The PRESUPPOSITION That PREVENTS CALVINISTS From RIGHTLY Understanding ROMANS 9 | Leighton Flowers

This presupposition keeps Calvinists from understanding the true context of Romans 9...
Check out the full episode here:
• Romans 9: Is there Unr...
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 #Calvinism #Romans9 #Theology

[@fabriciofla8019]

Honestly, the calvinistic interpretation of Romans 9 makes 0 sense if you keep reading through chapters 9, 10 and 11. The argument Paul is making is so abundantly clear in those three chapters that it baffles me that a lot of people read that and believe Paul is talking about calvinistic doctrines. Like, what??

[@TimWismer]

I assume you mean because Romans 9-11 is talking about Israel as a whole? If so, you are right, but this doesn't negate the fact that Romans 9-11 is also talking about the salvation of individuals, both Jew and Gentile. Consider, for example, the fact that Paul talks in Rom 11:5 about the "remnant according to the election of grace", who were individuals chosen for salvation amongst the larger group of Israelites who were not saved, even though they were chosen ("elected") as a group. Both corporate election (for Israel), and individual election are interwoven through Paul's discussion in chapters 9-11. Corporate election is not saving (though there are those within that group who are saved), but individual election is saving, for both Jews and Gentiles. If this isn't the case, and Romans 9-11 is just talking about Israel as a whole, then who is Paul talking about when he speaks of the "vessels of mercy, which [God] had prepared beforehand for glory . . . not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles" (Rom 9:23-24)? After all, the rest of Rom 9-11 makes it clear that not all Israel will be saved.

[@dustinpaulson1123]

It's because context kills Calvinism. It's built from prooftexts out of context.

[@Drspeiser]

Yes, just like with any other doctrine inspired by a spirit of error! Just keep reading

[@benanderson4118]

@@TimWismerGod chose to use Israel for his redemptive purposes when he chose Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and said he would make them a great nation which would be a blessing to the world (Gen. 12:1-3). Examples are Joseph, Jonah and Daniel. After some 2000 years, Israel rejected their responsibility as God's nation on earth. Before his death at the hands of Jewish leaders, Stephen declared to Israel as a people, “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him-you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.” Romans 9-11 is explaining God's right to choose to raise up Abraham and his nation and then harden or blind the nation when they failed to accomplish the purpose for which he had made them. The potter reference comes directly from Jeremiah when the potter decided to form a better pot out of a marred lump of clay, “Then the word of the LORD came to me. He said, “Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?” declares the LORD. “Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel” (Jer. 18:5-6). The reference is to Israel as the people of God. Of course there was a remnant of Jews who did believe Jesus was the promised Messiah. They could continue to worship God even though the nation together with her temple, priests, covenants and even the land would be taken away for a time. Romans 9:22-24 is a reference to the body of Christ which is made up of Jews and Gentiles who become one body in Christ. Paul is symbolically calling Israel "objects of wrath" and the body of Christ "objects of mercy." In Eph. 3:1-3 Paul calls his ministry among the Gentiles an "administration of grace." God will form a new pot out of Israel in the future, as Paul explains at the end of Rom. 11, “and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins”” (Rom. 11:26-27).

[@meowpurrrrr]

What??? You can't bring in chapters 10 and 11, that's off topic! 😉

[@elteacher6410]

When I cane across this Soteriology 101 channel, I was immediately edified by the clarity of the teaching, and I have been blessed through brother Leighton Flowers' ministry. If he had done this work several years before, and then had stopped, I wouldn't have found it. The need for clear teaching about salvation (soteriology) will not disappear now that a few followers of this channel "have had enough" of this. My personal hope is for this work to continue until our Lord and Saviour comes again. If LF were to stop before the 2nd coming, I pray that somebody as passionate and dedicated will continue this valuable work. Those who "have had enough" are (have always been, will always be) free to move on.

[@johndisalvo6283]

Agree 1000%. Let them move on and tell somebody else what God’s will for their ministry should be!!!

[@elaineauo]

God bless you Brother Leighton!

[@jjphank]

OSAS Hebrews 6:18. ..It is impossible for god to lie. 3 verses in the Bible say your name can be blotted out of the book of life, for 3 various reasons; Psalm 69:28, revelation 3:5, 22:19! Never receiving Jesus is not the only way to go to hell Says Matthew 7:21-23 ; verse 23 ‘away from me I never knew you’ does not apply to everybody, Jesus says this twice in verses 21 and 22! “Not everyone will say to me (on that day)……., yes many will say…..” If OSAS was true he would’ve said “everyone and all” instead of “not everyone and Many”! So not everyone will go to hell based on never knowing Jesus, and other verses will back this up as well! you can no longer use Matthew 7:23 to say they were never saved to begin with! Same with 2 Peter 2 “after knowing the Lord, they went back into their vomit as a dog; or back into the mud as a pig wallowing in the mud”. The word ‘knowing’ is the same word “knew” in Matthew 7:23, it’s ‘ginosko’ in the Greek- it’s a salvific relationship with Jesus! So you can lose your salvation, says this verse as well! 2 Peter 2:20 “If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning!” THEY ARE ENTANGLED IN THE CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD…AGAIN- says this verse! Jude 12 - “twice dead”; Dead in sin, born again, dead again! And there’s many more; Revelation chapters 2 & 3 are full of ultimatums and all Jesus is focused on is our works! Revelation 2: 5 Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place! Revelation 2:14 there are some among you….. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. These are just 2 and Jesus says “he who overcomes” , Overcomes is present active- future tense, and Jesus says this to all 7 churches, even the 2 good ones! You have to stay faithful to the end of your life to go to heaven! John 3:16 is he who believes, or continues to believe will have eternal life! it doesn’t say ‘believed’ past tense, you have to maintain your faith to go to heaven! The Greek word ‘believes’ is ‘Pistis’ which basically means faithfulness so faith equals faithfulness, according to the Bible! So if you have problems with this, then you have problems with the word of God, the Bible! You need to study these passages so that you can make it to heaven! If your pastor cannot answer these questions according to what I just said, then you need to leave that church!

[@edinmo5399]

Well said. I have been a contributor to Leighton's ministry for a year now and have considered stopping because it seems it's always about Calvinism and/or James White. Then I thought, what a valuable ministry, thank our Savior for servants who are willing to take on that erroneous teaching at every level from the scholarly debater to the infant believer. I will continue to contribute.

[@johndisalvo6283]

@@edinmo5399. Amen! It’s very important!!!!

[@warrenreels864]

I love this. It makes so much more sense. Thank you, Dr. Flowers.

[@TimWismer]

It makes so much sense because, as Leighton pointed out, predestination strikes us all as "intuitively unjust." But the fact that it strikes us that way doesn't make it false. Leighton rightly points out that everyone finds predestination offensive. Yet, there are those who receive it because it is taught clearly throughout Scripture. This is why Paul goes to such great lengths to explain it in Romans 9-11, and why Paul doesn't try to use reason to justify God's behavior, but rather says, "God has the right to do whatever He wants with us" (Rom 9:21). Coming to grips with predestination is very hard, and you may actually find it impossible to balance it with God's love. But all things are possible with God. God's love is taught throughout Scripture, and is seen most clearly in Christ's sacrifice on the cross. So, also, is God's sovereignty (if we are willing to accept what is plainly taught in the Bible). We are not required to reject predestination in order to affirm the love and mercy of God. And we should not suggest, as Leighton does, that when the Bible teaches predestination it doesn't mean what it says. Ask God to help you receive what He has said, even if it is hard to understand. And ask Him to show you His love in a way that is undeniable, regardless of whether you understand His sovereignty.

[@lindajohnson4204]

@@TimWismer Predestination of specific things, such as the cross: the Bible clearly teaches it. Predestination of ecery thou g ht, word and deed, of natural phenomena, etc. Including who it is Fods pleasure to save, and who He doesbt wabt to save, predestined to be lost: the Bible doesnt teaxh this. It is the predestination doctrine of

[@jjphank]

@@lindajohnson4204 predestination of people is only for groups, never individuals! OSAS Hebrews 6:18. ..It is impossible for god to lie. 3 verses in the Bible say your name can be blotted out of the book of life, for 3 various reasons; Psalm 69:28, revelation 3:5, 22:19! Never receiving Jesus is not the only way to go to hell Says Matthew 7:21-23 ; verse 23 ‘away from me I never knew you’ does not apply to everybody, Jesus says this twice in verses 21 and 22! “Not everyone will say to me (on that day)……., yes many will say…..” If OSAS was true he would’ve said “everyone and all” instead of “not everyone and Many”! So not everyone will go to hell based on never knowing Jesus, and other verses will back this up as well! you can no longer use Matthew 7:23 to say they were never saved to begin with! Same with 2 Peter 2 “after knowing the Lord, they went back into their vomit as a dog; or back into the mud as a pig wallowing in the mud”. The word ‘knowing’ is the same word “knew” in Matthew 7:23, it’s ‘ginosko’ in the Greek- it’s a salvific relationship with Jesus! So you can lose your salvation, says this verse as well! 2 Peter 2:20 “If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning!” THEY ARE ENTANGLED IN THE CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD…AGAIN- says this verse! Jude 12 - “twice dead”; Dead in sin, born again, dead again! And there’s many more; Revelation chapters 2 & 3 are full of ultimatums and all Jesus is focused on is our works! Revelation 2: 5 Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place! Revelation 2:14 there are some among you….. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. These are just 2 and Jesus says “he who overcomes” , Overcomes is present active- future tense, and Jesus says this to all 7 churches, even the 2 good ones! You have to stay faithful to the end of your life to go to heaven! John 3:16 is he who believes, or continues to believe will have eternal life! it doesn’t say ‘believed’ past tense, you have to maintain your faith to go to heaven! The Greek word ‘believes’ is ‘Pistis’ which basically means faithfulness so faith equals faithfulness, according to the Bible! So if you have problems with this, then you have problems with the word of God, the Bible! You need to study these passages so that you can make it to heaven! If your pastor cannot answer these questions according to what I just said, then you need to leave that church!

[@TimWismer]

​@@meowpurrrrr I watched the whole video. The passage doesn't talk about judicial hardening until Rom 11:7. That doesn't mean that Paul couldn't have been thinking about that issue when he put the question of God's justice in the mouth of the Interlocutor in 9:14, but I don't think that's what is going on here. I think the question of God's justice is this: "How can God be just if His chosen people, Israel, end up condemned and not saved? Is God's choice of Israel therefore of no effect? Has God not fulfilled His promise?" I think this is not only the question being asked in Rom 9:14, but I think the same basic question is asked (in slightly different forms) in Rom 3:3 and Rom 11:1. So I think the larger context of Romans 9-11 is actually introduced at the start of chapter 3, is picked back up in Rom 4:9-17 (see esp. 4:13 and compare to Gal 4:21-31), and then resumes in earnest in chapter 9. And the overall answer that is given is that the promise given to Abraham did not apply to all his physical descendants (see Gal 4:21-31), or even to all of Israel, but only to Abraham's "seed", which refers specifically to Jesus, and by extension, those who are "in Christ." Since it is those who have the faith of Abraham (4:16) who are counted his "seed", and most of Israel pursued righteousness as if it were by law rather than through faith (9:31), most of Israel will be lost. But this does not prove God unjust or unfaithful. It just shows that most of Israel did not understand the nature of the promise or who it applied to, and as a result tried to take hold of the promise through their own efforts, rather than by receiving it by grace. As for predestination of individuals, Paul speaks at the start of chapter 11 of "a remnant according to the election of grace" (verse 5). Paul cites the example of the 7000 that God had "reserved for [Himself" (v. 4), and says that "at this present time" there still exists a remnant (v. 5) who are elect (i.e. predestined). In other words, within the larger group of Israel who are elect in a corporate sense (God's "chosen" people -- see 11:28 for the election of Israel as a whole), there are a certain number of elect individuals who have been "prepared beforehand for glory" (9:23). In other words, "reserved for Himself". This is true, however, not just of individuals within corporate Israel, but also of elect Gentiles. Paul says this specifically in 9:23, referencing "the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory . . . not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles". But how can God destine people to heaven or hell before they have done anything good or bad, and still be just? I agree with Leighton that this seems intuitively unjust. But so does eternal Hell, which the Bible also clearly teaches. We cannot rely on our intuition to tell us the truth on such matters -- we have to trust the Word of God. We are not really capable of fully reconciling such things, which is why part of the answer given by Paul is, "Who are you [a fallen and limited human] to talk back to God?" (9:20). And also, Paul basically says, "God has the right do do whatever He judges to be right" (9:21). This is fundamentally the same response God gave to Job in chapters 38-41, where He refuses to justify His actions and instead asks Job a series of questions that Job has no ability to answer, in order to prove that He and Job are not on a level playing field. And despite not getting the answer he wanted, Job was satisfied with God's response, as indicated in Job 42:1-6. His intellect hadn't received a satisfactory answer, but now "his eye had seen" God, and he felt no more need to question God's justice. Ultimately I think this is what we are all seeking when we dig into these issues with our intellects -- what we are truly after is the personal and experiential knowledge of God, which does not puff up (1 Cor 8:1), but rather rests in the assurance of His love and goodness not because the doctrine has been proven, but because His presence is what really satisfies (e.g. Rom 8:15-17). Sorry for the long answer. I like your handle, by the way.

[@larrybedouin2921]

The key is that God hardened the Jews in their unbelief. He did not cause them to not believe. The opposite is actually true.

[@ingela_injeela]

And now, He is at work softening Jewish hearts toward the Gospel. The fig tree is bearing fruit!

[@Tim.Foster123]

Help me out: where does it say that He didn't cause them to not believe? I don't know of any verse that says that, but maybe you have one I can look at. (In the mean time, you might want to check out Isaiah 63:17)

[@larrybedouin2921]

@@Tim.Foster123 The scriptures in order to be properly understood must be understood from the point of view of God's freedom and mans responsibility, not from the pretext of God's Sovereignty and mans predestination.

[@Tim.Foster123]

​@@larrybedouin2921 Rightly understood, there is no difference between "God's freedom" and "God's Sovereignty" nor "man's responsibility" and "man's predestination". God's Sovereignty entails His freedom (and vice versa) Man's responsibility is not independent of his predestination (and vice versa) That being said, I do believe you're presenting a false dichotomy.

[@Tim.Foster123]

@@larrybedouin2921 But for argument's sake, let's assume there is a distinction between God's sovereignty and His freedom. Where do we see in Scripture that we must understand it from the POV of His freedom and not from the POV of His Sovereignty? (I'm not aware of any passages that would suggest this. Perhaps you have something specific in mind). Thanks.

[@Yaas_ok123]

We need Provisionist Study Bible !

[@TimWismer]

The primary function of any Study Bible is for someone to usurp the role of the Holy Spirit in teaching Scripture to us. If we rely on the notes below the Biblical text to tell us what the Bible means, we are denying the Spirit His proper place in teaching us, and letting a man do it instead. It's best to use a Bible that only contains the words of God, and to use commentaries and the like sparingly, but separately. Please consider 1 John 2:26-27, John 16:13-15, and 1 Cor 2:9-16.

[@Yaas_ok123]

@@TimWismer I am not denying that text may and should speak by itself. Most study bibles are reformed or calvinistic leaning. Just hope that provisionistic view would also have a voice in that "genre".

[@TimWismer]

@@Yaas_ok123 I think it is hard to read the text without consulting the "meaning" in the notes below. Having said that, your response is fair enough! May God bless your studies in His Word and always "open your eyes to see wonderful things in [His] law!" (Ps 119:18).

[@IveSeenSupernatural]

im 34 ive come to realize age means almost nothing when it comes to spiritual growth.. pride and ego still holding esteemed men like jame white etc back...humility is such an important trait to never let go of.. professing to be wise the became fools smh..lots of spiritual road blocks ppl never get over.. stay strong Bros and Sis's

[@redeemed2517]

Amen, my friend. I’m 50 and I agree with you. I’ve been saved for a little over seven years and I’m learning everyday. There’s a certain smugness that I get from men like White, MacArthur,Baucham and the like. I don’t have everything figured out and I never will. I’m not a scholar by any means but I do know that I have eternal life because I believe God’s record concerning His Son and I believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It’s all because of His finished work on the cross. If that’s not enough by man’s standards than so be it. I have found the peace in Jesus Christ that I had been searching for. He is my rest. God bless you, my friend!

[@ProfessorV.]

This is a very needed ministry. As an academic, I struggled for years with accepting a Calvinistic view, precisely because I saw its fatalism when taken to its logical conclusion. Calvinism appeals to a kind of lofty intellectualism and if you can accept its initial premises, locks you in logically to its system of theology through carefully selected versus that strongly argue in its favour. Unfortunately, it also undermines the very character of God, leaving one with a dark and depressed view of our sovereign and it was this result in conjunction with the full counsel of God's Word that always caused me to avoid it as spiritually dangerous. I reject the two positions of Arminianism and Calvinism as the only two answers but live instead with the tension between human free will and God's sovereignty as an inscrutable thing. It is ironic to me that so many Calvinists are hyper-literal in their select verses while rejecting a literal six day creation some 6,000 years ago and denying God's sovereign election in fulfilling His promises to the nation of Israel. Could it be that their over-spiritualized hermeneutics in these other areas similarly impacts their reasoning in matters of salvation? Calvinistic teachers like John Macarthur stand as an exception to this rule, but most reformers, like Sproul who waffled on the creation question, would have presented a more main-stream position, especially in eschatology reminiscent of what I call residual Catholicism given their replacement theology or its softer cousin, covenant theology.

[@londonderrry]

"Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, That he may dwell in thy courts: We shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple" (Psalm 65:4.)

[@bornagainbeliever1429]

Keep sharing the good news Leighton!! God is using you to reach the blind- God bless you 🙏🏻

[@normmcinnis4102]

I don't see any love in Calvinism. I notice also that God's " sovereignty is actually erased if one follows the trail. Also, if" regeneration preceded faith" then the point of God's exercise is gone.

[@alomax92]

I recently left a Calvinist church who had 77 statements of what they teach and not once was the love of God mentioned in those 77 statements...

[@lindajohnson4204]

Dr McGee devoted a couple of _Saturday Q & A's_ to explaining why he sometimes called himself a Calvinist (it was a complicated historical reason, made worse by the fact that if he'd said he wasn't a Calvinist, he'd be thought to be against salvation by grace through faith, and if he tried to explain his position, he'd never have time to preach anything else). Also, he loved his teacher at Dallas Seminary, Lewis Sperry Chafer, who was a moderate (for that day) Calvinist, and as a kind man, Chafer was able to make it sound better than it would have, otherwise. But he talked about how miserable he was in seminary, and the liberal Presbyterian one in Decatur, Georgia was worse, in some ways, than Dallas would be. But the required reading at Dallas was wearying and disappointing (kind of "witheringly" dry, I imagine) He said just that: he had to read every word of Calvin's interminable _Institutes,_ then finally that was done, but beginning through to the end, there was no love in it. Then he had to read all of Matthew Henry, which I believe he said was better in some ways, but if anything, even drier and lacking any interest in or expression of love than Calvin had been. And there were others, of course, but those were two of the longest, driest texts, so there were long stretches without a word about God's love, and this notable lack of interest throughout the whole so-called discipline, was very discouraging and depressing. The thing is that he took his faith and salvation very seriously. He had not been raised in a religious family, although his late father had insisted he go to Sunday school. When a school friend's father explained the gospel to him, he was so willing to hear, and amazed and grateful for what he heard., and he believed and was saved, and it was all a miracle to him. Love was at the very heart of the gospel, yet when they were supposedly being equipped to handle the word of God (soundly, honestly, and theologically safely) to preach God's word, love wasn't even important enough to say a word or two about it? That's why he always said "Christianity is not a religion, but a Person", and "Christianity is a love story, about God's love for us, and our love in return". It is difficult to understand why they wouldnt notice that leaving love out of the equation could be a way to faithfully teach or understand Him (impossible to understand, because it doesn't make sense). Love is God's interest even more than our own. He said "God IS love", not us. So how can Jesus be taught about or understood if we leave out love?

[@truthseeker5698]

So true , devoid of so much are its adherents. A troubled tribe , especially the young upper HS /college aged ones.

[@jjphank]

@@lindajohnson4204 actually, Arminianism is the right belief, people can walk away from their salvation! OSAS Hebrews 6:18. ..It is impossible for god to lie. 3 verses in the Bible say your name can be blotted out of the book of life, for 3 various reasons; Psalm 69:28, revelation 3:5, 22:19! Never receiving Jesus is not the only way to go to hell Says Matthew 7:21-23 ; verse 23 ‘away from me I never knew you’ does not apply to everybody, Jesus says this twice in verses 21 and 22! “Not everyone will say to me (on that day)……., yes many will say…..” If OSAS was true he would’ve said “everyone and all” instead of “not everyone and Many”! So not everyone will go to hell based on never knowing Jesus, and other verses will back this up as well! you can no longer use Matthew 7:23 to say they were never saved to begin with! Same with 2 Peter 2 “after knowing the Lord, they went back into their vomit as a dog; or back into the mud as a pig wallowing in the mud”. The word ‘knowing’ is the same word “knew” in Matthew 7:23, it’s ‘ginosko’ in the Greek- it’s a salvific relationship with Jesus! So you can lose your salvation, says this verse as well! 2 Peter 2:20 “If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning!” THEY ARE ENTANGLED IN THE CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD…AGAIN- says this verse! Jude 12 - “twice dead”; Dead in sin, born again, dead again! And there’s many more; Revelation chapters 2 & 3 are full of ultimatums and all Jesus is focused on is our works! Revelation 2: 5 Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place! Revelation 2:14 there are some among you….. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. These are just 2 and Jesus says “he who overcomes” , Overcomes is present active- future tense, and Jesus says this to all 7 churches, even the 2 good ones! You have to stay faithful to the end of your life to go to heaven! John 3:16 is he who believes, or continues to believe will have eternal life! it doesn’t say ‘believed’ past tense, you have to maintain your faith to go to heaven! The Greek word ‘believes’ is ‘Pistis’ which basically means faithfulness so faith equals faithfulness, according to the Bible! So if you have problems with this, then you have problems with the word of God, the Bible! You need to study these passages so that you can make it to heaven! If your pastor cannot answer these questions according to what I just said, then you need to leave that church!

[@TimWismer]

This is a worthwhile point. I also really like @lindajohnson4204's comments and truthseeker5698. I became a Calvinist in college, and according to the 5 points, I still am one by most standards (though I believe 4.5 of the points -- don't ask). But soon after I became one, I realized that I had become proud about what I "knew." This was confusing to me because Calvinism says that everything comes by grace, and therefore I recognized that whatever I "knew" was from God, and therefore I shouldn't be proud about it. I saw the contradiction between what should have been in my heart, and what actually was. Like the lack of love, this lack of humility is a common occurrence in Calvinists. I've spent a lot of time contemplating this "bad fruit" of Calvinism, and I watch videos like these to see if I'm missing something. And I've come to conclude that there are at least 4 big problems with Calvinism, and they are not with the doctrines themselves: 1) Calvinism, as a system of thought (rather than individual doctrinal beliefs), becomes a filter through which a person reads the rest of the Scripture, so that it becomes difficult for him to read many parts of the Bible for what they actually say (e.g. Ezek 18:23 that God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked"). This is not only true of Calvinism, but any system we develop and then use as a shortcut to interpret Scripture without taking the time to truly understand. 2) Most Calvinists are intellectuals and/or academics (especially the rabid ones), and we know that "knowledge puffs up" (1 Cor 8:1). This verse is not speaking of the personal/experiential knowledge of God, but intellectual knowledge. Any person whose faith is founded on their intellect will struggle with pride. Incidentally, and ironically, the Bible says that being intelligent and learned is actually a hindrance to being saved (see Luke 10:21 and 1 Cor 1:18-22). 3) Calvinism, for whatever reason, is not typically advocated by casual Christians. It is typically advocated by zealous Christians who are especially religious (in the negative sense where a person is trying really hard to prove themselves righteous). But this kind of religion invariably produces pride and judgmentalism (see Romans 2, for e.g.). 4) Calvinism is not an overall theology (there are many aspects of God's nature that it doesn't speak to). As a result, it doesn't talk about God's heart towards sinners, and things of that nature. This is not a criticism, but just to say that Calvinism is specifically about God's sovereignty over human salvation, and doesn't speak to man's responsibility or other issues. As such it paints a decidedly incomplete picture of God. And if a person fixates on that picture (as Calvinists unfortunately tend to do), he starts to think of God as the "hard man" of Matthew 25:24. They err, in essence, at the opposite end of the spectrum from a person who constantly talks about the love of God, but won't ever face the reality of God's wrath against sin. My conclusion is that the fundamental doctrines of Calvinism are actually correct, not because we should listen to Calvin, or Luther, or Augustine, but because the Bible teaches them. However, Calvinism as a system, and most Calvinists, do indeed suffer from what I call "harsh man syndrome", where they see God as harsh, and dark, and unloving, and austere. I don't think the 5 points actually demand such a view of God, but I think the types of people who usually adopt them tend toward this kind of view. Their view of God becomes a negative testimony for the "doctrines of grace", much in the same way that the deceit of false prophets is a negative testimony for the merits of genuine prophecy (if you reject the idea that prophecy is for today, the analogy should still work for the sake of argument).

[@philly5330]

It's starting to sink in for me Leighton, thank you! Keep repeating, teaching, and pursuing legitimate interpretations for these passages. It is helpful to have an accurate interpretation of Scripture that does not lead to God being the source of evil and a view that is logically consistent. Thanks again!

[@venutt65]

I just found this channel and subscribed. As a layman teacher I just published a book titled “What Can A Corpse Do?” Largely due to Reformed doctrines starting to be lobbied in my own congregation which I will not name. I would love to get some honest reviews. If you have a kindle subscription it costs nothing. I did invest a lot into the production of it, but hope the Lord will be blessed, and that people might understand how loving our God is. I am grateful for your efforts as well.

[@FilthyBadger]

What can a corpse do?

[@BigGuy86ed]

The idea that God needs to push a man made doctrin that the destinctives all come from outside of scripture is ridiculous. It's a good thing that there are calvanist to set God correct on what he clearly says in his word.

[@TimWismer]

Predestination/election and the sovereignty of God are not doctrines brought in from outside of Scripture. They are found throughout the Bible, both Old and New Testaments. If you do a word study on predestination, or election, you will not be short on verses to investigate. One doctrine that IS brought from outside Scripture is free will. Every mention of free will in Scripture merely means "voluntary." The philosophical idea that we are "free" (in the sense of "capable") to respond to the gospel is found nowhere in Scripture, and is refuted by the fact that we are "slaves to sin" (Rom 6:17-6:20 -- note that in v. 17 God is credited with our obedience). Two primary reasons that people don't like the Biblical truth about predestination: 1) We don't realize that without God predestining some, none would be saved (Eph 2:1-10). 2) We value autonomy so much that we actually hate the idea of God making us eternally happy in heaven, if that happiness is forced on us.

[@BigGuy86ed]

@TimWismer Sovereignty isn't a word used in the Scripture. It is a word Agastinianisms use to infer determinism on God's part while applying a moral framing of it. Christian do hold to biblical election which is to service and blessing every time in scripture, not to salvation. Also, biblical predestination which is the adoption, the glorification of the believer future tence. Again no one is predestined to salvation or dambnation. We reject the Agastinian perversions of election and predestination. There is no doctin of free will. A Christian holds to biblical athourity rejecting Agastinian philosophy of the will. God clearly and perfectly says who it pleases Him to save. And he dose not need a calvanist to clear it up for Him. ‭1 Corinthians 1:21 KJV‬ [21] For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

[@philipatoz]

I can tell you exactly why theologians like Piper, Sproul and White won't reconsider that there is another option to what the Apostle Paul was thinking - it's because Five Point Calvinism is their hill to die on! People who have built their careers and followings around flying the flag of Calvinism - if they were to have a change of mind on their determinism, they would lose their ministries, be ostracized - they'd be cast out by those in the Reformed church, seen as traitors, as blasphemous, etc. The cost is so high that these Calvinists are terrified to reconsider. And so, they won't. It's terribly sad. It's been 25 years ago, but I can vividly remember when I first truly understood Calvinist / Reformed teachings and considered their implications (if true) for humanity. And so, I was greatly disturbed. It made me question God's goodness, His fairness and love. Those teachings disturbed my very soul! And so it became my mission to learn the truth. And then I found Norman Geisler's excellent book - "Chosen but Free!" WHAT a blessing and so many understandings it gave me! And then I further realized these Calvinists were slandering God, as well as hurting the cause of his Great Commission. And yet, many of these Calvinists are wonderful people, but they are absolutely brainwashed and blinded by the doctrines of Calvinism! It's amazing to me that they aren't disturbed to believe that God supposedly has condemned to Hell billions of people BEFORE they were even born, much less yet had ANY sin or guilt, and that he only desired and orchestrated for them to experience lives of misery, trapped in sin, and to further be doomed toward eternal separation and punishment. HOW they can glue such a belief to the unfathomable love and suffering of Jesus on the Cross, the God who said to love EVERYONE as themselves - even their ENEMIES - is simply mind-boggling. My belief is that many in Reformed churches don't truly understand their doctrine, nor comprehend what such a horror would mean for most of mankind.

[@sheilasmith7779]

@philipatoz: If calvinists understood the root of their belief is Augustine's own answer to, the existence of evil. Not the biblical answer, Augustine's explanation. And coupled with that was Augustine's grave concern over Christians "boasting," of their salvation. He invented an answer for both issues: 1. Evil exists to glorify God. 2. Humans are incapable of doing anything righteous, ever on their own, therefore God does absolutely everything. If a premise is incorrect, so will be the remedy. Calvinists are taught the answer, the solution, without ever considering the soundness of the premise of evil.

[@TimWismer]

@philipatoz: I can completely understand where you are coming from. But consider the fact that most of the major figures of the Protestant Reformation (such as Luther and Calvin) came to believe in election/predestination and the sovereignty of God by reading the Bible for themselves, not from reading Augustine, or reading the works of "Calvinist" writers. Regular people didn't have the Bible in their own language back then (let alone possess a Bible), and even most Catholic priests didn't have the opportunity/ability to read the Bible for themselves (they simply accepted whatever the Catholic Church taught). As they read the Bible they found that the sovereignty of God is affirmed throughout the Scriptures. I understand how you are disturbed by the Calvinist belief that "God supposedly has condemned to Hell billions of people BEFORE they were even born . . . and that He . . . orchestrated for them to experience lives of misery, trapped in sin, and to further be doomed toward eternal separation and punishment." You are disturbed by this because God is love (1 Jn 4:8), and because He sent His Son to die for the world (John 3:16), and because God "is not willing [i.e. desiring] that any should perish" (2 Pet 3:9). We should not let go of these truths in favor of any particular doctrines. However, regardless of whether God predestines some to heaven and some to hell, the fact remains that every human being is born "doomed toward eternal separation and punishment." Ephesians 2:1 says that we were "dead in trespasses and sins", and as a result we were "by nature children of wrath" (verse 3). We find ourselves in this state because "all sinned" in Adam (Rom 5:12), and thus we are born with a sinful nature that "is enmity with God" (Rom 8:7). As a result, there is "no one who understands, no one who seeks God" (Rom 3:11). Since God has foreknowledge, and knows all things, He knew that this would be the situation before He created the world. But He created the world anyway, and in fact subjected it to frustration "in hope that the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God" (Rom 8:20-21). God had a purpose in creating a world where billions would perish. This may seem contrary to His love and mercy which we spoke of before, but it isn't. The fact that we can't make sense of this doesn't prove that God is unjust -- it proves that finite beings (us) are not capable of fully reconciling both truths. God's purposes may not be knowable to us, but this doesn't negate His justice, love, or mercy. You are right that some Calvinists believe their system because they have a lot to lose if they reject it. But there are many who affirm the sovereignty of God over human salvation because they see it taught throughout the Bible, and they rely on the Holy Spirit to help them balance the fact that God is, in fact, loving and just, with the fact that "He has mercy on whom He wills, and He hardens whom He wills" (Rom 9:15). I'm glad you have a heart for the lost that causes you to be angry at doctrines that seem to impugn God's love for sinners. But I assure you that there are many who hold these "doctrines of grace" that feel that the denial of these doctrines denies God the glory He deserves. The best way to deal with this disconnect is for both sides to maintain dialogue, while searching the Scriptures for more understanding (keeping 1 Jn 2:27 in mind). Like you and I are hopefully doing here. 🙂

[@philipatoz]

​@@TimWismer, the question is NOT whether God is sovereign - of COURSE he is! The question is, HOW has God, IN his sovereignty, decided to deal with mankind when it comes to salvation and eternity? God REDUNDANTLY throughout the Bible tells us we have a choice that HE has yes, SOVEREIGNLY, given us - to either receive or reject Him. And NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that God only gives faith to SOME to believe! Instead, ALL are called to believe and to repent. They don’t MERIT salvation, can’t obtain in on their own, but they must RECEIVE it, as would a blind, helpless beggar. Does God command something (repentance, submitting themselves to Him) that He’s prevented people from doing? Does God urge people to call on the name of the Lord but simultaneously prevent them from having that ability? Does God expect us to obey his words or does He only desire SOME to obey them? By the way, rejecting Christ is a great evil that comes with a horrific punishment and separation - are we to believe that GOD ordained that most people commit the sin of rejection? GOD causes SIN???!!! Do words have MEANING? Look at the verses below - does “ALL” mean only “SOME?” Does God desire “ANY” to perish? Yes or no? Do these all inclusive words (in all CAPS) found below not mean what they say? Yes, one can cherry pick verses and come up with an UnScriptural doctrine, but one cannot get around the all-inclusive meanings found below. 1 Timothy 2: 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires ALL people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for ALL, which is the testimony given at the proper time. Acts 17:30: The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands ALL people EVERYWHERE to repent Ezekiel 18:23: Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live? 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should reach repentance.

[@sheilasmith7779]

@TimWismer Correct Tim, most did not read or have bibles. They came to their beliefs by what the preachers taught, sadly. As to Rom 3:11, you are mistaken in your understanding because you neglected to read the quote from the source Paul is citing: Psalm 14:1-3 and Psalm 53:1-3. WHO is being referred to? "The fool." And WHO is the "fool?" "The fool says in his heart, There is no God." The "they," is the fool. So if you had read these, you would know Paul is not condemning ALL humans but rather very specific humans, those who deny the existence of God.

[@jjphank]

They are brainwashed if only they would read The Verbs and adverbs that only groups are predestined and never individuals! God wants all men to be saved first Timothy 2:4, second peter 3:9! God, predestines groups or plurals only, never individuals. Ephesians 1 -2 points: “ us and we” are pre-destined never “you and I“! And 11 times in 11 verses from 3-14 you have to remain “in Christ“ (in him, in whom) to be predestined! Romans 9:1-3 Paul is talking about the nation of Israel, all the way to the end of chapter 11 ! So, “Jacob, I loved, Esau I hated“ is genesis 25:23 “there are two nations in your womb“! It’s talking about ‘Nations,’ not individuals in the whole context of those three chapters! Stop taking it out of context, along with Ephesians 1! Of course, we have the story of Jacob and Esau and how Esau despised his birthright ! So God truly does love all people, he truly did make hell for the devil and his angels just as Matthew 25:41 says ! Even the 42 youths, mauled by the 2 bears, was because they mocked Elijah‘s rapture, a.k.a. the resurrection , they were saying “go on up Baldy “ ; and ALL their prophets just recently Were killed by Elijah and they should’ve known to stop worshiping Baal! Bethel was the headquarters of Baal worship, where this took place! 490 priests got killed by Elijah, There was no Priests around,; should’ve been a gigantic clue. So God never arbitrarily and haphazardly deals with any human being ! His love cannot be measured says Romans 8! But if you’re a Calvinist, it’s “his love cannot be measured , (Wink, wink)“! Come out of the false belief system of Calvinism ! Now you have no excuse because you cannot out argue this, let’s hear you try! Read Matthew 25 the parable of the Calvinists, a.k.a. talents ! Where the guy buried his talent calling God,- somebody who doesn’t judge rightly & he was thrown into hell as a result! He had the wrong view of God, & So Will a Calvinist, they’ll have a callous view of God & The love of Christs sacrificial death on the cross! Jesus was crucified before the foundations of the world, but he only had to die one time Says hebrews, so don’t get it wrong like Moses; when did Jesus die ? So this trumps predestination before the foundations of the world, because God chose to to write this to disprove & trump predestination! Revelation 13:8

[@danielortega9943]

I wish people would read letters as intended (entirely). Ive never had a letter from a loved one delivered to me where I just read a chunk of it. So much of calvinism makes no sense when you read the entirety of Romans vs. snippets.

[@naturallycurly2384]

Exactly! I am currently reading through Romans again. It is like Calvinists throw out the first five chapters.

[@nealwright5630]

When you consoder Paul is speaking to Jews in Romans 9 (and the previous eight chapters as well), your argument makes perfect sense.

[@nealwright5630]

@@morrij01 Claudius died. Jews returned. That's pretty simple. Besides, what other group of people would Paul write to who were "under the law (of Moses)"? It's not historically, theologically (what?), or (CON)textually false. Calvinists love to brag about their exegesis. But exegesis without context just gives you well-diagramed sentences.

[@MisGrace4]

X Calvinist here! This makes so much more sense! In fact In Calvinist lens reading the Bible actually became very confusing for me. Psalm 89:14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne; love and faithfulness go before you.

[@JoeBloggs-4096]

That's good to hear. The Bible functions just fine without Calvinism. Quite a bit better actually. Calvinism blinds you from seeing others doctrines because it often obscured the text, making you think it is talking about something completely different. And in the end you miss half of what the passage is supposed to teach.

[@elaineauo]

Praise the Lord!!

[@elaineauo]

What was it that first got you doubting and come out of Calvinism. Thank you for sharing. So encouraging!

[@MisGrace4]

@@elaineauo oh wow it’s been a long road here! I’ve always had doubts about it and it never felt right inside but I took it anyway cuz they said the reason why you don’t like it is because your heart is not right with God and your sinful we want to be God and if we want to have a say in our salvation that means we could save our selfs! I didn’t want to be rebellious towards God so I had to take it. Crazy. After I received this word and believed it a heaviness came over me that I could not shake for a couple of weeks. My mind became confused reading the Bible. A verse kept coming to mind that the lord wishes that none shall perish but to come to life. That was the first seed. But I definitely was a Calvinist and understood it well. I watched a video by a lady who told her story about coming out of it and I she recommended Leighton flowers so I starting to watch him. Since being taught Calvinism for so many years I had to unlearn everything. That was hard. But bit by bit strong holds began to fall. As I was getting more confident I thought could there be an evil spirit behind this? I began to put Calvinist teaching and line it with the word of God and spoke the word (example God only came to save the elect verse God wishes that none shall perish) out loud and demons started coming out. I had received a different spirit (of confusion and doubt). As a Calvinist I’ll Amit I did not gain one good thing from this teaching I saw myself God and ppl differently. now I know God loves everyone. I have a stronger relationship with him and feel like I truly know him as before. Calvinism is false doctrine and I think pride has a big part in it. And yes I didn’t listen to the other side cuz the other side didn’t “know anything”. So I thought. But the way Leighton does it drew me in some how and I said ok I will be open to it he seems nice. I am so grateful that God uses ppl like him to set ppl free from bondage.

[@elaineauo]

@@MisGrace4 wow thanks for taking the time and sharing this! I loved reading your testimony. I agree. Dr. Flowers and kindness is refreshing and allows people to listen! And makes a HUGE difference. Like the model of God in Romans 2:4-- it's the KINDNESS of God that brings us to repentance! *Truth in Love.. Always* Also, curious. what was the name of the lady that you watched share her own story walking out of Calvinism. Praise the Lord! so wonderful

[@DaysofElijah317]

I appreciate you continuing to answer Calvinist I knew I never believed that system but never had good voices pushing back on their teaching. Keep it up, thank you and Good bless!

[@KevinW3535]

What convinced me is how perfectly the concept of judicial hardening fits into the whole of scripture. Intuition is worth pointing out, but scripture just started making so much more sense when I learned about judicial hardening. It also cleared up my hangups with the idea of God hardening people.

[@jjphank]

Yes; OSAS Hebrews 6:18. ..It is impossible for god to lie. 3 verses in the Bible say your name can be blotted out of the book of life, for 3 various reasons; Psalm 69:28, revelation 3:5, 22:19! Never receiving Jesus is not the only way to go to hell Says Matthew 7:21-23 ; verse 23 ‘away from me I never knew you’ does not apply to everybody, Jesus says this twice in verses 21 and 22! “Not everyone will say to me (on that day)……., yes many will say…..” If OSAS was true he would’ve said “everyone and all” instead of “not everyone and Many”! So not everyone will go to hell based on never knowing Jesus, and other verses will back this up as well! you can no longer use Matthew 7:23 to say they were never saved to begin with! Same with 2 Peter 2 “after knowing the Lord, they went back into their vomit as a dog; or back into the mud as a pig wallowing in the mud”. The word ‘knowing’ is the same word “knew” in Matthew 7:23, it’s ‘ginosko’ in the Greek- it’s a salvific relationship with Jesus! So you can lose your salvation, says this verse as well! 2 Peter 2:20 “If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning!” THEY ARE ENTANGLED IN THE CORRUPTION OF THE WORLD…AGAIN- says this verse! Jude 12 - “twice dead”; Dead in sin, born again, dead again! And there’s many more; Revelation chapters 2 & 3 are full of ultimatums and all Jesus is focused on is our works! Revelation 2: 5 Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place! Revelation 2:14 there are some among you….. 16 Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. These are just 2 and Jesus says “he who overcomes” , Overcomes is present active- future tense, and Jesus says this to all 7 churches, even the 2 good ones! You have to stay faithful to the end of your life to go to heaven! John 3:16 is he who believes, or continues to believe will have eternal life! it doesn’t say ‘believed’ past tense, you have to maintain your faith to go to heaven! The Greek word ‘believes’ is ‘Pistis’ which basically means faithfulness so faith equals faithfulness, according to the Bible! So if you have problems with this, then you have problems with the word of God, the Bible! You need to study these passages so that you can make it to heaven! If your pastor cannot answer these questions according to what I just said, then you need to leave that church!

[@steves7141]

We can't all be right, but we can all be wrong.

[@joimes]

I notice that you’re using the ESV. I think at some point you opened my eyes to this being a calvinistic translation or at least one with a bias. Thanks for all your content.

[@johndisalvo6283]

ESV. Entirely Sproul Version

[@TimWismer]

The most important issue is whether the version you use is a more literal-approach translation. You can use NKJV or NASB if you prefer them to the ESV. But if you want to avoid seeing predestination and the sovereignty of God in the Bible, you will have to take more extreme measures and read something like The Message. What Leighton refers to as "Calvinism" is found all through the Scriptures. Objecting that it is "intuitively unjust" is irrelevant. The Scripture was given because we are all fallen "in Adam" (see Rom 5), and as a result our intuition is entirely unreliable.

[@dedios03]

​@TimWismer that's just wrong sir our intuition isn't "intirely wrong" When it is guided by scripture and what we know to be revealed of God's nature. What he is saying here is 100%. Correct the interlocker of Roman's 9 isn't just any person who is objecting to God's sovereignty. I. E meticulous divine determinism it is the hardened jew who was been hardened even further in their unbelief to bring about god's purpose. Exhaustive divine determinism is nowhere in the bible rather we see God acting His purposes Regardless of the free choices men make.

[@andrewlineberger7544]

Well said​@@dedios03

[@williammarinelli2363]

@@TimWismerI read/study/believe the KJV. A word search on "sovereignty" returns a null. I one asserts that sovereign is a synonym to Lord, then a search for common understanding of the definition of the word must account for our Lord's, or our sovereign's, words in Luke 6:46 - in the English language a sovereign can be disappointed.

[@ccchhhrrriiisss100]

Thank you for another great video, Dr. Flowers. On a side note, I must say that I never sensed any of the "five points" when I became a believer and began pouring myself through the Scriptures. Prior to Christ, I was agnostic. I felt no loyalty to denomination, ideology or any particular set of Bible teachers. I simply believed -- was born again -- and sought to know the Lord and truth. I've read the Scriptures many, many times -- cover to cover -- and have become familiar with the Biblical languages too. I get why some Calvinists believe as they do (in terms of their Scriptural bases); yet, I believe that they interpret that handful of passages selectively or with mistaken context. They use that set of passages to judge (i.e., selectively reinterpret) the rest of the Word of God and its doctrinal truths. Yet, when I read the rest of God's Word, I believe that it clarifies any potential misunderstanding of those passages.

[@Stoneington]

This video is absolutely fantastic and is spot on. Something I’ve been looking for for a while. This video also sheds light onto why so many reformed camps are anti-Semitic and believe staunchly in replacement theology. When you abandon Israel and think the church is Israel you are in error and this whole Calvinistic doctrine is founded on a complete misunderstanding of God’s purposes for Israel. It has quite literally led to the entire Calvinistic belief system. If you get things right on Israel in Romans 9, there is no basis in scripture to abide by Calvinistic principles.

[@Steve-og4ii]

What you're saying not only makes alot more sense from the point of intuition and conscience, but more importantly, from a contextual Biblical standpoint!

[@rossslaughter5197]

Do you have anything on Molinism? I am listening to your videos, but also speakers and literature regarding Molinism. I hope you see this. Thanks.

[@indigofenrir7236]

God *is* righteousness. Calling Him unjust is declaring oneself morally superior and placing limited human understanding above God's infinite wisdom.

[@KISStheSON...]

It's very important to understand that Pharao was already hard which is why God chose him. God hardened him in his rebellion against him to make his power known.

[@TimWismer]

It is true that God hardened Pharaoh in order to make his power known (Rom 9:17). But God didn't choose Pharaoah because he was already hard. In that same verse it says, "For this very purpose I raised you up." God didn't merely see in hard-hearted Pharaoh an opportunity to further harden him and thus make His power known. He "raised him up" to his position of power for this specific purpose. This is consistent with what we see throughout the book of Daniel, summarized by Dan 4:17 & 4:25, which say that God gives the kingdoms of earth to whomever He wishes. It is also important to realize that Pharaoah is not the only instance of God hardening people in the Bible. For example, Deuteronomy 2:30 says, "but Sihon, king of Heshbon, would not let us pass through, for the Lord your God hardened his spirit, and emboldened his heart, that He might deliver him into your hands, as it is this day." God hardened Sihon so that he would resist Israel, and Israel could destroy him and his people. There are many other such examples in Scripture. Dealing with these issues can be really hard and confusing, and can make people fearful that in considering these things they may be attributing evil to God. But we are not attributing evil to God by affirming what God Himself has said in His Word. It is when we go beyond what is written (1 Cor 4:6) that we get into trouble. Calvinists often go beyond what is written, but giving God all the credit (1 Cor 1:29) for His mercy in our salvation is not such a place (Rom 9:23; 2 Cor 4:6). It is only through the work of the Holy Spirit that we can balance the understanding of God's sovereignty with our need to choose to take up our cross and follow Him.

[@KISStheSON...]

@@TimWismer Do you know the whole story of the Pharoa? He was hard. He was spoiled rotten. He was proud and stubborn. Raising him up would fullfl his desire of POWER and reveal that the power of God is GREATER than any man in "power". I think the most important lesson this teaches is not to put faith in the power of men/kings of the earth because God is GREATER! It is also important to understand that God hardens vessels in THEIR resolve. Picture a vessel made of clay that is being shaped in the potter's hands. The potter knows the way the vessel needs to be manipulated to make it strong and useful and this process is slow and steady. The vessel is stubborn and impatient, it thinks it knows a better, faster way to make itself strong and useful so it becomes marred in the potter's hands and the potter lets it go its own way to make his power known. That vessel that the potter let go will indeed become puffed up and think highly of itself and God will raise that vessel up and harden it in the condition that it has become for his purpose to make his power known. It's really simple if you let yourself see it. I know God will harden who He will harden...I also have greater understanding by knowing WHY he hardened them which makes logical sense so that I don't have to swallow the false ideas within Calvinism that were fed to me.

[@ellisrowe363]

Well done LW! Hopefully, Calvinists will watch this video and consider what is being presented. God Bless!

[@jesusisgod2953]

Well done Leighton! God continually works through you to bless others!

[@pastorbarnett3049]

Good job. Sounds right. In fact in Romans chapter one God also takes rebels and “gives them over” to blindness and depravity (including sexual immorality and homosexuality).

[@emf49]

I’ve learned so much about Calvinism from Dr. Flowers and his guests but my brain is ‘done’ now and I’d like to move on so I’m thankful to hear he is planning a non-Soteriology program. It’ll be excellent. 😊

[@johndisalvo6283]

You can always go to another channel if your “done”! Bye!

[@coreylapinas1000]

Leighton's "Sting Operation" is the Calvinist's entrapment!

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

Leighton, Read my book already...Jacob and Esau Two Nations and the Inheritance. You held it up on camera, said you loved the cover and what you glanced at inside. The interpretation I give is neither the rabbit nor the duck...it's the owl.

[@artifacthunter1472]

This is why only few will find the truth because men think there’s something good enough inside of them that they could find God on their own and they can’t. You can’t draw yourself to God being spiritually dead and you absolutely can’t resurrect your own heart. People who are spiritually dead, hate the truth.

[@TimWismer]

This is a good point about resurrecting yourself from the dead. Ephesians 2 not only points out that we were "dead in transgressions and sins," (2:1), but also that God made us alive together with Christ "even when we were dead in transgressions and sins" (2:5). A dead person can't respond to the command to believe on Christ to be saved. God must say "Let light shine out of darkness", in order for His light to shine in our hearts so that we can know the glory of God. He does this for us when we are dead, not after we resurrect ourselves.

[@jvieceli]

Brother, what software do you use for recording these videos and putting the Iures in the examples on the screen?

[@AlexanderosD]

When the Calvinist reads "Who are you o man, to question God?" It is a psychological trigger built into their presupposition to; as Kevin puts it "surrender their sense making". The entire book of Romans stops right there for them mentally. "How could it be otherwise?" Is their immediate presupposition. Because for the Calvinist, Calvinism MUST be true, and any other possibility CANNOT exist, there Calvinism is true. It's basically a feedback loop of reaffirming presuppositions.

[@beckya4074]

To the question below about God hardening Pharoah’s heart: He did it in order to show Himself in His miracles. We have no idea if it was permanent. It could have been temporary.

[@TimWismer]

It's hard to imagine it being temporary, because after Israel left Egypt, God hardened Pharaoh's heart again (14:4), and he pursued Israel into the Red Sea (14:6), where he perished (14:30). The Scripture teaches plainly that we are saved by faith alone (Rom 4:16), but it also teaches that saving faith is a gift from God (Heb 12:2; Rom 4:4-5, 4:16; Eph 2:8-9; Phil 1:29; Acts 18:27-28; James 2:5; many others), not something we are capable of producing on our own. Thus, if God hardens someone's heart, He is not removing salvation from someone who might have otherwise chosen it, He is hardening someone who is already "dead in transgressions and sins" (Eph 2:1), and is already an "object of [God's] wrath" (Eph 2:3). Thus salvation is entirely by grace.

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

Thus Salvation "through faith" is entirely by grace. See, I fixed it for you.

[@IveSeenSupernatural]

i almost see it as.. its too late when its too late and even tho pharoh knew it was too late and he needed to do the right thing.. God still needed to punish them for their treatment/rebellion up to that point... other wise pharoh would have let them go just to make it stop and maybe so the Heberew wouldnt be more convinced of His authority over false gods

[@IveSeenSupernatural]

@@TimWismer bro just think about it .. God is all wise, merciful etc right ? why think all a sudden He is going to go against His own nature and punish anything for something undeserved.. i can easily accept hardening pharos heart wont be something pharoh has to answer for ..just sensible logic based on what we know about Him

[@TimWismer]

@@IveSeenSupernatural Since Pharaoh hardened his own heart prior to God hardening his heart, God had plenty of grounds for punishing Pharaoh even before He hardened Pharaoh's heart.

[@justinjustin4605]

This is a pretty good point.

[@jordanrouden6440]

Question, Dr Flowers. God commanded Israelites to kill entire groups of people including children. Those would also be children who did neither good nor evil. Was God unjust in commanding the Israelites to kill babies?

[@aradicalmoderate5940]

A great defense of a non-Calvinist view of Romans 9. Well done sir!

[@frankrosenbloom]

Even from earlier days when reading the Bible, it never seemed to me that God's hatred of Esau was absolute. It merely could have meant that in the context of things Jacob was to be blessed abundantly and Esau was not to get the same level of blessing that Jacob was. To hate may mean to turn away from in a particular situation, not eternal hate. We must understand the times in which this was written. Nowhere did it say that Esau was going to go to Hell for eternity. Furthermore, it seems that God did afford some blessings to him. "I gave to Isaac Jacob and Esau: and I gave to Esau Mount Seir, to possess it. Jacob and his children went down into Egypt."

[@TimWismer]

I have thought about this myself. There are various places, like the one you cite, where God speaks of Esau/Edom and his descendants in a way that is not "hate-filled." But I think the point Paul is making in Romans 9 by quoting Malachi is that God chose Jacob over Esau against the normal nature of things (since Jacob was the younger brother), because He had a purpose for doing so. He then revealed Himself to Jacob in a way that He did not to Esau, and established Jacob in the promise/"blessing" that He had made to Abraham. He did this by having Isaac send Jacob to Padan Aram to take a wife from the line of Promise (see Gen. 28:4 where Isaac blesses Jacob). On his way to Padan Aram, God revealed Himself to Jacob at Bethel. And from that time on, God was with him. Esau, on the other hand, sought to receive blessing by marrying into the line of Abraham also (Gen 28:6-9). However, he married not into the line of the free woman (Sarah), through whom the promise comes, but through the line of the slave woman (Hagar), through whom comes slavery (Gal 4:21-31). Besides demonstrating his ungodliness by rejecting his birthright (Heb 12:16), Esau also demonstrates his carnal mind by ignorantly marrying into the wrong line of Abraham. He was ignorant of this because the natural man is not able to understand the things of the Spirit because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor 2:14). Hell is the default destination of every human being, because we are "by nature children of wrath" (Eph 2:1-3) who are "dead in transgressions and sins" (Eph 2:1). When Jesus is asked whether only a few are being saved (Luke 13:23), He responds by speaking of the broad road which leads to death and narrow gate that leads to life. In Matthew 7:14 Jesus says of this narrow gate that few find it. It's true that the Bible doesn't specifically say that Esau went to hell, but even apart from Paul's use of the Scripture, "Esau I hated", it is clear that God chose Jacob for salvation by continually revealing Himself to Jacob (despite the fact that Jacob was a trickster). God also made Jacob (not Esau) heir of the promise of salvation that He made to Abraham. This promise is only received by faith (Rom 4:13). It is also clear that God left Esau in his "godless/ungodly/profane" (Heb 12:16) state, and did not reveal Himself to Esau, leaving him instead without access to the promise of salvation made to Abraham and "his seed" (Gal 3:16).

[@frankrosenbloom]

@@TimWismer There was a plan being worked out here for the salvation of all humankind. We must understand that as well. We do not know whether Esau Repented in the end. The Catholic Church never says that any one particular person is damned. Protestants always are talking about their personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Personal relationship is going to go through ups and downs. I agree with what you have explained here, but we are talking about a particular plan of salvation being acted out. I am not as central to the plan as these biblical people were.

[@TimWismer]

@@frankrosenbloom Yes, interesting point. I agree with your point about not judging men's salvation (if I understood your position correctly). I will note, however, that the Catholic Church has taken that non-commital position a bit too far, given the fact that "St Jude" is actually "St Judas" (the patron saint of impossible causes), and given that Jesus refers to him as the "son of perdition" and specifically says he was lost (John 17:12). His betrayal may have been redeemable -- Peter's denial was -- but his suicide certainly did not constitute repentance.

[@frankrosenbloom]

@@TimWismer Tim, not the same Judas. St. Jude is not Judas Iscariot. If Scripture says he was lost, he was lost. It's just that the Catholic Church doesn't make pronouncements on that. Pretty much everyone thinks that Judas Iscariot, having betrayed Jesus and then took his own life, Is lost.

[@jimbenna9607]

Yes! Acts 2:37-41 sheds additional light on the hardening of Israel, to bring about the crucifixion of the Messiah during Passover, and then 50 days later, at Pentecost, in God's mercy He has Peter preach the Gospel to these same Israelites, who had crucified Christ. Many were cut to the heart, and repented (changed their minds) about Jesus and became identified with Him (baptized in His name) for the forgiveness of sins, receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit.

[@achristian11]

excellent video

[@ingela_injeela]

The god of islãm is also described as saying that he can cast people into hell or into paradise willy nilly, "no matter if they are good or bad".

[@joelthompson7064]

Is there anything to the arguement which states that God's rejection of Esau and his choice of Jacob occured, not in eternity past, but in time; not as a result of an eternal decree, but in response to a prayer made by Rebecca as to why there was so much struggle in her womb?

[@jazzmankey]

Dr. Flowers, Does the Bible explain why it is that some people choose to put their faith in Christ Jesus while others do not?

[@glstka5710]

8:36 It seems like in almost all of Acts what gets the Jews mad is Paul preaching to Gentiles. Paul is always taking the Gospel to the Jew first, then when they reject it to the Gentiles. I don't see anywhere in the book of Acts where he preaches Determinism and the Jews get mad because he is teaching Calvinism.

[@TimWismer]

You are right that the Jews get really mad in the book of Acts when Paul says that he will take the gospel to the Gentiles. They get mad because they see themselves as the special chosen people of God, and are arrogant about it. Paul preaching to the Gentiles violates their sense of identity. Jesus does basically the same thing in Luke 4:23-27 when he preaches a sermon and points out that God ignored the needs of the Israelites in the time of Naaman the Syrian and the time of the widow of Zarephath. The Jews got so mad that they tried to throw Jesus off the cliff. The idea of God hardening the Jews in order to bring Gentiles to salvation in Romans 11:6 and following is the same thing, as you said. There is nothing that made the Jews more angry than the idea that God wouldn't save them simply because they were "children of Abraham". But Jesus told them not to trust in this, because "out of the stones God can raise up children for Abraham" (Mat 3:9). But how would they be Abraham's physical descendants if they came from stones? They wouldn't be. But God could make people out of stones (after all, He already made them out of dust), and then He could give them the faith of Abraham (since He is the author of our faith -- Heb. 12:2), which would make them spiritual children of Abraham (see Rom 4:12,16). After all, "the flesh profits nothing". "It is the Spirit that gives life" (John 6:63).

[@Lala_Land551]

Is God unjust if He has the ability and the will to stop child rape, yet chooses not to so as not to violate the almighty will of man? It begs the greater question: Would God be unjust if He had the ability to stop evil but chose not to so as not to violate man's will? Anybody want to explain how this isn't a moral dilemma yet the Calvinist position is?

[@jesse6731]

I noticed you talked about Romans 9: 10-19 but didn’t actually defend the words Paul used…can you make a video and actually elaborate on these verses? Specifically verse 11

[@CosmicalChrist]

He's done that multiple times. Check his channel

[@jesse6731]

@@CosmicalChrist could you point me to it? I’ve listened to a few hours of him I think he has good points for the most part just seems to avoid the crux of the argument It took 6 minutes of build up to answer the question…then he didn’t answer the question 😬

[@CosmicalChrist]

@@jesse6731 Can't send link on KZbin. At least not now. All my posts keep getting deleted. Not sure if this will stick. All I'll say is check his videos on Romans 9. My next response ( if not deleted) would really help

[@CosmicalChrist]

@@jesse6731 Check out 5hamounian on Romans 9 pt1 and 2. He completely decimates Calvinism on this

[@CosmicalChrist]

@@jesse6731 He goes through it verse by verse

[@Kevinrichardsonministries]

Very Well said...

[@AdventureSMBW]

I have an honest question as an Arminian. How many videos can you make saying the same thing? I could be wrong here, but I kinda feel like its all been said a million times, and that at great length

[@IveSeenSupernatural]

same questions from new generations bro think of how annoyed God is with all these hearts.. we can endure one life of it i think and do our best informing

[@dannypomeroy3198]

If we are speaking of nations...even as the vessels...then why do people not have a problem with God choosing some nations for destruction and some for mercy...but not individuals?

[@RambleChristianPodcast]

Commenting to show support and say thanks.

[@ingela_injeela]

Calvinist preachers have astonished me with their harsh stance against Jews/ Israel.

[@Yaas_ok123]

New Foskey's video is so funny, hope you respond !

[@AndrewKeifer]

Once I understood the background behind why Jesus frequently said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear," and saw how Paul treats Pharoah as a type of Israel, how he cites OT passages about two nations, it became very clear that _national election for a purpose_ is the context Paul is revealing. The Calvinistic understanding of individual salvation seems to me clearly to be nothing more than a foreign thread in the tapestry of scripture.

[@robertwheeler1158]

The problem here is how can God choose Israel as a nation without choosing the individual Israelites that make up the nation? It really does come down to how people respond to the gospel.

[@AndrewKeifer]

@@robertwheeler1158 _"The problem here is how can God choose Israel as a nation without choosing the individual Israelites that make up the nation?"_ How is that a problem exactly?

[@TimWismer]

Romans 9-11 is indeed talking about the corporate election of Israel and their "national election for a purpose", but it is also talking about individual election. Israel is elect as a group, but this doesn't mean all Israelites will be saved. Paul deals in Romans 3:1-6 with accusations that God is unjust for not saving all individuals within Israel, and explains in Rom 4:13 that those whom God saves are not saved on the basis of being the physical descendants of Abraham, but on the basis of having the faith of Abraham. This isn't to say that Israel as a group isn't elect, or that they have lost their election (Rom 11:29), but just to say that God's election of Israel as a group does not guarantee the election of all individuals within that group. Yet even amongst the elect group of Israel, Paul mentions individuals who are elect unto salvation, namely the remnant (Rom 11:1-6). So corporate election also does not negate the possibility of individual election. Of course, individual election is mentioned throughout the Scriptures, and not just for those amongst ethnic Israel. Such believers, whether Jew or Greek, were chosen for salvation "in Him before the foundation of the world" (Eph 1:4). These are the individuals Paul is talking about in Romans 9:23 who are the "vessels of mercy, which [God] had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles."

[@AndrewKeifer]

@@TimWismer Exactly. 👍

[@chaddonal4331]

For anyone legitimately trying to interpret Paul’s line of argumentation in Romans 9: Think of where every Calvinist teacher goes after establishing their view of Romans 9. What else do they talk about? What other theological emphases do they bring in for support. What parallel passages do they try to reference for support? Now, read Romans 10-11 carefully and see if those places (that Calvinist go) are where Paul goes, at all! Notice - he doesn’t! His destination is quite different! Then Read ch 10-11 for where Paul’s argument actually leads. Confirm what the 3-chapter argument is truly about! Then re-read ch.9 with fresh eyes to see how it contributes to the whole scope of ch.9-11. Doing this does not confirm Calvinist expectations. But it does reveal what Paul intended to communicate! Notice the Calvinist questions that aren’t answered by ch. 10-11! Notice the topic centers on questions about God’s promises to Israel, and how they will be fulfilled! Then reconsider what the issue of God’s supposed injustice from ch. 9 must have been about. As Leighton discusses in this video, the injustice of concern to Paul and to Israelites is not solved by TULIP. Rather, ch 10-11 go a different direction entirely… Do the work!

[@TimWismer]

The larger context of Romans 9-11 isn't about God's judicial hardening of Israel. Paul only begins to address this particular topic in 11:6, more than 2 chapters into the text in question. The overall question being addressed on Romans 9:14 is: "How can God be just if the majority of His chosen people (Israel) are condemned? What about His promises to Abraham?" This question was raised for the first time in Romans 3:3: "what if some [Israelites] did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect?" Paul then deals with the problem off and on in chapter 3 and then 4, and then (in my view) puts the question to the side for the most part until the start of chapter 9, where he picks it up again and finally starts to get to the heart of the matter, saying, "But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, 'In Isaac your seed shall be called.' That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed" (9:6-8). In other words, just because someone is a genetic/physical descendant of Abraham, that doesn't mean he is the "seed" of Abraham. As Paul argues in Galatians 3, the "seed" mentioned in the promise is singular, and refers specifically to Christ (3:16). Thus, only those who are "in Christ" by faith are heirs of the promise (Paul expands on this distinction between Abraham's physical, and spiritual, "seed" or descendants, in Gal 4:21-31). Paul argues that this distinction is not his own invention, but rather was already evident in the Old Testament, where God tells Elijah that He has "reserved for [Himself] seven thousand men who have no bowed the knee to Baal" (Rom 11:4). And Paul argues that in their present time, there is still "a remnant according to the election of grace". In other words, those who were faithful to God in Elijah's time were faithful because God had "reserved them for Himself" "according to the election of grace." In other words, they were predestined from out of Israel at large. Though Israel was elect ("chosen") in a corporate sense, they were not chosen for salvation. Only the remnant within the larger chosen group was actually saved. Thus, Paul is effectively arguing that nobody should be surprised at his claim that most of Israel is lost (condemned). After all, they pursued a "law of righteousness" (9:31), "not by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law" (9:32), "by which no man shall be justified" (Gal 2:16). Thus, lacking faith, they were not truly children of Abraham (Rom 4:13-16). In this larger context, Paul's discussion about the "judicial hardening" of Israel in Romans 11:7 and following, describes how God is using corporate, rebellious Israel to help bring in the full number of Abraham's spiritual children among the Gentiles. And the passage in Romans 9:22-24 finally makes sense, since it says that God has "prepared for destruction" the "vessels of wrath" (9:22), in order to make God's mercy known to "the vessels of mercy, which [God] had prepared beforehand for glory" (9:23). And these are "not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles" (9:24)! So, though it is true that Israel as a whole is God's chosen (elect) people, it does not follow that all within that group are individually election unto salvation. Rather, only the "remnant", those faithful within Israel, are Abraham's children. Likewise, among the Gentiles there are also those who are predestined (see Eph 1:4) to be Abraham's (spiritual) children, and these are made manifest by their faith.

[@markemma5]

Yes. Thank you.

[@HJEvan]

How does anyone know which interpretation is, 'rightly?' I rely on educated guesses.

[@TimWismer]

The answer to your question is found in 1 John 2:27, and in 1 Cor 2:9-16

[@peterjajiow1181]

Was Christ being crucified for the sins of the world just or unjust ? Honest question.

[@peterjajiow1181]

Also is it fair that we receive Adam’s sin merited to us , also is it fair that we have Christ righteousness merited to us?

[@peterjajiow1181]

You can cry out for mercy. But Can you receive mercy without it being given to you? And can you snatch up grace for yourself simply because you choose ?

[@canadiankewldude]

*_Eph 5:9 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)_* *_Eph _**_5:10_**_ Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord._* *_Eph _**_5:11_**_ And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them._* *_- KJB_*

[@glennmariacher4525]

You would make a good lawyer; very good reasoning!

[@sonny6string822]

The Bible teaches salvation through faith alone by Grace alone. Calvinism teaches salvation through predestination. Which one do you believe? I set before you life and death blessing and curse, therefore choose life. That Is what scripture teaches.

[@elliejames9465]

Maybe God has hardened the Calvinist teachers' hearts because of their unbelief so they are unable to understand the truth?

[@frederickanderson1860]

The parable of the wheat and tares they both receive same blessings until the end of their growth. Consider judas he was the tare among the wheat.

[@MyRoBeRtBaKeR]

If He is a respecter of persons!

[@IZZY404_]

Did Leighton actually take down the video where he was reacting to Apologia? I wanted to revisit one of the worst argumentation a christian has made in all of history. Damn

[@karldo4809]

Hi Flowers, Got an alternative name for what you call Provisionism. It's Flowerism.

[@annakimborahpa]

Monergism and Unconditional Election vs. Synergism and Conditional Election However much John Calvin cited Augustine of Hippo as his inspiration for monergism and unconditional election, he or any Calvinist cannot claim him as their own since Augustine preached synergism and conditional election: "But God made you without you. You didn't, after all, give any consent to God making you. How were you to consent, if you didn't yet exist? SO WHILE HE MADE YOU WITHOUT YOU, HE DOESN'T JUSTIFY YOU WITHOUT YOU. SO HE MADE YOU WITHOUT YOUR KNOWING IT, HE JUSTIFIES YOU WITH YOUR WILLING CONSENT TO IT. YET IT'S HE THAT DOES THE JUSTIFYING (in case you should think it's your justice, and go back to the dead losses, the wastage and the muck), for you to be found in Him not having your own justice, which is from the law, but THE JUSTICE THROUGH THE FAITH OF CHRIST, WHICH IS FROM GOD; JUSTICE FROM FAITH, TO KNOW HIM AND THE POWER OF HIS RESURRECTION, AND A SHARE IN HIS SUFFERINGS (Phil 3:9-10). And that will be your power, your strength; a share in Christ's sufferings will be your strength." [The Works of St. Augustine, Sermon 169, P. 231; Wesley Scholar Com webpage /wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Augustine-Sermons-148-183. pdf 239 of 388]

[@sjeter61]

I wish I could believe this , Im a reluctant calvanist, who has decided Im not elect, , horrible place to be

[@yvonnedoulos8873]

Why are reluctant to see Jesus died for all men? It is stated so simply in Scripture. He loves you so much he went to the cross for you, friend. May you know His grace at this very moment. 🙏🏼

[@VideoGames-lm2eq]

Leighton, You made it very clear that you think it would be unjust for God to create someone, let them be born into sin, and not give them His mercy. (My dictionary is a Calvinist dictionary). You also made it a point to quote Sproul who is being honest with these realities. Why don't you make a video and lay out all of your struggles with your own view and things that don't quite add up to you? If we are all honest we do not have all the answers to our own views and there are weaknesses and challenges that are presented to us all when trying to understand and know the Lord. Here is one that I feel directly hits home on your view. If you struggle with God deciding who to give His mercy to and who to remain in sin, then what about the fact that the majority of mankind are created by God knowing that they will not believe or didn't even have a chance to believe the gospel yet God still created them knowing their outcome? If we are honest wouldn't this be a similar situation we all have a hard time swallowing? Isn't this why universalists exist to relieve that tension? I assume you can relieve this tension by saying, "well most of them did have a chance and a real opportunity to reject."You still have to ask yourself, "Self, would I create a world for my glory that causes most people to suffer eternity in hell?" If we are honest we desire God would save everyone or would have made a world absent of sin as Bill Maher requested. So yes, I agree with Sproul that its a tough reality to swallow. God is sovereign but who am I to make a judgment on a holy and good God with a series of oversimplifications from my pea sized brain? Im not attacking you, but just making a point in saying we need to be careful. I fear that these types of thoughts have to be coped with by using caution. I think we should be prayerful of them and honest with God about our thoughts but never try to create a better reading of scripture or worse, a new religion as some have done. This is not an attack on you personally but my response to the point of the video.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Your argument is a moralistic one. Essentially "Leighton's view has most of mankind being lost - I don't like it." You guys are always so emotional

[@VideoGames-lm2eq]

@@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi I don't think you captured what I was saying in your summary. Both Calvinists and Non-Calvinists are presented with the reality that God chose to create a world that He knew in advance would be fallen. In addition the vast majority of human beings would reject Him and go to hell. I am not saying I don't like that. I am saying that it is a reality that is biblically true, applies to both camps, and is not far away from the issue he has with Calvinism in this video. Mr. Flowers is stating Calvinism's view of God is unjust because He had created men and women who he did not choose to extend His mercy to. If God knew in advance who would reject, wouldn't it be better to just not create the ones who would reject him? I would think this is grounds to say God is unjust if I used Flower's logic. Furthermore, there are many points of tension that finite human beings have with an infinite holy God. To use his logic consistently here would likely lead people into agnosticism or a form of universalism. As believers we trust God on things that we do not fully understand. The temptation is to subconsciously twist the scripture to, "make our views fit." As far as your jab on me being emotional. You and I both know that a Calvinist can't be emotional. Just read all the comments it is very clear how dried up we are. :)

[@TimWismer]

@@VideoGames-lm2eq You said: "As far as your jab on me being emotional. You and I both know that a Calvinist can't be emotional. Just read all the comments it is very clear how dried up we are. :)" Oh man, you're killing me! Praise God that "Calvinism" does not, in fact, prohibit a sense of humor. Apparently, "against such a thing there is no law."

[@VideoGames-lm2eq]

@@TimWismer :) I get on Christian Forums and KZbin from time to time to listen to both sides of the debate and people can be brutal. I think the issue is important but man it's bad sometimes. If I were to make videos I'd just turn the comments off as most of them are embarrassing to Christianity and at best misrepresent one side or the other. Sadly, very few deal with and discuss the issues.

[@ACTSVERSE]

When you accept that Calvinism is a cult, all of their responses will make sense.

[@petemiller9865]

Check out Heiser on predestination he ends it pretty quickly. 👊✌️

[@TimWismer]

I think Heiser's take actually makes the situation worse. If election means not that God elected unto salvation, but that He has elected who He will provide His revelation to, then the sliver of those saved is going to be even smaller than the Calvinists believe, because "the natural man cannot receive the things of God, nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor 2). Most will not be saved regardless (Luke 13:24), but for the Calvinist the problem isn't the lack of hearing, but the lack of ears to hear and eyes to see (consider Matt 13:15). But if election means chosen to have God's revelation given to them (such as Israel, if I remember Heiser's position correctly), then there is also the problem that most will not be presented with the message in the first place, let alone have ears to hear it. Having said all that, it is possible that I haven't understood Heiser's position correctly.

[@petemiller9865]

@TimWismer yes I'm sorry, but I do not think you understand Heiser or the Hebrew language on this subject. I would recommend Unseen Relm. Have you tried anything from William Lane Craig as well? Unfortunately, Jimmy White refuses to engage with them. IMO, it's because Jimmy knows he has an emotional vice against people with more knowledge and experience than him. His side kick the power ranger Durbin acts as his fluffer. No one in Jimmy's circle is allowed to disagree with him, or they are kicked out of his club. 👊✌️

[@TimWismer]

@@petemiller9865 You are quite possibly right. Sorry if I spoke out of turn.

[@virgilcaine3291]

Whosoever will.

[@TimWismer]

Yes, but a person who is "dead in their transgressions and sins" (Eph 2:1) will not, unless God makes them alive, even when they are dead (Eph 2:5).

[@mysteriouschannel2391]

My fav🎉🎉Dr.LF

[@mrupholsteryman]

I'm seriously thinking that Calvinism is in Revelation...the church that gave up (abandoned) their first love... despite their abilities to call out falsehoods...they still are told to repent...but I guess they see no need to being irresistibly graced and by God's "decree" are still in the process of perseverance.... God's Only Son Permits Eternal Life! 😇🙏💪

[@TimWismer]

I believe in predestination and most would consider me a Calvinist . . . but sadly I think there is a lot of truth in your observation. However, I don't think the doctrines themselves are the cause of that, but rather the self-assurance and pride that tends to accompany being an intellectual, which most vocal Calvinists are. Unfortunately, this is also true of intellectuals who reject Calvinism in favor of some other Systematic Theology (including "Free-Will Theologians"). This is why being "wise and intelligent" (see Luke 10:21) is a hindrance to faith, not a help (see also John 6:63, 65; 1 Cor 1:20-24; 1 Cor 3:20). In this sense, intelligence is much like wealth (see Matt 19:24; 1 Tim 6:9-10). And to piggyback on your final line: God's Son IS Eternal Life! (John 14:6).

[@mrupholsteryman]

@TimWismer my reason for the God's Only Son Permits Eternal Life...is the first letter in each. Gospel. 😊

[@mrupholsteryman]

@TimWismer do you believe that God predetermined His Son to take the sins of the world upon Himself (while secretly only allowing a certain few to actually be able to hear and receive the Good News?) Is this the same God that tells us to love even our enemies and to not show favoritism...and is not the Author of confusion? Do the people on the wide path to destruction go there cuz God decreed it and they have no way, shape, or form...unless faith had been given to them? While they can have faith and place it in all kinds of other things... I believe that God offers a love to all and that love can either be received and embraced and shared or resource guarded...or rejected ...or just plain disregarded.... I don't see God being so afraid of His creation and rejection to not offer salvation to all... Jesus never told His disciples that the folks that don't receive the Gospel...couldn't receive it anyway and that the feelings were mutual and that He hated them first... It completely distorts the relationship with the Father and the Son.... the Holy Spirit would know ahead of time who is gonna be saved ...so why not just have the disciples find the "elect" like a Where's Waldo game or Easter egg hunt... I don't mean to come across as condescending...I do attack the position and not the person.... I gotta get to bed as my wife is desiring this hand held device not be a distraction... 😊

[@koraegis]

They are already equally condemned. John 3:18-19 (NASB95) 18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. There are none innocent. John 3:17 (NASB95) “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

[@michealmatt2259]

as a former Calvinist to me a big whole in there system is there view of what it means to be an image bearer or Michael Heisers term "imagers"...... yes you can get wierd and unbiblical with what it means to be made in His likeness but we should stand in awe and praise as to what it does mean to be an image bareer and love Jesus the one who willinging became the God-Man.

[@robinq5511]

The Jews had a wrong view of the last days of the OC much as we see in the eschatology of the Dispensationalists today. Jesus did not fit what they wanted from Messiah despite what Moses, the prophets and Psalms had told them to expect. This was a major theme that their scriptures declared and though they knew the time was at hand they refused to believe Jesus was Messiah. Had not God already told them, they might have had an excuse; and this is exactly why God was just in hardening their hearts so His plan could go forth within that eschatological time frame He had set forth. Their old covenant was to be replaced with the new which Jesus declared that the time had arrived. Calvinists today seem to be following their same unbelief which is what was beginning to change Sproul's mind in his latter days as he became more preteristic in his understanding of the NT scriptures and repented of his own former unbelief. Jesus calls us to do the same!

[@frederickanderson1860]

Its all through scripture from Cain and Abel onwards.

[@ianjayme23]

How will you explain that this "presupposition" was asked in this passage? Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad-in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What then shall we say? IS GOD UNJUST? Not at all! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Romans 9:11‭, ‬13‭-‬15 NIV

[@ronnierubio3445]

Does anyone know any non Calvinist study bibles. Maybe some men study bibles. The closest one I got was Alastair begg lol

[@Post_Tenebras_Lux_1647]

So "judicial harding" is man closing his spiritual eyes and ears and harding his own heart? That sounds like man harding his own heart. How did God harden Pharaoh heart?

[@UpwardBoundtoHeaven]

This question has troubled me in the past. To see how God can harden any heart, including Pharoah’s, God’s messages will always elicit two responses: obedience or disobedience. Continued disobedience will harden a heart just like sunlight will harden clay. The same sunlight which hardens clay will soften Jello (a humble heart).

[@johndisalvo6283]

God gives them over to their own suppression of the truth. Read Romans 1

[@Post_Tenebras_Lux_1647]

@johndisalvo6283 I agree with that. The problem is the Bible says God hardened Pharaoh heart before Moses even spoke with Pharaoh. Read Exodus 4:21.

[@rbb5980]

@@Post_Tenebras_Lux_1647 Based on what I read God says that he would harden Pharaoh’s heart in 4:21 but doesn’t say exactly at what point he would do it. As we read along in the following chapters we see that in the first instance of Moses and Aaron speaking with Pharaoh he hardens his own heart by not letting the people go. The Bible specifically tells us the times when God himself does the hardening.

[@Post_Tenebras_Lux_1647]

​@renaldobriggs5980 How I understand the text God hardens Pharaoh heart before he does anything. I agree its doesn't say when but God says : So he wont let my people go. I guess maybe at the time Pharaoh hearing the message is when God harden his heart? 21 And the LORD said to Moses, “When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go."

[@KevinHale-vq2xr]

God did not condemn Adam and Eve when he created them. They were perfect or righteous. But they sinned willfully and became guilty. Interesting

[@r.a.panimefan2109]

Keep doing this between you and idol killer helped pull me from the doctrine of origional sin as its understood. I had trouble with this idea even as a kid in sunday school about it. Did o.g. sin happened yes. Adam was punished. We r not guilty of adams sin We are guilty of our own with a free will to fall to sin or live in christ. Christianity is very infected by it. I dont believe babies are guilty. Keep this up. Tho it be interesting if u branch to catholics and others. A calvinist that i do listen to(tho i dont know how calvinist) Is gavin ortlund. His knowledge of church history... Maybe you could talk with him. Like winger as well

[@eskimo227]

”What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”“ ‭‭Romans‬ ‭9‬:‭30‬-‭33‬ ‭ESV‬‬ They were hardened and used to show God’s wrath BECAUSE they stumbled. This is righteousness.

[@oscarcoronel3021]

Is God unjust if he sends someone that lived for 30, 40, 80 years on this earth, for all eternity to hell ?

[@oscarcoronel3021]

@Oneforall86 I agree brother

[@sheilasmith7779]

Well if we believe that EVERY event is directed by God, yet we are punished, then, yes God is unjust. When Calvinist created the belief that sovereignty means God executes every action and event, then Calvinists have to justify or explain the existence of murder, rape, torture etc.

[@FilthyBadger]

Did u say sh!? At 9:10!😅

[@camwhite6263]

I do not understand the God of non-calvinists. If God is truly outside of linear time (unlike humans, who exist entirely within God’s creation), then from His perspective words like “before” and “already” do not make any sense. It would be like saying why did George Lucas damn Anakin Skywalker to death via his own son before Anakin even turns to the dark side. The question makes no sense; Lucas created Anakin and every decision Anakin ever makes is available for Lucas to judge. If you believe God created the universe and that he created you as you are, he already has access to every decision you will ever make and ever could make (assuming the “middle-knowledge” of the Molinist). Thus, it is not unrighteousness on God’s part for damning those that he chooses to damn, because it’s not like he doesn’t know the bad decisions you will eventually make. Judging God for creating you as a you are is just cursing reality as it is, unless you think you are somehow outside of reality and should have the power to change it. It’s just the problem of evil, and the answer is to understand that God is good, and his plan for the universe is good. Romans 9:21 says “Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?” (ESV). If you think we are somehow different from the Israelites that Paul is speaking of, then I do not understand why. We are all God’s creations, so if Paul is right that God has a right to harden Israel and Pharoah, he has a right to harden people born today, because he is the Creator, the Most High, and we his creations do not have the right to question him, although we will try.

[@TimWismer]

Yes. God created and ordained everything in such a way as to make His glory known. In Revelation we are told that God locks Satan up for 1000 years, and then lets him out. If God can lock up Satan, why not do so now? If "the whole world is lies under the sway of the wicked one" (1 Jn 5:19), why not just lock him up now, or 7000 years ago immediately after Adam's sin? Why not block the serpent from entering the Garden of Eden in the first place? The answer to all these types of questions is, "Because God had a purpose", or also fair, "We don't know -- God didn't tell us." Just like Christ was "slain before the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:18), not after God figured out how to fix the problem Adam created.

[@barnabasalbonetti2536]

The Calvinist is hardened. Self righteousness keeps them from confessing the truth! Can't admit they are wrong. It takes humbleness to do so. They don't want to lose their fame of knowledge, not wisdom but knowledge.

[@officialDavidRees]

Paul- Who are you oh man to argue against God? Also Paul- Please please fellow Jews, humble yourselves, stop using your "choosing" as a nation for an excuse to harden your hearts against the Gospel of Faith that GOD offers to ALL people, even Gentiles.

[@MyRoBeRtBaKeR]

Heres is the thing, God's election has nothing to do with works, bad or good, amen? Solely on the good pleasure of His will. Ephesians 1:5 New Living Translation 5 God decided in advance to adopt us into his own family by bringing us to Himself through Jesus Christ. This is what he wanted to do, and it gave him great pleasure. Therefore what is the point of ordaining man to die if He predetermined us into adoption? Also, before the world began it was God's purpose and plan for all men to live, this is why Adam was made a LIVING soul, not a half-dead soul but a LIVING soul, yet it wasn't until after the world was created that men died, due to their unbelief. So we need to look at the intent of God and doing that should lead us to see that it was never God's intention for man to die. Did they? Of course but it was not God's intention for them to.

[@Steve-og4ii]

I noticed in the comments that many want you to stop doing videos opposing Calvinism, and go on to something else. While I understand that to a certain point,I hope you continue to teach against it,even if you choose to do videos along other lines. Ti me,the fruit if Calvinism is so bitter,abd its effect on people's understanding and conception of the very nature and character of God, is so horrible, i I believe it must be withstood at every opportunity, even as it continues to spread throughout the church!

[@DanielBShaw]

God is just in hardening sinners who resist God's grace and persist in unbelief. God is just in hardening people who seek to establish their own righteousness.

[@TimWismer]

Leighton's overall argument is that God would be unjust to predestine someone to hell before they even sinned. But we have to remember that Adam had the chance to sin or not sin (he wasn't born with a fallen nature), and he sinned. As a result, "through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned" (Rom 5:12). So God finds us all guilty because our representative Adam sinned, not merely because we sin ourselves (though this is true too -- Rom 3:23). God states that part of our guilt is due to the fact that Adam is our "first father" (see Is 43:27). As a result we are born in "the flesh", unable to please God (Rom 8:8; Rom 3:10-18). For those (like Leighton seemingly), who object that this is unjust, we must answer "Who are you to talk back to God?" (Rom 9:20). We are not in a position to judge God's justice. All we can do is read what God has said on the matter in His Word. We can't make up philosophical concepts like "judicial hardening" (not found Rom 9-11) or "free will" (not found anywhere in the Bible), to try to explain away what is clearly laid out in Scripture. And finally, let's remember that not only is our sinful nature the result of a representative's actions (Adam), but our salvation is also the result of a representative's actions (Christ). If we object to the fact that our damnation results in part from actions outside our control, then we also must object to the fact that our salvation also results from actions outside our control.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Ahh.. It doesnt say guilt spread to all men. You've created a syllogism to make scripture conform to you're predetermined theology. Stop doing that

[@TimWismer]

@@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi True, it doesn't say guilt spread to all men. It says all men sinned and thus death spread to all men. I wasn't trying to reason based on a syllogism, but based on the fact that God punishes the sin of our representative (Adam) by giving to all of us -- therefore there must be guilt. In Is. 43:27 God punishes them and justifies it in part because their "first father sinned." I'm not sure I understand your counterpoint. Do you not believe in Original Sin? Do you not believe that all men are born in a state where they are "by nature objects of wrath" (Eph 2:3)? It seems like some of Leighton's objections to the idea of predestination may stem from a questioning of Original Sin. It seems to me there is no point debating/discussing predestination if one rejects Original Sin.

[@alanmunch5779]

The argument being made is about the context, that is: in Romans 9-11, Paul is discussing what has happened to Israel. The Jews who had believed in Christ, and those who had not, would have fundamental questions about where Israel fitted into God’s purposes. That’s the point. It’s all part of one long argument by Paul, explaining the gospel and how it relates to Jewish history.

[@countrycat2008]

There again: Israel was chosen corporately, but didn’t come in because of their unbelief..thus extending himself to us.. that’s the Gospel.

[@youflatscreentube]

Well, it was said, without being said: Todays Calvinist see the non-Calvinist in much the same way as the blind Pharisee saw Jesus.

[@mikelyons2831]

They are so all-in with this false gospel, they don't consider Paul's conclusions of Romans mid-9 starting in 9:30 thru 10:4...then 10:8-13 (how to be saved, all can be saved)

[@rodneytruitt9335]

My problem with provisionism as explained by Leighton is that I could never read the Bible and come to the same conclusions. The apostle Paul doesn't say what Leighton has said here. Paul doesn't say God hardens those who harden themselves. He doesn't say He hardens those who deserve it either. Paul does say it is according to God's choice and His desire.

[@Soteriology101]

Even lower Calvinists like MacArthur point out it’s in the passive and thus a result of what they are doing. To “harden” means to give someone over to their resolve, much like is spelled out in Romans 1.

[@rodneytruitt9335]

@@Soteriology101 I understand what you are saying but that is not what is said in Rom. 9. Paul made it clear in Rom. Ch. 1-3 that we are all in the same position spiritually. So this idea that God hardens one over another based on what they do doesn't agree with scripture. If it was based off of what we deserve then all would be hardened.