Really good Leighton. Thank you! As a guy who spent twenty some years at John MacArthur's Grace Community Church-who was baptized by him in '84-who taught Fundamentals of the Faith on the Grace campus on Sunday mornings, I can say that finally questioning the "paradoxes" of Calvinism (starting a little over two years ago), and searching through the Bible with the help of guys like Leighton, I can say for sure that rejecting this false Augustinian doctrine is the best thing you can do. The Bible stops contradicting itself, and you view every single person on the planet as someone that God really, fully, genuinely loves. None are irreversibly lost. We are called to be a blessing to all of those people. We are called to go get 'em. It really is "Good News"!
Such a great encouragement reading your testimony, thanks for sharing. I imagine there’s not many stories like yours, glad you finally escaped praise God!
Good coming out of the MacArthur cult. No, he's not an actual cult leader, but his views and his personality of unquestioned authority lend itself to cultic appearances. MacArthur won't be questioned or challenged. He is always in an echo chamber, condemning Arminian Pentecostals like me as "cultists," but overlooking John Calvin's murders while he reigned in terror in Switzerland in the 16th century.
This comment brings joy to my heart. I was never a Calvinist but a few of the teachings snagged me for a minute to the point I though I probably wasn’t saved based on reflecting on the “fruit” in my life. May I ask what helped you start that process of leaving? I have a few conversations with Calvinists but rarely encounter anyone open to another way of seeing various texts.
@@garyleemusic Hi Gary, that's a really long story. But I'll try to keep it short. After years of study in apologetics, history, geology, archeology, etc.. It became clear that humans really love their "authority bubbles" and rarely understand any competing ideas (never mind accepting them). They often have no idea what the options are, or if they do, they caricature them to make them seem silly (which yes, sometimes they are). About five years ago I started asking myself if I was doing the same thing. I had read a lot of theology books and often ran into "challenging" ideas and paradoxes" that left me holding what I now call "shrug" theology. Have an idea that seems to cast a shadow on the character of God? Well, it's what the Bible teaches so you just have to accept it. How do we know the Bible teaches it? Well, your paster with his Masters in Divinity told you what it means. Yes, it's uncomfortable and seems to contradict a lot of the Bible, but it's simply a "mystery" that points to the "unknowableness" of your sovereign God. Anyone that disagrees is a heretic. Shrug. I got serious about all of it about three years ago and decided to reset and ask tough questions about all of the "difficult" ideas in scripture. I had started memorizing full bible chapters and started seeing verses in context that told a different story than the "proof texts" I had heard for decades. Maybe, just maybe, if a doctrine seems to contradict scripture, you should question it and search deeply like a Berean (and yes, everyone thinks they are the Berean's). My new rules: 1. The writers of scripture chose words for a specific reason and they have meanings (literal and figurative) that you should respect. 2. Context is everything. Read all of the chapter. And the one before and after. You will often get clarity (as Leighton points out regularly). 3. Study all the various viewpoints until you can convince all of them you believe what they believe. Hardly anyone does this. BUT, I think you should not be a pastor if you can't do this. It's not that hard. Read their stuff with the goal of understanding it. Only then can you legitimately challenge it. 4. Read verses and add doctrine ideas as you go. If you find yourself changing definitions and context. That's a doctrine worth questioning. So much for short. I'll end with a verse example for rule 4. John 3:16 My old doctrine version (briefly)...For God so loved the world (meaning only the elect, the others He loves in the sense that He hasn't thrown them into the lake of fire... yet) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever (and I don't mean an open invitation, again, it's only the elect) believes (and by believe I mean made to believe, not the way you believe in things in real life) in Him shall not perish (and by perish, I mean never perish, but be in a place where you wish the word perish had meant perish) but have eternal life (and by life I mean location. All live for eternity. Some live forever in a condition we oddly call death because it's apart from an omnipresent God. Others live with Christ, so that is called life.) John 3:16 How I read it now... For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. You can do this with a lot of "proof" texts. It can be revealing about what doctrines should be re-visited. Blessings to you and yours Gary! Study diligently. God is good. Always! Ron
I just found this channel and i have never heard anyone explain so clearly and biblically why calvinist doctrine is so wrong. This video was right on time! Thank you and thank GOD! Please keep at it!!
Awww I'm so sorry, Leighton, you were in so much pain! I'm glad God didn't answer your prayer to take you home! Not yet, you are still being used here!
Leighton, I thank God that you are well and have recovered from that. Btw, I’m FOR your longer videos. I don’t struggle with inattentiveness in the least bit, especially when it comes to theological topics of discussion. My eyes and ears are glued. Sponge just soaking up the information. 😊🙏
I love your videos. I have had these exact discussions with Calvinists and used these exact verses and arguments before I found your videos. It is good to know I'm not alone. I have been feeling a burden to share the gospel lately through preaching, and have been studying a lot to make sure my messages are strictly biblical. Thank you for you content.
Appearing in a recent video on the popular TH-cam podcast "Conversations with a Calvinist" Leighton Flowers just about convinced me he is a multi-point (gettin' close to a perfect score) Calvinist. His only real problem is with regeneration. Flowers and some of his Flowerites still cling to the Desiderius Erasmus/Jacobus Arminius secular humanism that believes in human determinism--that a person is capable of saving himself (if he would only try!--LOL).
Serious question. How are you so sure your position (you’ll say it’s not your position but the Bible’s) is correct? Much more learned and holy men have though otherwise. And machination of the devil? Do you want to be judged with the same measure as you are judging him? That’s quite a charge to bring.
@@christopherstavish6546 Well the fact that you used the word Arminian (a respresentative label as opposed to a belief system) says a lot and I don’t think any more dialogue will get us anywhere. I would however agree with you, that if a vague and (only) loving God is what you believe in, it’s not the living God. He’s not vague at all but very personal and if a person truly knows Him, they know there’s nothing vague about Him.
This Calvinist brother can be a very effective messenger of God. I would recommend that Dr. Flowers pursue him to bring the Calvinist to the right understanding of truth. He would be a benefit to the kingdom.
I have a BA in Religion which focuses on Biblical Languages. I will jokingly tell people that I know enough about Koine Greek to be dangerous. In truth, I'm quite good at Koine Greek and learned enough to know that I can't be a Calvinist and still hold the Bible in utmost authority and respect as I do because I would have to literally change the greek of the New Testament in order to make Calvinism fit. Case in point is with the clip Dr. Flowers played back when the commentator talked about Ephesians 2, and said that Faith was as much of a gift as Grace and Salvation due to verses 8 & 9. The problem is that he just revealed how little of the greek he actually knows. The main clause statement of verses 8 & 9 is "You are saved". You can break down the rest of these verses and make 3 complete and independent sentences. "You are saved by Grace." "You are saved through Faith." You are saved not of yourselves." Even that last part "It is a gift of God" is referring back to that main clause statement of "You are saved". Everything in those two verses are pointing back to that statement of "You are saved". Paul is saying that it is Salvation that is the gift. Calvinists erroneously will state that the gift is everything listed prior. This isn't true when examined through the lens of the language. They will point to the pronoun "and that" just before "not of yourselves" as their proof, that it's referring to everything. Actually, it's not. It's a near demonstrative pronoun, and it should actually be translated as "and this" ... again referring to the main clause statement of "You are saved". I cringe everytime I hear a Calvinist try to explain Ephesians 2:8 & 9, because they almost always make the same mistake and include faith in as also being a gift from God, that we could not have faith in God unless God first gave us Faith.
there is no argument that we are saved by grace but do not neglect the , 'through faith' because you cant have that access of that grace unless you believe. Faith establishes grace.
@@myraride9563 And I agree. It is our faith in Christ and God's grace which he bestows that facilitates Salvation. That's not the issue, however. According to Calvinists, not only is Salvation a gift of God, but so is Faith. In other words, it's not us having faith in Christ, but God providing us that faith, which they also claim is a gift of God. I disagree with the Calvinist claims and interpret and exegete Ephesians 2:8-9 differently.
@@myraride9563 No, grace, by regeneration grants faith and repentance. Otherwise, one saves themselves. The whole Reformed versus A/P dustup is over whether or not a person is partially saved before they are saved. The A/Ps say yes; the Reformed folks say no. ...the gift of God lest any Leighton Flowers should boast, and oh, how Leighton likes to boast...
@@Gablesman888 Not trying to be obtuse, but why do you say it comes down to whether one is partially saved before they are fully saved? By a Catholic, Armininian, Provisionist etc view, isn't God just presenting grace to all, which prepares our wills to respond to further grace? That initial prevenient grace isn't saving grace, but just God reaching out to us since we can't first reach out to Him. Just slightly confused on the point you're making as a Catholic who doesn't always dive this deep into intra-Protestant soteriology debates.
Thank you for this. You explain so well. Appreciate the time you put in to educate people like me searching for answers. From South Africa. I pray for understanding and discernment to find the truth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
10:53 is spot on! Calvinists get their research on non-Calvinists...from Calvinists. However, what Calvinists really mean by "on your own" is anything without an Irresistible Grace. So, if you do not get Irresistible Grace, that means you are on your own, in the undisciplined mind of a Calvinist.
If Calvinists are intellectually honest, they would never preach or speak in any manner of persuasion regarding the gospel. They cannot change the nature of the unelect and they cannot lose their salvation if they are elect. So no level of persuasion can change anything. Sinners have a perfect excuse to continue in sin, because they were born that way and God does not care about them (which is explicitly in contradiction to the words of God and Jesus in the Bible).
A warning to all calvinists in regard to Job's 3 companions - 'After the LORD had spoken these words to Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite: "My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.' Job 42:7. Did Job's 3 companions made an honest mistake? Even if yes, God was angry. Ignorance is no excuse. Deliberate? Better repent.
This is what I’ve been saying. If Calvinism is truly false, it is NOT a small thing to represent God that way. I used that exact example of Job’s friends. This is serious. We need to get God right!
Thank you once again for this in-depth teaching. Praise God for keeping you well. Take some time to build yourself up…..lots of Vitamin C and time with your family. Praying for renewed strength.
Dr. Leighton, have you seen the debate on The Gospel Truth between Warren Mcgrew and Matt Slick on total depravity? I really hope that you will do a video on that debate and give your perspective about that video and on the topic of total depravity. You are the leading source for me that I would go to about topics like that. I have learned so much on the topic of predestination and Calvinism because of you and your channel. Love your work, brother! Also, I just ordered your book "God's Provision for All" on Amazon. Excited to read it!
Would be nice to have a dispensationalist in your podcast for example David Hoffman. Good job keeping up refuting this bad spirited doctrine called Calvinism, Christianity needs men like you who shed light on what scripture says regarding this issue.
One thing I learned, going back to my 20s is to attempt to learn how each doctrine views the text. It is frustrating when I attempt to explain how I arrive at a view, using scripture, they respond with, 'but that's not what it says'. In terms of scripture, I am 50/50 on Provisionism vs Calvinism. I can understand both sides. But logically, I am 100% on the Provisionist side. Therefore, I choose, with my own free will, to believe the Provisionist interpretation of the bible. If I'm wrong, then I couldn't do it differently anyway.
Amen, getting the Gospel of humility to the lost is what the entire New Testament is about. (Jesus stated even Jews were lost, and He came to them only). Calvinism now states that God only comes to the Gentiles. Their entire theology is false on that doctrine of dispensationalism alone. I do not agree calvinism, nor lutheran presbyterianism teaches from the Scriptures', but rather from calvin and luther's writings, and other documents such as 'westminster confessional'. Acts 15:8 "He knows what is in everyone's heart. And he showed he had chosen "the gentiles" (specific gentile believers, not all gentiles), when he gave them the Holy Spirit, just as he had given his Spirit to us" Some have said there is no need to be water baptised , that only laying of hands is needed. I disagree, as all believers were water baptised before God gave the Holy Spirit. Many were Jews who partook of the ordinances of repentance and washing, sprinkling etc. The baptism by laying of hands was done to those who had already been water baptised, by Apostles with the HolySpirit that believed in the repentance and belief Gospel. Their humility preceding their receiving of the HolySpirit, and proof of their Salvation. Of at least sealing in the Spirit lest they become boastful, which Paul warned about and they fall away (OSAS refuted) If you have the Holy Spirit, you are in the Holy Spirit and sealed, if one rebels, they can lose the Holy Spirit, and thus lose the seal on them.
So I was praying today and I got this very clear thought in my mind. I told God that I loved the Calvinist brothers for their efforts in giving God max max in their diagnosis of simply read scripture in an attempt to really worship God for his Sovereignty and bigness. When I went to explain to God the Arminian stance, I got a clear thought God makes man and gives them a random dice block halfway through their life where they are the entropy source of randomness. It has the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 on it. Each number scales with pride, 6 being the most proud and damnable, and 1 being the most humble and is the only number that selects Christ. The number is determined by the human, and God CANNOT make the decision for him entirely, because he is using the veiled humans as an entropy source for randomness to see if the human wants to glorify God's Justice (2-6) or God's Mercy (1). So God gets the credit for the number still, no matter what is chosen, but man gets some of the credit for the CHOICE of number, but not anything else. This is hybrid open theism maybe, but I think it's okay. God foreknows all dice rolls in Flowers theory, but I think God is actually more creative than he is all-knowing, so I lean towards infinite foreknowledge (multi-verse even), not singular foreknowledge. God pre-destines everyone to a 1 of course, but they, us, can choose other numbers for the short term pleasure long term pain. On Judgment day, everyone will be held partially accountable for their dice results, and God gets all the credit obviously. Choices, too, are a gift of course. I guess Total Depravity rebuttal is the stance that scripture states that all mankind will always choose a 6 without God's help in changing their minds, but what the Calvinists don't get is that humans are only depraved BEFORE they get the gift of the dice in them, so humans are actually *dynamic* during the "Choice phase" of life where they can pick their pride stats. The idea here is that without the dice, all mankind will perish in their sins, unable to 1, but WITH the dice, we get a 1/6 chance or so, scaling with the "Luck" of the dice (our true choices) to pick Jesus. We are the luck, and God and Satan probably have rules in play to manipulate us too, Satan with temptations, and God by Truth. Imagine it like a game God plays with himself and the devil where the game is rigged to giving God glory by Justice or Mercy. As humans, our only choice is to glorify God by accepting His Son (Mercy) or going our own way here and glorifying God's Anti-Evil itch later (Justice in Hell). We can make God most happy with a 1, but it's not a big deal if you go 2-6.
@HillDueceua I think the new theories merge the camps together better and still endorses God's sovereignty while keeping God creative and clean If there is a theory to do it then why be against a new theory
If I was not a follower of Jesus and watched this TH-cam video supporting Calvanism...it would deter me from Christianity. Good news for merely a few? No!!! For God so loved the world... ..praise Jesus!!!!
Love your channel brother! Please consider mixing cayenne pepper with water ..comfortably a couple times a day, consistently. Raw garlic everyday would be helpful as well. Trust me, this could prevent or minimize the affects of Ecoli etc God bless
Thank you for your comments on death. The reality that death communicates a change in the state of one’s existence irreversible apart from the intervention of God as opposed to the cessation of life, whether physical or spiritual, is a concept which needs to be brought to the forefront with respect to the biblical understanding of death.
Mike Winger made a great video showing how Calvinism isn't the case, and he started it by using the Bible to prove that faith is not a work. Faith is not a work. Faith is not a work. He hammered that point, then he showed how Calvinism is based on the notion that faith is somehow a work. I realized that you're making that same point when you showed that Calvinists conflate righteousness by the law, which no one can do, with righteousness by faith. They correctly think that no one can be righteous in the sense of their works, but then they conflate being righteous by faith with righteousness by the law and think therefore no one can be righteous by faith unless faith is out of their control.
It always puzzles me that Calvinists in such videos as this go to a Merriam-Webster dictionary to make their points rather than a good lexicon that tells you the Hebrew or Greek definitions, and the nuances in different contexts.
@@wpdaffue3966 oh yeah! and most dont exegete them themselves.... I've seen their lists they all have. It will say "t" and then a whole bunch of single verses, then "u" and a bunch more etc. ...that is their bible... the cheat sheet! Lol!
(Exodus 4) Moses is chosen by God. God reveals his power to Moses. Moses refuses to do what he is asked because of his fears and insecurities. God promises to empower him to do what He requires. Moses still refuses and tells God to find someone, anyone else. God gets angry with Moses God alters his original plan to compensate for Moses' stubbornness. Any Calvinists wanna take a stab at that one? ("Oh it was God's plan all along for him to take Aaron". Then why is God angry if all is going according to plan?)
Sounds like Paul is speaking specifically to Israel under the Law in most of these verses Calvinists use as proof text. Even though Israel was chosen, much of the time they lived in unbelief.
I love my Calvinist brother and Armenian brothers I love all brothers in Christ no matter if their doctrine may be not something I believe I do believe they are Christians either way we need to focus on Jesus than who’s right or wrong we’re taking glory away from god and we need to reach people that truly need our help than arguing over theology all the time I understand it’s necessary but we have to give glory to god
Not to mention Genesis Chapter 4 says this; 26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord. When did total depravity begin exactly. I mean here you have men calling the Lord. Here we see that there were men who did call upon the name of the Lord
"First we may call this doctrine(Calvinism) a novelty, seeing that for the first four hundred years after christ there is no mention of it. The first foundations for it were in the writings of Augustine, who, in his warring against Pelagius, let fall some expressions which some have unhappily picked up to the establishment of this error."- Quaker Theologian Robert Barclay
Dr. Flowers, I’m a student at Trinity and would love to hear your opinion about people saying certain translations are “Calvinistic” thank you for everything you do!
It is a fact that all people have a moral compass. So if they are completely incapable of responding to the gospel then why do they have a moral compass. Where did that moral compass come from? If man is completely incapable of responding to God then why are there commands in scripture? Why is the gospel to be proclaimed? A text without a context is a proof text to say whatever you want.
Great point about Noah. Supported here: Hebrew 11 [1] Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. [2] For by it the elders obtained a good report. [3] Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. ... [7] By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
There are a lot of people like atheists or whoever that live a success life to world standards but everyone is born spiritually blind it’s our choice to decide whether to believe and trust god god doesn’t make us follow him without our choice or else we truly not free
A question for any Calvinists still perusing the comments here, or who come across this: Are you okay or vindicated for bearing false witness? Does God overlook every time that you knowingly lie to someone?
To utilyan and heaven guy. I had a question for you. Why in Jesus’s perfect prayer does he tell us ask God for forgiveness. Why do we have to repent if we do not sin? Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper, but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy. Proverbs 28:13 If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.
Because Saints have a very real responsibility towards you in so much as they ask for forgiveness on your behalf even for things they never did, Job for his children, Jesus "forgive them for they know not what they do", examples. IS it "If your brother or sister sins against you" or "WHEN your brother or sister sins against you" ? See I can't hold a judgement expecting you to sin, Like If a took a bet PRESSUMING you would sin next week I would be wrong for it. The best teachers actually get the job done......How good is Jesus at teaching you not to sin? Pretty Terrible Right? lets hear it. 😈
@@utilyan the prayer asks him to forgive us pur trespasses. Us means us that includes The person praying otherwise it would be forgive them their trespasses.
1 Cor 3:1 And I, my brethren, have not been able to speak with you as with spiritual ones but as with the carnal and as to babies in The Messiah" Many claim they are in the HolySpirit even after confessing Christ. We must watch how.we deal with every one because we are saved by our faith and pure doctrine of repent and turn from sin. Not all Christian's become saved as to strive toward purity and sinless image bearers. The age old debate (between Doctrines of Grace and Gospel of Grace) one is false, but I'll let the saved discern which it is.
Good to have you back, brother. If the Calvinistic argument is that ALL people were totally depraved with the soul exception of Noah, whom God regenerated, then how did original sin pass through Noah's righteous family?
Especially since Noah's son Ham "uncovered his father's nakedness" -- Ham slept with his mom after getting off the Ark (Lev 18:8). "The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness." ~ Lev 18:8
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi so what you're saying is that God is not powerful enough to save people who are slaves to sin? He can only save people he picked from the foundation of the world? That His gospel is not powerful enough to enable a slave of sin to repent and believe? That sin is more powerful than he is and that he can't overcome it except by exempting certain people ahead of time? Wow, your god is too weak to be worshipped.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi you do understand that there is a difference between accepting an offer of salvation and actually being saved, right? They are not the same thing. Men do the believing and God does all the saving.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi lol. So many words against an argument I didn't make. It doesn't matter what I have or don't have. It is by grace THROUGH FAITH and not by works, so that no one can boast. See faith IS NOT WORKS. so when we hear the gospel, We can put the faith, which comes from hearing the gospel ... In Christ...and God saves us.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi pretty sure I'm talking about faith and belief which are aspects of the will. God says L can do both by hearing the gospel, so...... Not works. No matter how comically you protest.
This was a really good summary and rebuttal. The only thing I think is worth adding is that talking about Pelagianism in a protestant context is quite misleading. That was a debate about grace, but the key question was really regarding the distinction between nature and grace. Pelagius thought that we were capable of doing good works out of our own nature without the aid of God's grace. Augustine affirmed that was only possible through God's grace. Neither of them believe in Sola Fide. Their view was that to get to heaven you needed faith, good works and love for God. This was the same for Augustine as for Pelagius. Also, Augustine's view of Justification was transformative (just like that of the rest of the Church Fathers) rather that only forensic. That's why John Macarthur's condemnation of Arminianism (and provisionalism for that matter) is just plainly wrong. And on top of that his views on double predestination are condemned also by a valid Church Council. But in any case, what's the point of Macartur quoting a Church Council edict anyways.
I wonder if you've come across Messiah Matters on TH-cam? Caleb Hegg and Rob Vanhoff? They were once one place we could recommend people go for some common sense. They are part of Torah Resource. They are Calvinists and are lately promoting it more openly, using as is often the case, proof texts and accusing this who disagree of not studying the Bible hard enough. On a personal level, I can take that, but many of their listeners are young in the faith and vulnerable.
When you suggest that death is a separation from God & then go on to say they continued to interact with God, I would appreciate more clarification on what this "separation/death" entails. From my perspective/ understanding the relationship continues.
Wonderful talk! Should general determinism be a greater priority than soteriology in discussions about Calvinism? Soteriology seems almost moot in the context of theistic determinism. Even a fully Arminian soteriology would yield the same results in that context. God's going to decide how people respond, regardless of the ordo salutis. God's going to determine whether people persevere. Etc.
Good thing I did not meet a calvinist when I was a down and out hippie 52 years ago. I would never have met Jesus and received the infilling of the Holy Spirit. I got baptized as an adult which is forbidden by true calvinists. Being an anabaptist I woiuled have been drown by the thugs and brutes of the reformation.
Why would the Lord need to "look down from heaven to see if there is one who seeks for God" if He already knows that all people are born in a condition where they cannot seek after God? To be clear, I'm not saying that we can seek God on our own, but I do affirm that we can seek after God since He first sought after us. How can we know of someone we have never heard about? We can't. But none of us are on our own since God is actively seeking to save the lost, thereby enabling everyone to seek after Him and to find Him. Hallelujah!
Hence why *You* make the choice to respond and seek Him whom seeks you. Philosophy isn't relevant unless it leads to thought-provoking exhortation. Why seek knowledge of God if you are already saved and have no need to understand that which you already know. Have you understood why Noah was in an Ark? Because they alone were faithful to the Call. This alone disproves, not so much Calvin's writings on keeping works as proof of salvation, but rather why works of correct theology are imperative. We seek God where as your system claims God seeks you. God doesn't have to look down? You said "you do not seek Him, and already knows". So you refuted your own comment. In fact you proves why we do need to seek Him, and require Him to look down at us to see if we are doing His will.
Somebody had to have sought God, it does state that many did. Psalms 1:01 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, or set foot on the path of sinners, or sit in the seat of mockers. 2But his delight is in the Law of the LORD, and on His law he meditates day and night.3He is like a tree planted by streams of water, yielding its fruit in season, whose leaf does not wither, and who prospers in all he does."
@@phillipjackson1517 I may have been but here is a study of those who have chosen Christ, as further proof of what you are trying to display. Man chooses God. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 1 Corinthians 15:23-24 (NASB) In these two verses the Holy Spirit provides a timeline starting with the resurrection of Christ and ending with Christ giving the kingdom to the Father. Timeline Christ's Resurrection to End of Age Christ the First Fruits The term “first fruits” refers to the first of the crop that is harvested from a field. In Romans 16:5 the term was used to refer to the first converts from converts from Asia. In James 1:18 the first fruits refers to Christians. Christians are “a kind of first fruits among His creatures.” But 1 Corinthians 15:20 explicitly explains what the Holy Spirit means by the phrase that Christ is the first fruits. But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:20 (NASB)
That is, Christ is the first fruits from among those who are dead. He was the first one to have been resurrected and go to heaven (Some had been brought to life only to die again such as Lazarus). Please note that the expression “who are asleep” refers to those are dead and awaiting resurrection. Resurrections Of All Men and Women Christ was resurrected the third day after He died. He died on Friday, Nisan 14, A.D. 33 and returned to life on Sunday, Nisan 16, A.D. 33. Forty days later He ascended back to heaven (Acts 1:3, 9-11). Christ is the first fruits from among all Christians. Those Who Are Christ’s At His Coming The opening phrase of verse 23 reveals that the Holy Spirit is giving us a timeline for future resurrections when we are told “each in his own order.” Christ was resurrected first and next all Christians will wait for the second coming of Christ for it says, “after that those who are Christ’s at His coming.” When is Christ’s coming? There are two phases to Christ’s coming. The first phase is the rapture of all Christians prior to the tribulation as described in John 14:1-3; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1. The second phase is the second coming of Christ or the return of Christ (Matthew 24:3, 29-31; Peter 1:16; 2 John 7; Revelation 19:11-21). The second coming of Christ will occur at the end of the Tribulation period.
1:26:27 Augustine himself may have been influenced by Origen, who outright taught all men preexisted along side Christ, who was simply the ony one who didn't sin and fall. That's the only view in whch the Calvinistic concepts make sense. (Also, Calvinsts will insist reprobation is not an "excuse"; He just silences any appeal to an excuse).
When talking to an Atheist I will say that we all are born with an A+ and it is up to us too keep it because we are all prodigal childen of God. That is easier to undrstand than you aren't as bad as you chould be , but.
I just can't see calvinist as brothers. it's just like wolves in sheep clothing. Just like the surface of the ocean, it looks bright and sunny from the shore, and even as you swim out, you dive down into it, and the deeper you dive, the darker it gets and the further away from the light you get. If you don't have the light in you, you can get lost in the dark and drown! Decieved by truth, they are!!! And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel. Ezekiel:14:9 I find that when you read the scriptures, it exposes the heart and you see and hear what your heart desires. Just like when you read the parable of talents and all you see is doing business and making money and considering that handling your money properly is what that parable is trying to convey! Your heart is set on money and not the things of God! And if you use this parable towards me about being a good servant with my money, then I know who your god is!
When this guy was talking about Noah my thought was, if God gave Noah and his family the ability to believe and God rejected and never gave the people of the earth that same ability; then why even bring the cross into it. If God had already picked who would be saved and who would be damned then why the suffering on the cross? I mean with the Calvinist teachings people will be saved by God picking them and it has nothing to do with their turning to God in faith, in that teaching the cross would be meaningless.
I didn’t even learn about Calvinism in my back woods Bible college. It’s such unnecessary baggage. The gospel as a set of eyes reads 20/20 just fine without the garbled nonsense. It takes being a Christian who has learned the scriptures and knows the context to fend off such bad presupp
Quick reference to a Bible app that contains all translation. Not specifying which was correct in generality. Much of doctrine comes from deep word analysis, When we notice people reject valid doctrines such as Imputed Righteousness, which comes directly from the Scriptures'. The we should question what the Bible says concerning a person's actual beliefs. Jam 2:23"And the scripture was fulfilled which says, *Abraham believed God* , and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God" Most books of the bible refute entire denominational beliefs by simply reading the context.
40:15 I've had a Calvinist say this to me as well, this is just taking the Bible too literally lol. "There is no one righteous; not even one!" For one, David could be saying "At this present time" for another, David was righteous. I don't think this was saying "No one in the world is righteous, not now, not later, not ever!" He's speaking figuratively... David is lamenting at the lack of righteous people in the present time, not saying no one is ever righteous. That's my interpretation anyway.
@@RenardGarzaro I'm not basing it off of nothing, but rather the evidence throughout the Bible that righteous men do in fact exist. Psalm 112 Why is David talking about "righteous men" if they don't exist? genesis 15:6 Abraham was called righteous because of his faith, wait, i thought righteous men didn't exist? Genesis 6:9 Noah was the last righteous man. What about Lot? And David himself was surely righteous, even though he said "there is no one righteous, not one!" He was speaking figuritively, he wasn;t saying "no righteous man exists in the world, or ever has existed, or ever will", because righteous men DO indeed exist, David himself was called a man after God's own heart. Romans 4:6 "David also spoke of this when he described the happiness of those who are declared righteous without working for it:" I did not honestly think i would find such abundant evidence, i knew there was some, but just researching it now, i found countless verses where men were called "righteous". Keep in mind, righteous does not me sinless, for there are no sinless men. But righteous men? Of course they exist.
Regarding John 3.3, Leighton comments at 1:11:25: "Of course we all believe that you have to born again, given new life, in order to enter the kingdom of God. We all believe that, but that's not what the Calvinist is using this verse to support. They're using this verse to support pre-faith regeneration. So, what they're using this verse to say is not, 'Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.' What they’re meaning it to say is, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot believe in the Jesus.’ It doesn’t say that."
Jesus says, "All that the Father gives me will come to me!" John 6:37 So these people that the Father gives to Jesus belong to the Father and the Father gives them to Jesus! So how did they come to belong to the Father to begin with? By being chosen and predestined? No! Jesus is talking to Old Testament Jews. Jesus is telling them that the ones who believed in God were also to believe in Jesus. The Father is going to take these believers in God and give them to Jesus, because Jesus is God the second person of the Trinity. This is why Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father gives them to me!" John 6:44, 65 The next verse 45 says these are the ones who already were taught and believed in God! "It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me!" John 6:45 John 6 has nothing to do with Calvinism! Calvinists never include verse 45 for context! John 6 is about believers in the God of the Old Testament being brought and given to Jesus the messiah who they were looking for. If they did not already believe in God they could not come to Jesus who is God in the flesh! We are talking here about people who by the grace of God became believers in the Old Testament God and now are being brought and given to Jesus by the Father! Jesus is saying he is God the second person of the Trinity. Jesus is saying in John 6, “Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me!" John 14:1 "And Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me. And whoever sees me sees him who sent me!" John 12:44-45 "No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also." 1 John 2:23 This is why Jesus says, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out." John 6:37 John 6 is not teaching Calvinism! Calvinism is a stepping stone to learning the Bible, and it is now time to move past Calvinism to better know God like many other people have done. John 17:3 John 10 is teaching the same! Jesus says, "You do not believe because you are not my sheep!" John 10:26 The sheep are the Jews who already believed in the God of the Old Testament and now recognize Jesus as their God the second person of the Trinity! Jesus is claiming to be God! "The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God." John 10:33 John 10 is not teaching Calvinism! And Jacob and Esau were both saved and Romans 9 does not teach Calvinism!
Really good Leighton. Thank you! As a guy who spent twenty some years at John MacArthur's Grace Community Church-who was baptized by him in '84-who taught Fundamentals of the Faith on the Grace campus on Sunday mornings, I can say that finally questioning the "paradoxes" of Calvinism (starting a little over two years ago), and searching through the Bible with the help of guys like Leighton, I can say for sure that rejecting this false Augustinian doctrine is the best thing you can do. The Bible stops contradicting itself, and you view every single person on the planet as someone that God really, fully, genuinely loves. None are irreversibly lost. We are called to be a blessing to all of those people. We are called to go get 'em. It really is "Good News"!
Such a great encouragement reading your testimony, thanks for sharing.
I imagine there’s not many stories like yours, glad you finally escaped praise God!
❤️
Good coming out of the MacArthur cult. No, he's not an actual cult leader, but his views and his personality of unquestioned authority lend itself to cultic appearances. MacArthur won't be questioned or challenged. He is always in an echo chamber, condemning Arminian Pentecostals like me as "cultists," but overlooking John Calvin's murders while he reigned in terror in Switzerland in the 16th century.
This comment brings joy to my heart. I was never a Calvinist but a few of the teachings snagged me for a minute to the point I though I probably wasn’t saved based on reflecting on the “fruit” in my life.
May I ask what helped you start that process of leaving? I have a few conversations with Calvinists but rarely encounter anyone open to another way of seeing various texts.
@@garyleemusic
Hi Gary, that's a really long story. But I'll try to keep it short.
After years of study in apologetics, history, geology, archeology, etc.. It became clear that humans really love their "authority bubbles" and rarely understand any competing ideas (never mind accepting them). They often have no idea what the options are, or if they do, they caricature them to make them seem silly (which yes, sometimes they are).
About five years ago I started asking myself if I was doing the same thing. I had read a lot of theology books and often ran into "challenging" ideas and paradoxes" that left me holding what I now call "shrug" theology. Have an idea that seems to cast a shadow on the character of God? Well, it's what the Bible teaches so you just have to accept it. How do we know the Bible teaches it? Well, your paster with his Masters in Divinity told you what it means. Yes, it's uncomfortable and seems to contradict a lot of the Bible, but it's simply a "mystery" that points to the "unknowableness" of your sovereign God. Anyone that disagrees is a heretic. Shrug.
I got serious about all of it about three years ago and decided to reset and ask tough questions about all of the "difficult" ideas in scripture. I had started memorizing full bible chapters and started seeing verses in context that told a different story than the "proof texts" I had heard for decades. Maybe, just maybe, if a doctrine seems to contradict scripture, you should question it and search deeply like a Berean (and yes, everyone thinks they are the Berean's).
My new rules:
1. The writers of scripture chose words for a specific reason and they have meanings (literal and figurative) that you should respect.
2. Context is everything. Read all of the chapter. And the one before and after. You will often get clarity (as Leighton points out regularly).
3. Study all the various viewpoints until you can convince all of them you believe what they believe. Hardly anyone does this. BUT, I think you should not be a pastor if you can't do this. It's not that hard. Read their stuff with the goal of understanding it. Only then can you legitimately challenge it.
4. Read verses and add doctrine ideas as you go. If you find yourself changing definitions and context. That's a doctrine worth questioning.
So much for short. I'll end with a verse example for rule 4.
John 3:16 My old doctrine version (briefly)...For God so loved the world (meaning only the elect, the others He loves in the sense that He hasn't thrown them into the lake of fire... yet) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever (and I don't mean an open invitation, again, it's only the elect) believes (and by believe I mean made to believe, not the way you believe in things in real life) in Him shall not perish (and by perish, I mean never perish, but be in a place where you wish the word perish had meant perish) but have eternal life (and by life I mean location. All live for eternity. Some live forever in a condition we oddly call death because it's apart from an omnipresent God. Others live with Christ, so that is called life.)
John 3:16 How I read it now... For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
You can do this with a lot of "proof" texts. It can be revealing about what doctrines should be re-visited.
Blessings to you and yours Gary! Study diligently. God is good. Always!
Ron
I just found this channel and i have never heard anyone explain so clearly and biblically why calvinist doctrine is so wrong.
This video was right on time! Thank you and thank GOD! Please keep at it!!
@zanmirrob Just did, thanks!
Very well said. I sent a similar message about two years ago. What a merciful God we love and serve.
Awww I'm so sorry, Leighton, you were in so much pain! I'm glad God didn't answer your prayer to take you home! Not yet, you are still being used here!
Leighton, I thank God that you are well and have recovered from that.
Btw, I’m FOR your longer videos. I don’t struggle with inattentiveness in the least bit, especially when it comes to theological topics of discussion. My eyes and ears are glued. Sponge just soaking up the information. 😊🙏
I could listen to this all day everyday as well!
Same here! Love the long, in-depth explanations!
I love your videos. I have had these exact discussions with Calvinists and used these exact verses and arguments before I found your videos.
It is good to know I'm not alone. I have been feeling a burden to share the gospel lately through preaching, and have been studying a lot to make sure my messages are strictly biblical.
Thank you for you content.
If there was a Nobel Prize for objective thinking regarding Calvinism - you deserve it.
Go see his debate with James White on Romans 9. :)
Leighton Flowers is as objective about Calvinism as Heinrich Himmler was objective about Judaism. LOL.
So many Calvinists put you down online in slanderous ways. Your videos are always clear and convincing to me.
Appearing in a recent video on the popular TH-cam podcast "Conversations with a Calvinist" Leighton Flowers just about convinced me he is a multi-point (gettin' close to a perfect score) Calvinist. His only real problem is with regeneration. Flowers and some of his Flowerites still cling to the Desiderius Erasmus/Jacobus Arminius secular humanism that believes in human determinism--that a person is capable of saving himself (if he would only try!--LOL).
Serious question. How are you so sure your position (you’ll say it’s not your position but the Bible’s) is correct? Much more learned and holy men have though otherwise. And machination of the devil? Do you want to be judged with the same measure as you are judging him? That’s quite a charge to bring.
@@JRey-re9rl Use your TH-cam URL or simply Google-ize it. It's a long video.
@@christopherstavish6546 Well the fact that you used the word Arminian (a respresentative label as opposed to a belief system) says a lot and I don’t think any more dialogue will get us anywhere. I would however agree with you, that if a vague and (only) loving God is what you believe in, it’s not the living God. He’s not vague at all but very personal and if a person truly knows Him, they know there’s nothing vague about Him.
@@Gablesman888 Probably no Christian has ever said that a person can save himself.
This Calvinist brother can be a very effective messenger of God. I would recommend that Dr. Flowers pursue him to bring the Calvinist to the right understanding of truth. He would be a benefit to the kingdom.
Thank God there are people here on earth who refute Calvinism otherwise we would all be sucked into their gnostic false beliefs.
The Calvinists dominate the Academy. This is one of the main issues.
I laugh every time that someone equates Calvinism with Gnosticism. I have never seen that claim backed up with any substance whatsoever.
I have a BA in Religion which focuses on Biblical Languages. I will jokingly tell people that I know enough about Koine Greek to be dangerous. In truth, I'm quite good at Koine Greek and learned enough to know that I can't be a Calvinist and still hold the Bible in utmost authority and respect as I do because I would have to literally change the greek of the New Testament in order to make Calvinism fit. Case in point is with the clip Dr. Flowers played back when the commentator talked about Ephesians 2, and said that Faith was as much of a gift as Grace and Salvation due to verses 8 & 9. The problem is that he just revealed how little of the greek he actually knows.
The main clause statement of verses 8 & 9 is "You are saved". You can break down the rest of these verses and make 3 complete and independent sentences. "You are saved by Grace." "You are saved through Faith." You are saved not of yourselves." Even that last part "It is a gift of God" is referring back to that main clause statement of "You are saved". Everything in those two verses are pointing back to that statement of "You are saved".
Paul is saying that it is Salvation that is the gift. Calvinists erroneously will state that the gift is everything listed prior. This isn't true when examined through the lens of the language. They will point to the pronoun "and that" just before "not of yourselves" as their proof, that it's referring to everything. Actually, it's not. It's a near demonstrative pronoun, and it should actually be translated as "and this" ... again referring to the main clause statement of "You are saved".
I cringe everytime I hear a Calvinist try to explain Ephesians 2:8 & 9, because they almost always make the same mistake and include faith in as also being a gift from God, that we could not have faith in God unless God first gave us Faith.
there is no argument that we are saved by grace but do not neglect the , 'through faith' because you cant have that access of that grace unless you believe. Faith establishes grace.
@@myraride9563 And I agree. It is our faith in Christ and God's grace which he bestows that facilitates Salvation. That's not the issue, however. According to Calvinists, not only is Salvation a gift of God, but so is Faith. In other words, it's not us having faith in Christ, but God providing us that faith, which they also claim is a gift of God. I disagree with the Calvinist claims and interpret and exegete Ephesians 2:8-9 differently.
I appreciate your time in study. Thank you for this explanation.
@@myraride9563 No, grace, by regeneration grants faith and repentance. Otherwise, one saves themselves. The whole Reformed versus A/P dustup is over whether or not a person is partially saved before they are saved. The A/Ps say yes; the Reformed folks say no. ...the gift of God lest any Leighton Flowers should boast, and oh, how Leighton likes to boast...
@@Gablesman888 Not trying to be obtuse, but why do you say it comes down to whether one is partially saved before they are fully saved? By a Catholic, Armininian, Provisionist etc view, isn't God just presenting grace to all, which prepares our wills to respond to further grace? That initial prevenient grace isn't saving grace, but just God reaching out to us since we can't first reach out to Him. Just slightly confused on the point you're making as a Catholic who doesn't always dive this deep into intra-Protestant soteriology debates.
I love the long videos, mostly in podcast format, I listen to them while I'm working graveyard shift. I'm glad you are feeling better!
Thank you for this. You explain so well. Appreciate the time you put in to educate people like me searching for answers. From South Africa. I pray for understanding and discernment to find the truth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
10:53 is spot on! Calvinists get their research on non-Calvinists...from Calvinists. However, what Calvinists really mean by "on your own" is anything without an Irresistible Grace. So, if you do not get Irresistible Grace, that means you are on your own, in the undisciplined mind of a Calvinist.
If Calvinists are intellectually honest, they would never preach or speak in any manner of persuasion regarding the gospel. They cannot change the nature of the unelect and they cannot lose their salvation if they are elect. So no level of persuasion can change anything.
Sinners have a perfect excuse to continue in sin, because they were born that way and God does not care about them (which is explicitly in contradiction to the words of God and Jesus in the Bible).
I’m sorry you were in so much pain but I sure am glad you’re still around! We need you!
I was looking at you Leighton, thinking you slimmed down a bit, then you mentioned you were sick. Glad you are feeling better brother. God bless.
I've been really anticipating this, this is exactly what we need
A warning to all calvinists in regard to Job's 3 companions - 'After the LORD had spoken these words to Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite: "My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.' Job 42:7. Did Job's 3 companions made an honest mistake? Even if yes, God was angry. Ignorance is no excuse. Deliberate? Better repent.
What were his companions telling about God that was so wrong?
This is what I’ve been saying. If Calvinism is truly false, it is NOT a small thing to represent God that way. I used that exact example of Job’s friends. This is serious. We need to get God right!
Thank you once again for this in-depth teaching. Praise God for keeping you well. Take some time to build yourself up…..lots of Vitamin C and time with your family. Praying for renewed strength.
Dr. Leighton, have you seen the debate on The Gospel Truth between Warren Mcgrew and Matt Slick on total depravity?
I really hope that you will do a video on that debate and give your perspective about that video and on the topic of total depravity. You are the leading source for me that I would go to about topics like that. I have learned so much on the topic of predestination and Calvinism because of you and your channel. Love your work, brother! Also, I just ordered your book "God's Provision for All" on Amazon. Excited to read it!
Would be nice to have a dispensationalist in your podcast for example David Hoffman. Good job keeping up refuting this bad spirited doctrine called Calvinism, Christianity needs men like you who shed light on what scripture says regarding this issue.
One thing I learned, going back to my 20s is to attempt to learn how each doctrine views the text. It is frustrating when I attempt to explain how I arrive at a view, using scripture, they respond with, 'but that's not what it says'. In terms of scripture, I am 50/50 on Provisionism vs Calvinism. I can understand both sides. But logically, I am 100% on the Provisionist side. Therefore, I choose, with my own free will, to believe the Provisionist interpretation of the bible. If I'm wrong, then I couldn't do it differently anyway.
24:30~ amazing Noah's explanation
God resists THE PROUD but grace to THE HUMBLE. Did we have grace before we were humble? No! We are GIVEN grace after we humble ourselves.
i misread that. Amen
Amen, getting the Gospel of humility to the lost is what the entire New Testament is about. (Jesus stated even Jews were lost, and He came to them only). Calvinism now states that God only comes to the Gentiles. Their entire theology is false on that doctrine of dispensationalism alone.
I do not agree calvinism, nor lutheran presbyterianism teaches from the Scriptures', but rather from calvin and luther's writings, and other documents such as 'westminster confessional'.
Acts 15:8 "He knows what is in everyone's heart. And he showed he had chosen "the gentiles" (specific gentile believers, not all gentiles), when he gave them the Holy Spirit, just as he had given his Spirit to us"
Some have said there is no need to be water baptised , that only laying of hands is needed. I disagree, as all believers were water baptised before God gave the Holy Spirit. Many were Jews who partook of the ordinances of repentance and washing, sprinkling etc. The baptism by laying of hands was done to those who had already been water baptised, by Apostles with the HolySpirit that believed in the repentance and belief Gospel.
Their humility preceding their receiving of the HolySpirit, and proof of their Salvation. Of at least sealing in the Spirit lest they become boastful, which Paul warned about and they fall away (OSAS refuted)
If you have the Holy Spirit, you are in the Holy Spirit and sealed, if one rebels, they can lose the Holy Spirit, and thus lose the seal on them.
So I was praying today and I got this very clear thought in my mind. I told God that I loved the Calvinist brothers for their efforts in giving God max max in their diagnosis of simply read scripture in an attempt to really worship God for his Sovereignty and bigness. When I went to explain to God the Arminian stance, I got a clear thought
God makes man and gives them a random dice block halfway through their life where they are the entropy source of randomness. It has the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 on it. Each number scales with pride, 6 being the most proud and damnable, and 1 being the most humble and is the only number that selects Christ. The number is determined by the human, and God CANNOT make the decision for him entirely, because he is using the veiled humans as an entropy source for randomness to see if the human wants to glorify God's Justice (2-6) or God's Mercy (1). So God gets the credit for the number still, no matter what is chosen, but man gets some of the credit for the CHOICE of number, but not anything else. This is hybrid open theism maybe, but I think it's okay. God foreknows all dice rolls in Flowers theory, but I think God is actually more creative than he is all-knowing, so I lean towards infinite foreknowledge (multi-verse even), not singular foreknowledge. God pre-destines everyone to a 1 of course, but they, us, can choose other numbers for the short term pleasure long term pain. On Judgment day, everyone will be held partially accountable for their dice results, and God gets all the credit obviously. Choices, too, are a gift of course.
I guess Total Depravity rebuttal is the stance that scripture states that all mankind will always choose a 6 without God's help in changing their minds, but what the Calvinists don't get is that humans are only depraved BEFORE they get the gift of the dice in them, so humans are actually *dynamic* during the "Choice phase" of life where they can pick their pride stats. The idea here is that without the dice, all mankind will perish in their sins, unable to 1, but WITH the dice, we get a 1/6 chance or so, scaling with the "Luck" of the dice (our true choices) to pick Jesus. We are the luck, and God and Satan probably have rules in play to manipulate us too, Satan with temptations, and God by Truth. Imagine it like a game God plays with himself and the devil where the game is rigged to giving God glory by Justice or Mercy. As humans, our only choice is to glorify God by accepting His Son (Mercy) or going our own way here and glorifying God's Anti-Evil itch later (Justice in Hell). We can make God most happy with a 1, but it's not a big deal if you go 2-6.
@HillDueceua I think God is more complicated than me is the thing lolz
@HillDueceua I think the new theories merge the camps together better and still endorses God's sovereignty while keeping God creative and clean
If there is a theory to do it then why be against a new theory
If I was not a follower of Jesus and watched this TH-cam video supporting Calvanism...it would deter me from Christianity.
Good news for merely a few?
No!!! For God so loved the world...
..praise Jesus!!!!
Love your channel brother!
Please consider mixing cayenne pepper with water ..comfortably a couple times a day, consistently.
Raw garlic everyday would be helpful as well.
Trust me, this could prevent or minimize the affects of Ecoli etc
God bless
Excellent Leighton, very helpful.
I praise God for you Brother!
Is it just me or do calvinists always seem super angry.
And arrogant.
Thank you for your comments on death. The reality that death communicates a change in the state of one’s existence irreversible apart from the intervention of God as opposed to the cessation of life, whether physical or spiritual, is a concept which needs to be brought to the forefront with respect to the biblical understanding of death.
Welcome back Leighton
Mike Winger made a great video showing how Calvinism isn't the case, and he started it by using the Bible to prove that faith is not a work. Faith is not a work. Faith is not a work. He hammered that point, then he showed how Calvinism is based on the notion that faith is somehow a work.
I realized that you're making that same point when you showed that Calvinists conflate righteousness by the law, which no one can do, with righteousness by faith. They correctly think that no one can be righteous in the sense of their works, but then they conflate being righteous by faith with righteousness by the law and think therefore no one can be righteous by faith unless faith is out of their control.
In other words, Calvinists are the modern-day Judaizers?
It always puzzles me that Calvinists in such videos as this go to a Merriam-Webster dictionary to make their points rather than a good lexicon that tells you the Hebrew or Greek definitions, and the nuances in different contexts.
...and then ignore the dictionary definitions in those cases where it would work *against* their position: "all", "whoever", etc.
Just listened again. Great video still. :D
Thanks for all you do!
Calvinists all seem to possess text proofed cheat sheet lists of verses....
Every text Calvinists see must be bent and "panel beated" to fit into their bizarre TULIP theory.
@@wpdaffue3966 oh yeah! and most dont exegete them themselves.... I've seen their lists they all have. It will say "t" and then a whole bunch of single verses, then "u" and a bunch more etc. ...that is their bible... the cheat sheet! Lol!
Praise God for your healing!
How have I not seen this before? Not that I would agree but it’s refreshing that it’s not full of hate only a civilly made counter argument
Clear contextual teaching, well done.
This is an amazing video!!!
(Exodus 4)
Moses is chosen by God.
God reveals his power to Moses.
Moses refuses to do what he is asked because of his fears and insecurities.
God promises to empower him to do what He requires.
Moses still refuses and tells God to find someone, anyone else.
God gets angry with Moses
God alters his original plan to compensate for Moses' stubbornness.
Any Calvinists wanna take a stab at that one?
("Oh it was God's plan all along for him to take Aaron". Then why is God angry if all is going according to plan?)
Sounds like Paul is speaking specifically to Israel under the Law in most of these verses Calvinists use as proof text.
Even though Israel was chosen, much of the time they lived in unbelief.
I love my Calvinist brother and Armenian brothers I love all brothers in Christ no matter if their doctrine may be not something I believe I do believe they are Christians either way we need to focus on Jesus than who’s right or wrong we’re taking glory away from god and we need to reach people that truly need our help than arguing over theology all the time I understand it’s necessary but we have to give glory to god
Not to mention Genesis Chapter 4 says this; 26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.
When did total depravity begin exactly. I mean here you have men calling the Lord.
Here we see that there were men who did call upon the name of the Lord
"First we may call this doctrine(Calvinism) a novelty, seeing that for the first four hundred years after christ there is no mention of it. The first foundations for it were in the writings of Augustine, who, in his warring against Pelagius, let fall some expressions which some have unhappily picked up to the establishment of this error."- Quaker Theologian Robert Barclay
Dr. Flowers, I’m a student at Trinity and would love to hear your opinion about people saying certain translations are “Calvinistic” thank you for everything you do!
It is a fact that all people have a moral compass. So if they are completely incapable of responding to the gospel then why do they have a moral compass. Where did that moral compass come from? If man is completely incapable of responding to God then why are there commands in scripture? Why is the gospel to be proclaimed? A text without a context is a proof text to say whatever you want.
Great point about Noah. Supported here:
Hebrew 11
[1] Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
[2] For by it the elders obtained a good report.
[3] Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
...
[7] By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
"Draw" word can be defined as, to lead to, to invite, to enable
There are a lot of people like atheists or whoever that live a success life to world standards but everyone is born spiritually blind it’s our choice to decide whether to believe and trust god god doesn’t make us follow him without our choice or else we truly not free
A question for any Calvinists still perusing the comments here, or who come across this: Are you okay or vindicated for bearing false witness? Does God overlook every time that you knowingly lie to someone?
I’m no,and …
the calvinist tower resembles babel and is unscalable by us mortals. the tulip tower is plain wrong and insults the Lord High God.
Hello! Praise Jah! Psalm 68:4 KJV and his name alone is the most high Psalm 83:18 KJV
Just like a horse, God can lead (or draw) a sinner to salvation, but does not put a firehose in your mouth, and pump you up with the water of life.
To utilyan and heaven guy. I had a question for you. Why in Jesus’s perfect prayer does he tell us ask God for forgiveness. Why do we have to repent if we do not sin?
Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper,
but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy.
Proverbs 28:13
If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.
Because Saints have a very real responsibility towards you in so much as they ask for forgiveness on your behalf even for things they never did, Job for his children, Jesus "forgive them for they know not what they do", examples. IS it "If your brother or sister sins against you" or "WHEN your brother or sister sins against you" ? See I can't hold a judgement expecting you to sin, Like If a took a bet PRESSUMING you would sin next week I would be wrong for it.
The best teachers actually get the job done......How good is Jesus at teaching you not to sin? Pretty Terrible Right? lets hear it. 😈
@@utilyan the prayer asks him to forgive us pur trespasses. Us means us that includes The person praying otherwise it would be forgive them their trespasses.
1 Cor 3:1 And I, my brethren, have not been able to speak with you as with spiritual ones but as with the carnal and as to babies in The Messiah"
Many claim they are in the HolySpirit even after confessing Christ. We must watch how.we deal with every one because we are saved by our faith and pure doctrine of repent and turn from sin. Not all Christian's become saved as to strive toward purity and sinless image bearers.
The age old debate (between Doctrines of Grace and Gospel of Grace) one is false, but I'll let the saved discern which it is.
@@danielletracyann Its "ὀφειλήματα" Debts and US/OUR. scrupulous is a problem too. I got a question are you SINNING RIGHT NOW?
@@utilyan nope not sinning right now. At least not to my knowledge
Thanks for this awesome teaching
Good to have you back, brother.
If the Calvinistic argument is that ALL people were totally depraved with the soul exception of Noah, whom God regenerated, then how did original sin pass through Noah's righteous family?
Especially since Noah's son Ham "uncovered his father's nakedness" -- Ham slept with his mom after getting off the Ark (Lev 18:8).
"The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness." ~ Lev 18:8
No idea. Do calvinists really argue that?
@@pessimistprime6318 no they don't, At least I don't know of anyone who teaches it.
We do not inherit original (sins of our fathers) sin.
We inherited a sinful nature.
@@larrybedouin2921
Scripture?
Why do the texts continuously discuss death if the concept at issue is separation?
praying for your brother!
So helpful!!!
42:00 Paul quotes from Psalm 13 in the Septuagint.
You son of a gun you better not leave us! Lord has lots and lots and lots of work here on terra forma for you! 😅
Glad you made it through your illness!
something came up to my mind, if regeneration or rebirth happened before we believe, what is the point of Jesus dying on the cross.,so mind twisted.
Well, Noah was righteous, he walked with God. So he was able to be pleasing as he was just, the just shall live by faith.
55:23 speaking of context, the context of Col 2v12 is immersion.
Context kills Calvinism.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi where
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi so what you're saying is that God is not powerful enough to save people who are slaves to sin? He can only save people he picked from the foundation of the world? That His gospel is not powerful enough to enable a slave of sin to repent and believe? That sin is more powerful than he is and that he can't overcome it except by exempting certain people ahead of time? Wow, your god is too weak to be worshipped.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi you do understand that there is a difference between accepting an offer of salvation and actually being saved, right? They are not the same thing. Men do the believing and God does all the saving.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi lol. So many words against an argument I didn't make. It doesn't matter what I have or don't have. It is by grace THROUGH FAITH and not by works, so that no one can boast.
See faith IS NOT WORKS. so when we hear the gospel, We can put the faith, which comes from hearing the gospel ... In Christ...and God saves us.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi pretty sure I'm talking about faith and belief which are aspects of the will. God says L can do both by hearing the gospel, so...... Not works. No matter how comically you protest.
This was a really good summary and rebuttal. The only thing I think is worth adding is that talking about Pelagianism in a protestant context is quite misleading. That was a debate about grace, but the key question was really regarding the distinction between nature and grace. Pelagius thought that we were capable of doing good works out of our own nature without the aid of God's grace. Augustine affirmed that was only possible through God's grace. Neither of them believe in Sola Fide. Their view was that to get to heaven you needed faith, good works and love for God. This was the same for Augustine as for Pelagius.
Also, Augustine's view of Justification was transformative (just like that of the rest of the Church Fathers) rather that only forensic. That's why John Macarthur's condemnation of Arminianism (and provisionalism for that matter) is just plainly wrong. And on top of that his views on double predestination are condemned also by a valid Church Council. But in any case, what's the point of Macartur quoting a Church Council edict anyways.
I wonder if you've come across Messiah Matters on TH-cam? Caleb Hegg and Rob Vanhoff? They were once one place we could recommend people go for some common sense. They are part of Torah Resource. They are Calvinists and are lately promoting it more openly, using as is often the case, proof texts and accusing this who disagree of not studying the Bible hard enough. On a personal level, I can take that, but many of their listeners are young in the faith and vulnerable.
When you suggest that death is a separation from God & then go on to say they continued to interact with God, I would appreciate more clarification on what this "separation/death" entails. From my perspective/ understanding the relationship continues.
If its a limited atonement then its limited grace, limited mercy, and given because of HIs limited love.
Universal "atonement" must somehow be limited in your mind, because a vast number of people still end up in hell.
God was talking about physical death.
I can gather from this Calvinist that he didn't go to seminary.
About the 27 minute mark Leighton said "God found favor in Noah's eyes" ... wasn't it the other way around?
Wonderful talk!
Should general determinism be a greater priority than soteriology in discussions about Calvinism? Soteriology seems almost moot in the context of theistic determinism. Even a fully Arminian soteriology would yield the same results in that context. God's going to decide how people respond, regardless of the ordo salutis. God's going to determine whether people persevere. Etc.
Good thing I did not meet a calvinist when I was a down and out hippie 52 years ago. I would never have met Jesus and received the infilling of the Holy Spirit. I got baptized as an adult which is forbidden by true calvinists. Being an anabaptist I woiuled have been drown by the thugs and brutes of the reformation.
Why would the Lord need to "look down from heaven to see if there is one who seeks for God" if He already knows that all people are born in a condition where they cannot seek after God? To be clear, I'm not saying that we can seek God on our own, but I do affirm that we can seek after God since He first sought after us. How can we know of someone we have never heard about? We can't. But none of us are on our own since God is actively seeking to save the lost, thereby enabling everyone to seek after Him and to find Him. Hallelujah!
Hence why *You* make the choice to respond and seek Him whom seeks you.
Philosophy isn't relevant unless it leads to thought-provoking exhortation.
Why seek knowledge of God if you are already saved and have no need to understand that which you already know. Have you understood why Noah was in an Ark? Because they alone were faithful to the Call. This alone disproves, not so much Calvin's writings on keeping works as proof of salvation, but rather why works of correct theology are imperative. We seek God where as your system claims God seeks you.
God doesn't have to look down? You said "you do not seek Him, and already knows". So you refuted your own comment. In fact you proves why we do need to seek Him, and require Him to look down at us to see if we are doing His will.
Somebody had to have sought God, it does state that many did.
Psalms 1:01 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, or set foot on the path of sinners, or sit in the seat of mockers. 2But his delight is in the Law of the LORD, and on His law he meditates day and night.3He is like a tree planted by streams of water, yielding its fruit in season, whose leaf does not wither, and who prospers in all he does."
@@abashedsanctimony154 I think you might be a bit confused. I'm not a Calvinist I'm a provisionist.
@@phillipjackson1517 I may have been but here is a study of those who have chosen Christ, as further proof of what you are trying to display. Man chooses God.
But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 1 Corinthians 15:23-24 (NASB)
In these two verses the Holy Spirit provides a timeline starting with the resurrection of Christ and ending with Christ giving the kingdom to the Father.
Timeline Christ's Resurrection to End of Age
Christ the First Fruits
The term “first fruits” refers to the first of the crop that is harvested from a field. In Romans 16:5 the term was used to refer to the first converts from converts from Asia. In James 1:18 the first fruits refers to Christians. Christians are “a kind of first fruits among His creatures.” But 1 Corinthians 15:20 explicitly explains what the Holy Spirit means by the phrase that Christ is the first fruits.
But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:20 (NASB)
That is, Christ is the first fruits from among those who are dead. He was the first one to have been resurrected and go to heaven (Some had been brought to life only to die again such as Lazarus). Please note that the expression “who are asleep” refers to those are dead and awaiting resurrection.
Resurrections Of All Men and Women
Christ was resurrected the third day after He died. He died on Friday, Nisan 14, A.D. 33 and returned to life on Sunday, Nisan 16, A.D. 33. Forty days later He ascended back to heaven (Acts 1:3, 9-11). Christ is the first fruits from among all Christians.
Those Who Are Christ’s At His Coming
The opening phrase of verse 23 reveals that the Holy Spirit is giving us a timeline for future resurrections when we are told “each in his own order.” Christ was resurrected first and next all Christians will wait for the second coming of Christ for it says, “after that those who are Christ’s at His coming.” When is Christ’s coming? There are two phases to Christ’s coming. The first phase is the rapture of all Christians prior to the tribulation as described in John 14:1-3; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1. The second phase is the second coming of Christ or the return of Christ (Matthew 24:3, 29-31; Peter 1:16; 2 John 7; Revelation 19:11-21). The second coming of Christ will occur at the end of the Tribulation period.
So do you think that a person should respond to the Christ by believing and being baptize after first hearing the gospel?
1:26:27 Augustine himself may have been influenced by Origen, who outright taught all men preexisted along side Christ, who was simply the ony one who didn't sin and fall. That's the only view in whch the Calvinistic concepts make sense. (Also, Calvinsts will insist reprobation is not an "excuse"; He just silences any appeal to an excuse).
I don't necessarily consider Calvinists "brothers"....they arguably preach and teach a "different" Gospel!
When talking to an Atheist I will say that we all are born with an A+ and it is up to us too keep it because we are all prodigal childen of God. That is easier to undrstand than you aren't as bad as you chould be , but.
1 Thessalonians 1:4 has always stumped me...
Didn't Jesus say that millions of Gentiles would believe. Also doesn't Calvinism seem a little cultish?
7:30 is when this first point is made.
I just can't see calvinist as brothers. it's just like wolves in sheep clothing. Just like the surface of the ocean, it looks bright and sunny from the shore, and even as you swim out, you dive down into it, and the deeper you dive, the darker it gets and the further away from the light you get. If you don't have the light in you, you can get lost in the dark and drown! Decieved by truth, they are!!!
And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.
Ezekiel:14:9
I find that when you read the scriptures, it exposes the heart and you see and hear what your heart desires. Just like when you read the parable of talents and all you see is doing business and making money and considering that handling your money properly is what that parable is trying to convey! Your heart is set on money and not the things of God! And if you use this parable towards me about being a good servant with my money, then I know who your god is!
@20:00, it's dead defined by a Jewish thinking person vs dead defined by a Greek thinking person . . .
When this guy was talking about Noah my thought was, if God gave Noah and his family the ability to believe and God rejected and never gave the people of the earth that same ability; then why even bring the cross into it. If God had already picked who would be saved and who would be damned then why the suffering on the cross? I mean with the Calvinist teachings people will be saved by God picking them and it has nothing to do with their turning to God in faith, in that teaching the cross would be meaningless.
I didn’t even learn about Calvinism in my back woods Bible college. It’s such unnecessary baggage. The gospel as a set of eyes reads 20/20 just fine without the garbled nonsense. It takes being a Christian who has learned the scriptures and knows the context to fend off such bad presupp
Amen!
Calvinism seems to be an exercise in irresponsibility. Calvinists simply want to blame EVERYTHING on God !
Why did you use the NIV first and then the CSB?
Quick reference to a Bible app that contains all translation. Not specifying which was correct in generality. Much of doctrine comes from deep word analysis,
When we notice people reject valid doctrines such as Imputed Righteousness, which comes directly from the Scriptures'. The we should question what the Bible says concerning a person's actual beliefs.
Jam 2:23"And the scripture was fulfilled which says, *Abraham believed God* , and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God"
Most books of the bible refute entire denominational beliefs by simply reading the context.
How does it make sense that you are totally depraved but not as bad as you could be. If I can't do good what's holding me back?
Thank you!!!
Thank you
You were born with a sin nature wouldn’t Jesus have to have been born with a original sin nature as well?
@@RenardGarzaro thanks for your reply
40:15 I've had a Calvinist say this to me as well, this is just taking the Bible too literally lol. "There is no one righteous; not even one!" For one, David could be saying "At this present time" for another, David was righteous. I don't think this was saying "No one in the world is righteous, not now, not later, not ever!" He's speaking figuratively... David is lamenting at the lack of righteous people in the present time, not saying no one is ever righteous. That's my interpretation anyway.
@@RenardGarzaro I'm not basing it off of nothing, but rather the evidence throughout the Bible that righteous men do in fact exist. Psalm 112 Why is David talking about "righteous men" if they don't exist? genesis 15:6 Abraham was called righteous because of his faith, wait, i thought righteous men didn't exist? Genesis 6:9 Noah was the last righteous man. What about Lot?
And David himself was surely righteous, even though he said "there is no one righteous, not one!" He was speaking figuritively, he wasn;t saying "no righteous man exists in the world, or ever has existed, or ever will", because righteous men DO indeed exist, David himself was called a man after God's own heart. Romans 4:6 "David also spoke of this when he described the happiness of those who are declared righteous without working for it:"
I did not honestly think i would find such abundant evidence, i knew there was some, but just researching it now, i found countless verses where men were called "righteous". Keep in mind, righteous does not me sinless, for there are no sinless men. But righteous men? Of course they exist.
Regarding John 3.3, Leighton comments at 1:11:25: "Of course we all believe that you have to born again, given new life, in order to enter the kingdom of God. We all believe that, but that's not what the Calvinist is using this verse to support. They're using this verse to support pre-faith regeneration. So, what they're using this verse to say is not, 'Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.' What they’re meaning it to say is, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot believe in the Jesus.’ It doesn’t say that."
So will be those like in the days of Noah if all sinner are like the days of Noah then it wouldn’t be a foreshadowing to the end times
I know this was posted 3 years ago, but perhaps it will be seen and responded to.
God said, " In the very day you eat of it, you will die."
What died?
Jesus says,
"All that the Father gives me will come to me!" John 6:37
So these people that the Father gives to Jesus belong to the Father and the Father gives them to Jesus!
So how did they come to belong to the Father to begin with?
By being chosen and predestined? No!
Jesus is talking to Old Testament Jews. Jesus is telling them that the ones who believed in God were also to believe in Jesus.
The Father is going to take these believers in God and give them to Jesus, because Jesus is God the second person of the Trinity.
This is why Jesus says,
"No one can come to me unless the Father gives them to me!"
John 6:44, 65
The next verse 45 says these are the ones who already were taught and believed in God!
"It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me!" John 6:45
John 6 has nothing to do with Calvinism! Calvinists never include verse 45 for context!
John 6 is about believers in the God of the Old Testament being brought and given to Jesus the messiah who they were looking for.
If they did not already believe in God they could not come to Jesus who is God in the flesh!
We are talking here about people who by the grace of God became believers in the Old Testament God and now are being brought and given to Jesus by the Father! Jesus is saying he is God the second person of the Trinity.
Jesus is saying in John 6,
“Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me!"
John 14:1
"And Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me. And whoever sees me sees him who sent me!"
John 12:44-45
"No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also."
1 John 2:23
This is why Jesus says,
"All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out."
John 6:37
John 6 is not teaching Calvinism!
Calvinism is a stepping stone to learning the Bible, and it is now time to move past Calvinism to better know God like many other people have done. John 17:3
John 10 is teaching the same!
Jesus says,
"You do not believe because you are not my sheep!"
John 10:26
The sheep are the Jews who already believed in the God of the Old Testament and now recognize Jesus as their God the second person of the Trinity! Jesus is claiming to be God!
"The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God."
John 10:33
John 10 is not teaching Calvinism!
And Jacob and Esau were both saved and Romans 9 does not teach Calvinism!
This just reads like pure sophistry.