Is PROVISIONISM The MOST CONSISTENT In Rejecting CALVINISM? | Leighton Flowers | Redeemed Zoomer

Dr. Leighton Flowers has a discussion on the differences between Provisionism and Calvinism with ‪@redeemedzoomer6053‬.
Check out the full discussion on ‪@BraxtonHunter‬here:
• The Calvinism DEBATE: ...
To get your copy of Dr. Flowers new book, Drawn By Jesus, go here: a.co/d/6s767Ey
To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: soteriology101.com/support/
Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter
Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? soteriology101.com/2017/09/22...
DOWNLOAD OUR APP:
LINK FOR ANDROIDS: play.google.com/store/apps/de...
LINK FOR APPLE: apps.apple.com/us/app/soterio...
Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software development needs! Show them some love for their support of Soteriology101!!!
To ORDER Dr. Flowers Curriculum “Tiptoeing Through Tulip,” please click here: soteriology101.com/shop/
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.com/home/
For more about Traditionalism (or Provisionism), please visit www.soteriology101.com
Dr. Flowers’ book, “The Potter’s Promise,” can be found here: www.amazon.com/Potters-Promis...
Dr. Flowers’ book, “God’s Provision for All” can be found here: www.amazon.com/Gods-Provision...
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.com/2017/09/22...
To become a Patreon supporter or make a one-time donation: soteriology101.com/support/
#LeightonFlowers #RedeemedZoomer #Calvinism

[@ChristineKenyon]

Not only is provisionism consistent, it is not the turbulent and relentless contradiction that is Calvinism.

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

What contradictions are you referring to? Be specific.

[@ip7101]

@@scienceandbibleresearch I'll take a bite (well, more like a test run for an argument I've been pondering). -God decrees whatsoever comes to pass. -God selected in secret, from before the foundation of the world, who would be saved (the elect, the ones who will be regenerated prior so as to have faith) If I had to guess, every Calvinist considers themselves a member of the elect. They believe that they can verify this, by referring to the scriptures in light of their own lives (their fruit, e.g. a good tree bears good fruit). However, what they're unwittingly doing is relying upon information that ultimately can be no assurance to their salvation. Consider the following: Secret Will:abcZ Revealed Will: ab Each of these letters represents that which is contained in the Will of God. One category is revealed to us, and the other is not. The secret will obtains everything regardless of the revealed will, so it seems appropriate to include elements from the revealed will in it. Let [a] represent anything we know is revealed. [b] is what the Calvinist may claim is revealed through scripture. [c] and [Z] are foreign to the revealed Will. Let [c] be God's secret decisions (e.g. election). Z will also be secret, but is in a category that has no consequences to abc (it is reasonable to think the possibility of another universe exists for example, but it has no bearing on what is revealed to us in scripture). If b (scripture) is supposed to to get to c (secret decision), then c will need to be under the category of revealed. It cannot be. Thus b is unreliable to determine c. Evanescent Grace is how this plays out. If you are unfamiliar with it, this is essentially where I was going from the beginning. That very outcome can be contained within c, and no one will be the wiser. Now, I have heard the objection that eventually the person will either preservere or fall away (revealing they were not elect). However, this assumes there are zero people who carry their delusion to the grave. The Bible even mentions it (e.g. Lord, Lord, did we not cast out demons and preach in your name?) A calvinist cannot know whether they were secretly determined for salvation or not. Yet many claim that they can, which insinuates they have knowledge (some might say... divine gnosis ... lol) of the secret category of God's will. I hope this finds you well, and sparks more questions. I do realize this was long, I intend to refine and condense this eventually.

[@toktik8715]

Doesn't consistent mean there are no contradictions?

[@goodshorts]

@@scienceandbibleresearchhow about God decreeing whatsoever comes to pass, even burning innocent children to idols? This is what Calvinism teaches.

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@goodshorts : Yes, but do you understand that God's decrees function in such a way that he doesn't force people to commit sin? Do agree that God's will is holy and ours is sinful?

[@avivastudios2311]

Despite the fact that Redeemed Zoomer is a Calvinist, I still adore his channel. Thanks for bringing him on. 😃

[@AndrewKeifer]

Thank you to Mr. Ackerman for his cordiality and graciousness.

[@JW_______]

Leighton Flowers is a boss. No getting around that.

[@kevinteichroeb6997]

Thank you Dr. Leighton and Dr. Hunter. And thank you Richard. It takes a lot of courage to enter this debate. And you did it with grace.

[@andrewmorgensen326]

Yes! Well done Leighton! Really well said

[@jacobbyarlay3420]

I really like Richard. Anyone else?

[@trebmaster]

He does seem more genuine than the rest. Complete opposite of a Matt Slick type of personality where you can't expect a single genuine conversation even one time.

[@johnknight3529]

I do, especially the way he often speaks of things like "Calvinistic implications" in various passages/verses, rather than speaking as if they simply must be seen as confirmations of the Calvinistic interpretations, placing the rhetorical "burden of proof" on the "negative" side of his argument. Proving negatives is generally difficult if not impossible.

[@jeffreybomba]

He is not James White debate hustler.

[@JohnSmith-tx3ys]

He seems genuine. He’s also courteous. JW could learn a lot from him.

[@daddada2984]

Hope he will not change his demeanor when he gains more fame... hope not to become james white the 2nd or 3rd or what..

[@yeshuaneitheristheresalvat8018]

If David's baby with Bathsheba was determined to eternal punishment, (because as Calvanism teaches, that baby heart was not open yet to believe, it was not even aware that it was a sinner yet) then why did the Lord allow David to exclaim "the baby will not return to me, but I will go to the baby." If that was not so, Hashem would have corrected David. Like Thomas "my Lord and my God."

[@AndrewKeifer]

One thing I see that I think a lot of people miss, though I'm not sure why that is, about the "soil types" in the parable of the sower, but also about people in general is that we have the ability to change ourselves. So it's possible for a person to be more than one type of soil throughout their lives and this change isn't solely due to outside influences, but we can influence ourselves as well, which could lead to a change in our soil type.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

What most people miss about this parable is that Jesus explains it in private, soon after He gives it.

[@alldayfacts-178]

Love you, brother. You’ve done so much, in conjunction with NT Wright, John Lennox and Michael Heiser, to put my heart at ease over this divisive doctrine that turns Yahweh into a demonic puppet master. Thank you for all your hard work and perseverance.

[@justchilling704]

Those 3 and others truly are a blessing to my understanding as well!

[@DrGero15]

Where can I see what they have to say on the matter at hand?

[@justchilling704]

@@DrGero15 All reject Calvinism. They have videos about it on KZbin.

[@DrGero15]

@@justchilling704 Links?

[@TheProvisionistPerspective]

5:30 this was the point in the discussion where we all realized they *should* have been talking about “Total Depravity” the whole time for how foundational it is to “Calvinism”

[@eclipsesonic]

Revelation 2:20-21 is a key passage that often gets overlooked in this discussion: "But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality." Obviously, God wasn't causing this prophetess to not repent, otherwise Jesus wouldn't have given her any opportunity or time to repent if He was causing her to not repent. She was the one responsible here, not Jesus.

[@oterosocram25]

We are to be like children to enter into the kingdom of Heaven, God protects them, command us to protect them and not to stumble them as Augustine has this position 😮

[@OpenUrMind777]

Dr. Flowers, I have been watching you debate and I'm encouraged to see the fruits of the Spirit in you in how you debate and address your opponents, especially Dr. White. For that I encourage you in your walk with Christ. As Paul said, we should only be looking to see Christ in each other regardless what we are doing. I also thank the Lord for you sharing your teaching. It has helped answer many of my questions about Calvinism. So far I see your understanding of the scriptures to be the right one. However, I have not closed the door on this 100%. Certainly the Apostle Paul writings are not easy to understand as Peter said :) God bless you and keep going!

[@jeffreybomba]

When it comes to the idea of hardening, the story of Pharaoh is the only one that is remotely ambiguous enough to support Calvinism. Of course God knows how it will turn out, and He tells Moses the end at the beginning. From there we either see Pharaoh hardening his own heart, or it says HIS HEART WAS HARDENED. Half way through we see God start responding be CONFIRMING Pharaoh’s heart. Instead of using all of the other examples that leave no room for Calvinism to clear up the ambiguity, Calvinists use there system to firm up to one account with ambiguity, and then use that as a hammer to bludgeon the rest into submission.

[@jeffreybomba]

The soils are predetermined? Jeremiah 4:3 uses the same picture, ‘For thus says the Lord to the men of Judah and to Jerusalem, “Break up your fallow ground, And do not sow among thorns. Circumcise yourselves to the Lord And remove the foreskins of your heart, Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Or else My wrath will go forth like fire And burn with none to quench it, Because of the evil of your deeds.’ Let me guess, God is tell us to do something He knit us together to not be able to do it, and we simply must accept what only appears to our puny minds to be a contradiction.

[@goodshorts]

Spot on.

[@goodshorts]

When God tells us to believe, this means we have the ability to believe. The belief can only occur by God’s power, because He created our minds, and gave us His word and the gospel.

[@oterosocram25]

10:19 great job Flower, that is the top friction and misunderstanding, At what point we are given the ability to believe, not who gives it, there is no argument as to who gives it.

[@martytu20]

We are called to be like the child and humble ourselves. You can train a four year old to be a chess prodigy vs a 40 year old. There are studies that show that people that become adults are far less likely to change their worldview than a child could. There is more backing for the Provisionist view in psychology than Calvinism “dead from the womb”.

[@sethpawlik]

@@martytu20 The Calvinist view of children is that they are "vipers in diapers".

[@goodshorts]

We are given ability as human beings to believe. TULIP robs this God given ability and blames God as the cause for unbelief.

[@oterosocram25]

@@martytu20 yeap

[@JacquelineHahn1]

I love to listen to Dr Flowers. however I have listened to more than enough calvinists. If I never hear Calvinism again it will be too soon.

[@HumanLarvae]

Starting with a “theology” in mind, and it doesn’t matter which one, is LITERALLY the definition of eisegesis. Zoomer AFFIRMED 100% that he practices eisegesis!

[@sweethometreasures]

"I just don't care about the council of Orange" 😂 Bingo! 🙌

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

Right on. Farmers have to prepare their fields, turn soil. 1:17

[@Saved_Qc]

I thought we were saved by faith alone, not random election.

[@avivastudios2311]

The thing he said about the Parable of the Sower is very interesting. It made me think of the people who are born in Muslim countries. They were scattered in an area without Christ...

[@goodshorts]

I think we need a clarification here. At 2:12 RZ defined judicial hardening as “God increasing one’s evil”. This seems to me to be a a contradiction with scripture where God hardens people in their existing rebellion. Giving them over. Do Calvinists think God increases evil in individual’s hearts?

[@mikelyons2831]

Of course he sights Augustine's works, the West Minster & LBC & other works of men to try & validate his theology... because it's not found in scripture.

[@littlenuggets6426]

I don't think that quoting a person makes an argument inherently weak especially when what that person is interpreting the bible. While I would agree that the bible is absolute truth I would also argue it is intellectual and not always easy to understand. For example in the past people have used the bible to justify terrible things like slavery, or the crusades. Instead I would argue that the way we can tell what is a false interpretation from a true one is by going to other people, going to church, or even reading books. That doesn't mean we shouldn't scrutinize heavily every single interpretation we get, but saying that an argument is invalid just because you don't agree with what they say and then just throwing scripture that you interpreted without scrutiny kind of makes me lean towards the other side automatically

[@marce.goodnews]

Became Catholic thanks to this channel. Now I go to Society St Pius X, to the Traditional Latin Mass.

[@zacharystarrin4039]

I know this is a debate, but it is more accurate to describe this as really good and fruitful conversation between two brothers in Christ. This really blessed me to watch and truly it is good when brothers dwell in unity on the essentials of our faith.

[@grizz4489]

He is stuck, stuck in a system , reading his presuppositions into the text. On a merry go round.

[@AardvarkBuster]

The final word, "Progress", amen to that. These discussions are very beneficial for learning -why- the different systems exist. Augustine as with many early teachers got a lot right, but also missed the mark with other things.

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

Very good conversation. 👍

[@yeshuaneitheristheresalvat8018]

The fact the Spirit shows us in the soils, is that 3 soils germinated. That's eternal life in Christ. Rewards are quite another thing. Please study the text IN CONTEXT and the difficulty disappears. Grace to you brethren.

[@jeffreybomba]

As long as you start with a base of Augustine, which just happens to be real similar to his original GNOSTIC views…..

[@jeffreybomba]

The actual soil for the third seed (heart) is never described, but instead the weeds (circumstances) are, and circumstances would not be able to affect God’s pre-determined plan.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Unless His "predetermined plan" is to allow it 😊

[@littlenuggets6426]

Dr. Hunter is a great person and the first person i watched to get into calvenism vs. armenienism, but seeing him just randomly reapear then disappear is re a lly funny to me for some reason

[@sethpawlik]

Calvinism is a belief in meticulous divine determinism over every thought, choice and event throughout human history-and according to John Piper this includes every one of your personal, besetting sins. Just think about the insidious implications of such a view. If a rapist or pedophile were to declare in a courtroom, “God caused me to do it!” we would denouce him as a liar or a lunatic. However, when a Calvinist declares more a less the same thing behind their pulpit (substituting “caused” for “decreed” or “determined”), he is extolled as being biblical!

[@manager0175]

If all things occur according to God's will (by decree, or permitting, or not preventing), then God is responsible for all evil, all suffering, all sins, and all Sin. If Calvinism is true.

[@devengen]

Leighton or anyone - ASSISTANCE PLEASE (for a friend): Can you recommend a solid Bible commentary set that is from a NON-calvinist perspective (preferably a provisionist perspective) & that goes deep enough so that it's not simply "fluff", but not TOO deep in order that a layperson can follow it easy enough? The person looking for the commentary set has no knowledge of biblical languages.

[@vitaignis5594]

Eastern Orthodoxy is the most diametrically opposing paradigm which Calvinism faces.

[@johnknight3529]

Why do you say that? (Not asking to be confrontational, I just want to hear some of your reasons/reasoning, not being very familiar myself with Eastern Orthodoxy)

[@devengen]

Joel ... or anyone: Can you recommend a solid Bible commentary set that is fomr a NON-calvinist perspective (preferably a provisionist perspective) & that goes deep enough so that it's not simply "fluff", but not TOO deep in order that a layperson can follow it easy enough? The person looking for the commentary set has no knowledge of biblical languages.

[@orandegellogaming4793]

Hello, have you covered John 3’s “water and the spirit” birth? Or John 3:18-20?

[@atdcross101]

Augustine, in his younger years, believed in human free will; he did not hold to what is now defined as "total depravity." Also, the Council of Orange 529, if I'm not mistaken, while it condemned "pelagianism," also rejected Augustine's predestinarian views.

[@manager0175]

You make a very good point. To really get a good understanding of Augustine's theology, you have to read every work of his. He deals with every topic in every work.

[@Squish-Mo]

Why is it that Calvanists can't explain Calvanism without using big words and wanting to talk over the heads of everyone. I have never had a Calvanist explain their position is simple terms.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Or from Scripture. Theyll allude to a verse, but then explain Calvinism. Kind of like rhe saying "I asked him what time it was, and he told me how to build a clock."

[@Solemn_Kaizoku]

Hey Dr. Flowers, I couldn't find a video where you exegete Romans 5:12-21. I'm sure you've referenced it in other videos, but could you walk through it verse by verse sometime?

[@manager0175]

That is one of my favorite sections of scripture. In fact, my favorite sermon of all time is from that section (You Are Accepted delivered by Paul Tillich. It can be read for free in PDF form online)

[@caman171]

Will someone please tell me why the Catholic church reveres Augustine so highly, yet they still teach we can cooperate with God? Why does the Catholic church reject calvinistic predestination?

[@justsomeguy9192-hx7jv]

They were too busy discussing Mary’s sex life or lack of one to focus on further theology.

[@sergeshmash2171]

Certainly one reason is Augustine believed in transubstantiation. He also taught that baptism is salvific and grace works through the baptiser to the one being baptised...this led to infant baptism. He also taught that depravity was passed from parent to child through the sex act, making sex itself, even between husband and wife depraved and sinful....The RCC took this up and forbade priests (the concept itself à heresy as Christ abolished the Priesthood and through his saving work brought the priesthood of believers)...and what horrific and tragic consequences this doctrine begot.

[@caman171]

@@sergeshmash2171 i totally agree brother. But stil dont understand why the Roman church reveres him as a saint if he taught that everyones destiny is already decided. And Ive never understood how some calvinists like Presbyterians and reformed churches can believe "faith alone" yet still teach that grace comes thru baptism and sacraments. Calvin demanded that ALL infants be baptized, yet he couldnt have believed that ALL infants are :"elect"! makes no sense

[@oterosocram25]

Man, this guy made the view on Calvinism much worse. So God makes life, places babies in the womb, know us from before the womb, and to think that Augustine taught that people are dammed from the womb seems a little sick

[@JohnSmith-tx3ys]

Richard is an example of a Calvinist who walks in the fruit of the Spirit. I don’t think that Calvinists are lost, as some people claim. I myself was Calvinist most of my adult life.

[@drjcw]

I told my former Calvinist pastor that he chose to be a Calvinist and I was predetermined to reject it. Both can be correct. 🙃

[@manager0175]

I am not an anti-Calvinist. I contend that one can believe all the Calvinist distinctives and be a genuine, authentic believers in Christ as Savior.

[@drjcw]

@manager0175 But only if God predetermined you to before the beginning of the world, irresistibly graced you into believing, and makes you persevere till the end of your life. You can believe that if you want to, or should I say God chose you to believe that Calvin stuff. If you are correct, then God predetermined me to reject the TULIP. I have no choice. God also predetermined me to write this to you. Baloney. But hey, have a great day, I still accept you as my brother.

[@manager0175]

@@drjcw I am not a Calvinist.

[@sergeshmash2171]

Just because the soil is hard or weedy doesn't mean God purposefully made the soils thus, right?

[@Aztshirts]

Also the sheep are those who repented at the preaching of John.

[@YeshuaSaves3]

Imagine believing aborted babies could be sent to hell. That’s true total depravity of grace and heart.

[@manager0175]

Matt Slick once said on his radio show: "If there are babies that died in infancy that go to hell, they deserve it.."

[@YeshuaSaves3]

@@manager0175 Tell me you’re lying… that’s a sick minded person.

[@manager0175]

@@YeshuaSaves3 It is absolutely true exact quote from Matt Slick.

[@YeshuaSaves3]

@@manager0175 :/

[@trebmaster]

Church of Christ culture even goes further than Provisionism against Calvinism because it is very open to open theism claims and some members are against PSA but there is a split there. Classical theism and PSA are both very foundational frameworks for Calvinism. You can't have Calvinism exist feasibly without those 2 pillars, but most Baptists accept both.

[@caman171]

I think PSA is interpreted differently by most Baptists. They might use the same words, but being a Baptist from "birth" I never heard anything said that even comes close to the calvinistic concept which says God MUST have an object of his wrath. We were always taught that Christ took our place (substitution) but that the suffering of the cross was a "consequence" of our sin. In other words Christ bore the consequences. It was never thought of as retribution or punishment, it was seen as justice. So Christ bore in his body the pain of sin, then the Father turns away which is our separation from God, and he goes to the grave, the final consequence of sin. I have never understood the concept of "sovereignty" from the calvinistic view. If that view is correct, why cant God just choose to forgive without any atonement? thats what islam basically teaches. So I see the cross as God saying, that he will accept the pain and consequence of sin on our behalf, IN ORDER TO DEMONSTRATE his love for us.

[@DamonNomad82]

True! I'm a member of the independent Christian Churches and Churches of Christ (also from the Restoration movement and very similar to the CoC except that we use those eeeeeeeeeevil musical instruments) and I have never heard of any of the Restoration Movement churches being in any danger of being taken over by stealth Calvinism. Like Provisionists, we utterly reject the heretical false doctrines of Augustine of Hippo, but unlike them, we don't have the doctrine of OSAS in common with Calvinists (yes, there are differences in the details between OSAS and the "P" of "TULIP", but the main idea is the same) to let the Calvinists get a foot in the door.

[@drjcw]

​@@caman171Well said.

[@caman171]

@@drjcw thank you friend

[@caman171]

@@DamonNomad82 well you are wrong about Restoration churches not being in danger from stealth calvinism. "yourcalvinist" channel's Keith Foskey grew up in a "Christian Church and he turned the church calvinist. there are also examples of CoC churches having members becoming Primitive Baptists

[@michaelfaber6904]

Open Theism with provisionism would be better

[@atdcross101]

Aren't Catholics Augustinian?

[@manager0175]

Today's RCC parts company with Augustine on many topics.

[@yeshuaneitheristheresalvat8018]

With respect, Lord Jesus would be a liar and by saying "...and you will not come to me that you might have life," if He was the one that forced them not to come to Him by creating them that way. Please study in context. He DID SAY, "YOU" WILL NOT COME TO ME." AND THAT MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE. YOU WILL NOT, NOT I CREATED YOU NOT TOO..

[@manager0175]

Rather than calling Provinsionism "more consistent" I'd call it "less contradictory" than Calvinism. IMHO neither one is consistent. But Calvinism is explicitly contradictory on at least 3 levels.

[@shanelozoya9287]

Yeah the first soil is hardened and sees no life. What do the next 3 soils have in common...go ahead I'll wait.

[@stevebaughman1163]

Way off on the soil idea! Calvinism says men are DEAD and unable to respond at all! Several soils responded to a certain degree.

[@ip7101]

First? Lol

[@acsberean4092]

No, the Bible is.

[@pwx13]

Once saved always saved needs to be rejected

[@Laugical]

Whoever eats this bread shall never hunger. Whoever drinks this water shall never thirst. Whoever believes in me shall never die. If you can believe in Jesus and then still die spiritually, Jesus was a liar. I for one do not think Jesus was a liar.

[@jasonhussong1378]

If that has to be rejected, you would also have to reject Christ’s finished work on the cross. Either the work itself all together or the effectivity of it.

[@virginiahernandez1329]

no someone can get saved as a child an stay with God till they die, OSAS it can happen. But we know the bible has warnings for a reason.

[@virginiahernandez1329]

@@jasonhussong1378 FALSE WE read all the scriptures not parts.

[@virginiahernandez1329]

@@Laugical then ignore the warnings