Yes, this is great. Clear, intelligent, well presented and passionate. Really helpful to share with Calvinist friends. Also very helpful to share common Calvinist objections and how not to be tied in knots. This is the big problem; it does tie people up in knots!
Take a look at leighton flowers... He channel is second to none when it comes to breaking calvin... and more over gives the history of where Calvin's view originated (Hint a particular heresy the early church fought vehemently If u want history of doctrine of origional sin Idol killer Warren mcgrew. Or even Dr micheal hieser(may he rest in piece) You won't be a fan of augustine after these 3 are done
Excellent sermon!! I am not a Calvinist either. I was born to Non-church parents. Starting at age four or five, I would walk down the street to the Baptist church to attend Sunday School (Kindergarten-grade 5) and then church by myself. At the beginning of sixth grade, we moved 2 miles away from the church and my parents told me church was over because they were not going to drive me. I’m now closing in on 77 years old. I never left Jesus and He for sure never left me. Did I sin any during those 72 years? Of course, but the Holy Spirit convicts and God’s grace is sufficient! Hallelujah! I took my children to church and they are both saved. They and I cannot imagine ever walking away from Jesus. If we ever tried, He would be pulling us back to Him. Thank you for this most excellent teaching. ☺️🙌🏼
Bottom line: you don’t have to believe in Calvinism to be saved. You do have to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. I like what you did with TULIP there. Pretty clever and something to mull over.
Listing Charles Stanley as a Calvinist in the video description was a surprise to me. Still is. If a citation exists, specifically that Charles affirms the U and I in TULIP, I would be interested.
If he rejects a point, it would probably be the L, not the U. Most Baptist Calvinists do not accept L. I believe he was cited in Zondervan's Counterpoints series on Eternal Security. If he has changed his views since the 90s, I'd be interested to know.
Why I CAN be a Calvinist (hint: it’s because of scripture!). Seriously though, scripture, when interpreted with a proper hermeneutic using the historical-grammatical method, it seems to suggest that the Calvinists MIGHT have it right, but it also seems to suggest that non-Calvinists MIGHT have it right as well. Just like scripture seems to suggest in certain passages that A-Millennialism is true while at the same time there are passages that seem to suggest that dispensational premillennialism is true - all without contracting itself. Awww heck, can’t we all just agree that our Lord God works in mysterious ways. I’m still learning about Calvinism versus Non-Calvinism, so this is still open-ended for me.
This is why it's so helpful that when Jesus was on earth he started a Church with the authority to interpret Scripture and break interpretive "ties" which cannot be escaped under Protestantism/Sola Scriptura.
Forget Calvinism and Arminianism. Check out Jim Brown at grace and truth ministries and learn Greek and Hebrew and get all the tools you need so you can read the Bible for yourself.
This is a great video presentation much needed right now with reformed theology taking over christian thought. Would like to see you collab with Dr Leighton Flowers. God Bless.
I dunno…I just watched a debate between White & Flowers, and the spirit of it left something to be desired, IMO. Maybe that’s a bad judgment on my part, but I actually came here to listen to episodes on it because I knew the tone is completely different…more charitable and winsome. If anyone enters the Dojo, it should be someone that shares this gracious spirit. I’m currently in a church that has folks who hold to both Calvinistic and Arminian thinking and trying to better understand both sides so I can lead Bible studies in such a way as to maintain the unity of the Spirit. Appreciate the work here to that end.
Hello! I had expected a very good presentation and you didn’t disappoint. Well done! Thinking about the matter and the premise of your bottom-line statements, I think that to me the Reformed position makes sense. I found myself interacting with you as you eloquently expounded on the many Scripture references and to me it was a case that they also could be premised on the Reformed views and still make sense of them that way. I guess that what I’m saying is that God’s ways are indeed His ways and baffle us and will continue to baffle us! I can live with that. I’m ok with that. After all He is God and not me/us. About assurance of salvation, I think He is gracious to let us know if we are saved or not, and the test you proposed of asking the simple straight question whether at that moment we believe in the atoning work of our Savior is a very good way to know. Daily, I find myself in awe of the work and ministry of the Holy Spirit, which is how I think I’m even sensitized to ask about it! Thank you for sharing this great presentation! 👍😊
That is a fair conclusion. I have no desire to talk anyone out of their Reformed views...just to show that that is not the *ONLY* way to read Scripture, as some of the more dogmatic Reformed popularizers tend to teach. This is why I don't attack Reformed theology like some Arminians do either. I will *critique* it, but I recognize that it is a *possible* approach (just one that I don't find persuasive or necessary to begin with). Cheers and thanks for the interaction!
@@DiscipleDojo I agree. The Reformed way to understand this matter is not the only way, and it is obvious. The debate is still ongoing among faithful believers. Like you, I don't seek to change another believer's point of view. I am not the Holy Spirit. And like you, I find it useless and unproductive to take a hard line approach about this issue whether it comes from a Reformed Theology perspective or an Arminian perspective. Watching your content makes me think and I have learned lots from your videos!!! Thank you! :)
@@DiscipleDojo I watched Part 1 and now Part 2. You messed with my head, but it was good for me to come out of my Reformed bubble. I have some reading to do. Now, I appreciate that there is another way to interpret Scripture. You made some excellent points that I can't dismiss. I am OK with being a lifelong learner of the Bible. I ordered some of the books you suggested. Thank you, thank you, thank you for this channel. :)
Hello sir. You must be doing something wrong, I can't believe how low are the numbers of views on your videos. You deserved at least a million views. I learned a lot going through your videos today.
@@DiscipleDojo I'm not saying the message is bad but the presentation is not TH-cam friendly. A 40 minute sermon with very little visual activity is not going to go viral. And yes. I know the point is not to go viral but if you want more views and more subscribers you need to make shorter (10 minutes?) videos with engaging imagery.
@@SaltLight7 disagree. there are many of us who just listen and do boring chores so can't watch whatever the imagery is. the length of videos should be whatever is appropriate to do justice to the subject.
@@ElenaLearningForeverToInfinity I'm not speaking about accuracy or appropriateness of the content. I was replying to why the video doesn't get more views especially given how good and enlightening the content is.
I was raised in a Calvinistic church and converted to Arminianism at age 34 after an intense search of the scriptures. Since this liberating event, I've experienced great security and satisfaction...🙂
I love your TULIP! This is the first cogently explained thing I’ve heard that gives me any explanation of Christ as the elect. Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Tried listening to this but could not finish. You mentioned several claims against Calvinists that I have never heard before. As a life long Presbyterian, it's difficult to listen to someone present God differently from the loving father that is presented from the teachers and scripture that I have learned from. In addition, from my understanding of scripture, it is not wise to make such proclamations that paint many of us as hyper-calvinists when we aren't. I found your discussion with Dr Imes to be much more credible in presenting scripture and exegetical references to support your position regarding women leadership at the pastor, elder and deacon levels.
Did you watch my presentation of Calvinism in the prior video in this series? Most of my Calvinist friends and viewers said that it was fair and an accurate portrayal of Calvinism.
Only thing I’ll say about your point on the P is there other scriptures that back up that you can’t lose your salvation. I’m kinda at a middle ground of reformed and regular baptist and I believe if you are truly saved you will have up and downs but will always come back. My testimony personally I went through several seasons of disobedience but was still being convicted still at my heart wanted to get back on track and I eventually repented and through the Lords grace I’m still working and striving to walk with him daily. However I believe if someone makes a confession of faith and one just walks away completely I don’t think they truly had any true faith. I also reject once saved always saved because many people use that excuse to say a little pray and love how they want which is simply wrong. I believe once in Jesus he does good works in us and we long to do those things for him and it’s a life time of repentance and sanctification. But I really appreciate your video as someone who is kind of lnbetween major Baptist ideas. I also appreciate that you seem to like myself put stake in personal study and wanting serve God with each other even if certain people interpret things differently. I don’t know if you’ll see this comment since this video is older but again I appreciate the video and your Bible reviews have a good one sir!
Hi DiscipleDojo! Funny story: I’ve been recently praying through starting up a TH-cam channel dedicated to pointing others to behold the beauty and joy of Christ and living life in His Kingdom right now moment by moment in all areas of our lives, whether through music, art, math, science, culture, etc. Anyway, as a longtime martial artist as well, I was thinking through name ideas for the channel and thought up something like Disciple Dojo because discipleship is really much like the discipline of a method or way and like martial arts prepares us for battle and worst case scenarios when they come, our walk as believers is Biblically described in this spiritual battle language (armor of God, waging war not against flesh and blood but principalities, etc) that we ought to be ready for. Fun fact: “dojo” literally translates to “the place of the way” and so what better descriptive name than “dojo” describes how we are to live in the Kingdom of THEE Way…of Jesus, who is the way! Anyway, all that to say, while I was super excited and blessed yet also low key disappointed to find your channel knowing that my name idea was taken 😂. But no hard feelings because I actually find your content and humble heart really well sound and refreshing in such a time of arrogance and deceitfulness. Maybe sometime in the near future if I get a channel going (hopefully with a cool name like yours) we can collaborate or something and share our stories as martial artists for Christ! 😁 Also, this response to Calvinism was super helpful and respectfully thought through!
I don't think I have the handouts that they used when I taught it, because it was so long ago. But if you have questions on any of the books mentioned I'm happy to point you to them.
You made some very good points. Before I quit my Baptist church and become a non member and go to a evangelical church non Calvinism I’ll pray before I quit my Baptist church
Baptist are not all calvinist Check out Leighton flowers. The difference between a Baptist and say a Presbyterian is in church organisation Basically as un institutional and as much scripture as it gets. Presbyterian is very calvinist. They're gov ecclesiaolgy Is built more as a republic a bottom up form of gov. These two schools are the most anti tradition pro scripture. The problem with Presbyterian is calvin started it. Baptists are controlled locally and one group may be different to another. Lutheren is mixing scripture with tradition Similer to catholic Anglican is the middle way. But there are both freewill and calvinist baptists.
Hello, I have another question to ask, how would you interpret Rev 13:8 and 17:8 that says: "The beast that you saw pwas, and is not, and qis about to rise from rthe bottomless pit2 and sgo to destruction. And tthe dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in uthe book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast" Calvinists use this as proof-text that since God predestines people to heaven, He also predestines people to hell which is the teaching that I can't accept since it seems contrary to God's character in 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 Tim 2:3
Earlier in Revelation there is a warning that people's names can be blotted out of the book of life. So, either way, this concept doesn't say what Calvinism says.
Replying to the “T”, where are you talk about how John is referencing back to the Exodus… the Israelites were chosen as God’s holy people by God‘s own sovereignty, and not because there was anything special or unique about them, which would seem to reinforce Calvinistic theology
This should be interesting, I started going down the Calvinist route 20 years ago and backed out when I realized that God didn't have to control man's will to guarantee His outcomes. I know Calvin talked about secondary causes but it still ends up limiting God's omnipotence and providence. I grew up in the Mennonite church, went to Lutheran schools and moved on to Baptist and Bible churches and recent study has caused me to even adopt some Eastern Orthodox views. On the down side I feel as if I don't really fit in at one church or the other...
The problem is that when you talk about total depravity, it basically means every part of man is effected with sin. Adam had a will that was free from the bondage of sin. That bondage or sin nature was given to his posterity. That is why the Virgin birth is important. It is not that man doesn’t make choices. It’s that his nature has been wholly corrupted since he died separated himself from god in the garden. Man still makes. Choices but his nature dictates those choices. Also it is those whom he foreknew not he who he foreknew but those he foreknew. Is not US the direct object in the text. Also election is individual and corporate. Not one or the other.
Quite helpful. I still wonder if, based on passages like 1 Pt. 1:4-5, there isn’t a both/and going on rather than an either/or; that is, God preserves those who come to Him through faith such that they will persevere. I’m also still wondering what to do with Romans 9:22-24. When I was first being introduced to Calvinist thinking, I distinctly remember praying, “God, I don’t like this view of you, but I can see it in Scripture, so help me to love you for who you reveal yourself to be, not who I want you to be.” I cried and prayed a lot. Romans 9:23 was the only explanation I found for why God might chose some and pass over others…to display the riches of His glory. I’ve been in reformed-ish churches for a couple of decades now, but I’m not opposed to exploring the other side. Thanks for recommending follow up resources! And as always, I so appreciate your charitable spirit, brother! Would that more folks would copy you as you imitate our Savior!
You are taking Romans 9:22-24 out of context, keep reading the verses that follow..."I shall call Not My People, My People. And she who is unloved, Beloved." Incidently I think Calvinist thinking divides the church. The REALLY amusing thing is most Calvinists think they are the Elect, it is everyone else that is suspect.
@@naps3386 I understand that Arminians read Rom. 9 differently than Calvinists, I just don’t understand how. That’s kind of what I was getting at. I have read the entire book of Romans dozens of times, so your comment about reading it out of context isn’t particularly helpful. Sorry. When you’ve been taught to read something through certain lenses, it can be hard to read it differently unless someone carefully walks you through it. I’ve been part of Calvinist circles for over two decades, and I don’t know a single one who would say that they are the only ones who are elect and that everyone else is suspect. So, I’m not sure where that comes from.
Part of it is bad manuscripts Look into hieser on origional sin It will clear alot of this mess up. Also augustine was gnostic for 10 years @@elizabethhankins6973
Hey! I'm glad I found you and your channel is very helpful and is one of the few that holds the Arminian view. Most popular Christian TH-camrs are Calvinist-leaning these days. However one thing's been bothering me in regards to the topic of whether salvation can be forfeited or not. How would you interpret 2 Corinthians 5:17 that says "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed and the new has come." Calvinsits would say that when a person is born again, he will desire what God desires and hate what God hates, Christlikeness. That a saved person will no longer live a sinful lifestyle because he doesn't see sin the same as before he was saved, thus he cannot forfeit his salvation because he has died to sin (Romans 6:1-11). I'd love to hear your response, thanks in advance!
I think sin still continues to try and reclaim us as its slave until the day we go to be with the Lord or until His return, whichever comes first. But the indwelling Holy Spirit gives us the means to resist sin's siren call and leads us in victory as we abide in Him. However, the Holy Spirit can be grieved, quenched, resisted, and even blasphemed. So it is not an automatic process by any means, nor do I believe it is one that a believer can't choose to walk away from entirely.
Wow tulip i can actually get behind ... 🎉 i lean heavily toward provisionism and armininism molinism. I enjoy leighton flowers William lane craig etc. This was great You earned a sub. I really wish gavin ortlund would get away from calvin. Hed be a force of nature with his church history knowledge. For the team free will
Thank you for your succinct and clearly-presented argument. This, together with with the companion video, is the clearest exposition on this topic that I have seen.
So, the presentation of Calvinism wasn't terrible, but certainly lacking as you acknowledged. The "drawing" described is John 6:44 and John 12:32 does mean in the Greek "to drag". So it's not enticing or wooing, etc. It's to certainly bring forth, which is the point you made and that's one of our greatest points as Calvinists. So, John 6:44 says the person will be drawn (dragged) to Christ but you forgot to mention the second part of that verse, that ALL who come to Him in this manner will be raised on the last day, i.e. they will be saved. John 12:32 says when Christ is lifted up He will draw (drag) all men to Himself. So, unless you are a universalist and believe that literally every person will be saved, then you necessarily must acknowledge that the "all" in John 12:32 does not mean every single person on the face of the earth, but rather it means every type of person, i.e. both Jew and Gentiles. That's what the verse means. God is sovereign and He has the right to do with His creation as He pleases. He is thrice holy and good and we, as Christians, trust Him. His election is not arbitrary, but is in keeping with His perfect will and plan from before the world began. Two sparrows do not fall from the sky apart from the will of your Father. We might see that happen and think "so what a couple birds died." We would think that's completely random and arbitrary, but what does Jesus say? That it's all part of God's perfect will and plan for creation. So, if such mundane things are controlled according to the will of God, do you really think He's going to leave the eternal salvation of His people up to chance? By no means! For you are worth more than many sparrows.
It just says God knows when that happens to the sparrows...not that He *makes* it happen to them. That's an assumption Calvinists bring into the text. And if it's "all kinds" of people God "drags" in John 12, then that also fits John 6 just as well. To demand otherwise is special pleading, I would suggest. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo The scripture does not say that God just "knows" when the sparrows fall from the sky. It says that does not happen "apart from the will of your Father" that is, it only happens *if* it is the will of your Father, that is, God ordains it to come to pass or it would *not* happen. Jesus is teaching the disciples about the sovereignty of God here plainly and comforting them with that. If He just knows when that happens that doesn't help them or anyone else whatsoever and contextually is obviously not the case. Yes, it necessarily must mean all *kinds* of people in John 12 or you would have to be a universalist, again by necessity. And I would have no problem applying that same logic to John 6:44 *if* it said "all" anywhere there, which it does not, because He doesn't draw all to Christ and all will not be saved.
@@anchorintheveil The problem with what you said about John 6:44 is John 6:45. The second half of the verse. Those are conditions. There are 2 of them. It's ironic, that one verse later, says who Jesus means. Don't you read your bible?
@@shredhed572 That's no problem at all. It's kind of interesting though, that you think it would be. Yes, all who hear and learn from the Father come to Christ, that is, they do actually come to Christ. Not that they might come to Christ, they *do* come to Christ and are saved. How many times did Jesus say "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."? The Father is the One who opens our ears and our eyes to the truth of the gospel so we *can* come. (Jn 6:44) Not that we may come, or might come, that we can come, and the Father must enable us to come. “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” John 6:65
JM… There are many different ‘beliefs’ that are drawn… hehehe… there’s that word again… drawn from scripture. A lot of which could be dismissed if certain teachers would contemplate scripture as a whole, rather than become fixated upon certain passages… and if they opened their eyes to the world around them. Before watching watching this presentation, I watched your handling of T.U.L.I.P. Having never investigated the tenets of reformed theology, with regard to the ‘5 points of Calvinism,’ before today; although I had heard of the concept, but chose to over look it, I never realised how biblically skewed it really is. Which is funny, because I can listen and take heart to the likes of RC Sproul (rest his soul); et al, all day and every day for his treatment of what it is to be a Christian. Yet… your exposition of the topic far outstrips anything I have heard argued about the intricacies of Salvation according to Scripture. I will go as far to say that the 5 points of Calvinism belong along side of the teachings of Mormonism, Jehovah Witness and Seventh Day Adventist teaching. Well meaning, but utterly unrealistic… though, I would not go as far as lumping the whole of Reformist Theology into that basket of course. BUT surprised that they come to that conclusion about the scriptures that they so diligently study and delight in. If you are reading this today, July 29, 2022… I also caught your presentation about your recommendations for OT resources… Yes. today is my day off from a very long and demanding week at work… and rest was the order of the day. I absolutely keyed into your recommendations about spreading the net to gain an understanding about how people from other cultures; ie Africa and South Asia (as you pointed to) think and interpret life and scripture through their own lens. I think that the world would be such a better place if everybody; including those of differing cultures, took the time to contemplate everybody else’s ‘world views.’ - especially since the world has become such a smaller place than it once was. That is an aside from understanding OT Theology of course… but good all round practice. While I am full of glowing compliments about your efforts, I have to ask about why you always point to the book of Romans when you are sharing your Study Bible thoughts. Anyway, I am just another sojourning viewer on the receiving, though paid up, end of the TH-cam experience, though sometimes wishing that I knew some of its content creators personally… 👍 All the best from Kangaroo Land.
Hi David, thanks for watching and for sharing your thoughts! To answer your question, I always look at 4 books when reviewing study Bibles (Gen, Exod, Rom, Rev) because these are the places at which a study Bible's theological & hermeneutical leanings are usually most readily apparent. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo Ah! Thanks for clarifying JM… James. Down here, apart from the minor Christian based religions, the main theological divide is simply between Catholicism and Protestantism… hence me never looking into TULIP… :) Enjoy your day/night sir.
It's definitely a helpful resource. I'm not a Classical Arminian, but he makes a lot of great points and shows some of the misconceptions many Calvinists have about Arminianism.
If you are asking whether I believe someone can "fall away" (Heb 3.12), "make a shipwreck of their faith" (1Tim 1.19) or be told "away from me, I never knew you" (Matt 7.23) ...yes, yes I do.
@@DiscipleDojo So that person suddenly becomes unregenerated? He or she is no longer a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17 ). The Holy Spirit no longer indwells that person (Romans 8:9, 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; Eph. 2:2)? Jesus says that the Spirit will be with us forever (John 14:16). Even if a true believer falls away and is in grevious sin, Paul talks about delivering that one to satan for the destruction of their flesh that this Spirit can be saved (1 Cor. 5:5). I don't see a true Christin becoming unborn again from the Scriptures. If they apostasize, they were never truly saved (1 Jn 2:19).
Sorry brother, I cannot agree with you. The clear teaching of Scripture as a whole is total depravity. Eph 2:1- 8. It takes the work of God in Christ to bring us to spiritual life.
Nothing I said denies that the Spirit brings us to life. The question is, are we unable to desire it beforehand? Beware of using words like "clearly" on issues where faithful Christians have disagreed for 2000 years.
”Jesus responded and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus *said to Him, “How can a person be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb a second time and be born, can he?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which has been born of the flesh is flesh, and that which has been born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it is coming from and where it is going; so is everyone who has been born of the Spirit.”“ John 3:3-8 NASB2020
If you pray for a sick person to be positively healed, rather than for God to make it possible for them to be healed, then you are already more Calvinist than you may know.
@@DiscipleDojo Disease is because of the curse of God upon the sinful human race. God chose that man would be inflicted with suffering. It is the purpose of God that sinful man should suffer.
I don't mind being a robot in God's absolute sovereignty. I hear people say being unable and unwilling makes us robots. I will take it and give ALL glory to God
I wouldn't Think about it this way if you loved a girl And could hand her a potion to magically love you. Are her feelings real... God wants a family he wants willing companionship Forced servitude isn't it. I'd rather be a willing servant I'd rather be the bride to the bride groom. Even tho I'm not perfect. And I sin I'd still yoke my fate willingly to my perfect lord and savior. Than a chattel slave being whipped to build a temple on a pile of other people that weren't on calvinisms damnable doctrine. If I were to be born a tool For the lord may it be on a hurricane or some other force of nature used to smite the ungodly. Something with no emotion...
@@r.a.panimefan2109 We MUST HAVE the imputed righteousness THAT God gives us when we ARE SAVED. Without THAT gift none will be in heaven. God sees the believer COMPLETE in HIM
@@Over-for-now that's not what calvin taught. Tho. We all agree that when we come to faith we are imputed the riteous covering of christ... What calvinism teaches is that Imputation comes before faith. I.e. God chooses you then you believe. That's the difference Which means that those who are not saved were also chosen by god to be damned. With no power or say so by the individual... That is based on dualistic gnostic views... Aka augustine was a gnostic He literally confesses to it. He grew up gnostic. He believed that god chose to save prior to faith and regeneration. It turns the process on its head. So let's not strawman. I agree christ imputed riteous to us. When we believe. It says it over and over Peter in acts. (Repent and believe and you will be saved.) Calvin flipped it.
@@Over-for-now and yet your a calvinist following people that went even further with the gnostic interpolation of scripture. Jodie vacuhmen (vipers in dipers.) He believes baby are evil and this is the calvinist view. This is why I'm saying there's some cognitive dissonance here
We shouldn't confuse the times of God being very sovereign towards Israel for the purpose of providing salvation for the world, with our free choice for personal salvation
Provoking thought... Read John Calvin's own commentary on John 3:16 and see if it matches the way "Limited Atonement" is taught today. Fun fact, he even talks about a free will choice. (I am in the middle between Calvinism and Arminianism, leaning more Arminianism but still researching.)
Yeah, it's always interesting when people drop their assumptions about what Calvinists believe and actually read primary sources. The Reformed confessions are full of affirmations of free will as well.
Did Paul write Romans to Christians or non-Christians? Christians. So when Romans says we have been set free from captivity to sin, he was writing to believers. You say some people will choose to go back, but Jesus explains that with the parable of the soils. Some of the seed that fell on bad soil sprang up, but because the soil was bad, for one reason or another, there was no fruit. But ALL the seed that fell on the good soil produced fruit. Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” How can a person choose what he cannot even see? He must be born again BEFORE he can see the kingdom and desire it. Being dead to sin, and being dead in your sins, are legal positions. A Christian, while retaining his flesh prior tp the resurrection, is still capable of sin because the flesh is not redeemed until the resurrection. But legally before God's judgment seat, he died to sin on the cross with Christ, and is made alive in Christ through regeneration. Right now, you still sin. But that is different from being *dead in your sins.* It's nice that you think free will is assumed everywhere, but you really fell flat there, I think. In the Exodus account, five times it says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, six times it simply states the fact that Pharaoh's heart was hard, and twice it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. If you throw in 1 Samuel 6:6, then call it three times. God cooperated with the already bent/corrupted/dead heart of Pharaoh in the hardening. God did nothing to Pharaoh against Pharaoh's will. The statement that every command/exhortation in scripture assumes that we can respond to it flies in the face of Galatians 3:24, which says that the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ. How was it our tutor? because by seeing that we are unwilling and unable to keep the law, we see our need for Christ. This leads to repentance. But how does a sinner come to repent? "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God (Eph. 2:8)." As for election/predestination, Romans 8 says that "those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." Note that the "those" is plural. So he cannot be saying that Christ alone was predestined, nor that Christ was predestined to be conformed to himself. Another point on that verse. Non-Calvinists take the "foreknow" to mean that God looks ahead to see who will choose him, then elects those persons. If that were the case, then the verse would read, "For those *about* whom he foreknew ...." Whenever the Bible takes on a person as the object of "to know," it speaks of an intimate relationship, not of knowledge *about* a person. E.g., "And Adam knew Eve, his wife; and she conceived .... (Genesis 4:1, KJV)." I need to stop. But I want to ask you a question. I'm sure you believe that God is unchanging, so when did God become merciful? Was he not eternally merciful? But until the fall, there was no one who needed his mercy. But if the elect were eternally predestined, then God has been eternally merciful to the elect, which would explain his "foreknowing them." Sorry, brother, but you did not win me with your logic. Grace and peace to you.
On Pharaoh's heart, see the video I did on that topic specifically (I even quote Augustine and other Reformed heroes in it!). :-) Your other points, IMO, hinge on selective literalism unevenly applied ("dead" is a figure of speech, but "seeing the Kingdom of God" is literaly chronology, etc.) As for your question, where does the Bible say that God was merciful from all eternity? I'd say God "became" merciful as soon as there were objects of mercy toward whom to express His eternal loving nature...just as He "became" incarnate during the incarnation. I reject concepts of divine immutability which reduce God to an unchanging essence rather than the personal God we meet in Scripture. What you are suggesting sounds more like Islamic conceptions of God than a Hebrew view of YHWH. But I don't expect a single TH-cam video to win over someone who's been teaching Reformed Theology for decades and is comfortable in it. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo Likewise, my comments aren't going to change anyone's opinion. :) I don't see how you can reject divine immutability. If that is not true, then that means that there is something in creation which causes him to change; something outside of God causes a change within God. I can't fathom that. James 1:17 settles that one for me. Oh, well. One of us will have some 'splainin' to do when we meet the Lord. ;) I am still trying to get to your video on the parallels between the Jewish War and Revelation. If only I didn't have a job! :)
It seems that you are saying that rebirth in Christ can somehow be undone. For the converted assurance is permanent. I guess this means I come down of the side of the reformed view. When someone saysI can lose my salvation I must ask, How? I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer. MikeinMinnesota
You can't "lose" your salvation...because it's not a 'thing' you own to begin with. It's a *relationship*...and you can always walk away from a relationship. That doesn't "undo" anything you experienced in the past; it simply entails (to use NT language) a "shipwreck of faith."
isn’t it generally recognised that his popular books are somewhat less trustworthy than his academic ones? Personally, while of course I find much good in his works. I find also egregious illogic and failure to see alternative views (eg on the presumed error on the early return of Jesus).
The old nature could walk away from Jesus at the slightest pain or trouble, but the new nature, "born of God", cannot. Therefore, the whole person cannot walk away and mean it, because although it is free, the new nature can't want to walk away from Jesus. So if the old nature is packing its bags to leave, the new nature is frightened, horrified, and beyond consolation. It sure isn't going to be a matter of walking out into the "sunshine" of a godless life, like atheists think. I lived through this over many years when I was young.
I jus came across your videos I am enjoying watching them very much thank you for sharing your knowledge I w as brought up in a Christian home my dad is a calvinist he believes in absolute predestination of all things even as a child I had a problem with this theory when I was a child and dad would spank or punish me for telling a lie or doing something else wrong I would ask him why he was punishing me for something that I had to do since God had pre determined even before the beginning of time Thanks again for your videos they explain a lot to me
This has always been something I've struggled with. I was raised as a Free Will Baptist which is very Arminian, and have been to various churches ranging from very Calvinist with Presbyterian roots to many somewhere in between, and the more I dig, the more confusing it becomes, because I can see both sides being accurate, but not necessarily for every single Christian and person represented in the Bible. Paul was seized on the road to Damascus which lends to the Calvinist argument, but Ruth willingly came to God, which is Arminian. Calvinism-Arminianism and The Age of Accountability are the two most troubling concepts that I have struggled with most. If you have any good resources for The Age of Accountability (is it or is it not biblical) I would greatly appreciate it.
The concept of a person reaching a point where they "know to choose the good from the bad" is certainly present in the Hebrew Bible...but it is never spoken of as a certain age, and certainly not depicted as the same for everyone. When it comes to that question, I simply echo Abraham: "Will not the Judge of all the earth do what is right?" and leave the particulars up to God, who knows the heart of every person and loves them more than I ever could.
One of the biggest problems dividing the church today is the false dichotomy being created between the requirement for man to believe for salvation on the one hand, and God's choice in salvation on the other - there are many teachers who would say that the Bible teaches an either/or approach to salvation where the one camp emphatically states that "we must believe to be saved" while ignoring God's sovereignty over salvation, while the other camp states "God chooses who will be saved" while ignoring the requirement for man to believe. What people in both of these camps need to realize is that the Bible does not present an "either/or" proposition between these two ideas. The truth is a "both/and" scenario: We must believe for salvation, and it is God who chooses who will be saved, and in time, grants him the ability to believe; if you are willing (Isaiah 1:19), it is only because God has made you willing (John 6:29, 37, 44, Acts 13:48, Philippians 1:29). As for "free will," the Bible never talks about man’s freedom in the sense of having the ability of contrary choice. Rather, whenever scripture speaks of man’s freedom, it is in reference to Christ setting an individual free from his slavery to sin (cf. Galatians 2:4, 5:1, 13, Hebrews 2:14-15, John 8:32-36, Romans 6:6, 16-20, 8:15, 2 Corinthians 3:17). There is no freedom for man once he is set free from sin however, for either he is a slave to sin, or he is a slave to God (Romans 6:17-18, 22, 1 Corinthians 7:22, 1 Peter 2:16, Ephesians 6:6, Colossians 3:24). Since a slave is not the master of his own will, but instead does the will of his master who owns him, and scripture says that the slave desires to do his master’s will, cf. Psalm 40:8, John 8:44, and that his desire is from God (1 Corinthians 15:10, Philippians 2:13), therefore any notion that suggests that man has a free will in the libertarian sense (the ability of contrary choice) is an unbiblical notion.
@@lawrencestanley8989 "It is for freedom Christ has set you free..." Be careful of calling unbiblical what is actually assumed throughout. When Paul uses the metaphor of "slavery to God", he is building upon the Exodus image of Israel being freed from "serving" Pharaoh in order to "worship" YHWH (same word in Heb). He is not making a philosophical axiomatic claim, as many later Reformed interpreters assume.
@@lawrencestanley8989 Luke 7:30 "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him". Apparently it can be rejected. Luke 10:31. Jesus says "by chance". 1 Sam 23 David is told by the Lord that he will be delivered to up to Saul, and he and his men leave. God knew what was going to happen but He can allow men's plans to change. Preknown by God is not set in stone, He has all the bases covered
I have found Calvinists to be VERY legalistic, holier than thou, to the point of shunning me. Like moths to the flame, Calvinism seems to attract this type of judgmental person.
This guys sermon is a prime example of poor biblical scholarship. Even a basic course in hermeneutics, teaching the literal-historical-grammatical interpretation of scripture will teach you that interpretation is not reader based, but author based. What did the author mean? Along with this comes a full study of entire chapters, background, complete verses not paraphrased and taken out of context (e.g. Romans 7), order in which Paul's letters were written, original languages, etc. I've no doubt that this gentleman is a genuine born again believer, but before you buy his sales pitch, read the fine print of scripture surrounding his proof texts, entirely. If you want to read another Apostle and also read Christ's own words, read John 1, 3, 10, 15, 17. Jesus' own words cannot be more clear. BE DILIGENT IN YOUR OWN STUDIES.
@@brentmccain7737 “what did the author mean” you can claim it’s author based (regarding to Protestantism) but all leaders in Protestantism are miniature popes using their own reasoning to try and understand the Bible instead of listening to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church Jesus Christ Himself built. You’re in my prayers 🙏🏻
@@DiscipleDojo 2nd that. Maybe review S101 and followup with how you may differ. Your TULIP vs S101 PROVIDE acrostic. Would also love a video on sanctification. Your have a great presentation style.
“IF you continue in your faith, your present salvation is secured.” “You’re judged by your faith and your deeds together because you’re judged according to who you are” Thank God I won’t be judged by who I am but on account of Christ in me; I’ll make it because He said I’ll make it. Time and space, all of eternity, past and present, all pales in comparison to the look I long for in the Lord Jesus’ face and nothing can break that bond. While yes I will experience judgement in the body but the blood of the Lamb will be enough to get me through, even if my crown is not like Paul’s or that of a martyr. I hear a lack of eternal security in this which isn’t what Paul said when he said that I know my God will keep you until the Day (paraphrase).
But if Christ in you doesn't bear fruit...then is Christ actually in you? Scripture gives a resounding "no" to that question, I believe. Not having assurance is better than having false assurance and hearing, "Away from me. I never knew you."
@@DiscipleDojo what about the Corinthian believers who was in sin, abusing the Lord supper, paul said for that reason ( their sin) some of them was sick, some sleep ( died)… what about Ananias who lied to the Holy Spirit and died because of it. God will chastise every son he receives but he absolutely will not take away their salvation… the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, he will not change his mind… Jesus said we HAVE eternal life the moment we believe, if it’s eternal it lasts forever. He said we are in his hand and in the fathers hand, we will never perish. Jesus said, the one who doesn’t believe shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. He didn’t say you can see life and then lose it. Nothing can separate us from the love of God… We’ve passed from death unto life etc etc. good message overall apart from I disagree with losing salvation.
At the 12:21-23 spot you stated that "the elect is never used of people who are not yet in a relationship with God"... ugh 2 Timothy 2:10 Paul wrote," I endure all things for the sake of the elect that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus." According to Paul, his motive for enduring suffering was for "elect" who have not been saved yet, that the may also be saved in Christ Jesus. Therefore, the attempt to equate elect with a corporate community of faith only after conversion makes Paul a liar.
Two ways of interpreting this passage, either of which accorda with Marshall's point: 1. The suffering Paul endured was for the sake of God's chosen people *corporately*, that they might obtain salvation in the eschaton (i.e. run the race, not make a shipwreck of their faith, reach the prize of the upward calling, etc.). Salvation always has past, present, and future senses depending on context. 2. Paul is alluding, with not a little irony, to the Jewish people who have not yet heard the news of their Messiah. Israel *corporately* was the elect, and Paul's ministry was "to the Jew first" in bringing them the good news (gospel) of their King. So, no, Paul is not a liar, and the elect is not talking about chosen *individuals* in Scripture, but rather a chosen *people* and corporate community.
Galatians 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, Galatians 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Paul thought he was pre selected.
@@michaelshelnutt3534 carefully read Romans 9-11 , or, simply look at life of Jesus The Messiah and try to cohere coalesce the christ of Calvinism with Him. Your choice
When we look at Acts 4 v 27, we are informed that God chose 4 'parties' to deliver up Jesus to crucifixion (2 'corporates' and 2 'named individuals'). We are told "they did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen". (v28). It was all determined beforehand.
8:56 Amen. 9:38 Amen. 12:01 Interesting. 13:24 AMEN TO THIS. *This sheds light on the title --> Messiah or Mashiah // Christ or Christos. *New Israel (Jacob = person/descendants), New People, New Chosen, New Jerusalem, New Earth, New Covenant, New Descendants from Abraham, New Adam (Adam = person/humanity). 17:35 Interesting note. 22:02 Amen. 26:18 Missionaries. 29:59 Good note. 31:09 Doubt. 33:02 Testimony. 39:54 Excellent. 41:58 Depicting Calvinism.
Luke 10:21 KJV - In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight. If someone asserts that trusting "babe" belief is man-made "folk religion", well, it isn't. It is revealed by God, through the written word and the Holy Spirit, not invented by the believers. It may be believed by "folk", but it came from God.
Where does it say that Paul was referring to the time before he got saved when he talked about the sin that he would not do that he does and the good that he would do that he doesn’t do? How then do you explain that Christians sin? Anyone who claims to be without sin is a liar and the truth is not in them. If you are not without sin, doesn’t that make you a sinner? I would think that if you’re not without sin then sooner or later you will sin. Any sin you commit must be wilful, it’s you doing it not someone else. Surely that’s why God has put our Salvation all on Himself. You who think too take a little credit for yourself be warned, God is not mocked and He does not share His Glory with another. God is a jealous God and you are saved by His Grace and all the Glory belongs to Him alone, The Triune God of The Scriptures. Remember Abraham was put to sleep, God did it all. You bow down to someone other then God and unless they are evil or appointed over you, like a judge, they should say to you,” I am your fellow servant, do not bow down to me.
See our video here on the channel where we look at Romans 7 in detail. It's in the Viewer Questions playlist. No one is arguing that any part of our salvation is not on God. This is a common error Calvinists make regarding non-Calvinist soteriology and has been addressed countless times by non-Calvinist theologians.
I disagree. Scripture itself never makes that equation when discussing the Gospel. I believe Calvinism is incorrect, but does not qualify as heterodoxy in the sense Paul is speaking of in Galatians 1.
@@DiscipleDojo sad way to live not knowing if you have salvation living in doubt till the end is not trusting in the finished work of Christ. Stay blessed ✝️🙏🏽
Thank you for this I don’t know why but I liked your content but I thought you leaned reformed. Now I know that’s not the case and I like your content even more knowing I don’t have to question every single thing you say through the lens not embracing Calvinism
![โรงเรียนห้ามรัก โดนจับได้ตาย...!! [เอิร์นไดเม่]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4u02Sbr556Q/mqdefault.jpg)
'The ability to love HAS to entail the ability to not love' ... Best statement I have ever heard on the subject of love.
Yes, this is great. Clear, intelligent, well presented and passionate. Really helpful to share with Calvinist friends. Also very helpful to share common Calvinist objections and how not to be tied in knots. This is the big problem; it does tie people up in knots!
Thank you so much for unpacking this! Outstanding 😊
This was really helpful, I've been struggling to understand this.
thank you
This is such a great, clear explanation on an alternate view to Calvanism. It put to words what I was struggling to articulate myself. So thank you!
Take a look at leighton flowers...
He channel is second to none when it comes to breaking calvin... and more over gives the history of where Calvin's view originated
(Hint a particular heresy the early church fought vehemently
If u want history of doctrine of origional sin
Idol killer Warren mcgrew.
Or even Dr micheal hieser(may he rest in piece)
You won't be a fan of augustine after these 3 are done
This is SO GOOD! You have really spelled out what I have been sensing in my heart, but could not put into words. Thank you thank you THANK YOU!!!!
My thoughts exactly. This video is pure gold!
Be careful, the heart is wicked above all things (Jer 17:9)!
Excellent sermon!! I am not a Calvinist either. I was born to Non-church parents. Starting at age four or five, I would walk down the street to the Baptist church to attend Sunday School (Kindergarten-grade 5) and then church by myself. At the beginning of sixth grade, we moved 2 miles away from the church and my parents told me church was over because they were not going to drive me. I’m now closing in on 77 years old. I never left Jesus and He for sure never left me. Did I sin any during those 72 years? Of course, but the Holy Spirit convicts and God’s grace is sufficient! Hallelujah! I took my children to church and they are both saved. They and I cannot imagine ever walking away from Jesus. If we ever tried, He would be pulling us back to Him. Thank you for this most excellent teaching.
☺️🙌🏼
FORGET calvin. There's too much obsession with calvin. Stay with God's word. Let God be true and every man a liar
That was such an amazing talk. Thank you!
Bottom line: you don’t have to believe in Calvinism to be saved. You do have to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. I like what you did with TULIP there. Pretty clever and something to mull over.
Refreshing. I am glad your channel popped up in my feed.
It is always a treat to find someone who is "Scholarly" and nerdy about theology but is not Calvinist
We do exist. 😁
Thank you! I really enjoy all of your videos! This video gave me some good things to review and research.
Listing Charles Stanley as a Calvinist in the video description was a surprise to me. Still is. If a citation exists, specifically that Charles affirms the U and I in TULIP, I would be interested.
If he rejects a point, it would probably be the L, not the U. Most Baptist Calvinists do not accept L. I believe he was cited in Zondervan's Counterpoints series on Eternal Security. If he has changed his views since the 90s, I'd be interested to know.
Why I CAN be a Calvinist (hint: it’s because of scripture!). Seriously though, scripture, when interpreted with a proper hermeneutic using the historical-grammatical method, it seems to suggest that the Calvinists MIGHT have it right, but it also seems to suggest that non-Calvinists MIGHT have it right as well. Just like scripture seems to suggest in certain passages that A-Millennialism is true while at the same time there are passages that seem to suggest that dispensational premillennialism is true - all without contracting itself. Awww heck, can’t we all just agree that our Lord God works in mysterious ways. I’m still learning about Calvinism versus Non-Calvinism, so this is still open-ended for me.
This is why it's so helpful that when Jesus was on earth he started a Church with the authority to interpret Scripture and break interpretive "ties" which cannot be escaped under Protestantism/Sola Scriptura.
Forget Calvinism and Arminianism. Check out Jim Brown at grace and truth ministries and learn Greek and Hebrew and get all the tools you need so you can read the Bible for yourself.
Excellent sermon brother. We'll said. You have inspired me to do a sermon on this topic.
Thanks for the video, challenging and edifying. I purchased several of the books on the end card, including a For AND Against Calvinism book set.
Awesome and fair breakdown brother. Definitely enjoyed this.
Thanks, brother!
This is a great video presentation much needed right now with reformed theology taking over christian thought. Would like to see you collab with Dr Leighton Flowers. God Bless.
I dunno…I just watched a debate between White & Flowers, and the spirit of it left something to be desired, IMO. Maybe that’s a bad judgment on my part, but I actually came here to listen to episodes on it because I knew the tone is completely different…more charitable and winsome. If anyone enters the Dojo, it should be someone that shares this gracious spirit. I’m currently in a church that has folks who hold to both Calvinistic and Arminian thinking and trying to better understand both sides so I can lead Bible studies in such a way as to maintain the unity of the Spirit. Appreciate the work here to that end.
Hello! I had expected a very good presentation and you didn’t disappoint. Well done! Thinking about the matter and the premise of your bottom-line statements, I think that to me the Reformed position makes sense. I found myself interacting with you as you eloquently expounded on the many Scripture references and to me it was a case that they also could be premised on the Reformed views and still make sense of them that way.
I guess that what I’m saying is that God’s ways are indeed His ways and baffle us and will continue to baffle us! I can live with that. I’m ok with that. After all He is God and not me/us. About assurance of salvation, I think He is gracious to let us know if we are saved or not, and the test you proposed of asking the simple straight question whether at that moment we believe in the atoning work of our Savior is a very good way to know. Daily, I find myself in awe of the work and ministry of the Holy Spirit, which is how I think I’m even sensitized to ask about it!
Thank you for sharing this great presentation! 👍😊
That is a fair conclusion. I have no desire to talk anyone out of their Reformed views...just to show that that is not the *ONLY* way to read Scripture, as some of the more dogmatic Reformed popularizers tend to teach. This is why I don't attack Reformed theology like some Arminians do either. I will *critique* it, but I recognize that it is a *possible* approach (just one that I don't find persuasive or necessary to begin with). Cheers and thanks for the interaction!
@@DiscipleDojo I agree. The Reformed way to understand this matter is not the only way, and it is obvious. The debate is still ongoing among faithful believers. Like you, I don't seek to change another believer's point of view. I am not the Holy Spirit. And like you, I find it useless and unproductive to take a hard line approach about this issue whether it comes from a Reformed Theology perspective or an Arminian perspective.
Watching your content makes me think and I have learned lots from your videos!!! Thank you! :)
@@DiscipleDojo I watched Part 1 and now Part 2. You messed with my head, but it was good for me to come out of my Reformed bubble. I have some reading to do. Now, I appreciate that there is another way to interpret Scripture. You made some excellent points that I can't dismiss. I am OK with being a lifelong learner of the Bible. I ordered some of the books you suggested. Thank you, thank you, thank you for this channel. :)
Hello sir. You must be doing something wrong, I can't believe how low are the numbers of views on your videos. You deserved at least a million views. I learned a lot going through your videos today.
Feel free to share them and help us change that! 😁
@@DiscipleDojo I'm not saying the message is bad but the presentation is not TH-cam friendly. A 40 minute sermon with very little visual activity is not going to go viral. And yes. I know the point is not to go viral but if you want more views and more subscribers you need to make shorter (10 minutes?) videos with engaging imagery.
Same
@@SaltLight7 disagree. there are many of us who just listen and do boring chores so can't watch whatever the imagery is.
the length of videos should be whatever is appropriate to do justice to the subject.
@@ElenaLearningForeverToInfinity I'm not speaking about accuracy or appropriateness of the content. I was replying to why the video doesn't get more views especially given how good and enlightening the content is.
I was raised in a Calvinistic church and converted to Arminianism at age 34 after an intense search of the scriptures. Since this liberating event, I've experienced great security and satisfaction...🙂
I love your TULIP! This is the first cogently explained thing I’ve heard that gives me any explanation of Christ as the elect. Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Tried listening to this but could not finish. You mentioned several claims against Calvinists that I have never heard before. As a life long Presbyterian, it's difficult to listen to someone present God differently from the loving father that is presented from the teachers and scripture that I have learned from. In addition, from my understanding of scripture, it is not wise to make such proclamations that paint many of us as hyper-calvinists when we aren't. I found your discussion with Dr Imes to be much more credible in presenting scripture and exegetical references to support your position regarding women leadership at the pastor, elder and deacon levels.
Did you watch my presentation of Calvinism in the prior video in this series? Most of my Calvinist friends and viewers said that it was fair and an accurate portrayal of Calvinism.
@@DiscipleDojothis is how they always react...
You could quote calvin himself to people in context and they will hate the representation
Only thing I’ll say about your point on the P is there other scriptures that back up that you can’t lose your salvation. I’m kinda at a middle ground of reformed and regular baptist and I believe if you are truly saved you will have up and downs but will always come back. My testimony personally I went through several seasons of disobedience but was still being convicted still at my heart wanted to get back on track and I eventually repented and through the Lords grace I’m still working and striving to walk with him daily. However I believe if someone makes a confession of faith and one just walks away completely I don’t think they truly had any true faith. I also reject once saved always saved because many people use that excuse to say a little pray and love how they want which is simply wrong. I believe once in Jesus he does good works in us and we long to do those things for him and it’s a life time of repentance and sanctification. But I really appreciate your video as someone who is kind of lnbetween major Baptist ideas. I also appreciate that you seem to like myself put stake in personal study and wanting serve God with each other even if certain people interpret things differently. I don’t know if you’ll see this comment since this video is older but again I appreciate the video and your Bible reviews have a good one sir!
This was fantastic. Loving your channel. I’m a new subscriber and am eating up all your videos. 😊
Outstanding! Thank you.
I am a Calvinist, but I loved listening to this.
Thank you. I try to be fair to my Calvinist brothers and sisters and not strawman their views.
Thank you for sharing this invaluable information!!!
Hi DiscipleDojo!
Funny story: I’ve been recently praying through starting up a TH-cam channel dedicated to pointing others to behold the beauty and joy of Christ and living life in His Kingdom right now moment by moment in all areas of our lives, whether through music, art, math, science, culture, etc. Anyway, as a longtime martial artist as well, I was thinking through name ideas for the channel and thought up something like Disciple Dojo because discipleship is really much like the discipline of a method or way and like martial arts prepares us for battle and worst case scenarios when they come, our walk as believers is Biblically described in this spiritual battle language (armor of God, waging war not against flesh and blood but principalities, etc) that we ought to be ready for. Fun fact: “dojo” literally translates to “the place of the way” and so what better descriptive name than “dojo” describes how we are to live in the Kingdom of THEE Way…of Jesus, who is the way!
Anyway, all that to say, while I was super excited and blessed yet also low key disappointed to find your channel knowing that my name idea was taken 😂. But no hard feelings because I actually find your content and humble heart really well sound and refreshing in such a time of arrogance and deceitfulness. Maybe sometime in the near future if I get a channel going (hopefully with a cool name like yours) we can collaborate or something and share our stories as martial artists for Christ! 😁
Also, this response to Calvinism was super helpful and respectfully thought through!
Haha, great minds think alike brother! 😁 Blessings on starting your channel! Let us know when it's up and running!
@@DiscipleDojo Will do, thanks! Keep up the content. It’s good stuff!
Excellent acrostic to counter Calvinism theology.
JM- by chance can you share your resources that you use in this video? This is so well done!
I don't think I have the handouts that they used when I taught it, because it was so long ago. But if you have questions on any of the books mentioned I'm happy to point you to them.
Do you have any recommendations on the subject of romans 9?
@@pappywinky4749 Ben Witherington, NT Wright, Michael Gorman, and Jason Staples.
@@DiscipleDojo thank you :)
You made some very good points. Before I quit my Baptist church and become a non member and go to a evangelical church non Calvinism I’ll pray before I quit my Baptist church
Baptist are not all calvinist
Check out
Leighton flowers.
The difference between a Baptist and say a Presbyterian is in church organisation
Basically as un institutional and as much scripture as it gets.
Presbyterian is very calvinist.
They're gov ecclesiaolgy
Is built more as a republic a bottom up form of gov.
These two schools are the most anti tradition pro scripture.
The problem with Presbyterian is calvin started it.
Baptists are controlled locally and one group may be different to another.
Lutheren is mixing scripture with tradition
Similer to catholic
Anglican is the middle way.
But there are both freewill and calvinist baptists.
Thank you so much for all the reading recommendations! I love everything you’re doing for the kingdom.
It’s always great to hear the truth. Thanks
I want to know if this sermon convinced any of your Calvanist friends? Well done!
It was a presentation I did at a Methodist campus ministry, so there weren't many Calvinists there. But who knows since posting it online? 🙂
Hello, I have another question to ask, how would you interpret Rev 13:8 and 17:8 that says: "The beast that you saw pwas, and is not, and qis about to rise from rthe bottomless pit2 and sgo to destruction. And tthe dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in uthe book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast"
Calvinists use this as proof-text that since God predestines people to heaven, He also predestines people to hell which is the teaching that I can't accept since it seems contrary to God's character in 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 Tim 2:3
Earlier in Revelation there is a warning that people's names can be blotted out of the book of life. So, either way, this concept doesn't say what Calvinism says.
@@DiscipleDojo thanks
That was very well put together..thanks..
This was excellent thank you.
Thanks for watching!
You made some very good points. Before I quit my Baptist church and become a non member and go to a evangelical church non Calvinism
Replying to the “T”, where are you talk about how John is referencing back to the Exodus… the Israelites were chosen as God’s holy people by God‘s own sovereignty, and not because there was anything special or unique about them, which would seem to reinforce Calvinistic theology
Yes, but *individual Israelites* were not.
This should be interesting, I started going down the Calvinist route 20 years ago and backed out when I realized that God didn't have to control man's will to guarantee His outcomes. I know Calvin talked about secondary causes but it still ends up limiting God's omnipotence and providence. I grew up in the Mennonite church, went to Lutheran schools and moved on to Baptist and Bible churches and recent study has caused me to even adopt some Eastern Orthodox views. On the down side I feel as if I don't really fit in at one church or the other...
The problem is that when you talk about total depravity, it basically means every part of man is effected with sin. Adam had a will that was free from the bondage of sin. That bondage or sin nature was given to his posterity. That is why the Virgin birth is important. It is not that man doesn’t make choices. It’s that his nature has been wholly corrupted since he died separated himself from god in the garden. Man still makes. Choices but his nature dictates those choices. Also it is those whom he foreknew not he who he foreknew but those he foreknew. Is not US the direct object in the text. Also election is individual and corporate. Not one or the other.
Great video and teaching. Thanks, man.
Quite helpful. I still wonder if, based on passages like 1 Pt. 1:4-5, there isn’t a both/and going on rather than an either/or; that is, God preserves those who come to Him through faith such that they will persevere.
I’m also still wondering what to do with Romans 9:22-24. When I was first being introduced to Calvinist thinking, I distinctly remember praying, “God, I don’t like this view of you, but I can see it in Scripture, so help me to love you for who you reveal yourself to be, not who I want you to be.” I cried and prayed a lot. Romans 9:23 was the only explanation I found for why God might chose some and pass over others…to display the riches of His glory. I’ve been in reformed-ish churches for a couple of decades now, but I’m not opposed to exploring the other side. Thanks for recommending follow up resources!
And as always, I so appreciate your charitable spirit, brother! Would that more folks would copy you as you imitate our Savior!
You are taking Romans 9:22-24 out of context, keep reading the verses that follow..."I shall call Not My People, My People. And she who is unloved, Beloved." Incidently I think Calvinist thinking divides the church. The REALLY amusing thing is most Calvinists think they are the Elect, it is everyone else that is suspect.
@@naps3386 I understand that Arminians read Rom. 9 differently than Calvinists, I just don’t understand how. That’s kind of what I was getting at. I have read the entire book of Romans dozens of times, so your comment about reading it out of context isn’t particularly helpful. Sorry. When you’ve been taught to read something through certain lenses, it can be hard to read it differently unless someone carefully walks you through it.
I’ve been part of Calvinist circles for over two decades, and I don’t know a single one who would say that they are the only ones who are elect and that everyone else is suspect. So, I’m not sure where that comes from.
Part of it is bad manuscripts
Look into hieser on origional sin
It will clear alot of this mess up.
Also augustine was gnostic for 10 years
@@elizabethhankins6973
Hey! I'm glad I found you and your channel is very helpful and is one of the few that holds the Arminian view. Most popular Christian TH-camrs are Calvinist-leaning these days.
However one thing's been bothering me in regards to the topic of whether salvation can be forfeited or not.
How would you interpret 2 Corinthians 5:17 that says "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed and the new has come." Calvinsits would say that when a person is born again, he will desire what God desires and hate what God hates, Christlikeness. That a saved person will no longer live a sinful lifestyle because he doesn't see sin the same as before he was saved, thus he cannot forfeit his salvation because he has died to sin (Romans 6:1-11).
I'd love to hear your response, thanks in advance!
I think sin still continues to try and reclaim us as its slave until the day we go to be with the Lord or until His return, whichever comes first. But the indwelling Holy Spirit gives us the means to resist sin's siren call and leads us in victory as we abide in Him. However, the Holy Spirit can be grieved, quenched, resisted, and even blasphemed. So it is not an automatic process by any means, nor do I believe it is one that a believer can't choose to walk away from entirely.
@@DiscipleDojo Ooh, so basically after being saved, the Holy Spirit enables us, He's like a weapon but we have the choice to use the weapon or not
Wow tulip i can actually get behind
...
🎉 i lean heavily toward provisionism and armininism molinism.
I enjoy leighton flowers
William lane craig etc.
This was great
You earned a sub.
I really wish gavin ortlund would get away from calvin. Hed be a force of nature with his church history knowledge. For the team free will
I’ve watched a ton of videos about this topic and this is by far one of the most concise. Thank you for sharing!
Thank you for your succinct and clearly-presented argument. This, together with with the companion video, is the clearest exposition on this topic that I have seen.
So, the presentation of Calvinism wasn't terrible, but certainly lacking as you acknowledged. The "drawing" described is John 6:44 and John 12:32 does mean in the Greek "to drag". So it's not enticing or wooing, etc. It's to certainly bring forth, which is the point you made and that's one of our greatest points as Calvinists. So, John 6:44 says the person will be drawn (dragged) to Christ but you forgot to mention the second part of that verse, that ALL who come to Him in this manner will be raised on the last day, i.e. they will be saved. John 12:32 says when Christ is lifted up He will draw (drag) all men to Himself. So, unless you are a universalist and believe that literally every person will be saved, then you necessarily must acknowledge that the "all" in John 12:32 does not mean every single person on the face of the earth, but rather it means every type of person, i.e. both Jew and Gentiles. That's what the verse means. God is sovereign and He has the right to do with His creation as He pleases. He is thrice holy and good and we, as Christians, trust Him. His election is not arbitrary, but is in keeping with His perfect will and plan from before the world began. Two sparrows do not fall from the sky apart from the will of your Father. We might see that happen and think "so what a couple birds died." We would think that's completely random and arbitrary, but what does Jesus say? That it's all part of God's perfect will and plan for creation. So, if such mundane things are controlled according to the will of God, do you really think He's going to leave the eternal salvation of His people up to chance? By no means! For you are worth more than many sparrows.
It just says God knows when that happens to the sparrows...not that He *makes* it happen to them. That's an assumption Calvinists bring into the text.
And if it's "all kinds" of people God "drags" in John 12, then that also fits John 6 just as well. To demand otherwise is special pleading, I would suggest. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo The scripture does not say that God just "knows" when the sparrows fall from the sky. It says that does not happen "apart from the will of your Father" that is, it only happens *if* it is the will of your Father, that is, God ordains it to come to pass or it would *not* happen. Jesus is teaching the disciples about the sovereignty of God here plainly and comforting them with that. If He just knows when that happens that doesn't help them or anyone else whatsoever and contextually is obviously not the case.
Yes, it necessarily must mean all *kinds* of people in John 12 or you would have to be a universalist, again by necessity. And I would have no problem applying that same logic to John 6:44 *if* it said "all" anywhere there, which it does not, because He doesn't draw all to Christ and all will not be saved.
@@anchorintheveil
The problem with what you said about John 6:44 is John 6:45. The second half of the verse.
Those are conditions.
There are 2 of them.
It's ironic, that one verse later, says who Jesus means.
Don't you read your bible?
@@shredhed572 That's no problem at all. It's kind of interesting though, that you think it would be. Yes, all who hear and learn from the Father come to Christ, that is, they do actually come to Christ. Not that they might come to Christ, they *do* come to Christ and are saved. How many times did Jesus say "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."? The Father is the One who opens our ears and our eyes to the truth of the gospel so we *can* come. (Jn 6:44) Not that we may come, or might come, that we can come, and the Father must enable us to come. “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” John 6:65
Have you considered putting the content of this video in writing? Perhaps a booklet, or better yet, on a website.
This Was A Very Good Teaching And Video.
Thanks for watching!
This really helped me a lot.. I mean a lot...
JM… There are many different ‘beliefs’ that are drawn… hehehe… there’s that word again… drawn from scripture. A lot of which could be dismissed if certain teachers would contemplate scripture as a whole, rather than become fixated upon certain passages… and if they opened their eyes to the world around them.
Before watching watching this presentation, I watched your handling of T.U.L.I.P. Having never investigated the tenets of reformed theology, with regard to the ‘5 points of Calvinism,’ before today; although I had heard of the concept, but chose to over look it, I never realised how biblically skewed it really is. Which is funny, because I can listen and take heart to the likes of RC Sproul (rest his soul); et al, all day and every day for his treatment of what it is to be a Christian.
Yet… your exposition of the topic far outstrips anything I have heard argued about the intricacies of Salvation according to Scripture. I will go as far to say that the 5 points of Calvinism belong along side of the teachings of Mormonism, Jehovah Witness and Seventh Day Adventist teaching. Well meaning, but utterly unrealistic… though, I would not go as far as lumping the whole of Reformist Theology into that basket of course. BUT surprised that they come to that conclusion about the scriptures that they so diligently study and delight in.
If you are reading this today, July 29, 2022… I also caught your presentation about your recommendations for OT resources… Yes. today is my day off from a very long and demanding week at work… and rest was the order of the day. I absolutely keyed into your recommendations about spreading the net to gain an understanding about how people from other cultures; ie Africa and South Asia (as you pointed to) think and interpret life and scripture through their own lens. I think that the world would be such a better place if everybody; including those of differing cultures, took the time to contemplate everybody else’s ‘world views.’ - especially since the world has become such a smaller place than it once was. That is an aside from understanding OT Theology of course… but good all round practice.
While I am full of glowing compliments about your efforts, I have to ask about why you always point to the book of Romans when you are sharing your Study Bible thoughts.
Anyway, I am just another sojourning viewer on the receiving, though paid up, end of the TH-cam experience, though sometimes wishing that I knew some of its content creators personally… 👍
All the best from Kangaroo Land.
Hi David, thanks for watching and for sharing your thoughts! To answer your question, I always look at 4 books when reviewing study Bibles (Gen, Exod, Rom, Rev) because these are the places at which a study Bible's theological & hermeneutical leanings are usually most readily apparent. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo Ah! Thanks for clarifying JM… James.
Down here, apart from the minor Christian based religions, the main theological divide is simply between Catholicism and Protestantism… hence me never looking into TULIP… :)
Enjoy your day/night sir.
What do you think of Roger Olson's classical Arminianism?
It's definitely a helpful resource. I'm not a Classical Arminian, but he makes a lot of great points and shows some of the misconceptions many Calvinists have about Arminianism.
Such a great sermon! Thank you for your channel! God bless you!
So you believe a person who was born again and truly transformed and indwelt by the Spirit of God can actually be unborn again? (1 Jn 2:19) Really?
If you are asking whether I believe someone can "fall away" (Heb 3.12), "make a shipwreck of their faith" (1Tim 1.19) or be told "away from me, I never knew you" (Matt 7.23) ...yes, yes I do.
@@DiscipleDojo So that person suddenly becomes unregenerated? He or she is no longer a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17 ). The Holy Spirit no longer indwells that person (Romans 8:9, 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; Eph. 2:2)? Jesus says that the Spirit will be with us forever (John 14:16). Even if a true believer falls away and is in grevious sin, Paul talks about delivering that one to satan for the destruction of their flesh that this Spirit can be saved (1 Cor. 5:5). I don't see a true Christin becoming unborn again from the Scriptures. If they apostasize, they were never truly saved (1 Jn 2:19).
Sorry brother, I cannot agree with you. The clear teaching of Scripture as a whole is total depravity. Eph 2:1- 8. It takes the work of God in Christ to bring us to spiritual life.
Nothing I said denies that the Spirit brings us to life. The question is, are we unable to desire it beforehand? Beware of using words like "clearly" on issues where faithful Christians have disagreed for 2000 years.
”Jesus responded and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus *said to Him, “How can a person be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb a second time and be born, can he?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which has been born of the flesh is flesh, and that which has been born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it is coming from and where it is going; so is everyone who has been born of the Spirit.”“
John 3:3-8 NASB2020
Amen.
@@DiscipleDojo How do you interpret that passage as a non-calvinist?
If you pray for a sick person to be positively healed, rather than for God to make it possible for them to be healed, then you are already more Calvinist than you may know.
How does that follow? Disease doesn't have free will.
@@DiscipleDojo Disease is because of the curse of God upon the sinful human race. God chose that man would be inflicted with suffering. It is the purpose of God that sinful man should suffer.
@@timothykeith1367 super duper.
Along the same line, why do we pray for God to change someone's heart?
@brentmccain7737
Because we want God to influence a person in such a way as to change there heart.
GREAT, GREAT, SOUND BIBLICAL CONTENT... exposing Truth from lies. Keep up the great work!!!
Why I can't be (enter opposing view here)... it's because of my INTERPRETATION of scripture
Yes, I feel like that is made quite clearly in the video.
I don't mind being a robot in God's absolute sovereignty. I hear people say being unable and unwilling makes us robots. I will take it and give ALL glory to God
I wouldn't
Think about it this way if you loved a girl
And could hand her a potion to magically love you.
Are her feelings real...
God wants a family he wants willing companionship
Forced servitude isn't it.
I'd rather be a willing servant I'd rather be the bride to the bride groom. Even tho I'm not perfect. And I sin I'd still yoke my fate willingly to my perfect lord and savior.
Than a chattel slave being whipped to build a temple on a pile of other people that weren't on calvinisms damnable doctrine.
If I were to be born a tool
For the lord may it be on a hurricane or some other force of nature used to smite the ungodly.
Something with no emotion...
@@r.a.panimefan2109 We MUST HAVE the imputed righteousness THAT God gives us when we ARE SAVED. Without THAT gift none will be in heaven. God sees the believer COMPLETE in HIM
@@Over-for-now that's not what calvin taught. Tho.
We all agree that when we come to faith we are imputed the riteous covering of christ...
What calvinism teaches is that
Imputation comes before faith.
I.e. God chooses you then you believe.
That's the difference
Which means that those who are not saved were also chosen by god to be damned. With no power or say so by the individual...
That is based on dualistic gnostic views...
Aka augustine was a gnostic
He literally confesses to it. He grew up gnostic.
He believed that god chose to save prior to faith and regeneration.
It turns the process on its head.
So let's not strawman.
I agree christ imputed riteous to us.
When we believe. It says it over and over
Peter in acts. (Repent and believe and you will be saved.)
Calvin flipped it.
@@r.a.panimefan2109 l CAN'T HELP WHAT CALVIN SAID. He is nothing to me. I stay with God's WORD
@@Over-for-now and yet your a calvinist following people that went even further with the gnostic interpolation of scripture.
Jodie vacuhmen (vipers in dipers.)
He believes baby are evil and this is the calvinist view.
This is why I'm saying there's some cognitive dissonance here
We shouldn't confuse the times of God being very sovereign towards Israel for the purpose of providing salvation for the world, with our free choice for personal salvation
Provoking thought... Read John Calvin's own commentary on John 3:16 and see if it matches the way "Limited Atonement" is taught today. Fun fact, he even talks about a free will choice. (I am in the middle between Calvinism and Arminianism, leaning more Arminianism but still researching.)
Don't forget about molinism!!!
You don’t have to pick between the two.
Yeah, it's always interesting when people drop their assumptions about what Calvinists believe and actually read primary sources. The Reformed confessions are full of affirmations of free will as well.
Did Paul write Romans to Christians or non-Christians? Christians. So when Romans says we have been set free from captivity to sin, he was writing to believers. You say some people will choose to go back, but Jesus explains that with the parable of the soils. Some of the seed that fell on bad soil sprang up, but because the soil was bad, for one reason or another, there was no fruit. But ALL the seed that fell on the good soil produced fruit.
Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” How can a person choose what he cannot even see? He must be born again BEFORE he can see the kingdom and desire it.
Being dead to sin, and being dead in your sins, are legal positions. A Christian, while retaining his flesh prior tp the resurrection, is still capable of sin because the flesh is not redeemed until the resurrection. But legally before God's judgment seat, he died to sin on the cross with Christ, and is made alive in Christ through regeneration. Right now, you still sin. But that is different from being *dead in your sins.*
It's nice that you think free will is assumed everywhere, but you really fell flat there, I think. In the Exodus account, five times it says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, six times it simply states the fact that Pharaoh's heart was hard, and twice it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. If you throw in 1 Samuel 6:6, then call it three times. God cooperated with the already bent/corrupted/dead heart of Pharaoh in the hardening. God did nothing to Pharaoh against Pharaoh's will.
The statement that every command/exhortation in scripture assumes that we can respond to it flies in the face of Galatians 3:24, which says that the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ. How was it our tutor? because by seeing that we are unwilling and unable to keep the law, we see our need for Christ. This leads to repentance. But how does a sinner come to repent? "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God (Eph. 2:8)."
As for election/predestination, Romans 8 says that "those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." Note that the "those" is plural. So he cannot be saying that Christ alone was predestined, nor that Christ was predestined to be conformed to himself.
Another point on that verse. Non-Calvinists take the "foreknow" to mean that God looks ahead to see who will choose him, then elects those persons. If that were the case, then the verse would read, "For those *about* whom he foreknew ...." Whenever the Bible takes on a person as the object of "to know," it speaks of an intimate relationship, not of knowledge *about* a person. E.g., "And Adam knew Eve, his wife; and she conceived .... (Genesis 4:1, KJV)."
I need to stop. But I want to ask you a question. I'm sure you believe that God is unchanging, so when did God become merciful? Was he not eternally merciful? But until the fall, there was no one who needed his mercy. But if the elect were eternally predestined, then God has been eternally merciful to the elect, which would explain his "foreknowing them."
Sorry, brother, but you did not win me with your logic. Grace and peace to you.
On Pharaoh's heart, see the video I did on that topic specifically (I even quote Augustine and other Reformed heroes in it!). :-)
Your other points, IMO, hinge on selective literalism unevenly applied ("dead" is a figure of speech, but "seeing the Kingdom of God" is literaly chronology, etc.)
As for your question, where does the Bible say that God was merciful from all eternity? I'd say God "became" merciful as soon as there were objects of mercy toward whom to express His eternal loving nature...just as He "became" incarnate during the incarnation. I reject concepts of divine immutability which reduce God to an unchanging essence rather than the personal God we meet in Scripture. What you are suggesting sounds more like Islamic conceptions of God than a Hebrew view of YHWH.
But I don't expect a single TH-cam video to win over someone who's been teaching Reformed Theology for decades and is comfortable in it. :-)
@@DiscipleDojo Likewise, my comments aren't going to change anyone's opinion. :) I don't see how you can reject divine immutability. If that is not true, then that means that there is something in creation which causes him to change; something outside of God causes a change within God. I can't fathom that. James 1:17 settles that one for me.
Oh, well. One of us will have some 'splainin' to do when we meet the Lord. ;) I am still trying to get to your video on the parallels between the Jewish War and Revelation. If only I didn't have a job! :)
It seems that you are saying that rebirth in Christ can somehow be undone. For the converted assurance is permanent. I guess this means I come down of the side of the reformed view. When someone saysI can lose my salvation I must ask, How? I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer. MikeinMinnesota
You can't "lose" your salvation...because it's not a 'thing' you own to begin with. It's a *relationship*...and you can always walk away from a relationship. That doesn't "undo" anything you experienced in the past; it simply entails (to use NT language) a "shipwreck of faith."
isn’t it generally recognised that his popular books are somewhat less trustworthy than his academic ones? Personally, while of course I find much good in his works. I find also egregious illogic and failure to see alternative views (eg on the presumed error on the early return of Jesus).
Hi disciple dojo. Can you recommend the best in depth study bible with good study notes but haven't got much calvanist/reformed bent.
Thanks
See my Top 7 Recommended Study Bibles video here on the channel.
Love your channel. I totally agree with you.
The old nature could walk away from Jesus at the slightest pain or trouble, but the new nature, "born of God", cannot. Therefore, the whole person cannot walk away and mean it, because although it is free, the new nature can't want to walk away from Jesus. So if the old nature is packing its bags to leave, the new nature is frightened, horrified, and beyond consolation. It sure isn't going to be a matter of walking out into the "sunshine" of a godless life, like atheists think. I lived through this over many years when I was young.
But notice that Scripture never says this...and the book of Hebrews assumes the opposite.
I jus came across your videos I am enjoying watching them very much thank you for sharing your knowledge I w as brought up in a Christian home my dad is a calvinist he believes in absolute predestination of all things even as a child I had a problem with this theory when I was a child and dad would spank or punish me for telling a lie or doing something else wrong
I would ask him why he was punishing me for something that I had to do since God had pre determined even before the beginning of time Thanks again for your videos they explain a lot to me
This has always been something I've struggled with. I was raised as a Free Will Baptist which is very Arminian, and have been to various churches ranging from very Calvinist with Presbyterian roots to many somewhere in between, and the more I dig, the more confusing it becomes, because I can see both sides being accurate, but not necessarily for every single Christian and person represented in the Bible. Paul was seized on the road to Damascus which lends to the Calvinist argument, but Ruth willingly came to God, which is Arminian.
Calvinism-Arminianism and The Age of Accountability are the two most troubling concepts that I have struggled with most.
If you have any good resources for The Age of Accountability (is it or is it not biblical) I would greatly appreciate it.
The concept of a person reaching a point where they "know to choose the good from the bad" is certainly present in the Hebrew Bible...but it is never spoken of as a certain age, and certainly not depicted as the same for everyone. When it comes to that question, I simply echo Abraham: "Will not the Judge of all the earth do what is right?" and leave the particulars up to God, who knows the heart of every person and loves them more than I ever could.
One of the biggest problems dividing the church today is the false dichotomy being created between the requirement for man to believe for salvation on the one hand, and God's choice in salvation on the other - there are many teachers who would say that the Bible teaches an either/or approach to salvation where the one camp emphatically states that "we must believe to be saved" while ignoring God's sovereignty over salvation, while the other camp states "God chooses who will be saved" while ignoring the requirement for man to believe. What people in both of these camps need to realize is that the Bible does not present an "either/or" proposition between these two ideas. The truth is a "both/and" scenario: We must believe for salvation, and it is God who chooses who will be saved, and in time, grants him the ability to believe; if you are willing (Isaiah 1:19), it is only because God has made you willing (John 6:29, 37, 44, Acts 13:48, Philippians 1:29).
As for "free will," the Bible never talks about man’s freedom in the sense of having the ability of contrary choice. Rather, whenever scripture speaks of man’s freedom, it is in reference to Christ setting an individual free from his slavery to sin (cf. Galatians 2:4, 5:1, 13, Hebrews 2:14-15, John 8:32-36, Romans 6:6, 16-20, 8:15, 2 Corinthians 3:17). There is no freedom for man once he is set free from sin however, for either he is a slave to sin, or he is a slave to God (Romans 6:17-18, 22, 1 Corinthians 7:22, 1 Peter 2:16, Ephesians 6:6, Colossians 3:24). Since a slave is not the master of his own will, but instead does the will of his master who owns him, and scripture says that the slave desires to do his master’s will, cf. Psalm 40:8, John 8:44, and that his desire is from God (1 Corinthians 15:10, Philippians 2:13), therefore any notion that suggests that man has a free will in the libertarian sense (the ability of contrary choice) is an unbiblical notion.
@@lawrencestanley8989 "It is for freedom Christ has set you free..."
Be careful of calling unbiblical what is actually assumed throughout. When Paul uses the metaphor of "slavery to God", he is building upon the Exodus image of Israel being freed from "serving" Pharaoh in order to "worship" YHWH (same word in Heb). He is not making a philosophical axiomatic claim, as many later Reformed interpreters assume.
@@DiscipleDojo
So God set individuals free from their slavery to sin to then serve no one?
@@lawrencestanley8989 Luke 7:30 "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him". Apparently it can be rejected. Luke 10:31. Jesus says "by chance". 1 Sam 23 David is told by the Lord that he will be delivered to up to Saul, and he and his men leave. God knew what was going to happen but He can allow men's plans to change. Preknown by God is not set in stone, He has all the bases covered
Tulip to me is antagonistic to the gospel and scripture...
This tulip actually makes sense didn't think it possible
I agree with leighton flowers provisionism
I am a Calvinist because of scripture. BTW, I only read the King James version.
Ok.
"logical and coherent". There's the problem right there. Man's attempt to domesticate God.
Thank you, praise Jesus Christ 🙏 🙌
I have found Calvinists to be VERY legalistic, holier than thou, to the point of shunning me. Like moths to the flame, Calvinism seems to attract this type of judgmental person.
Unfortunately this has been my experience as well.
"Why I cant be Calvinist....God did not elect me" LOL I had too
This guys sermon is a prime example of poor biblical scholarship. Even a basic course in hermeneutics, teaching the literal-historical-grammatical interpretation of scripture will teach you that interpretation is not reader based, but author based. What did the author mean? Along with this comes a full study of entire chapters, background, complete verses not paraphrased and taken out of context (e.g. Romans 7), order in which Paul's letters were written, original languages, etc. I've no doubt that this gentleman is a genuine born again believer, but before you buy his sales pitch, read the fine print of scripture surrounding his proof texts, entirely. If you want to read another Apostle and also read Christ's own words, read John 1, 3, 10, 15, 17. Jesus' own words cannot be more clear. BE DILIGENT IN YOUR OWN STUDIES.
@@brentmccain7737 “what did the author mean” you can claim it’s author based (regarding to Protestantism) but all leaders in Protestantism are miniature popes using their own reasoning to try and understand the Bible instead of listening to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church Jesus Christ Himself built. You’re in my prayers 🙏🏻
@@TheProdigalCatholic Sorry, my friend, I'm a reformed 5 Solas guy.
@@brentmccain7737 that’s why I said I’m praying for you 🙏🏻
@@TheProdigalCatholic to whom are you praying? 🤪
Non Calvinist TULIP. A Masterstroke!
Are you familiar with Leighton Flowers and Soteriology101? You'd probably have an interesting discussion on his podcast.
I am not, but I'm always happy to connect. :-)
Please do
@@DiscipleDojo 2nd that. Maybe review S101 and followup with how you may differ. Your TULIP vs S101 PROVIDE acrostic. Would also love a video on sanctification. Your have a great presentation style.
It was scripture that made me a Calvinist.
Twisted scripture. The Satan has you deceived.
“IF you continue in your faith, your present salvation is secured.” “You’re judged by your faith and your deeds together because you’re judged according to who you are”
Thank God I won’t be judged by who I am but on account of Christ in me; I’ll make it because He said I’ll make it. Time and space, all of eternity, past and present, all pales in comparison to the look I long for in the Lord Jesus’ face and nothing can break that bond. While yes I will experience judgement in the body but the blood of the Lamb will be enough to get me through, even if my crown is not like Paul’s or that of a martyr. I hear a lack of eternal security in this which isn’t what Paul said when he said that I know my God will keep you until the Day (paraphrase).
But if Christ in you doesn't bear fruit...then is Christ actually in you? Scripture gives a resounding "no" to that question, I believe. Not having assurance is better than having false assurance and hearing, "Away from me. I never knew you."
@@DiscipleDojo what about the Corinthian believers who was in sin, abusing the Lord supper, paul said for that reason ( their sin) some of them was sick, some sleep ( died)… what about Ananias who lied to the Holy Spirit and died because of it. God will chastise every son he receives but he absolutely will not take away their salvation… the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, he will not change his mind… Jesus said we HAVE eternal life the moment we believe, if it’s eternal it lasts forever. He said we are in his hand and in the fathers hand, we will never perish. Jesus said, the one who doesn’t believe shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. He didn’t say you can see life and then lose it. Nothing can separate us from the love of God… We’ve passed from death unto life etc etc. good message overall apart from I disagree with losing salvation.
At the 12:21-23 spot you stated that "the elect is never used of people who are not yet in a relationship with God"... ugh 2 Timothy 2:10 Paul wrote," I endure all things for the sake of the elect that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus." According to Paul, his motive for enduring suffering was for "elect" who have not been saved yet, that the may also be saved in Christ Jesus. Therefore, the attempt to equate elect with a corporate community of faith only after conversion makes Paul a liar.
Two ways of interpreting this passage, either of which accorda with Marshall's point:
1. The suffering Paul endured was for the sake of God's chosen people *corporately*, that they might obtain salvation in the eschaton (i.e. run the race, not make a shipwreck of their faith, reach the prize of the upward calling, etc.). Salvation always has past, present, and future senses depending on context.
2. Paul is alluding, with not a little irony, to the Jewish people who have not yet heard the news of their Messiah. Israel *corporately* was the elect, and Paul's ministry was "to the Jew first" in bringing them the good news (gospel) of their King.
So, no, Paul is not a liar, and the elect is not talking about chosen *individuals* in Scripture, but rather a chosen *people* and corporate community.
Galatians 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
Galatians 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Paul thought he was pre selected.
Are there any Systematic/ Biblical Theology books from the Arminian approach?
Yes. Ornton Wiley, Roger Olson, and Thomas Oden are a few off the top of my head.
It’s funny the reason I’m a Calvinist is also because of Scripture…
Twisted scripture. The Satan has you.
@@truthseeker5698 see now I can’t take you seriously. Carefully read Paul in Romans chapter 9.
@@michaelshelnutt3534 Examining Calvinism website , if you’re willing.
You think you’re elect to salvation?
lololol, pathetic
@@michaelshelnutt3534 carefully read Romans 9-11 , or, simply look at life of Jesus The Messiah and try to cohere coalesce the christ of Calvinism with Him.
Your choice
If you follow Scripture you will be a calvinist!
Patently incorrect.
@@DiscipleDojo John 6, Ephesians 1 and Romans 9 are laughing!
@@thomasglass9491So is the satan laughing at you!
Isaiah 45:6-7 says God created evil. He is sovereign in EVERYTHING
Second time watching this. Mt comment from 1 year ago is below. Here's a secong 👍
Passages such as Romans 9 shows God has mercy on whom he will have mercy, hardens whom He hardens. E.g. Esau vs. Jacob. Is the Potter, we the clay.
Watch the whole video. I specifically address Romans 9 and how it is talking about *corporate* election rather than *individual* salvation.
In the OT God told beforehand how 'an individual' (Pharaoh) would be hardened. In the NT Jesus foretold of an individual 'born to perdition' (Judas).
@@DiscipleDojo what do you mean by corporate ? please elaborate on this
When we look at Acts 4 v 27, we are informed that God chose 4 'parties' to deliver up Jesus to crucifixion (2 'corporates' and 2 'named individuals'). We are told "they did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen". (v28). It was all determined beforehand.
@@karinapillay874 Election to service. God chose Abraham's lineage, Israel, to bring forth the Messiah.
Excellent message.
8:56
Amen.
9:38
Amen.
12:01
Interesting.
13:24
AMEN TO THIS.
*This sheds light on the title --> Messiah or Mashiah // Christ or Christos.
*New Israel (Jacob = person/descendants), New People, New Chosen, New Jerusalem, New Earth, New Covenant, New Descendants from Abraham, New Adam (Adam = person/humanity).
17:35
Interesting note.
22:02
Amen.
26:18
Missionaries.
29:59
Good note.
31:09
Doubt.
33:02
Testimony.
39:54
Excellent.
41:58
Depicting Calvinism.
Thanks
Let God be true and every man a liar. FORGET calvin. Who is he? God's absolute sovereignty is ALL through the scriptures
Luke 10:21 KJV - In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
If someone asserts that trusting "babe" belief is man-made "folk religion", well, it isn't. It is revealed by God, through the written word and the Holy Spirit, not invented by the believers. It may be believed by "folk", but it came from God.
Where does it say that Paul was referring to the time before he got saved when he talked about the sin that he would not do that he does and the good that he would do that he doesn’t do? How then do you explain that Christians sin? Anyone who claims to be without sin is a liar and the truth is not in them. If you are not without sin, doesn’t that make you a sinner? I would think that if you’re not without sin then sooner or later you will sin. Any sin you commit must be wilful, it’s you doing it not someone else. Surely that’s why God has put our Salvation all on Himself. You who think too take a little credit for yourself be warned, God is not mocked and He does not share His Glory with another. God is a jealous God and you are saved by His Grace and all the Glory belongs to Him alone, The Triune God of The Scriptures. Remember Abraham was put to sleep, God did it all. You bow down to someone other then God and unless they are evil or appointed over you, like a judge, they should say to you,” I am your fellow servant, do not bow down to me.
See our video here on the channel where we look at Romans 7 in detail. It's in the Viewer Questions playlist. No one is arguing that any part of our salvation is not on God. This is a common error Calvinists make regarding non-Calvinist soteriology and has been addressed countless times by non-Calvinist theologians.
Isaiah 44:1 mentions nothing about Gentiles.
@@neilbode829 keep reading.
Personally I think they preach another gospel like Paul describes in Galatians. No assurance of salvation isn’t the gospel.
I disagree. Scripture itself never makes that equation when discussing the Gospel. I believe Calvinism is incorrect, but does not qualify as heterodoxy in the sense Paul is speaking of in Galatians 1.
@@DiscipleDojo sad way to live not knowing if you have salvation living in doubt till the end is not trusting in the finished work of Christ. Stay blessed ✝️🙏🏽
Yes !!!yell that for the person in the back of the room!!
Thank you for this I don’t know why but I liked your content but I thought you leaned reformed. Now I know that’s not the case and I like your content even more knowing I don’t have to question every single thing you say through the lens not embracing Calvinism
Nope. Lifelong Wesleyan Methodist here. But I have much love for my Calvinist/Reformed brethren (and sistren). :)
Excellent - thank you.