Is Calvinism Biblical? Douglas Wilson and Steve Gregg Debate, Part 2 of 6
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2024
- TRANSCRIPT: opentheo.org/i/25490373890918... | In this debate between Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson, the topic of Calvinism and its biblical basis is explored. The two engage in a cross-examination, with Gregg questioning Wilson on his beliefs about predestination and God's sovereignty. Wilson argues that God determines everything that comes to pass, but he does not author evil, while Gregg challenges him on the idea of God being responsible for the sin and suffering in the world.
DEBATE PLAYLIST: • Is Calvinism Biblical?...
Part 2 of a 6 part debate between radio host and author Steve Gregg (thenarrowpath.com/biography.php) and renowned author and pastor Douglas Wilson (dougwils.com/about).
#calvinism #arminianism #debate #douglaswilson #dougwilson #thenarrowpath #stevegregg #freewill #predestination #tulip #soteriology #salvation #predetermined #god #sovereignty #accountability #culpability #damned #condemned #hell #heaven #choice
TRANSCRIPT: opentheo.org/i/2549037389091852587/is-calvinism-biblical-part-2 | In this debate between Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson, the topic of Calvinism and its biblical basis is explored. The two engage in a cross-examination, with Gregg questioning Wilson on his beliefs about predestination and God's sovereignty. Wilson argues that God determines everything that comes to pass, but he does not author evil, while Gregg challenges him on the idea of God being responsible for the sin and suffering in the world.
DEBATE PLAYLIST: czcams.com/play/PLtzt3JhaK2U7gWyGypPKqbkqsBCMp0t_s.html
Wow, that was amazingly good. I don’t know how many calvinists step up to the plate to debate Steve, but my guess is it’s a small and dwindling list.
I really want to like Doug Wilson, but there was some very snake-like twisting of words in this conversation. Subtly changing definitions in real time to try and trap him. I know it's a debate, but that felt strange.
For the Calvinist to affirm that God has determined with specificity every thought and bend of our will and also affirm that we are free to choose without seeing the inherent and obvious absurdity that both could be true lends credence to the idea that Calvinists are victims of a form of brain-washing. "The more God determines, the freer I get." Wow.
We believe in two types of decrees. That is how man’s free will can work with God’s decrees.
@@ShepherdMinistry Amen.
Doug Wilson, or anyone else, can't defend Calvinism because it is indefensible when presented in the light of the totality of Scripture. Over and over again, he begs the question, redefines terms, and goes outside of Scripture to creeds or philosophy to impose a certain understanding on it. Gregg, on the other hand, starts and begins with Scripture and explains it in light of other passages. As much as I love philosophy, to believe that one needs an education in it to properly understand the Bible is ludicrous.
Calvinism is easily defended by scripture. You have a tradition that blinds you from seeing God in control rather than man.
@philipmurray9796 Surely you jest. Calvinism is the epitome of tradition, creeds, and philosophy rather than Scripture. It can be traced directly back to Augustine, who originated Christian platonism and differed with the Church Fathers. Many of his teachings, such as the baptism of infants, were foreign to the Christian church until he introduced them. The same is true with divine determinism, which has Gnostic and Manichean roots. Yet he is considered a church father by Catholics and Calvinists alike even though he lived almost 400 after Jesus. There is a reason why most Calvinists will quote Calvin, Luther, Beza, Spurgeon, Piper, MacArthur, etc. more than the Bible. I suggest you take an honest look in the mirror and your tradition first before making such absurd claims.
@@-the_dark_knight Calvinism is proven by the Bible, not by men from church history. There would be no need for words like predestination, called, elect, chosen, etc. to even be in the Bible if those concepts were false. Your problem is with Scripture, not with some teacher calling themselves a Calvinist.
@philipmurray9796 Thank you for demonstrating the classic Calvinistic deflection. I gave you facts and examples, and you respond with a word salad. You keep your proud Calvinistic label. I instead choose to be a follower of Christ.
@@-the_dark_knight hopefully you will have the grace given to you to turn from your man centered doctrines and your eyes will be opened to the beautiful truths of God's sovereign grace found in Calvinism. Turn to Jesus my friend. Set aside your pride.
Thank you for your work brother Steve. .
I wonder how Doug would answer, “Did God create carnal reasoning?”
Also, why would exhaustive divine determinism be necessary in order for God to settle His love on me? The love of Christ could only be separated from me if it was His choice to do so. Am I wrong here?
Excellent 👍
In case you missed Part 1 ... czcams.com/video/c9vsUorh4RQ/video.html
Looking forward to part 6. I had such great difficulty listening to it in the opentheo website. The quality of the sound wasn't very good.
I really wish they would have handled the fundamental questions!
1. Did God choose who would spend eternity in hell? Calvinist avoid this as well because the obvious answer is yes. God did not elect them so he damned them. On judgement day the lost will have a just argument and say why are you casting me into eternal damnation when you would not permit me to be saved?
2. Did God determine all sin? This was touched on but not really drilled down on. If God determined all things he determined sin making God the author of sin just like DW admitted with the book illustration.
Actually, many (what I call, "Consistent" Calvinists") would say, "Yes - God DID chose who would spend eternity in hell - even before the foundation of the world or, obviously, before they were conceived." And, Yes, according to consistent Calvinism (that is, Calvinism followed to it's logical conclusions without evoking the "Mystery" exit) God DID determine all sin. I have to give John Piper credit here. He is consistent - and admits that yes, God ultimately decrees the sin as well as the fate of sinners from eternity past. I have just always struggled with, for example, God DETERMINING that one should be born blind (literally or otherwise) THEN, damning that one eternally for being blind. I see it all the time. Calvinists want it both ways: "God decrees ALL THINGS (that's ALL things - including rebellion against Him; rebellion that MUST be and cannot be otherwise because He decreed it) BUT, "God isn't responsible for what He has determined to be: Man's rebellion." Again, I'm a Calvinist who has been dealing with the ramificaitons of it for years and have been trying to come to a reasonable resolve. Over the past 50 years, these issues have kept me up at night.
God is the cause of all things. Yes even sin, yet that does not entail he violated the free will (desires to do and commit evil/sin) of the person. What's the problem here? God is not responsible, the one committing it is. God ordained Judas to betray Christ, Judas wanted to betray Christ. Judas is responsible. We need to be careful calling what God decrees evil and trying to place some standard on God. God does good and just because he is good and just.
@@SugoiEnglish1 Agreed. But why did "Judas want" to betray Christ? Because God ordained/determined/decreed that he WOULD.
Doug trying to squirm his way out of the first question. If God determined all things how is he not the author of sin. His answer makes no sense. The confessions of faith make no sense. You’ve got to be especially thick skinned not to know that when you give the answer that he did do, that people aren’t laughing.
That’s because you’re not understanding the Calvinist position of two types of decrees.
@@ShepherdMinistry I do understand it. I fully understand it. But that’s exactly what it is a ‘Calvinist position of two types of decree’. It’s not a biblical or Godly doctrine. I was a Calvinist for thirty years. Read it, debated it, fully understand it, defended it. But then …… well now I know the truth and the folly of such man made reasoning. Two decrees makes God either a liar by telling people He wants all to come to repentance, when He secretly knows they can’t. Not even that they won’t, but they can’t. Or it makes him a schizophrenic where he doesn’t really lnow what he wants or means, and you and I can agree these two ideas are not characteristics of the God of the bible. So, in essence, I do understand it. Fully. It’s because I understand it, I can reject it. Just listen with an open heart what Calvinists say ….. it makes no sense.
@@7CorgiGirl Ok, explain the decrees for me. Judging by your comments you do not understand it.
@@ShepherdMinistry seriously I can’t be bothered. You know them and I know them. It’s not the explaining them that’s the problem. It’s the appeal to mystery that’s the problem. There’s no mystery. It’s just confusion. Anyone who thinks they agree to it are just brainwashed confused. Like I admit I was. But no longer thank God. Calvinism is a different gospel. It’s a character assassination of God. But I’ve got covid. I feel dire. And I can’t be bothered. If you’re unsure of how wrong Calvinism is, listen to Leighton Flowers for a hundred hours or Warren Magrew or Steve’s 8 part teaching on Calvinism. Please don’t reply because I’m off to lie down and take a few paracetamol. Shake off this headache.
Here is the problem. God is the cause of all things...He has free will. It is part of who He is. The bible does not teach free will in that mankind can act free from God. Heb 1:3 Col 1:16-17. If He sustains all things and those texts do not tell us there are any exceptions including man's free will, then yes God is the cause of all. Your alternative God allowing things does not absolve Him from what you are accusing the Calvinists of either. For if God is all powerful and He ALLOWS Hitler to kill, when He can stop it and chooses not to stop it, He is culpable. Clear?
Doug Wilson: I’ll use scripture not carnal logic.
Next breath…
Doug Wilson: suppose Shakespeare blah blah Hamlet blah blah.
Steve quickly addressed this but why do Calvinists virtue signal about using scripture (only) then precede to use analogy after analogy?
Steve did the same with explaining the ship analogy. Everyone does that. That is how we give an illustration to further explain the text.
It's a Biblical analogy, Psalm 139:16
@@hudjahulos It's not a biblical analogy. "All my days are written in your book" doesn't mean I'm a fictional character that doesn't exist outside a book!
Mr Gregg seems to be saying that the information God knows comes from outside Himself. That God created open ended and creation then informs God.
That is where Free will folks end up logically. They are forced to that view because of the text.
@@SugoiEnglish1 forced to God being informed? I dont think the text demands that if you take the whole of scripture and what we know about God into consideration.
That's EXACTLY what he's saying! Man's free autonomous will always leaves God ignorant. Only when man acts does God react.
I listened to Part 1 and 2 but where is part 3? Let me say this about Doug Wilson's approach to the Bible. He said in Part 1 and repeated in Part 2 that "Common Sense and Logic must take a back seat to what Scripture says." And this is HUGE. Yes a HUGE ERROR...In order to get anywhere with the Bible a person MUST use Common Sense and Logic to understand anything properly...The Laws of Logic are inescapable unless you think Irrationality is Reasonable...God is Logic. Just as God is the Spirit of Truth and to Understand Him without Logic is a Form of Idolatry...The 3 Laws of Logic are Metaphysical Reflection of the Trinity and I hold this because God Cannot Violate these Laws Either...By the Way Steve Really Good Job accept for your View on Open Theism...I say this because Open Theism is True...Great Debate...We could use more of these...Thank you Steve...
That example about the pennies falling as they are determined because of God’s foreknowledge of all things was such false dichotomy. The premise of that idea erroneously limits the options of a sovereign God. If God is truly sovereign and has all ability, authority, and power to do as He wishes, He could just as easily create a situation that functions randomly while both knowing the end result and not determining it beforehand. My guy Steve explains it so clearly every time he makes the point that Calvinists describe a deterministic style of sovereignty as the only kind sovereignty that can exist. Haven’t seen a Calvinists truly engage that point yet.
TULIP is purpose built to take the focus off faith in Christ alone for salvation.
T - removes our requirement to believe in Jesus (says we can’t)
U - removes our requirement to believe in Jesus (says we’re already saved)
L - removes our requirement to believe in Jesus (says Jesus atonement wasn’t for all sin just the chosen, back to point U)
I - removes our requirement to believe in Jesus (says we can’t believe God will make us believe)
P - removes our requirement to believe in Jesus. (Says God will make us preserve)
Any teaching that takes the focus off Christ alone for salvation is a false teaching.
Calvinism says God chose the elect from eternity past, but they still have to believe in Jesus to be saved, but they can’t believe because they’re also totally depraved, so God has to make them believe because he wants them saved? and everyone else he “passes over”?
Ummm?
Meanwhile Bible:
For He is willing that none shall perish , and that all shall come to repentance.
You are scare of Calvinism because your scare of the glory of God.
If the author of Hamlet were de Sade, then you could probably have convicted him of indecency. What a terrible analogy.
Calvinists seem to always promote & repeat Calvinism & never have thought provoking content like C.S. Lewis. Kind of like those in cults.
38 minute mark … God only meant it didn’t enter my mind to “command you to do this thing”, and that God just knew they would. He then says “it did enter his head, but just as a knowing of about it.” What a joke of an interpretation. Calvinism teaches that God doesn’t just know things, but literally ordains and is the first cause of alllllll things. Saying God don’t command them to do it, while actually being 😢the first cause and ordaining it … is laughable.
At 14:00 (After saying that God wanted man to have a choice) Steve makes the observation that that "doesn't mean that God wanted the man to commit fornication, but God didn't stop him because He preferred for man to make the choice."
Doug's follow up: "We say that God prohibits certain things in His commandments - that's His preceptive will, His precepts, His commandments. So, when people sin, they are violating the will of God, which we could both find plenty of places in Scripture where God says, "You ought not to violate My will..."
Doug, HOW and WHY do people violate God's preceptive will? GOD DETERMINES THAT THEY VIOLATE HIS WILL --- then, holds them responsible/guilty for doing so. How is that not, in some form or fashion, God being responsible for man's sin?
Your objection was anticipated, and answered, by the Apostle Paul in Romans 9:19.
@@hudjahulos Lol... yep. And your (I mean no offense), "Typical comeback" from Rom. 9 was answered by Steve @ 29:00.
@stevegreggvideos. doesnt the resurrection on the last day clearly refute limited atonement. 1 corinthians 15:22 if all men both evil and good ressurect and only by Jesus came the ressurection of the dead. isnt that just checkmate? doesnt that prove His blood applied to all men and the proof is they resurrect.
1 Samuel 3:14 (LSB): 14 “Now therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.”
@@ShepherdMinistry BOOM!
Jesus came to raise the Dry bones in Ezk. Meaning to raise the spiritually dead. May be you are confused on the texts?
“Shakespeare is responsible for Hamlet’s sin but he can’t be tried for them.” If He is responsible for Hamlet’s sin then He is guilty of Hamlet’s sin! He could have written the book where Hamlet did not sin. The fact that men do sin PROVES that God gives men a free will. Thus making man the guilty sinner and not God!
The Calvinist's answer: The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith: "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; YET (and here is the catch) YET so as thereby is God neither the author of sin..."
False. Who says he could have made the book like that? That is an assertion. God works through the free choices of people. You haven't proved God gave man free will. FIND in the BIBLE please, then assert it. All you have is your intuition that you have a free will. God is the only one with free will in the absolute sense as that is part of His attributes sir. The fact that men sin is proof of total depravity. Thanks! But as for sin proving free will, not when Heb 1:3 Col 1:17 all teach that God sustains the creation and that there are no exclusions mentioned in those texts. Therefore, if he sustains all things, even the free will choices of the creature are in view. God giving man free will, like Hitler to murder 6 million people all while He retained the power to stop Hitler, but didn't, makes God as culpable as you tried to say He is in the Calvinistic scheme.
@@SugoiEnglish1 Lol... I think we're on the same page.
Man does not have total freewill, but that doesn’t mean God predetermined every action, good and evil, benevolent and depraved from time and eternity past.
Here are a few scenarios wherein man’s freewill is limited:
1. If man doesn’t like his environment after he dies, he is not free to move into Heaven.
2. If man does not like his environment after he dies, he does not have the freewill (ability) to annihilate himself.
Man has a portion of responsibility, not unlimited freewill. If man has a portion of responsibility, who has the other portion? Well of course God and the angels. Man can’t have a genuine portion of responsibility if God predestined everything that man would think and do.
One more thing: God decides every person must participate in the reconciliation of all things both physical and spiritual, man decides how long he is going to put up with his fallen nature. Putting up with our fallen nature or not, not only pertains to life in the physical body, it pertains to people who have gone to the place for warehousing sinners. God is going to outlast every recalcitrant sinner and break them to get what He knows is best. He determines the outcome, but we can be stubborn. Did God want Adam and Eve to fall? Obviously not according to His words. Then why didn’t He get what He wanted and instead have to conduct a Providence of Restoration, a Providence of Salvation, and a Providence of Recreation? Because man has a genuine portion of responsibility.
If sin didn’t enter God’s mind, why does He have to know exhaustively everything that would transpire?
Did God create ex nihilo? No. God created out of Himself. All energy can be traced to God. God is omnipresent, there was never a category called nothing. In the sense that all sin will be restored and is a temporary aberration, it comes closest to the category of being nothing. It may seem appropriate to declare God created from nothing, but it doesn’t make God any more wonderful to create out of nothing than to create using His own being.
God does not create wickedness. Can God set limits? Of course but the length of depravity and impossible sins man can commit seems pretty boundless.
God is responsible for creating man with a portion of responsibility and He grieved with breathless sorrow from the results of Adam and Eve estranging themselves. How did Adam and Eve estrange themselves? By turning their backs and running away from God. Man created the problem through failed freewill (licentious will) both in the motivation and process of the Fall of Man, and then not even asking God what was the appropriate way to overcome their problem which included satanic accusation.
God did not send Jesus to die. God did not prepare a foundation only for the Messiah to die. Why punish Israel in 70 AD according to Jesus’ words if they were in alignment with God’s Will? Christians need to reevaluate this seeming axiom of the faith.
It may sound good to say God knows all things exhaustively, but what you are saying is that God has no new experiences when you assert this. Didn’t God create man to genuinely be good company? Why create if He knew everything? What would be the difference between knowing everything beforehand and creating?
Besides, these assertions are not coming from the level of the Creator, these assertions are coming from resultant beings with obvious limitations: we will never be God. Meshing we don’t know if God has a new experience unless He manifests His presence and says, I’m so pleased to see this sunset through your eyes for the first time.”
We have a name for people who premeditatedly set a course of evil in motion: we call them psychopaths, we call them heinous, depraved, wicked and diabolical. There are many Christian theories that say God predestines evil and then sends those who performed such foreordained actions to Hell. These theories are greatly mistaken. These theories are false theories, wrong theories, poison theories and evil theories. No wonder people don’t believe in God. He has bad PR. God 100 percent predestines that everyone will go to Heaven. However according to human responsibility man decides wether he will go to Heaven or Hell.
Nice assertions. Now let's use God's revelation to determine what God has chosen to reveal about how He acts towards mankind. Start with 1 John 5:1 and get back to me about being born of God prior to believing.