Who Is An Actual Provisionist?

In this CCShort Collin points out the inconstancy yith the Provisionist statment and the problems when Flowers opens the flood gates and allows anyone in to Provisionism.
Link to Full Video: • The Vagueness of Provi...

[@ManassehJones]

Your videos are excellent. Please continue preaching Truth.

[@aletheia8054]

Keep up the videos with the link. This is a good channel. Thanks for doing this.

[@ManassehJones]

Pro-Vision-ists can NEVER speak from a first person perspectives. Refutting their anathema self willed gospel is easy, because all you have to do is keep them from talking from a second or third party perspective. What about you, Leighton? Do you believe that what you preach and teach is your personal testimony, or a general open Theistic doctrine? Theyll never answer first party questions. They cant. It condemns them.

[@CCShorts]

Great point. I haven’t thought of using first party questions yet but I will now. *Provisionist Tactic of Negative Theology:* The Provisionist also uses the tactic of negative theology to avoid exposing their inconsistencies and keep their own views as vague and hidden as possible. Negative theology is a theological approach that seeks to describe God by negation, that is, by denying what God is not, rather than affirming what God is. In this approach, God is seen as beyond human understanding, and therefore any attempt to positively define God will always fall short. In the context of Provisionism, negative theology is used to avoid exposing inconsistencies in their own views. By keeping their own views vague and surface-level, they can avoid making positive statements that could be exposed as inconsistent or incoherent. Instead, they may rely on negative statements or denials to create an impression of depth and complexity, while avoiding any concrete claims that could be scrutinized by others. This tactic allows the position to maintain a level of ambiguity and obscurity, which can make it difficult for others to challenge or critique their ideas. By avoiding clear, positive claims, they can avoid being held accountable for inconsistencies or contradictions in their own views. However, this approach also has intentional limitations, as this tactic make it difficult for others to understand or engage with their ideas. Without clear statements or positive claims, it is difficult to determine what the position actually believes or advocates for. This can create confusion and mistrust, as others may feel that they are being misled or manipulated. In summary, the Provisionist use of negative theology as a tactic can be effective in avoiding exposure of inconsistencies in their own views, but it may also limit their ability to engage in productive dialogue and collaboration with others.

[@ManassehJones]

@CCShorts I accepted Leightons offer to come on his show to refute his lover of self false doctrine. He banned me on his platform. He can't debate an elect son of God, with the Spirit, in an open questioning diologue. John 3:19-20 says he can't. Their doctrine is so easy to refute simply by making them share their personal testimony as it aligns with their doctrine. It doesn't, it can't, they know it, and they hide behind their echo chamber channel. If you're reading this Leighton....👋👋. Accept my acceptance on your show right here 👇.

[@aletheia8054]

Flowers is a downright ConMan without a doubt. And he clearly contradicts his own self repeatedly here in this video. However he almost gets it right here and the Calvinist is wrong. A man is not guilty for the sins of the father. Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. If a man is not guilty for the sin of his own father he is certainly not guilty for the sin of Adam. He is guilty of his own sin which the Bible states repeatedly. Imputed guilt of Adams sin to everyone would be paganism. A man is guilty of his own sin just like Adam was. Romans 5

[@CCShorts]

Provisionism recognizes the biblical foundation of Calvinism on the surface level, but believes that there are deeper levels of understanding that are not in alignment with their own philosophy. They misrepresent Calvinism so as to establish a good starting point for beginners to see that they appear to have a more complete and accurate understanding of scripture that is only accessible through their own system of belief. Their intention, therefore, is to get Calvinism out of the way so that their view can take center stage on the surface level, making it more attractive and accessible to those who may be new to Christianity or less well-versed in theology. However, they do not intend to stop there. The position of Provisionism uses Calvinism as a platform to deceive people into believing unbiblical claims on a deeper level. They present their own system of belief as being more sophisticated and nuanced than Calvinism, using complex language and arguments to make it seem more credible. However, upon closer examination, their claims are found to be unsupported by scripture or even directly contradicted by it. In essence, Provisionism seeks to use Calvinism as a stepping stone towards their own system of belief, while also using it as a tool to manipulate and deceive others. While they may claim to be biblically sound on the surface level, their ultimate goal is to promote their own agenda, regardless of its biblical validity. One tactic the Provisionist use a false dichotomy to misrepresent Calvinism. False dichotomy is a logical fallacy where only two options are presented, when in fact there more possibilities or shades of meaning. In this case, the Provisionist would present a false dichotomy by implying that Calvinism believes that if God determines that a thing occurs on the storyline level of creation, then God must be part of the storyline created causes in creation. By doing so, they create a false either/or scenario that presents Calvinism as endorsing the idea that God is a direct cause of sin alongside other created beings. However, this misrepresents actual Calvinism, as true Calvinism teaches that God is not a created cause alongside other created causes. Instead, Calvinism affirms that God is the Transcendent cause of everything that occurs, as the creator and sustainer of all things. God is not a part of the created world, but is rather separate and sovereign over it. Therefore, the Provisionist false dichotomy presented creates a distorted view of Calvinism that is not accurate or reflective of the true beliefs of Calvinism. By relentlessly implying that Calvinism endorses the idea of God being a direct cause of sin, they misrepresent the complex and nuanced understanding of God's sovereignty and voluntary willing that is central to Calvinist thought. The Provisionists also use the tactic of oversimplification to misrepresent Calvinism. Oversimplification is a logical fallacy where a complex idea is reduced to a simple, often distorted, form. In this case, the position may take out important distinctions made by Calvinists in their statements to create an oversimplified version of Calvinism that does not reflect the nuanced understanding of the their true beliefs. For example, they may remove the distinction between a "natural person" and a "spiritual person" in Calvinist thought. Calvinism teaches that a natural person is able to have a natural understanding of the word of God, but they are not able to accept or understand the things of the Spirit without being born of God first. On the other hand, a spiritual person has been born of God and is able to understand and accept the things of the Spirit, including the Gospel, as the power and wisdom of God unto salvation. By removing the distinction between natural and spiritual persons, the Provisionist creates an oversimplified version of Calvinism that suggests both types of individuals are able to accept and understand the things of the Spirit, as the power of God unto salvation, instead of foolishness. This oversimplification ignores the crucial role that being born of God plays in the Calvinist understanding of salvation and the reception of spiritual truth. In doing so, Provisionism misrepresents Calvinism by presenting an inaccurate and distorted version of its teachings. By simplifying complex ideas in this way, they create a false impression of consistency where there is actually nuance and complexity in Calvinist thought. The Provisionist also uses the tactic of negative theology to avoid exposing their inconsistencies and keep their own views as vague and hidden as possible. Negative theology is a theological approach that seeks to describe God by negation, that is, by denying what God is not, rather than affirming what God is. In this approach, God is seen as beyond human understanding, and therefore any attempt to positively define God will always fall short. In the context of Provisionism, negative theology is used to avoid exposing inconsistencies in their own views. By keeping their own views vague and surface-level, they can avoid making positive statements that could be exposed as inconsistent or incoherent. Instead, they may rely on negative statements or denials to create an impression of depth and complexity, while avoiding any concrete claims that could be scrutinized by others. This tactic allows the position to maintain a level of ambiguity and obscurity, which can make it difficult for others to challenge or critique their ideas. By avoiding clear, positive claims, they can avoid being held accountable for inconsistencies or contradictions in their own views. However, this approach also has intentional limitations, as this tactic make it difficult for others to understand or engage with their ideas. Without clear statements or positive claims, it is difficult to determine what the position actually believes or advocates for. This can create confusion and mistrust, as others may feel that they are being misled or manipulated. In summary, the Provisionist use of negative theology as a tactic can be effective in avoiding exposure of inconsistencies in their own views, but it may also limit their ability to engage in productive dialogue and collaboration with others.

[@aletheia8054]

@@CCShorts there’s no such thing as provisionism. It’s a term coined by one guy, and only used by a handful of people .

[@CCShorts]

@@aletheia8054 I agree. I’m just trying to demonstrate the coin has no value before it gets to far into circulation. Please share this article to whoever you might think needs to read it.

[@aletheia8054]

@@CCShorts Lol. That’s a good way to put it. Ok

[@aletheia8054]

@@CCShorts Share some of my videos that I made about that con man. Appreciate it.

[@aletheia8054]

Imputed guilt of a mans sin is a pagan heresy concept. One of the reasons I’m not a Calvinist.