These conversations are good. First convo: you hear new stuff; Second convo: you hear old stuff and catch it better, plus hear some new stuff; third convo: you hear old old stuff and catch it really well, hear old stuff and catch better, then new stuff; and on it goes. But then: you relisten to first convo and catch all the stuff, plus then hear new stuff; listen to the second again... and on it goes. Anyway, so greateful for these repeated conversations, they help a lot . Keep up the good work :D
Enjoyed the conversation but still see no explicit text establishing an innate moral inability to believe the word of God. The best you have is a few implications which even you admit can be taken other ways. It just seems like a big leap to assume without a very clear explicit text that fallen men cannot respond positively to the truth calling them to be reconciled from that fall. Nevertheless, I appreciate the kind response.
David says that Flowers is not Pelagian nor Arminian, but falls short of calling him semi-pelagian, why? It's clear to me that Flowers is a semi-pelagian.
I've seen/heard several definitions of semi-pelagianism. What is your definition? Why would we say Leighton is semi-pelagian? Thx in advance for the discussion :) Edit: Hey actually, upon listening, right at 44:40-44:50, Nicholas says "they're not arminians, but they're pelagian, they're not semi-pelagian" and David says, "They are not, they're brothers in Christ". Sweet, we're good to go :D
@@VeryBasicBible a semi-pelagian would still be a Christian. A semi-pelagian is someone that denies at least two of the following things; total inability, prevenient grace, and the sin nature. A normal Pelagian denies all of those things and also denies the idea that God must be the first to act. As long as Flowers still says that man has a sin nature and that God must be the first to act, he is not a Pelagian/heretic. If he ever said that man does not have a sin nature, along with the things he already believes, than he would not be my brother in Christ. I do not throw around the word "heretic" as lightly as others do. I would consider most Calvinists to be brothers in the faith and most semi-pelagians to be brothers as well. On the extreme ends though, Pelagianism and Supralapsarian Calvinists are heretics.
This is a great video. This has helped cleared that im more in the Classical or Congruent grace view.
These conversations are good.
First convo: you hear new stuff; Second convo: you hear old stuff and catch it better, plus hear some new stuff; third convo: you hear old old stuff and catch it really well, hear old stuff and catch better, then new stuff; and on it goes.
But then: you relisten to first convo and catch all the stuff, plus then hear new stuff; listen to the second again... and on it goes.
Anyway, so greateful for these repeated conversations, they help a lot . Keep up the good work :D
Thank you, this is really encouraging!
Leighton actually uses Job 33 in his own book. And I’ll elaborate on my perspective of enabling/inability when I’m interviewed.
Enjoyed the conversation but still see no explicit text establishing an innate moral inability to believe the word of God. The best you have is a few implications which even you admit can be taken other ways. It just seems like a big leap to assume without a very clear explicit text that fallen men cannot respond positively to the truth calling them to be reconciled from that fall. Nevertheless, I appreciate the kind response.
God bless Dr. Flowers
David says that Flowers is not Pelagian nor Arminian, but falls short of calling him semi-pelagian, why?
It's clear to me that Flowers is a semi-pelagian.
I've seen/heard several definitions of semi-pelagianism. What is your definition? Why would we say Leighton is semi-pelagian? Thx in advance for the discussion :)
Edit: Hey actually, upon listening, right at 44:40-44:50, Nicholas says "they're not arminians, but they're pelagian, they're not semi-pelagian" and David says, "They are not, they're brothers in Christ". Sweet, we're good to go :D
@@VeryBasicBible a semi-pelagian would still be a Christian.
A semi-pelagian is someone that denies at least two of the following things; total inability, prevenient grace, and the sin nature.
A normal Pelagian denies all of those things and also denies the idea that God must be the first to act.
As long as Flowers still says that man has a sin nature and that God must be the first to act, he is not a Pelagian/heretic. If he ever said that man does not have a sin nature, along with the things he already believes, than he would not be my brother in Christ.
I do not throw around the word "heretic" as lightly as others do. I would consider most Calvinists to be brothers in the faith and most semi-pelagians to be brothers as well.
On the extreme ends though, Pelagianism and Supralapsarian Calvinists are heretics.
Nicolas are you on Facebook?
Yes, under the same name.
Just sent you a message on Facebook Messenger