My self will which was opposed to God was overcome by God's Mercy and grace.
I would never have believed with my self will. No man can. My belief and salvation was 100% of God.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Why Provisionism Is Not Biblical
- Thread starter Zaatar71
- Start date
I would never have believed with my self will. No man can. My belief and salvation was 100% of God.
I do not have a clue why you would teach that one who responds to God's offer of salvation to someone who needs it and for whom he has provided it is somehow not an act of the grace of God. Whether this one who needs it receives it or rejects it does not negate the fact that God is dispensing his grace to that person. What principle has Mr Flowers substituted in place of the grace of God in his plan of salvation?
I have heard him in live debates say; Man is Response -able. He denies the effects of the fall.
That he can believe first, apart from the Holy Spirit doing anything. He denies the truth as found in1 cor.2. He has been questioned on it, but holds that men have full ability, which is man centered nonsense.
In his presentation man believes first, then God saves him.
I think the difference in theological views among some is the failure to understand and define biblical terms. I think Calvinists like yourself mis-define salvation and what it is and what happens when a sinner is saved. Earlier you said that one must have the Spirit of God before they can have faith to be saved when the biblical definition of salvation is receiving the Spirit of God and of Christ by faith. I could quote verses proving that unequivocally but I know it would avail nothing. I will try just one. Ro 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
I encourage you to read Romans 8 and Ga 3 and believe the words.
I do believe both Chapters;
Rom8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. You and Leighton believe a man can do what this text He cannot do.
Watch now, the Spirit must indwell a person first, for that to happen;9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Gal.3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Only the Spirit can place us supernaturally
IN CHRIST...we do not do it, He does it.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Do you know what is meant by Pelagian?
what is pelagianism - Bing
Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.www.bing.com
Sure I have heard the term used any number of times by calvinists. You throw it around like some great got ya. In reality I have not seen anyone on this board that would even come close to fitting even what you calvinists think it means.
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
I don't think you do any more than the rest of us. I'm not interested in chastising someone who has a different view of how these things work out theologically. I think scripture teaches both frankly. Lydia seems to have had her eyes opened and yet she did seem to show some prior interest in things of God. She did not seem to hate God before she heard the gospel. Nicodemus was told he had to be born again, clearly a passive thing, and after being told it happens like the wind where you can't tell how it happens he is told that if you have faith you are born again and it is not clear at all here if you believe because you are born again or if by believing you become born again. That the two are linked is all we know for sure. But we do know that for our part, all we can consciously do is believe. So it is correct I think to tell people they can believe and believe immediately, without any preparation, with the only qualification is to understand that they have a need to come to Christ. And it may surprise you to know that the Calvinists also say that and promise that Christ will receive anyone who does so. They would say that the best way to tell if you are elect is to realize that this stuff is now important to you and that it appears to be true. They would say that this is a work of the Holy Spirit though.
If you want to analyze how this happens and express it in theological terms using all scripture I would personally suggest that if you have to pick a system what we call Calvinism best describes the whole of soteriology. I do personally have some doubts about certain aspects of that theology. And I like to discuss these things but as far as I am concerned I see how one can come to the same conclusions Flowers has so he really doesn't offend me by his beliefs.
I do have some complaints regarding his debate techniques and the way he uses quotes and video excerpts from others and takes them out of context to make it seem like they agree with him when they really were not aware that that particular issue was at hand.
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
Pelagianism as it relates to Dr. Flowers is something I noticed on my own before I saw the video by the Lutheran discussing it. And if I remember right, part of what honked him off was Flowers using quotes from him making it seem like he agreed with Dr. Flowers when in fact they were taken out of context. That's what I meant above.
My own concerns were just that Dr. Flowers does deemphasize the idea of the necessity of the Holy Spirit's work even in a sense of conviction and persuasion, like a classical Arminian. He does openly claim that we have complete ability totally of our own, to understand and evaluate the provided information and then decide to come to Christ. He may even be right and I certainly don't think he's a heretic. But it is way beyond the way most non-Calvinist Baptists understand soteriology. Most Baptists (non-Calvinist) believe that without the Holy Spirit you will not be saved. They pray that God will change hearts and minds. We sing "all is vain unless the Spirit of the Holy one comes down" and so on. That is my beef with him but a lot of folks in my church respect him while they speak of salvation in very Calvinistic terms while all the while denying Calvinism. Most of us probably shouldn't do theology.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
So what Flowers has said agree's with scripture and you disagree with what he said so it would mean that you do not agree with scripture.
Paul wrote
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with your heart you believe and are justified, and with your mouth you confess and are saved.
Paul wrote
Eph 1:13 And in Him, having heard and believed the word of truth—the gospel of your salvation—you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
John wrote
Joh 20:31 But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name.
Peter wrote
1Pe 1:8 Though you have not seen Him, you love Him; and though you do not see Him now, you believe in Him and rejoice with an inexpressible and glorious joy,
1Pe 1:9 now that you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls.
So none of these apostles got it right according to you?
Last edited:
I like all these verses,however I understand them.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Do you not think you have the ability to understand the gospel message? If it were that hard then how do you explain a child being able to grasp it?
If you say it is only because the Holy Spirit enables them then please explain why He does not enable all people since God desires all to come to repentance.
Further if the Holy Spirit enables all people then it finally comes down to whether the person wants to trust in or reject God which is what I see Flowers saying.
Have you heard him say that you do not need any influence from God?
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Your arrogance is showing Z.
How you understand them is not the test Z. It is what do they actually say.
The reality is that you cannot understand them as you contradict what they say.
Paul, John and Peter all said the same thing, one has to believe before they are saved. This is the same thing that Flowers says and you say he is wrong.
Here are some another verses that you do not understand Z.
Joh 3:14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
Joh 3:15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
Man has to make the choice Z. Where you error is that you think God makes the choice for them.
It seems that many calvinists confuse influence with force. God influences through many various means such as creation, conviction of sin, the gospel message. But none of these will force someone to believe. The man still has to choose to trust.
You have allowed yourself to be lead astray by a 4th century philosophy based on pagan teachings. Come back to the clear word of God Z.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you should listen to this video. I would suggest that you have come to the wrong conclusion.
Or this one
I was able to find both of these in just a few minutes so I am curious how you came to the conclusion you have in regard to Flower's.
Last edited:
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
I listened to the first video you posted above. The work of the Holy Spirit he talks about is that of providing the word, and the means. He emphasizes the provision of the mechanics and the information. What he dances around is the direct work of the Holy Spirit upon a person to directly open their mind or enlighten or convict. People should look at the video themselves.
Listening carefully to the first video proves my point.
I find this theme pervasive in his work. I think he goes beyond classical Arminians who firmly held that the Holy Spirit had to directly influence a person, separate from just provision of the means, or else no one would be saved. Even though the Arminians believe the influence is more of the nature of persuasion compared to Calvinists - the point is, they go further than Flowers. This, I guess is the reason for the charges of Pelagianism.
Please understand that I don't use Pelagianism as an insult but just as shorthand for identification. The fact is that in practice, modern Arminians are more semi-pelagian than they used to be, more like Flowers, and for what it's worth, Calvinists who became Calvinist in the internet era are more deterministic than the Puritans in my opinion. I really don't see much use in using these labels anymore, frankly. Many of my fellow Baptists nowadays, if you used the labels, would be semi-pelagian in getting saved and then almost hyper-Calvinist in staying saved. That's just an observation.
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
I would have liked your answer to my post to have been the Calvinistic rebuttal to my presentation of the resurrected Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, giving these apostles proof of his resurrection by showing them his wounds so they would know that he had physically come out of the tomb where they put him and he was alive.
Read the text. None of them received the indwelling Holy Spirit until they had believed in his person, he was the son of God, and that he had risen from the dead. After they believed the evidence Jesus breathed on them and said "receive the Holy Ghost."
Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
This is the first time since Adam that he had breathed the Holy Ghost into a man. Eight days later 11 men went from Jerusalem to a mountain appointed by the Lord and 10 of them were saved, after the manner that the Bible defines salvation, and one of them, Thomas was not. Thomas was then saved, acknowledging Jesus as Lord.
Sin separated the Spirit from Adam because he was not sealed but Jesus said he would never leave these men because he put away sin by the sacrifice of himself and sin has no more dominion over them.
The Holy Spirit was not even mentioned in this whole narrative until after these men had believed the gospel, (they had already acknowledged him as the Christ and son of God at least two times before). Now they must believe that he died, was buried, and rose again from the dead.
There is no way to superimpose Calvinist salvation over this. It will not work as Calvinism is defined by Zaatar71 and his teacher's article.
Calvinism does not teach the way of salvation accurately. Beware!
Last edited:
DaveXR650
Well-Known Member
I don't think I would use Thomas as an example of being saved. He was a chosen follower of Jesus before Jesus had accomplished his work on the cross and thus the situation cannot be compared to later evangelism. And if you insist on using an original disciple this way a Calvinist might ask you how come Jesus hand picked all the disciples without putting out a general invitation for anyone who wanted to join and then waiting to see how many disciples he would get.
Look, you guys on both sides need to turn down the animosity. There is no "Calvinist salvation", as opposed I guess to real salvation, to be imposed. It's the same thing. I listen to a lot of Dr. Flowers videos and don't agree with him on everything. But one thing I do like about him is that he refers to Calvinists as brothers and agrees that at the point of salvation it's the same. Disagreements are on the cause and effect and origin of our coming to Christ. Don't make too much out of this. And yes, I admit that overall, Calvinists are just as bad at doing this to non-Cals as you guys are dishing it back. That don't make it right.
Again. I tend to think highly of Calvinist soteriology, as a system, if you have to pick one. I don't agree with all its points. I also think that Flowers is a completely orthodox fellow believer. But I have areas where I disagree with him too.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Where in scripture do you see this "direct work of the Holy Spirit upon a person to directly open their mind or enlighten or convict." You can point to Lydia but she already knew and trusted in God. She learned about Christ but she was already saved or do you think faith in God is not enough?
God provides many means of influence as I have pointed out before but you seem to think He has to force man to change their mind about Him. That is not biblical.
If the influence of God was irresistible then since God desires all to come to repentance then why do not all come to repentance? Does man have the ability to overcome God's irresistible power?
Influence is not causation. What do you think Flower's was saying regarding the work of the Holy Spirit?
It seems to me that you are expecting him to hold the same irresistible dragging view that many calvinists put forward. That view is not found in scripture so why would you expect him to support it?
Flower's having been a calvinist would be well aware of that point of view and now strives to point out the errors found in it.
Pelagianism teaches that humans have the inherent ability to choose good and seek God without the need for divine grace, denying the concept of original sin. This view emphasizes that salvation is achieved through individual effort and moral choices rather than through God's grace alone.
But that is not what we see Flower's saying. Can you point out any video where you see him doing such? All I have heard him say is that those who believe in Him are saved by the grace of God. Which is a biblical view would you not agree?
Original sin is biblical the calvinist view of original sin is not.
So, in your world, Jonah 2;9 says-
But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the ----Man!.
I don't think you and Mr Flowers are right about that, Dave. If there is one thing about the Christian faith that is non negotiable it is the person and work of Jesus Christ.
The resurrection of Jesus Christ marked the transition from Law to Promise as it pertained to salvation of the Jews. Eventually it would transition to the grace of God as gentiles were included. Gentiles did not have a promise of salvation except through the promise to Abraham in his covenant where he said "in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. It did not mean there was a different way that Jews and gentiles would be saved. Being renewed into the image of Jesus Christ by the Spirit is the definition of salvation. Jesus Christ is the image of God on the earth. He is not less the image of God in heaven because of this. He is a trinity, something no man is or can be since Adam before the fall because sin is in the world and sin rules over men as a sovereign and men without the Spirit obey it (Rom 5). Jesus Christ is the son of David, the son of Abraham but he is the son of Man whose genealogy goes all the way back to the fallen Adam through Mary, his mother. He is not of the bloodline of Adam and his offspring else he could not be our savior. His Father is Jehovah God. He is the God Man and though tempted with the temptation that is common to us all he never sinned.
Jesus Christ said in John 3 that he came down to earth from the Father. He is the everlasting God and he came down as a Spirit to indwell the body that God had prepared for him in the womb of Mary and as the preacher, Solomon said, the spirit of man, the soul, comes from God. This is the image of God he intended for man and it is the image that is renewed in man through Jesus Christ who dealt with the penalty of sin by enduring the penalty of the sinner, death, separating of the soul and body, the first death, and by enduring the second death, which is the separation of body and soul from God and his wrath. He did this by a one time event of shedding his eternal blood, God's blood, on that cross, the second death being from 12 to 3 PM when the world went totally dark.
God had now reconciled the world to himself through Christ but this was not a worldwide salvation of every man but a sacrifice for every man in the world that they could claim as their own because God said he was propitiated on behalf of the whole world through Christ but each man must come to him in the name of Jesus Christ with this sacrifice. When they did, he promised he would give them eternal life and we read in the Bible that his life is the Spirit. He is the gift of God and he is Life.
Salvation is a personal transaction between each sinner and God and whosoever will, let him come and take of the water of life (the Spirit) freely.
Do not confuse this marvelous truth with false teaching.