do away with the need for The Cross, because unlike human Execs, God was determined to 'remain just' in handling repentant sinners/lawbreakers. I think we both agree...Gospel justification is pardon, and God remains within the law in doing it, and I think it is still true, He is not in a courtroom, acting as the Judge of all the Earth, when He does it. It is not that important a point, but just an interesting point I like to share. Strictly speaking judges do not have the right of pardon but must follow the Law handed to them by the Legislature. God did not write the Law, it was given to Him by his nature, and He is happy, willing, and bound to follow it. Blessings. On second thought it is a legal Pardon
They went out from us isn't a good answer cause what about Peter who denied Jesus? Though Peter went out from them he still remained a child and disciple of Jesus....so things happen to God's children
Your question assumes we are without rationality or free will it seems. While Craig suggests that Calvinism does a poor job explaining the data of Romans 9-11 as Israel fails to follow Jesus. Even though they weee elected they were not entering into God’s will. Rm 9:18ff seems to be that the elect are “Those whom have faith in Jesus.” For there is no distinction between Jew of Gentile for all who call on his name will be saved. In Romans 11:20-21 all verbs are singular If God didn’t spare the Jews who didn’t believe neither will he spare the genrile who don’t believe! What is the cause then? Belief! Not election election is an effect not a cause😮 Or so Craig argues. This is an argument that opposes Calvinism for sure. But one must ask themselves if their allegiance is to a particular historic view or to the best explanation of the revelation of scripture?😅
Unfortunately as Dr Craig shows Protestanism defines Baptism as Justification, those in baptism are justified by the Father, but justication by the Son is at judgement as we die.
@ubergenie6041 the chart Dr Craig shows separating Justification and regeneration puts salvation before regeneration, but the Justification legally given is at baptism not final judgement, reference to Romans 5 which is baptism. Justification has three stages, "I have been justified, I am being justified, and I shall be justified". Dr Craig claims that without any regeneration Protestants have salvation, buy rightly Catholics claim that regeneration is the process of sanctification, which is also the process of Justification. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' mostly exposing false teaching from the Reformation, although I was brought up CofE. Romans 5-8 is baptism and the legal position of Justification shown by Dr Craig, is pardoning of past sins, future sins cannot be pardoned before it is committed, as sin is a judicial act of condemnation in the law in the new covenant. Paul had no authority other than to baptise, Jesus did not pass all judgement to the apostles, the Father passed all judgement to the Son. So salvation cannot be given at baptism, to be "saved" is not salvation, it is saved from the condemnation of Adam as I cover in my video #32.
Plenty of Craig’s teaching over the LAST 40 years online! So one must be trying to cherry-pick the data to ignore his teaching on the drawing of the HS And softening of one’s heart by same before a person freely examines the claims of scripture and with renewed rationality chooses to trust those claims and Jesus’ work on the cross! Remember that all but a minority portion of the reformers believe that what would become known as Calvinism does a poor job of explaining the data of scripture.😮 Craig appeals to the data and his premises should be engaged based on those Data
Argument to the best explanation of the biblical data. Remember your first semester of logic? Deduction, induction and abduction? His presentation outlining the biblical data Then an ABDUCTIVE argument for which of the various salvific views best explain the data. Same as in all social sciences and most of new theories in hard sciences. Opinions are devoid of arguments that are sound, and premises that are true and explain portions of the data. Opinions don’t have all of these components.😊
The predestination of Christ isnt necessarily the cross, nor salvation. The predestination of Christ is implying that Christ was always the context, and primarily in creation, rather than salvation. This is why Jesus is quoting Genesis when He says, "It is finished". This is a throwback to creation and Gods Sabbath. Jesus was working from a creation context, not a salvation context. Jesus was working from Gods perspective, not our perspective. Salvation is RE-creation, and the emphasis is not so much on the effect, but the all important revelation of the preexisting cause and context. Christianity has gotten sidetracked on the effect, when the real revelation is the cause. Jesus operated from a basis, not an objective. Jesus came to establish creation, not salvation. Salvation is a byproduct for us. Salvation is a term we suffer in the post sin world, but there's only one plan and that is the plan of creation. Hence "born again".
Dangerous Craig! Who gives you the ability to choose God while being in a fallen state? Can a fallen nature allow you to choose a Holy God? This is dangerous on many levels, especially with reference to the doctrine of original sin. Your ability to choose after the fall was only sinful! Choosing was possible, with a fallen nature. Ability vs proclivity! Apostasy means nominal Christians sometimes sit in church with true regenerated Christians. Many never had the faith in the first place. They cannot lose something they never had.
@midimusicforever Interesting, God gives you the ability to choose Him, the Holy Spirit convicts us of Sin.. but we choose? If before your first two steps, we could still choose God, I wonder what role God had in us choosing Him? Ok,I see ... God is Sovereign except in matters of a Salvation.. Man is entirely in charge ( Sovereign ) of His eternal destination.. Got it! The Holy Spirit convicts us of Sin for us to stay in Sin... the Holy Spirit prompted nothing. It's all us! Lol.
@@MrLeejunfanstrawman😮 That is not a compliment. If you look it up you will realize why it is fallacious reasoning. Let’s see if you can go back and accurate represent the Craig. Further do you equate God’s sovereignty with God as puppet master ? Then why all the appeals to pray, or do x and not y across every page of scripture? Was God just running a big kabuki theatre? And is scripture false in every one of the thousands of places it asks us to respond to truths as if we had the free will to accept or reject that charge?😮 Why have you studied scripture for so long and not asked “Why would God ask an individual or nation to do a thing when according to your view of providence they never once had the power to do it? So God is an outright liar when he say through the Apostle Peter the “God doesn’t want any to parish” yet if God was providential in the way you suggest and the passage in Peter was also true then ALL WOULD BE SAVED No college degree necessary to draw that conclusion 😮
@@ubergenie6041 you solved it! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" (Romans 9:15-20, ESV)
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. 1 John 2:19
This is the lynch pin for me. Those who are truly born again will persist and "He who started a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." It is Christ who keeps those who truly believe in His grace. Thanks for sharing
It is assumed that this verse was posted to support the “once saved, always saved” doctrine of salvation. However, I find this interpretation to be an eisegesis reading of the data, completely missing the point of 1 John and its immediate context. There is no biblical evidence that supports “divine casual determination,” which is the presupposition required for TULIP to be successful. I would further add that “divine casual determination” is inconsistent with the scripture as well. Only the good and consistent Calvinists are willing to acknowledge this along with its logical and theological implications, such as Arthur W. Pink and John Piper. When discussing the perseverance of the saints, two fundamental questions arise: 1. Could a Christian lose their salvation? 2. Would a Christian lose their salvation? The obvious answer to the first question is affirmative. Rejecting this conclusion necessitates rejecting the substantial biblical support for it, which can be found in both the Old and New Testaments. Alternatively, one would be required to interpret the text in a completely different manner, which the text itself does not support. The answer to the second question is more likely negative. A genuine Christian will remain steadfast in their faith. God possesses knowledge through His middle knowledge of an individual’s actions (what one would do) under various circumstances. Consequently, God knows what an individual will do in the world He has chosen to actualize. Therefore, a true Christian “could” lose their salvation by abandoning the faith, although it is highly improbable that they would do so. The distinction lies in the concepts of possibility and probability. It is always possible for an individual to leave the faith, as the Bible provides strong warnings against certain lifestyle choices that could lead to complete abandonment of the faith. Nonetheless, it is highly improbable that a genuine lover of God and neighbor would abandon the faith, as such individuals trust in grace daily. My faith in Christ is not a meritorious work but an act of obedience and surrender. While there is much more that could be said, the primary point I wish to emphasize is that our free choices are not causally determined by God, even after we receive salvation. Our sole hope of maintaining our faith lies in remaining in Christ. God provides us with the grace or power to believe, but we must make the daily choice to act in faith. As Dr. Adam Clark aptly stated, “Without the grace or power to believe, no one has ever or will ever believe; but with that power, the act of faith becomes one’s own. God never believes for anyone; no more than He repents for them. The penitent, through this grace enabling them, believes for themselves. Nor does He believe necessarily or impulsively when He possesses that power; the power to believe may be present long before it is exercised, otherwise, why the solemn warnings we encounter everywhere in the Bible and the threats against those who do not believe? Is not this evidence that such individuals possess the power but choose not to use it? They believe not, and therefore are not established. Consequently, this is the accurate state of affairs: God grants the power, and man utilizes it in accordance with that power, thereby glorifying God. Without the power, no one can believe; with it, any person may.” The Elder’s statement, “For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us,” implies that these individuals had a choice to remain a part of the fellowship of believers but chose not to. This is because the people being referred to were heretics of some kind. They had no desire to be part of the genuine family of God. Therefore, it appears that when the Elder makes the statement, “they would have remained with us,” he is suggesting that only true believers desire to be a part of the community of believers. There is nothing in this verse that states (or implies) that believers who choose to remain will be causally determined to do so. If “divine casual determination” is false, then TULIP would necessarily be false. TULIP as a collective school of thought relies necessarily on this presupposition. There are aspects of TULIP that are true like the depravity of man. Nonetheless the system as a whole and as taught by leading Calvinist like John Piper is false if the necessary presupposition for TULIP is false.
Very well presented, Doc!
Great question at 43:31. It’s helpful to know a little of Dr. Craig’s process when researching a topic!
Dr. Craig's soteriological cartography is a wonder to behold!
John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath (not might have) everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. ..... take note of tenses
And who the Son sets free, he is free indeed!
Why are the soles of Dr. Craig’s shoes so thick?
Someone's asking the right questions 😂
He has a muscle disorder, and he’s in his 70s. I’m guessing the thick soles help him stand for an hour and teach to a group of people.
In God's eyes, we are already perfect, already sanctified because of Christ, our proxy, who has paid for all of our sins, past, present, and future. If you've believed in Christ, when God sees you, He sees His son or daughter. Even though we still have the experience of sin in this life, and God still chastens us for sin, this sin can never separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39) because the debt has already been paid by the blood of Jesus. If you've believed even for a moment, you are sealed until the day of redemption no matter what happens in this life! There's true peace in the true gospel! So put on the new man and bear fruit, not to be saved, but out of gratitude for what Christ has accomplished for us! All glory and praise to Him!
I feel like I might be a goner!
How do?
I don't know why you call it a 'legal' pardon. legal implies law, but the Bible says 'now one will justified by the law('Rom 3:20). Our justification takes place outside of the Law...outside of the legislative branch of God. Instead, he justifies us as the Chief Executive', or Moral Governor of the world. Gospel justification is not a forensic proceeding, is not done in the court of law.
We are not justified by the law, but we are condemned by it, and thus, a legal pardon is necessary. I don't think the chief executive thought works, that would mean the cross wouldn't be necessary.
@@midimusicforever I do think the thought of God, as Chief Executive administering a pardon does work...and does not do away with the need for The Cross, because unlike human Execs, God was determined to 'remain just' in handling repentant sinners/lawbreakers. I think we both agree...Gospel justification is pardon, and God remains within the law in doing it, and I think it is still true, He is not in a courtroom, acting as the Judge of all the Earth, when He does it. It is not that important a point, but just an interesting point I like to share. Strictly speaking judges do not have the right of pardon but must follow the Law handed to them by the Legislature. God did not write the Law, it was given to Him by his nature, and He is happy, willing, and bound to follow it. Blessings. On second thought it is a legal Pardon
They went out from us isn't a good answer cause what about Peter who denied Jesus? Though Peter went out from them he still remained a child and disciple of Jesus....so things happen to God's children
Your question assumes we are without rationality or free will it seems. While Craig suggests that Calvinism does a poor job explaining the data of Romans 9-11 as Israel fails to follow Jesus. Even though they weee elected they were not entering into God’s will. Rm 9:18ff seems to be that the elect are “Those whom have faith in Jesus.”
For there is no distinction between Jew of Gentile for all who call on his name will be saved.
In Romans 11:20-21 all verbs are singular
If God didn’t spare the Jews who didn’t believe neither will he spare the genrile who don’t believe!
What is the cause then? Belief! Not election election is an effect not a cause😮
Or so Craig argues. This is an argument that opposes Calvinism for sure. But one must ask themselves if their allegiance is to a particular historic view or to the best explanation of the revelation of scripture?😅
Unfortunately as Dr Craig shows Protestanism defines Baptism as Justification, those in baptism are justified by the Father, but justication by the Son is at judgement as we die.
Reference for your view please😮
@ubergenie6041 the chart Dr Craig shows separating Justification and regeneration puts salvation before regeneration, but the Justification legally given is at baptism not final judgement, reference to Romans 5 which is baptism.
Justification has three stages, "I have been justified, I am being justified, and I shall be justified". Dr Craig claims that without any regeneration Protestants have salvation, buy rightly Catholics claim that regeneration is the process of sanctification, which is also the process of Justification.
I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' mostly exposing false teaching from the Reformation, although I was brought up CofE.
Romans 5-8 is baptism and the legal position of Justification shown by Dr Craig, is pardoning of past sins, future sins cannot be pardoned before it is committed, as sin is a judicial act of condemnation in the law in the new covenant.
Paul had no authority other than to baptise, Jesus did not pass all judgement to the apostles, the Father passed all judgement to the Son. So salvation cannot be given at baptism, to be "saved" is not salvation, it is saved from the condemnation of Adam as I cover in my video #32.
Plenty of Craig’s teaching over the LAST 40 years online! So one must be trying to cherry-pick the data to ignore his teaching on the drawing of the HS
And softening of one’s heart by same before a person freely examines the claims of scripture and with renewed rationality chooses to trust those claims and Jesus’ work on the cross!
Remember that all but a minority portion of the reformers believe that what would become known as Calvinism does a poor job of explaining the data of scripture.😮
Craig appeals to the data and his premises should be engaged based on those
Data
Opinion...opinion...opinion...
Argument to the best explanation of the biblical data.
Remember your first semester of logic?
Deduction, induction and abduction?
His presentation outlining the biblical data
Then an ABDUCTIVE argument for which of the various salvific views best explain the data.
Same as in all social sciences and most of new theories in hard sciences.
Opinions are devoid of arguments that are sound, and premises that are true and explain portions of the data. Opinions don’t have all of these components.😊
The predestination of Christ isnt necessarily the cross, nor salvation. The predestination of Christ is implying that Christ was always the context, and primarily in creation, rather than salvation. This is why Jesus is quoting Genesis when He says, "It is finished". This is a throwback to creation and Gods Sabbath. Jesus was working from a creation context, not a salvation context. Jesus was working from Gods perspective, not our perspective. Salvation is RE-creation, and the emphasis is not so much on the effect, but the all important revelation of the preexisting cause and context. Christianity has gotten sidetracked on the effect, when the real revelation is the cause. Jesus operated from a basis, not an objective. Jesus came to establish creation, not salvation. Salvation is a byproduct for us. Salvation is a term we suffer in the post sin world, but there's only one plan and that is the plan of creation. Hence "born again".
Salvation was part of the plan from the beginning though.
@midimusicforever That's your guess. I demonstrated otherwise.
Dangerous Craig! Who gives you the ability to choose God while being in a fallen state?
Can a fallen nature allow you to choose a Holy God?
This is dangerous on many levels, especially with reference to the doctrine of original sin.
Your ability to choose after the fall was only sinful!
Choosing was possible, with a fallen nature.
Ability vs proclivity!
Apostasy means nominal Christians sometimes sit in church with true regenerated Christians.
Many never had the faith in the first place.
They cannot lose something they never had.
God gives the ability when the Holy Spirit convicts you of sin, but He doesn't make the choice for you.
@midimusicforever Interesting, God gives you the ability to choose Him, the Holy Spirit convicts us of Sin.. but we choose? If before your first two steps, we could still choose God, I wonder what role God had in us choosing Him?
Ok,I see ... God is Sovereign except in matters of a Salvation.. Man is entirely in charge ( Sovereign ) of His eternal destination.. Got it!
The Holy Spirit convicts us of Sin for us to stay in Sin... the Holy Spirit prompted nothing. It's all us! Lol.
@@MrLeejunfanstrawman😮
That is not a compliment.
If you look it up you will realize why it is fallacious reasoning.
Let’s see if you can go back and accurate represent the Craig.
Further do you equate God’s sovereignty with God as puppet master ?
Then why all the appeals to pray, or do x and not y across every page of scripture?
Was God just running a big kabuki theatre? And is scripture false in every one of the thousands of places it asks us to respond to truths as if we had the free will to accept or reject that charge?😮
Why have you studied scripture for so long and not asked “Why would God ask an individual or nation to do a thing when according to your view of providence they never once had the power to do it?
So God is an outright liar when he say through the Apostle Peter the “God doesn’t want any to parish” yet if God was providential in the way you suggest and the passage in Peter was also true then
ALL WOULD BE SAVED
No college degree necessary to draw that conclusion 😮
@@ubergenie6041 you solved it!
15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" (Romans 9:15-20, ESV)
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. 1 John 2:19
This is the lynch pin for me. Those who are truly born again will persist and "He who started a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." It is Christ who keeps those who truly believe in His grace. Thanks for sharing
John was referring to specific people, not to all cases
It is assumed that this verse was posted to support the “once saved, always saved” doctrine of salvation. However, I find this interpretation to be an eisegesis reading of the data, completely missing the point of 1 John and its immediate context. There is no biblical evidence that supports “divine casual determination,” which is the presupposition required for TULIP to be successful. I would further add that
“divine casual determination” is inconsistent with the scripture as well. Only the good and consistent Calvinists are willing to acknowledge this along with its logical and theological implications, such as Arthur W. Pink and John Piper.
When discussing the perseverance of the saints, two fundamental questions arise: 1. Could a Christian lose their salvation? 2. Would a Christian lose their salvation?
The obvious answer to the first question is affirmative. Rejecting this conclusion necessitates rejecting the substantial biblical support for it, which can be found in both the Old and New Testaments. Alternatively, one would be required to interpret the text in a completely different manner, which the text itself does not support.
The answer to the second question is more likely negative. A genuine Christian will remain steadfast in their faith. God possesses knowledge through His middle knowledge of an individual’s actions (what one would do) under various circumstances. Consequently, God knows what an individual will do in the world He has chosen to actualize. Therefore, a true Christian “could” lose their salvation by abandoning the faith, although it is highly improbable that they would do so. The distinction lies in the concepts of possibility and probability. It is always possible for an individual to leave the faith, as the Bible provides strong warnings against certain lifestyle choices that could lead to complete abandonment of the faith. Nonetheless, it is highly improbable that a genuine lover of God and neighbor would abandon the faith, as such individuals trust in grace daily. My faith in Christ is not a meritorious work but an act of obedience and surrender. While there is much more that could be said, the primary point I wish to emphasize is that our free choices are not causally determined by God, even after we receive salvation. Our sole hope of maintaining our faith lies in remaining in Christ. God provides us with the grace or power to believe, but we must make the daily choice to act in faith. As Dr. Adam Clark aptly stated, “Without the grace or power to believe, no one has ever or will ever believe; but with that power, the act of faith becomes one’s own. God never believes for anyone; no more than He repents for them. The penitent, through this grace enabling them, believes for themselves. Nor does He believe necessarily or impulsively when He possesses that power; the power to believe may be present long before it is exercised, otherwise, why the solemn warnings we encounter everywhere in the Bible and the threats against those who do not believe? Is not this evidence that such individuals possess the power but choose not to use it? They believe not, and therefore are not established. Consequently, this is the accurate state of affairs: God grants the power, and man utilizes it in accordance with that power, thereby glorifying God. Without the power, no one can believe; with it, any person may.”
The Elder’s statement, “For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us,” implies that these individuals had a choice to remain a part of the fellowship of believers but chose not to. This is because the people being referred to were heretics of some kind. They had no desire to be part of the genuine family of God. Therefore, it appears that when the Elder makes the statement, “they would have remained with us,” he is suggesting that only true believers desire to be a part of the community of believers. There is nothing in this verse that states (or implies) that believers who choose to remain will be causally determined to do so. If “divine casual determination” is false, then TULIP would necessarily be false. TULIP as a collective school of thought relies necessarily on this presupposition. There are aspects of TULIP that are true like the depravity of man. Nonetheless the system as a whole and as taught by leading Calvinist like John Piper is false if the necessary presupposition for TULIP is false.