Concepts You Won’t Find In Scripture

Please support this channel financially:
beyondthefunda...
View Full-Length Video: kzbin.info...
Website: www.beyondthefundamentals.com
Email: [e-mail]
Follow on X (Twitter): / beyondthefundy
Facebook: / beyondthefundamentals
T-Shirt - Say 'No' to Brother Melms: www.etsy.com/B...
Purchase the Original PowerPoint slide decks used in our other videos here:
www.etsy.com/s...

[@mandymarshmallow6142]

I remember hearing many sermons when I was a child growing up in church where they made a big point not to take them at their word, but make sure it is in the Bible. They were basically admitting up front they could be wrong, and to follow God's word not them. I miss that.

[@WalkingTemple-ws2si]

Keep up the good work in exposing these kind of teachers Kevin! I amazed at how they all try and convince themselves that "tension" is not another word for "contradiction"!

[@KevinThompson1611]

Thank you.

[@ellisrowe363]

People tolerate it because they do not know what Scripture teaches on many subjects. Very sad. No doubt this guy is an Augustinian/Calvinist. Good work!

[@pontificusmaximus6716]

4:33 This is a great point, namely that if you acquiesce to (i.e. accept) an authority figure's cognitive dissonance, it puts you into a sort of trance state. I don't doubt it for a second, but would love to have a reference if your psychologist friend can provide one.

[@pontificusmaximus6716]

Transcript: I have a psychologist who's been messaging me who has scientific evidence that shows when you're being taught somebody something from a supposed Authority or Mentor figure or something like that and you get cognitive dissonance where things just contradict and you're supposed like the moral thing to do is just to accept the contradiction because hey we don't (04:59) have to prove point you just accept it or you're evil that's a cult that's a cult and it's commonly used in Cults and when uh what this psychologist said what she told me was that when you hear this it puts you kind of into a trance especially when it's coming from somebody that you think you're supposed to trust kind of puts you into a trance where you kind of stop making sense of things and you're not able to think as critically anymore Safeguard your own soul

[@KevinThompson1611]

@@pontificusmaximus6716 Yes. We have a loose plan to have a discussion about it on the channel. Hopefully we can make that happen soon.

[@pontificusmaximus6716]

@ Epic! Thank you!

[@skidmoro9642]

I know a preacher that says you "gotta" be careful who you listen to..speaking of Word of Faith preachers, then in the next sentence , quote John Mac or a litany of other Calvinist about TRUE "teachings"...

[@lamontfaulkner5090]

Def Sovereignty: "The quality or state of having supreme power and/or authority". Kevin, according to the scriptures and the above definition, does scripture teach that God has total supreme power and authority (sovereignty) over His creation according to scripture? Let's see... Kevin, feel free to plug the following scripture verses into your "favorite bible version" on Bible gateway etc... then let the viewing audience know where the error is? God is Sovereign Exo 15:18; 1Chr 29:11-12; 2Chr 20:6; Psa 22:28 1. He exercises that sovereignty in actively ordaining everything: Deu 32:39; 1Sam 2:6-8; Job 9:12; Job 12:6-10; Psa 33:11; Psa 115:3; Psa 135:6; Isa 14:24; Isa 45:7; Act 15:18; Eph 1:11 -Including matters of “chance”: Pro 16:33; 1Ki 22:20, 34, 37 -The wicked actions of men: Gen 45:5; Gen 50:20; Exo 4:21; Jdg 14:1-4; Psa 76:10; Pro 16:4; Isa 44:28; Amos 3:6; Act 2:22-23; Act 4:27-28 -The actions of evil spirits: 1Sam 16:14-16; 1Ki 22:19-23; 1Chr 21:1/2Sam 24:1 The good actions of men: John 15:16; Eph 2:10; Phi 2:12-13 The actions of good angels: Psa 103:20; Psa 104:4 The actions of animals: Num 22:28; 1Ki 17:4; Psa 29:9; Jer 8:7; Eze 32:4; Dan 6:22 The operations of all creation: Gen 8:22; Psa 104:5-10; Psa 104:13-14; Psa 104:19-20; Mark 4:39

[@KevinThompson1611]

When a Calvinist says “soveriegn,” they don’t really mean the dictionary definition. They mean meticulous determinism. They speak in dog whistle language where words and phrases mean something different for them than what the dictionary says or how regular people use the terms. Saying that God has control is a different statement than saying that God executes that control in particular ways that violate clear passages of scripture. Jeremiah 19:5 (ESV) 5 and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind- Hosea 8:4 (KJV) 4 They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off. Psalms 78:41 (KJV) 41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel. Ecclesiastes 7:17 (KJV) 17 Be not over much wicked, neither be thou foolish: why shouldest thou die before thy time? Ecclesiastes 9:11 (KJV) 11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

[@John3.36]

Question: What does it mean if a church is listed on the 9marks website? Does 9marks need to get the church leadership's permission to do it?

[@SpotterVideo]

New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below? Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary? What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9. If the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20 and the Old Covenant is "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13, why would any Christian believe God is going back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period? What is the location of the "temple of God" in the Book of Revelation? The answer is revealed in Rev. 3:12 and Rev. 11:19 in heaven, and not in the wicked city found in Rev. 11:8. This temple is located in the same city promised to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:13-16 and also described in Hebrews 12:22-24.

[@lonniestoltzfus4944]

I'm on the same journey!!! It's a struggle. I'm asking God to reveal any deception in me . There's so many ISMS out there!!

[@duskatdawn7]

Every moment past the resurrection and before the wolfs were out there distorting the pure word of God I just realized that every church or group I've ever listened to or been a part of their so called ministry has been tainted with lies. The cult of the church CULTURE.... I was heavily into the navigators in the Army, they were deep into calvinism.

[@KevinThompson1611]

Right. Unfortunately, the presence of the leaven is pretty rampant. Egos and the left hemisphere have co-opted all the concepts and pulled them into their self-exalting schemes.

[@WalkingTemple-ws2si]

Hey Kevin I just want to say one thing that I think is very important! So the first time I had a disagreement with a Calvinist Pastor it occurred to me that if I were to accept this very confusing interpretation I would have to consider God to be a liar and have a very low opinion of His own Character! This was the red flag alert moment That told me don't accept any teaching that does this!!

[@2Tim3.16]

I see someone already mentioned to Trinity

[@victoryamartin9773]

So sad, they don't realize it until it is too late. i have warned people about the teachings of my old church, pointing out those that are Calvinistic, and people will argue with me, challenging me about how I know they are Calvinistic or even questioning what that means. They insist that they love other things about the church that keeps them loyal to it in spite of my referencing their false theology. It appears that what the church teaches is not as important to them as the other benefits they enjoy by attending.

[@roddyk2655]

He should just say "the Bible 'teaches' us logical fallacies like there's a tension between Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility.. yuck yuck..." .. 😮‍💨

[@jayd2670]

Understand this is Calvinistic. You can do the same with the Trinity. God the Son. Incarnation. Jesus literally says there is one God. Says his Father is his God. Yet, Trinitarians say... but the Bible teaches. Yet Jesus never spoke of it. Nor did anyone else.

[@KevinThompson1611]

We call out this fallacious line of reasoning in the longer video. All the Calvinists appeal to it. Does that mean we can just say things that are not scriptural and use the trinity as the cover story? Can I just say that Mary was a cocaine addict and that two of the apostles were gay? You would object, “Scripture never said that?” And I would reply, “But TRINITY!!! Trinity means that we can make up whatever we want and hold on to it until we find a verse that specifically negates the claim!” That is ridiculous, and that’s what Calvinists are essentially advocating for. In reality, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. It is not the skeptic’s burden to disprove. Appealing to an adjacent and well-accepted claim is a logical fallacy. Shifting the burden of proof is also a logical fallacy. It’s important not to have a version of Christianity that consists of semantically disambiguated propositional conclusions held in dogmatic fashion. It’s important to exercise first principles thinking, epistemic humility, and the inductive method of inquiry (not to be confused with inductive reasoning, which is not good). This means that we start with a blank slate with zero presumptions each time we examine the text or evidence. This includes anything from the trinity to the incarnation. If it’s supported by the text/evidence, then it will show itself again. It’s not ours to egoically hold on to. And when our theology consists more of presumptions and popular opinion than the text, we have completely lost touch with our external authority.

[@strayvion808]

Question, is this calvinist takeover more common in smaller churches or bigger mega churches?

[@evolgenius1150]

I agree with you but that’s a bad argument, go search for…. Can be used for trinity.

[@malvokaquila6768]

Calvinist concepts are also known as concepts contradicted by scripture.

[@DouglasCochran-p5j]

What happened in the business meeting Sunday afternoon?

[@78LedHead]

I'm trying to be nice, but this pastor is so held back, in 20 years no one will be listening to these guys. They'll be listening to open people like Kevin.

[@billmarvel8111]

This is the reason they are still trying to teach this. It is because the Bible never says this.

[@dominiclapinta8537]

In the other parts of the world, where God is working revival and people are knowing Jesus Christ as He should be known, there is not devine sovereignty, etc, as a cornerstone of their belief. Why? Mainly because they have encountered the True and a living God, and, they aren't rich and so, if they believe in something that isn't Biblical, then they suffer damage for it and they can't distract themselves with riches and say that divine sovereignty is true.

[@AlanaL3]

Were there people in the chat that know this pastor?

[@johntrevett2944]

Alana, don't he make the claim that a born again believers can lose salvation? Logically, those that hold to your view don't trust Christ alone, but themselves.

[@AlanaL3]

@ who? My view? What are you talking about?

[@johntrevett2944]

@@AlanaL3 Yes, you. You claim you can lose salvation. Absolute nonsense theology.

[@AlanaL3]

@@johntrevett2944 ok

[@KevinThompson1611]

I was told by other members that they recognized some member names in the live chat of the first video.

[@mebsteve47]

You’ve pointed out that others shouldn’t focus on flaws in your behavior or character. Yet you’re mocking him and his accent. I assume you don’t believe in the concept of the threeness of God. Father Son and Spirit. Well that phrase or word is not found in the Bible yet it’s true. You’re straining at gnats. I don’t believe Calvinism is doctrinal but that doesn’t mean the person has not been Born Again. I can see God’s Sovereignty within the verses provided. That to me can be worded as Divine Sovereignty. James 4: 13Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” 14Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow… 15Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” Romans 9:14-16 14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.

[@KevinThompson1611]

@@mebsteve47 Anyone who reads Romans 9:14-18 should immediately keep reading until they got to 11:32; Romans 11:32 (KJV) 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. And we are not “mocking” anyone. We are employing delivery memory markers that call attention to body language and tonality that indicate that the speaker knows that they are employing deception.

[@mebsteve47]

@ Again that verse reveals God’s Sovereignty over all. That verse lends itself to the Calvinist belief if misinterpreted. So they are closer to the Truth than whatever you believe. You have not explained what you actually believe. You are only trying to tear down their theology. It sounds to me like you’re using communist ideology to justify mocking them by redefining mocking. I don’t buy it. In my opinion you come across as a fraud. I can’t see you actually know what you’re talking about.

[@lamontfaulkner5090]

The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible, yet God is Triune. The word "Theocracy" is not in the Bible, yet Israel was a theocracy. Two concepts in the Bible, yet not the specific words coined to describe them. Is Kevin going to deny the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit because a word was coined by Turtullian in the third century as a means explain what scripture clearly teaches? Let's see?

[@KevinThompson1611]

Copying and pasting this from where I answered another low-brow on the same issue… If you’re going to say that “trinity” means that we can invent whatever we want that is unscriptural and use the wide acceptance of the “trinity” doctrine as a cover story, I’ll just copy and paste where this was already addressed under another comment on this same video: We call out this fallacious line of reasoning in the longer video. All the Calvinists appeal to it. Does that mean we can just say things that are not scriptural and use the trinity as the cover story? Can I just say that Mary was a cocaine addict and that two of the apostles were gay? You would object, “Scripture never said that?” And I would reply, “But TRINITY!!! Trinity means that we can make up whatever we want and hold on to it until we find a verse that specifically negates the claim!” That is ridiculous, and that’s what Calvinists are essentially advocating for. In reality, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. It is not the skeptic’s burden to disprove. Appealing to an adjacent and well-accepted claim is a logical fallacy. Shifting the burden of proof is also a logical fallacy. It’s important not to have a version of Christianity that consists of semantically disambiguated propositional conclusions held in dogmatic fashion. It’s important to exercise first principles thinking, epistemic humility, and the inductive method of inquiry (not to be confused with inductive reasoning, which is not good). This means that we start with a blank slate with zero presumptions each time we examine the text or evidence. This includes anything from the trinity to the incarnation. If it’s supported by the text/evidence, then it will show itself again. It’s not ours to egoically hold on to. And when our theology consists more of presumptions and popular opinion than the text, we have completely lost touch with our external authority.

[@timmartin7013]

What did we see transpire when Jesus was Baptized in the water and identified as the Only Begotten Son of God

[@KevinThompson1611]

If you’re going to say that “trinity” means that we can invent whatever we want that is unscriptural and use the wide acceptance of the “trinity” doctrine as a cover story, I’ll just copy and paste where this was already addressed under another comment on this same video: We call out this fallacious line of reasoning in the longer video. All the Calvinists appeal to it. Does that mean we can just say things that are not scriptural and use the trinity as the cover story? Can I just say that Mary was a cocaine addict and that two of the apostles were gay? You would object, “Scripture never said that?” And I would reply, “But TRINITY!!! Trinity means that we can make up whatever we want and hold on to it until we find a verse that specifically negates the claim!” That is ridiculous, and that’s what Calvinists are essentially advocating for. In reality, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. It is not the skeptic’s burden to disprove. Appealing to an adjacent and well-accepted claim is a logical fallacy. Shifting the burden of proof is also a logical fallacy. It’s important not to have a version of Christianity that consists of semantically disambiguated propositional conclusions held in dogmatic fashion. It’s important to exercise first principles thinking, epistemic humility, and the inductive method of inquiry (not to be confused with inductive reasoning, which is not good). This means that we start with a blank slate with zero presumptions each time we examine the text or evidence. This includes anything from the trinity to the incarnation. If it’s supported by the text/evidence, then it will show itself again. It’s not ours to egoically hold on to. And when our theology consists more of presumptions and popular opinion than the text, we have completely lost touch with our external authority.

[@timmartin7013]

The word "Bible" is not in the Bible

[@davidgreen-c2v]

They ALL sound exactly the same

[@ramlin35]

So God is not sovereign? 😮 Is that what you're saying? [6] If a trumpet is blown in a city, will not the people be afraid? If there is calamity in a city, will not the Lord have done it? Amos 3:6 NKJV

[@KevinThompson1611]

You have it all wrong. What I’m saying is that if you started reading a the Bible that I grew up with, and the Bible used in both Great awakenings, and wrote down all the words that it said, you’d never write down the word “sovereign.” That being the case, from where did that word coming into such common parlance among certain kinds professing Christians and not others? it’s typical for Calvinists to start with God’s presumed attributes and treat others as if they are morally inferior for not accepting the presumptions, even when scriptural accuracy is being optimized for in the objection. You are attempting that tactic here. We have been victims to narcissists in the past, but it doesn’t so much appeal to us any more. Off you go, now. Hosea 8:4 4 They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off.

[@mariusbosman9533]

' a patient cured, is a patient lost '. Calvinism's strength ( meaning influence and funding ) lays the foundation of those 2 concepts. 1. Fabricated tension mystery between sovereignty and human will. 2. ' Perseverance to the end ' you should never be in a position where your faith only, guarantee regeneration salvation. Personally thinking Calvinism is the Catholic 2.0 version.