Does Calvinism lead to Fatalism?

Dr. Leighton Flowers interacts with The Consistent Calvinist Podcast regarding the charge that Calvinism leads to Fatalism.
JOIN US FOR A LIVE CONVERSATION!
To read the article from Soteriology 101: soteriology101...
Listen to the CC podcast here: • Are Calvinists Fatalists?
To SUPPORT this broadcast please click here: soteriology101...
Dr. Flowers’ book, “The Potter’s Promise” can be found here: www.amazon.com....
Dr. Flowers’ book, “God’s Provision for All” can be found here: www.amazon.com....
DOWNLOAD OUR APP:LINK FOR ANDROIDS: play.google.co....
LINK FOR APPLE: apps.apple.com....
To ORDER Dr. Flowers Curriculum “Tiptoeing Through Tulip” please click here: soteriology101...
To listen to the audio only be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play or one of the other podcast players found here: soteriology101...
For more about Traditionalism (or Provisionism) please visit www.soteriology101.com
To engage with other believers cordially join our Facebook group: / 1806702. .
For updates and news follow us at: www.facebook/Soteriology101
Or @soteriology101 on Twitter
Please SHARE on Facebook and Twitter and help spread the word!
To learn more about other ministries and teachings from Dr. Flowers go here: soteriology101...
Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software developing needs! Show them some love for their support of Soteriology101!!!
To become a Patreon supporter or make a one time donation: soteriology101...

[@waitingandwatching9328]

I love this comment from live chat....Jordan Thornburg "​Whats funny is on calvinism all the textual variants in the bible were determined directly and deliberately by God" beautifully said.

[@gingrai00]

Great point!

[@annwolfe2620]

I have been hurt so much in the Calvinist church I’ve been in for the last 5 years. Such a lack of compassion among them Thank you you are helping so much!

[@brandons1566]

A determinist is simply a fatalist pretending to have the free will he claims not to have.

[@ShowCat1]

Almost 30 years ago Dr. Mal Couch, told me that "You will never amount to anything, you will follow in the steps of your father, everything you will try will fail," and that "there is no use in fighting it." Dr. Couch was a theologian (Calvinist) who founded Tyndale Theological Seminary and Biblical Institute in Fort Worth Texas. Some people I have told this to do not believe me, but Dr. Couch's words haunted me for almost three decades. A Calvinist minister, Rev. Stan Mcgehee, preached my mother's funeral and used the oportunity to talk about his doctrine. His attitude during the service was cavalier and insensitive. I could go on.

[@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT]

In addressing the desire of the reprobate/unsaved/unelect to only do evil under his Calvinist doctrine, R.C. Sproul was fond of saying man's "wanter" was broken... but not fond of admitting it was God that determined it to be broken.

[@sethpawlik]

We are just parsing words. Fatalism and determinism have basically the same meaning.

[@craigjoyner9857]

I agree. The fatalist is is just the logical end of determinism. If all is determined, then fatalism applied to anything in the future.

[@melissaschubert1653]

Excellent! Praying for many I know and love who will not examine these things - not seeing that it will set them FREE!!

[@a.k.7840]

So the fatalist behaves more consistently with their view. So what he's really saying is that calvinists are consistently inconsistent. Now where have I heard that before?

[@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT]

Calvinists are impervious to cognitive dissonance. It's kind of their super power😉

[@davidthomas9276]

In his boat example, Colin refers to the fatalist's and the determinist's "efforts." But if God meticulously decrees and causes those efforts, whose efforts are they, really? Doesn't it follow that no one on Earth really makes any efforts of their own?

[@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT]

Because of the contentions of their doctrine, Calvinists are forced to perpetually defend the indefensible. It's been going on for hundreds of years. The obvious objections and logical conclusions to their beliefs are both predictable and inevitable and their canned responses are well developed and choreographed, almost like a square dance. The amount of energy that has been directed at explaining away the preponderance of simple and clear scriptures which are in absolute conflict with their doctrinal claims is mind numbing. In their world, whenever scripture and Calvinism conflict it is scripture which must yield.

[@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT]

@The Quilted Gardener tks.

[@timothyhodges705]

Since fatalism is a fairly new term to me, my guess is another fatalistic statement would be, "It is what it is..." If I say that, does that make me a fatalist? Why?

[@titosantiago3694]

WOW! Again, theistic determinism self-destructs. And any who disagree with me fail to understand that in God's Sovereignty He caused me to decry theistic determinsm self-destructs entirely for His glory. So instead of disagreeing, rejoice with me that all my words are meticulously determined by God for His glory. Otherwise, you may find yourselves fighting against God's Sovereign determined will.

[@a.k.7840]

Except that God supposedly determined for them to critique what He determined for you to say... It's silly.

[@titosantiago3694]

@@a.k.7840 exactly! It's absurd...lol!

[@arkrainflood]

AMEN! however calvinists are blind to your "mic drop" argument. their response is always to multiply words. trying to get a calvinist to see the internal contradictions of their system is like attempting to nail jello to a wall. i assert that at least some calvinists are demonically deceived.

[@a.k.7840]

@@arkrainflood it definitely resembles some sort of spiritual blindness. The logical implications of their system are obvious and the problems it causes when trying to understand scripture are numerous. To this day I have yet to see a good answer from them for why God is angry at the results of his own decree. They just sort of clam up and avoid the topic.

[@dutchchic09]

That's exactly first question I had for a friend after learning what Calvinism teaches. And that was before I even heard of Provisionism or knew what Arminianism was. His answer was simply "because we're told to" But why if the elect will be saved? "It's a mystery " with a shrug.

[@tdawg135]

Where does calvin say i cant choose between coke or pepsi

[@st.christopher1155]

Calvinism says God decreed before the foundation of the world whether you will drink Pepsi or Coke and that you have no freedom to choose which one you drink. That being the case, you might as well choose beer 🍺 instead of Coke or Pepsi, as God will have decreed the beer as well. Cheers! 🍻

[@davidallin6909]

..."Free will"..."Determinism"...Do we even know what we are talking about...? I suggest that they are identical...Prove me wrong by giving me an actual illustration which will clearly distinguish between the two.( I myself have not been able to come up with one...)

[@b.rocket]

How can a person not be fatalistic believing as Calvin? I’m so confused.

[@ethankeating1644]

Fatalism has a lot of baggage even though it’s the same thing

[@beowulf.reborn]

By being illogical and inconsistent in their beliefs.

[@Rightlydividing-wx1xb]

Calvinistic preachers and teachers always preach, teach, admonish, exhort, etc. as though they "are not" Calvinists. I have heard no exception so far.

[@Maranatha7557]

Why is it that when I have interacted with Reformed Christians on social media, many times they are rude to me? They say things like “get a grip”, “sit down and shut up,” etc. I try very hard to have civil conversations when I make comments.

[@user-yv1fh3fc8y]

You can analyze the thoughts of calvinists on the matter of determinism vs fatalism all you want but in their minds, their god predetermines EVERYTHING including their lying, delusional, thoughts and doctrine.

[@DElainWashington]

When a person's belief and position is wrong, those people will stay on the defensive,so as to never allow themselves any exposure to truth and critical examination of their belief system. The calvinist will not take a deep dive introspection of Calvinism and see it stands in direct contradiction to the plain written word of God. God says"choose you this day",, the calvnist says,man doesn't have libertarian freedom. God says"you will not come to me that you might have life",,,,,, the calvnist says, you are not chosen therefore you cannot come.. Any clear minded person can easily see the tenets of Calvinism are not of God at all. It is a well devised,man inspired system that is used by Satan to cause untold confusion and to turn many from God forever. It is so sad.

[@beowulf.reborn]

The irony of the analogy with the Fatalist and Determinist in the boat is that if Determinism is true, then the Fatalist was right. It didn't matter what he did or didn't do. The Fatalist sat on his hands, whilst the Determinist threw the rope, and the guy in the water lived or died as he was Determined to do so by God.

[@a.k.7840]

The analogy unintentionally reveals that from a practical standpoint, determinism is a superfluous assumption after the choice is made.

[@Zomfoo]

Fatalism is a rational response to determinism.

[@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT]

You might say it's ...inevitable.🤔

[@beowulf.reborn]

Colin might be a "Consistent Calvinist", but Fatalists are Consistent Determinists.

[@n.holt7]

Well said.

[@n.holt7]

The part of this video where you talked about some Calvinists not even listening to your perspective reminds me of that video you did with Kevin Thompson about labels.

[@gingrai00]

I cannot help but think that many Calvinists equivocate on words like determinism or that they use them in an idiosyncratic way when describing their views and that this is the source of confusion in their minds and of disagreements that arise between Calvinists and other Christians. The Consistent Calvinist seemed to think that people who call Calvinism fatalism should stop and that these people were in error and maybe (probably) in sin. It seems to me that they should appeal to God (if determinism is true) to change the people who they are offended by… but how might they choose to appeal to God if he has not determined them to do so? Truly troubling to see our brothers trying to square a circle. I think, for what it’s worth Leighton, that you must stay focused on this most glaring and, I think, despicable aspect of Calvinism because it is the aspect of their theology that, far from glorifying God, denigrates his character. They want to ridicule or cajole, like Zack did in the side chat during the episode, to be rid of the burden they themselves insist on shouldering but they would do well to cast it off as it is not easy to carry nor light. I must say, though, that the view you described regarding the scriptures did sound a lot like a dictation theory of inspiration and it seemed to, maybe, not work with a free-will mind set. Do you think God determined Paul to write what he wrote or do you think that Paul wrote freely yet still penned the very words that God inspired? I think it is probably the latter but it sounded to me, while lies tending to your description in this clip, to be the former.

[@jackdaw6359]

I'm not quite destined enough to he a fatalist.

[@zaprowsdower]

You are obsessed with division . Look at the titles to nearly all of the content here. Non stop our side is smarter than their side. Have you ever considered sticking to the message of gospel to win souls? You think Macarthur and Sproul are evil...got it .( over and over ) Why not talk about your TX buddies Olsteen and Copeland a little and go after real damage that is being done .

[@Livingingrace]

Yes, Calvinist are Fatalist only replacing Fate(unknown cause) with some deity they call God.

[@garyknowlton8326]

Great content, Dr. Flowers.

[@Jamie-Russell-CME]

"Look at me, whatever I do is God's will." whatsoever i do, is what God wanted and decreed. Heck I may BE God? (joke)

[@davidallin6909]

John 6 clearly states that the 12 disciples were "Chosen".There is no doubt about that. But if this implies some inflexible determinism...then why did Jesus ask the question "Will ye also go away?" Also...just where did this heretical notion "free will" come from?...LEV22:18,19,21,23,29 (for starters) may provide a clue...Also...DUET30:19, NUM29:39 may be of some interest...

[@n.holt7]

There was actually a point in the history of England that most baptists there were anti-evangelism due to Calvinism.

[@AcidAdventurer]

It's hilarious his analogy assumes free will. There is no "what if" on determinism there is only "what is". The moment you ask "what if" you're assuming that the ability to change or make up your mind lies with you and not something outside of you.

[@n.holt7]

That's the problem. "If" is not a word consistent with Calvinism and yet it is a word that God seems to have no problem using. This means either Calvinism is false or God is lying.

[@grsministries9830]

They are the same, people can split hairs to justify a position but they are philosophically the same and philosophy is more at the root of calvanism than theology. The only arguable difference between fatalism and determinism is that determinism is a broader idea. Fatalism may appear to have a pejorative sense geared toward entropy and negative outcomes but consistent, authentic calvanism must embrace these along with beneficial determined events. According to dictionary definitions they are the same: Fatalism def. from Oxford: the belief that all events are predetermined and therefore inevitable. If you believe in determinism (God authors, controls and allows all events) you cannot limit God by saying he doesn't do so with the bad or evil things - people do that. You mean that God is unable to at least positively influence wicked people to change their mind to do good or preserve life? Even at the expense of his "determined-elect"? Further, if God only determines good and not bad then people are somehow able to operate outside of his determined goodness to do the bad he doesn't desire (lack of control) - so then, he has determined bad for them to be (reprobate) and do (non-reprobate) at the moment and back in the garden (can of worms). So, congruously, God determines bad and good and is both deterministic and fatalistic - in this system. Leighton is right, if you don't like this than you are calling yourself something you truly aren't, and many are doing this. I would add - probably to belong to something for your benefit (to sound smart) and not for the glory of God. The insanity required for these mental gymnastics is utterly exhausting. If this isn't works doctrine - nothing is.

[@a.k.7840]

We'll said!

[@sarahboudreault7779]

I'm a former Calvinist and love this channel. I believe that God is Sovereign like you do but I'd like to understand more about that from a non Calvinist perspective. I think God's Sovereignty and our free will is a paradox. I don't know why Calvinists can't accept that. They say that God's Sovereignty and our responsibility is a paradox. So why can't they believe in free will and God's Sovereignty as a paradox. Anyway, I'd like to know more about his Sovereignty from a provisionist perspective. For example my parents must have been meant to be married or I wouldn't be here and I was meant to be, even though she married a Catholic. Can you do a video on this?

[@peterfox7663]

"Sovereignty" means all-controlling and deterministic to Calvinists, so "God is responsible" vs "man is responsible" is not a paradox, it's a contradiction. The normal definition of "sovereignty" means God has the authority and power to rule as He pleases. "God's authority & power" vs "Man's free will" is not a paradox, and is not contradictory. God's authority is above a man's authority, and He wills that we have the ability to make our own free choices within the parameters He has set. Also, what makes you say your parents, and you, were "meant to be", and what role does the Catholicism play?

[@oracleoftroy]

Out of curiosity, what do you mean that "Calvinists can't accept that." Do you think they go too far in affirming that God established man's free will and the liberty and contingency of second causes by what he ordains (as affirmed in Westminster Confession 3.1)? Is there too much detail in their definition of human free will (ibid chapter 9)? I guess I'm not clear about what issue you have with the way Calvinists affirm both God's Sovereignty and man's free will.

[@edwardfriedrich411]

But its true, all Calvinism leads to fatalism! Let me quote from (Anton chigurh ). If The Rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?

[@garyleemusic]

Honest thoughts: If a person intentionally misrepresent a Calvinist as a fatalist, ultimately who bears responsibility for the lie that was told? Is it not God? Who ultimately intended the person’s intentions ? God Who intended for the lie to be uttered? God. Shouldn’t a consistent Calvinist recognize this? If one does, then ULTIMATELY, a consistent Calvinist should be upset with God for the misrepresentation. (Though I guess that if one was consistent then that person would not be upset to begin with realizing the person doing the misrepresentation doesn’t ultimately bear responsibility) What am I missing?

[@growingtruedisciples]

Hey God, stop determining me 🤣😂🤣!! One of the best lines on the channel.

[@gingrai00]

How bizarre to think that, on theological determinism, it was God determining such a person to be in anguish and to cry out, in the exact way, against God’s determinism… it actually would seem to make God into a being who seems something less than perfect… which is why we should avoid concluding determinism is true when we conclude that God exists.

[@growingtruedisciples]

@@gingrai00 agreed!

[@pianoboogie3935]

One interesting passage is where Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7v12 “To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)”. So, if under Calvinism, the Lord is saying through Paul it is not of the Lord how does that work?

[@oracleoftroy]

That would probably fall under human free will and the liberty and contingency of second causes established by what God ordains, as Westminster Confession 3.1 claims.

[@k7stingray]

On your view, if God knew pre-Creation the Determinist and Fatalist would have this debate while a man drowns and that they would take whatever action they would take, and he created with that knowledge, whatever it may be, wouldn't that still mean in some sense that God ordained or determined that it would occur? Wouldn't God still be responsible for it occurring in an ultimate sense?

[@robinq5511]

Colin can present his definitions ad nauseum, but its all just philosophical musings about what he doesn't really know is true. And he ends up removing all blame for his own actions or lack thereof and puts the blame on God instead - which includes his own sinful actions and desires supposedly 'for God's glory'. Perhaps he will discuss at some point the need for repentance...and why Christ died so we could be forgiven. Shouldn't we confess our sins because they are OUR own fault and not according to the will of God? I wonder what is the difference between saying "the devil made me do it" or "God planned for me to do it". Either way it puts the fault elsewhere and is a common response amongst children. Apparently even those who have attained their theistic degree. A distinction without a difference (or vs) is only a theory at best because there is no evidence to the contrary that his (Calvin's) philosphy is any less vain or deceitful because it is based on traditions of men Col 2:8.

[@undergroundpublishing]

Any arguments made about the motives involved in opposing determinism are moot next to the fact that it has no Biblical support and obstructs one from understanding the Scriptures. Everything you need to know about how free will intersects with 'divine decree' is wrapped up on Ecclesiastes 3 and the Book of Esther. Free will is simply a Biblical construct that is not only assumed, but specifically expounded upon in Esther, and unchangeably established in the Law. Determinism--in the Calvinistic sense is simply not present in Scriptures, and is the clear byproduct of eisegesis, and the injection of manmade philosophy into the Scriptures.

[@ACTSVERSE]

Theological determinism is theological fatalism. Sorry, you can't avoid the second to second, minute to minute, day to day fate God has ordained for you. When even your thoughts are said to have been decreed by God, that's fatalism. This guy is arguing as an INCONSISTENT Calvinist would view fatalism, not a CONSISTENT Calvinist. If you are a consistent Calvinist, then EVERYTHING has been immutably predetermined by God. Thoughts, words, actions, emotions, the flight of a bumble bee....every thing.....has been predetermined by God. That's resignation to the fact that there is no 'you' that can change what God is causing you to do second by second, minute by minute, day by day. And trolls like Zach Avery are exactly the reason why informed ex-Calvinists like Leighton don't take wannabe Calvinist keyboard warriors like him seriously. Stop embarrassing yourself on the chat forums, Zach.

[@2GunRock]

If you take Calvinism to its logical conclusion, every sinner whoever lived; serial killers, pedophiles, mass murderers, spree killers, even the Hitler's, Stalin's and Mao's of the world, who accounted for well over a 100 MILLION people slaughtered, ETC., can simply substitute that old; "The devil made me do it" defense, for "Don't blame me. God made me do it."

[@alexfanney9662]

Question: How could Calvinist be a brother in Christ when they have different characteristics of God, and isn't that considered a different gospel? Why wouldn't they be in the same boat as your WOF or NAR for examples bc isn't false, false? I sincerely would like to know. Thank you.

[@Manban-ed2ic]

I think most calvinist can be saved bc they get saved 1st then are duped into calvinism. You are 100% correct in that it IS a different Jesus, different gospel and different spirit.

[@Manban-ed2ic]

No but I do.

[@investinknowledge5304]

I wouldn't even say that WOF and NAR aren't our brothers and sisters. Accepting Christ as the Son of God and the ONLY hope of salvation is what places us all into the Body of Christ. What you're looking at are specific doctrines these groups may hold to that do not pertain to the essentials for salvation. And the same applies to Calvinists.

[@John-lq7hs]

@@jessethomas3979 No I don’t. There is no clear scripture that says OSAS but many that say you aren’t and even more that warn against falling away.

[@grsministries9830]

I have pondered this myself many of times. I agree with you - it seems sometimes that they see God so horribly how can they say they truly know Him? Then, in a moment of humility I ask myself - how clearly and rightly do I see God? Do I reflect my belief? Theology and praxis are two different things. Ultimately it is up to God to judge who enters His Kingdom and all of us huddle under his blanket of PROVISION of AMAZING GRACE (hesed)!

[@bradheath5464]

Agree. God gets glory for everyone who is condemned too. I know so many people who say and believe, "It does not make a bit of difference whether I come to believe or not. I am either chosen or I'm not and I can't do anything about it." Sounds "Fatalistic" to me.

[@kevinbratton670]

No🗿

[@falconguy4768]

So awesome

[@jpuddlejump]

@Soteriology101 You concede too much to him at the beginning of your video. If you go on to listen to the definitions he finds for a fatalist, you’ll see that he fits the definition of a fatalist. So his accusing Christians that call him a fatalist of being dishonest is in itself dishonest. If a person fits the definition of something, it’s dishonest to call me dishonest for saying he fits the definition of something.

[@ACTSVERSE]

THIS.

[@ShowCat1]

Calvinist double talk.

[@SquirrelOnIce]

Like “compatabilistic free will”

[@Myrdden71]

"Why should I evangelize?" "Because you don't know but that God may have planned to use you to lead them to Him." "So if I don't do it, they won't be led to Him? I can thwart God?" "Of course not!" "So they'll still be led to Him?" "Yes." "So, back to my first question...." Seems that the fatalistic determinist makes more sense under Calvinism than the non-fatalistic determinist.

[@Myrdden71]

@@jessethomas3979 Indeed, they probably would say that. Thank you!

[@Myrdden71]

@@jessethomas3979 And most of the Calvinists I know personally do encourage evangelism and support missionaries.

[@Rightlydividing-wx1xb]

A so called non fatalistic Calvinist is simply a Calvinist who ignores what he or she believes. They will simply, often, move back and forth in their mind or feelings about what they should do as a professing believer when God's teachings or doctrines are crystal clear.

[@tabazlover]

Seriously, if one speaks like a fatalist, believes like a fatalist, and behaves like a fatalist, then he probably is a fatalist regardless of the dictionary definition. The biggest issue with the calvinists/fatalists is that they "speak" the false Gospel. We should heed the voice of the Apostle Paul who said in Galatians 1:8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." So should we accurse calvinists? I believe we MUST!

[@michaelroberts3898]

I get so tired of the calvinists, like this one, going on and on about how non calvinists are intellectually dishonest and just don’t get it. Oh I get it. I completely understand these points. I just vehemently disagree. A calvinist will look at me defending atoning grace and free will and say I am probably not elect anyway so I am lost, maybe even determined to be so, by their standard. I look at them and say that any doctrine in the church beyond the simple truth of Christ on the cross and named for anyone else but Him is completely unnecessary. All the proof texting in Calvin’s favor doesn’t mean anything to me since I am reading my Bible for proof texts of Christ alone.

[@joshuagroh7958]

I used to be a determinist myself, then I realized becoming an atheist determinist was much better. Now I can say there is no God and why I sin is because there is no God.

[@n.holt7]

So basically what I learned from this video is that most Calvinists are not fatalists, but they would be more consistent if they were. More Calvinist inconsistency. What a surprise am I right? If Calvinism was true then whatever you do is God's Will so it is pointless to do anything since God will make you do it if He wants you to. Challenge for a Calvinist: Tomorrow, do not exert any effort to get out of bed and go to work. If God has determined it, then it will happened. Just go with the flow.

[@brendaboykin3281]

Thanx, Pastor 🌹🌹🌹

[@Rightlydividing-wx1xb]

If Calvinism is true then Jeremiah 7:31 is false; if Calvinism is true then 1 Samuel 23 is false; if Calvinism is true then Every author of scripture is a liar, they "all" disagree with Calvinism, from Genesis to Revelation. Even Hebrew, Greek, English, Spanish, every language the scriptures have been translated "AND" transliterated into have, has a completely improper and inappropriate "vocabulary"- willing; unwilling; reject, receive, listen, have not listened, obey, disobeyed, perhaps, etc.

[@oracleoftroy]

Jeremiah 7: 31 - "And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into my mind." Err yeah, God never once commanded child sacrifice. Just read the law and that is obviously true, regardless of "Calvinism". 1 Samuel 23 I assume this is about God knowing counterfactuals? Here's what Calvinists confess (Westminster Confession 3.2) "Although *God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions,* yet hath He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions." So no obvious contradiction with David asking God about alternate possibilities. _"if Calvinism is true then Every author of scripture is a liar, they "all" disagree with Calvinism, from Genesis to Revelation."_ I find Reformed Theology affirmed on every page of the Bible, so I obviously disagree with this claim. And interesting claim about translations, given that Calvinists are often prominent on translation boards. I wonder, have you read any of our confessions, like the Westminster Confession or the Three Forms of Unity? I wonder if you are going by some definition of "Calvinist" that only exists in the minds of ardent anti-calvinists? It's hard to see how this critique would pass muster if you tried to document exactly what we confess that is supposedly contradicted by the Bible.

[@isaiahkerstetter3142]

Chad yes.

[@mikeskrib510]

Is funny is like If I were to say I don't live in a planet I live in a blob, but I believing I don't live in a planet does not change the fact that I actually do live in a planet. Determinists do the same thing they say they are not feudalist because they live like there is no determinism but the fact is that even if they deny it they live that way because they have been determined to live that way according to their deterministic view of God. Is nonsense, (I ignore that the application has also been determined and live like it has not, even though I know that it has) lol. God Bless.

[@jordyE..]

Do provisionists believe the unbeliever has a spiritual heartbeat?

[@boluwadekujero1717]

What in the world is a spiritual heart beat? Is this another word invented to cloud truth?

[@jordyE..]

@@boluwadekujero1717 it’s just a question.. relax.. I’m referring to being spiritually alive in some sense

[@ip7101]

Define spiritually alive.

[@k7stingray]

The Bible describes unbelievers as being spiritually dead. Being spiritually dead does not mean they are physically dead or completely indifferent to spiritual matters. It means they are enemies of God who love their sin and are hostile to God and the things of God such as his people, his word, and the gospel. Until they are born again (or from above) which brings spiritual life, they remain in this wretched condition.

[@ip7101]

Thanks, so nothing new here. Just another way of saying sinners are totally unable to respond positively to the Gospel without being regenerated first. So as Boluwade suspected, a muddying of the waters.

[@Rightlydividing-wx1xb]

Calvinism is the most ridiculous of all cult type beliefs and the easiest of all cult like beliefs to refute. Calvinism has -0- evidence, refutation of Calvinism has explicit instantiation from Genesis to Revelation.

[@gojohnnygo3209]

Calvinist don't practice fatalism, they label those who do as not saved or never saved in the first place.

[@davidhickman4682]

Fatalists and determinists assume. To assume is not to believe, use YOUR faith.

[@falconguy4768]

Leighton makes a mockery out of Calvinists

[@phillipjackson1517]

You started out by saying that Calvinism could only lead to fatalism if God determined it to do so. I know you say that in a joking manner but it's not technically correct. It could be the case that Calvinism is false, and thus God is not a deterministic God, and nevertheless Calvinism still leads to fatalism because of some other reason, such as Calvinism being taught all over the internet these days or something like this. So its just not true that Calvinism could only lead to fatalism if God so determined. But what Leighton normally says us correct, which is that *IF* determinism were true, then God would have to determine for a person to be a deterninist in order for them to be one.

[@arkrainflood]

QUESTION FOR CALVINISTS: on a mere emotional level, would you not prefer that everyone has a God given freewill capable of accepting the Gospel (vs the T in tulip)?

[@peterfox7663]

I don't need to be a Calvinist to answer the question. You could substitute any idea for the one in your question - it's not really about the emotion or preferences. If God says ABC, we need to learn to accept ABC.

[@larrywaddell7332]

@@peterfox7663 Is it possible that by creating a grid through which one is supposed to interpret the Scriptures like Calvin did, that one can, by virtue of their grid, "make" the Bible say ABC when in fact it does not?

[@peterfox7663]

@@larrywaddell7332 Of course, what God does or does not say is the real question. We all have a "grid" - a means by which we interpret scripture or anything.

[@larrywaddell7332]

@@peterfox7663 So then you agree that one can create an interpretive grid through which they understand the Scriptures and that grid could be false like the Jehovah's Witnesses. It becomes destructive when that grid is used to convince people that theirs is the only possible way to understand the Bible and all others are outsiders, not to be believed or listened to. On Calvinism the outsiders are the unelected and all who reject Calvin's grid are of course the unelect.

[@arkrainflood]

@@peterfox7663 you dodge the question. anger, rage, sadness, despair, joy, happiness, are all human responses to a given set of perceived facts/ real life interpretations of events. "its not really about the emotion...God says" is hard hearted. God has decreed it is appointed for man to die, yet even Jesus was grieved at Lazarus' death.