If God is Not Sovereign, Then There is No Grace

[DaveXR650]

Are you suggesting that Flowers changed MacArthur's words?

No. But what I am saying is that Flowers selectively edits and presents excerpts that support a point he is trying to make. John Owen and Jonathan Edwards both preached that way too. Yet to present what they said as them not being Calvinists would take some explanation.

Fortunately, they gave explanation. Owen said that all our interaction with God will be by using our rational and thinking minds so that even if we are regenerated before having faith our perception and all appeals to salvations will be to your rational and sensible will. Without all the gobbledegoop it just means you hear preaching and then decide to come to Christ.

For what it's worth, I think it is perfectly legitimate to say that our free will is somehow involved in our salvation or damnation and you are correct in asserting that. My love for Calvinist writing is mostly because of their practical and teaching value. I was reading them for several years before I even understood the soteriology and their views on determinism.

 

[Brightfame52]

1 John 2:2 says Jesus is the means of reconciliation for the whole of humanity. 2 Peter 2:1 tells us Jesus bought even those heading for destruction.
Thus Christ died to provide the means of reconciliation for "all humanity," as He died as a ransom for all.

Sorry Christ died only for His elect, to say otherwise is a false gospel.

 

[Brightfame52]

You and @KenH are denying the word of God.

Those who teach Christ died for all mankind teach a false gospel, He only died for and saved by His death the elect.

 

[Silverhair]

No. But what I am saying is that Flowers selectively edits and presents excerpts that support a point he is trying to make. John Owen and Jonathan Edwards both preached that way too. Yet to present what they said as them not being Calvinists would take some explanation.

Fortunately, they gave explanation. Owen said that all our interaction with God will be by using our rational and thinking minds so that even if we are regenerated before having faith our perception and all appeals to salvations will be to your rational and sensible will. Without all the gobbledegoop it just means you hear preaching and then decide to come to Christ.

For what it's worth, I think it is perfectly legitimate to say that our free will is somehow involved in our salvation or damnation and you are correct in asserting that. My love for Calvinist writing is mostly because of their practical and teaching value. I was reading them for several years before I even understood the soteriology and their views on determinism.

The point he was trying to make was that MacArthur contradicted himself which from what I heard, he did.

That was not selective editing it was just posting two comments by the same person. Flowers did not say Mac was not a calvinist did he?

I understand that you do not like Flowers, I do not agree with all that he says. But he does make some good points about calvinist views.

 

[Silverhair]

Those who teach Christ died for all mankind teach a false gospel, He only died for and saved by His death the elect.

Then you are in disagreement with the Holy Spirit BF. Not a good place to be.

1Ti 2:3 This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

1Jn 2:2 He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

But you have put yourself offside with scripture many times in your posts.

We have been down this road before and you as then refuse to trust the word of God.

 

[DaveXR650]

The point he was trying to make was that MacArthur contradicted himself which from what I heard, he did.

That was not selective editing it was just posting two comments by the same person. Flowers did not say Mac was not a calvinist did he?

What Flowers did there is unethical because he knows for a fact, as a former teacher of Calvinism, that there is a very easy explanation for that type of preaching. Therefore to present it as showing something which was not on Mac's mind at that time is unethical. He has done this before with William Lane Craig and with the Lutheran Cooper, who actually made his own video to clarify what Flowers had done.

Say for instance, I'm an extreme hyper-Calvinist and I believe that giving out the gospel is just God calling all the elect from before the foundation of the world, to himself. My preaching is still going to be Christ, and him crucified, and a call to faith and repentance. That would all be biblical unless I went to either extreme. One of which would be to say all the "elect" will be saved no matter what so preaching is useless, or, to think I must either convince or cajole or even pressure people to get saved or else I'm causing them to go to Hell. Both extremes would be of course wrong.

 

[Silverhair]

What Flowers did there is unethical because he knows for a fact, as a former teacher of Calvinism, that there is a very easy explanation for that type of preaching. Therefore to present it as showing something which was not on Mac's mind at that time is unethical. He has done this before with William Lane Craig and with the Lutheran Cooper, who actually made his own video to clarify what Flowers had done.

Say for instance, I'm an extreme hyper-Calvinist and I believe that giving out the gospel is just God calling all the elect from before the foundation of the world, to himself. My preaching is still going to be Christ, and him crucified, and a call to faith and repentance. That would all be biblical unless I went to either extreme. One of which would be to say all the "elect" will be saved no matter what so preaching is useless, or, to think I must either convince or cajole or even pressure people to get saved or else I'm causing them to go to Hell. Both extremes would be of course wrong.

How do you know what was on Mac's mind? I just listened to what he said and one contradicts the other from what I heard.

You cannot say they have no ability to choose and they have the ability to choose and expect people not to call that a contradiction.

Now I have not heard Mac's full talk and he may have clarified his point but as it stands he did not.

If that is what a Hyper Cal would call the gospel then they do not understand the gospel. Plus for the Hyper Cal they would have to say God is just calling all the already saved and their repentance or faith has nothing to do with it. So sorry it is not biblical but it is calvinism.

 

[Van]

Sorry Christ died only for His elect, to say otherwise is a false gospel.

Claims such as above, lacking any reference to support from scripture, are a diversion from bible studied edification.

1 John 2:2 says Jesus is the means of reconciliation for the whole of humanity. 2 Peter 2:1 tells us Jesus bought even those heading for destruction.
Thus Christ died to provide the means of reconciliation for "all humanity," as He died as a ransom for all.

Every verse rewritten by Calvinism demonstrates they actually believe they are sovereign, and God just makes suggestions.

Here are their rewrites. No lost person ever seeks God. A natural (not born anew) person cannot understand any of the things of God. God did not choose individuals through faith in the truth. Many of the lost did not seek the narrow door. People entering the kingdom could not be prevented from going in because of irresistible grace. Faith is according to works.

I could go on and on...

 

[KenH]

God is just calling all the already saved and their repentance or faith has nothing to do with it.

The Bible teaches that salvation is 100% by the free grace of God, not 80% by God's actions and 20% by man's response, not 90% by God actions and 10% by man's response, not even 99.44% by God's actions and 00.56% by man's response. Salvation is 100% by God's actions and God's actions alone.

Faith in the finished work of Christ as the Lord our Righteousness and repentance from dead works are fruits that result from the work of regeneration by the Holy Spirit in giving spiritual life to God's elect, those God chose before the world began and gave to His Son to be their Surety.

There are really only two religions in the world - free grace or free will. And the only one of the two in which there is salvation is free grace.

 

[Silverhair]

The Bible teaches that salvation is 100% by the free grace of God, not 80% by God's actions and 20% by man's response, not 90% by God actions and 10% by man's response, not even 99.44% by God's actions and 00.56% by man's response. Salvation is 100% by God's actions and God's actions alone.

Faith in the finished work of Christ as the Lord our Righteousness and repentance from dead works are fruits that result from the work of regeneration by the Holy Spirit in giving spiritual life to God's elect, those God chose before the world began and gave to His Son to be their Surety.

There are really only two religions in the world - free grace or free will. And the only one of the two in which there is salvation is free grace.

What point are you trying to make Ken?

Of course we are saved by the grace of God. Did you doubt that Ken? Or do you think others would doubt that?

The bible is clear
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith...
...and that not of yourselves

Salvation is the gift of God, we do not earn it or deserve it.

Man has to freely respond to the drawing of God as He will not force anyone to trust in Him.
Rom 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

You are letting your calvinism cloud your mind Ken. It is because of man's free will that he can be rightly judged for rejecting the only means of salvation. If there is no free will then all choices of man have been determined and man is not responsible for them.

 

[KenH]

Man has to freely respond

Man does freely respond, after he is given the willingness to do so by God.

Psalm 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.

If there is no free will then all choices of man have been determined and man is not responsible for them.

Not an atom moves in this entire universe except at the direction of Almighty God. Yet, man is still responsible, for any time I sin - in thought, word, or deed - I am the one thinking, I am the one speaking, I am the one acting. It is the thought in my brain, those are my lips and tongue forming the words, those are my arms and legs acting.

I'd rather be what some in false religion call, "God's robot", and be saved, than to have some alleged free will and go to hell.

 

[Ascetic X]

The Bible teaches that salvation is 100% by the free grace of God, not 80% by God's actions and 20% by man's response, not 90% by God actions and 10% by man's response, not even 99.44% by God's actions and 00.56% by man's response. Salvation is 100% by God's actions and God's actions alone.

Faith in the finished work of Christ as the Lord our Righteousness and repentance from dead works are fruits that result from the work of regeneration by the Holy Spirit in giving spiritual life to God's elect, those God chose before the world began and gave to His Son to be their Surety.

There are really only two religions in the world - free grace or free will. And the only one of the two in which there is salvation is free grace.

Salvation is 100% by grace through faith when we repent and trust in Christ’s sacrifice for our sins, believing God raised Him from the dead.

Regeneration by the Holy Spirit happens after we call upon the Lord and repent, not before. Peter and Paul make this abundantly clear.

Acts 2:38

Peter replied, “(1) Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And (2) you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

Romans 19:13

For whosoever shall (1) call upon the name of the Lord shall (2) be saved.

Romans 10:9

That if thou shalt (1) confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt (2) be saved.

*** Thus, we are not saved, and then call upon the Lord.***

 

[KenH]

Salvation is 100% by grace by faith when we repent and trust in Christ’s sacrifice for our sins, believing God raised Him from the dead.

You say "100% by grace" but then you say it is only if man does something. You are contradicting yourself.

If salvation is "100% by grace", (and it is), then salvation cannot be dependent on man doing something.

If salvation is dependent upon man doing something, (and it isn't), then salvation is not "100% by grace".

God's elect respond after they have been empowered by God; it is not that God's elect do something, and then God empowers them.

Psalm 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.

 

[DaveXR650]

How do you know what was on Mac's mind? I just listened to what he said and one contradicts the other from what I heard.

You cannot say they have no ability to choose and they have the ability to choose and expect people not to call that a contradiction.

I know because he repeatedly shared his views on this. And he said that the question would be raised as to if this was a contradiction.

And I am reasonably sure Flowers was aware of this when he posted what he did. Right at the 4:30 mark he talks specifically and in a lot of detail about these "contradictions". By the way, I don't personally have any problem with the idea that the extent of the atonement could be "potential" as some say. It could very well be.

 

[DaveXR650]

Man has to freely respond to the drawing of God as He will not force anyone to trust in Him.
Rom 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

I tend to think MacArthur is correct in that there will always be to us a lot of unresolved tensions. It's funny but once I was listening to James White and he said something like "You'd think with all this talk about free will, that some people think that the whole thing is about our free will!" And then I got to thinking, well, the opening scene so to speak of man in the garden has a tree in the midst, totally accessible, with a warning not to eat from it. Maybe it is all about free will. Who knows? Mac at least admits it.

 

[Silverhair]

Man does freely respond, after he is given the willingness to do so by God.

Psalm 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.



Not an atom moves in this entire universe except at the direction of Almighty God. Yet, man is still responsible, for any time I sin - in thought, word, or deed - I am the one thinking, I am the one speaking, I am the one acting. It is the thought in my brain, those are my lips and tongue forming the words, those are my arms and legs acting.

I'd rather be what some in false religion call, "God's robot", and be saved, than to have some alleged free will and go to hell.

If you understood scripture you would know that Psa 110 is speaking of end times. But I am not surprised that you would use that verse as calvinists do have the habit of using out of context verses in the attempt to support their view.

If not an atom moves except at the direction of God then how could man move unless God determined they do so? You have just shown that your view makes God the ultimate sinner. All sin only happens because He directs it.

Your view is not biblical in the least. And the term "robot" would fit your version of religion quite well as your every thought and move has to have been determined for you. That is a sad way to look at God's creation.

 

[KenH]

That is a sad way to look at God's creation.

It is the glorious teaching of the Bible that the God Who created EVERYTHING is almighty, all-powerful, all-sovereign for His purposes and for His glory.

The God of the Bible is not the god who is a failure extolled by the false religions.

"By carelessness in Bible study on the part of many -- and evident wresting of the Scriptures on the part of some -- many professing Christians now claim to worship a god who is a failure! Often these people slander the Bible by saying it contains two contradictory lines of teaching which cannot be reconciled. They may claim to believe in a sovereign God, but at the same time think mankind has a "free will" by which he can resist God and hinder His working. Thus, they take the Thomist/Arminian view and promote free-willism. (Nowhere does the Bible teach that man's will is free from his depraved nature!)

This free will system of doctrine sets forth a god who is a wimp. He loves everybody (in spite of clear Bible teaching that God has set His love only on His elect people). The god of this theological system is trying to save everybody, but cannot because they will not let him. Therefore this god is a failure!

Most often, adherents to this Catholic system of theology deny vehemently that they teach that their god is a failure. However, occasionally one of their preachers will say in words or substance, "God has done everything He can do to save you. The rest is up to you". Or perhaps their preaching takes the slant that you must "let God" do this or that in your life. If you do not "let God" He cannot accomplish His purpose in your life, according to the god-is-a-failure theory.

As further proof, we quote one prominent "Baptist" (BBF) preacher of some years ago as representative of this Thomist/Arminian view. He wrote, ". . . hell is a ghastly monument to the failure of the Triune God to save the multitudes who are there . . . sinners go to hell because God Almighty couldn't save them! He did all He could. He failed." [Noel Smith, "Universal Atonement," Defender Magazine, Springfield, MO., U.S.A., December, 1956]."

- source: Is God a Failure?

 

[Silverhair]

I know because he repeatedly shared his views on this. And he said that the question would be raised as to if this was a contradiction.

And I am reasonably sure Flowers was aware of this when he posted what he did. Right at the 4:30 mark he talks specifically and in a lot of detail about these "contradictions". By the way, I don't personally have any problem with the idea that the extent of the atonement could be "potential" as some say. It could very well be.

I listen to his comments and he still contradicts himself. Man can't but man is responsible. He, as you would expect, gives his answer from his callvinist position.

He says to trust the scriptures when he was speaking on the atonement and he said it has to be limited as if it were not then all sins would be paid for. Then if people were judged for their sins that would be double jeopardy.

But if Mac is right then why the commands to repent? And not just for the calvinist elect but for everyone to do so.
Act 17:30 Although God overlooked the ignorance of earlier times, He now commands all people everywhere to repent.

Plus if the atonement took away their sins then what does this mean?
Act 3:19 Repent, then, and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped away,

But that is not what the atonement did. Christ covered all man's sins but if they do not repent and trust in Him then they will be held responsible for those sins.
1Jn 2:2 He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

 

[Silverhair]

It is the glorious teaching of the Bible that the God Who created EVERYTHING is almighty, all-powerful, all-sovereign for His purposes and for His glory.

The God of the Bible is not the god who is a failure extolled by the false religions.

"By carelessness in Bible study on the part of many -- and evident wresting of the Scriptures on the part of some -- many professing Christians now claim to worship a god who is a failure! Often these people slander the Bible by saying it contains two contradictory lines of teaching which cannot be reconciled. They may claim to believe in a sovereign God, but at the same time think mankind has a "free will" by which he can resist God and hinder His working. Thus, they take the Thomist/Arminian view and promote free-willism. (Nowhere does the Bible teach that man's will is free from his depraved nature!)

This free will system of doctrine sets forth a god who is a wimp. He loves everybody (in spite of clear Bible teaching that God has set His love only on His elect people). The god of this theological system is trying to save everybody, but cannot because they will not let him. Therefore this god is a failure!

Most often, adherents to this Catholic system of theology deny vehemently that they teach that their god is a failure. However, occasionally one of their preachers will say in words or substance, "God has done everything He can do to save you. The rest is up to you". Or perhaps their preaching takes the slant that you must "let God" do this or that in your life. If you do not "let God" He cannot accomplish His purpose in your life, according to the god-is-a-failure theory.

As further proof, we quote one prominent "Baptist" (BBF) preacher of some years ago as representative of this Thomist/Arminian view. He wrote, ". . . hell is a ghastly monument to the failure of the Triune God to save the multitudes who are there . . . sinners go to hell because God Almighty couldn't save them! He did all He could. He failed." [Noel Smith, "Universal Atonement," Defender Magazine, Springfield, MO., U.S.A., December, 1956]."

- source: Is God a Failure?

Ken you can quote as many calvinist sources as you want but it will not change the word of God.

God has given man the ability to make real choices and will hold them responsible fro the choices they do make.

That you can not or rather will not see this is unfortunate.

According to your view God is a failure if He does not fit into the mold your theory has made for Him.

 

[Silverhair]

I tend to think MacArthur is correct in that there will always be to us a lot of unresolved tensions. It's funny but once I was listening to James White and he said something like "You'd think with all this talk about free will, that some people think that the whole thing is about our free will!" And then I got to thinking, well, the opening scene so to speak of man in the garden has a tree in the midst, totally accessible, with a warning not to eat from it. Maybe it is all about free will. Who knows? Mac at least admits it.

He is right in one point, we do not have all the answers. Actually I do not think we even know all the questions.

Yes I think that free will is the main issue in all these discussions.