Was this Debate a Total Disaster? (special guest @KevinThompson1611 )

Does God know the future exhaustively? that's the topic of the debate we are reviewing between JJames White and Tim Barber, more specifically, we are looking at Enyart Theology's review of the debate and we've got a lot to discuss

@AominOrg @KevinThompson1611 @EnyartTheology @TheOverlapLifewithTimBarber

[roguecalvinist]

Before you start thinking that you are cool, or you noticed something, and you call me out for my anthropomorphic fleshly analogy of comparing God to Jr Tolkien and reality to Lord of the Rings -

I answered the question in this video why I'm able to use that analogy.

I just didn't answer it on the spot, because sometimes my brain causes me to completely forget what I'm talking about. That's why sometimes I just randomly stopped talking and rewind what we just watched a few seconds, because then it usually all comes flooding back to me.

God uses anthropomorphic analogies to help us understand him, and the author analogy is one that he uses.

I said that we can't make up our own anthropomorphic analogies. We can help people understand God by using the ones that he comes up with though

[HomeyTel]

Hey Rogue: FYI check this out. When Tim challenged James for using 2 minutes and James corrected him, Tim went on claiming James quoted no Scripture and was never challenged. So he lied about time and the lied about content. James referenced Scriputre in that minute.

[thespaminator]

This debate, and the awful conversations I saw in the various open theism watch party chats, made me rethink my own theology. I have never been an open theist. I would call myself a classical Arminian. BUT. If the only two theological views were Calvinism and open theism, I would run screaming straight to Calvinism.

[timothy]

I watched part of the debate and Barber honestly didn't have good answers for his open theism. He, Idol Killer, Chris Fisher, and even Leighton Flowers like to talk in circles, make assertions about how the scripture doesn't say that or "they refuted that already, " and they constantly use analogies over scripture (which I honestly believe that they don't believe is supernatural, sanctifying, and sufficient the way 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and John 17:17 says). The sad part is that these "Calvinist hunters" get such a large following because their disdain for Biblical theology as it pertains to God's sovereignty is appealing to the flesh for believers that would never give the doctrines of grace a Biblical look the way Acts 17:11 and 2 Timothy 2:15 exhorts. And Kevin Thompson really was hypocritical saying no one gives an opposing view a chance when his channel and nasty demeanor has done that for years.

[Zaloomination]

Finished the debate last night and excited to listen to this.

[reformed]

The rebuttal is done at the time of the debate, and the closing as well. you can only write your opening statement beforehand.

[slothdawg]

"Hello Mr. Calvinist, your son keeps calling other children reprobates"

[lawrencestanley]

That goofball has the audacity to say that sin is not a part of God's plan? Has he not read the Bible? While His Law includes “you shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14), in 2 Samuel 12:11-12, He states, “‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun.’” This declaration of God that He would raise up the evil of adultery against David was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:20-22 through the counsel of Ahithophel.

So, clearly the open theists are either lying, or they are ignorant.

As a matter of fact, in the following passages, we see God actively determining, decreeing, setting, predestining, or sending men to perform an action, and for those men who are doing what God has set them to do, it is a sin, an evil act, since they perform the action according to their own wicked intentions, and they could not have done otherwise; God is the ultimate cause of the action that men perform, and yet He is innocent of sin, while men are morally accountable for sin since they are the proximate or efficient cause of the sin in the action that God has ordained: Genesis 50:20, 1 Kings 12:15, Job 1:13-15, 17, 21, Isaiah 10:5-6, Judges 9:22-23, 1 Samuel 2:25, 16:14, 18:10, 19:9, 2 Samuel 12:11-12, Psalm 105:24-25, Proverbs 16:4, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12, 1 Peter 2:8-10, Romans 9:22, Acts 2:22-23, 4:27-28, Deuteronomy 2:30.

[timothykring]

At 1:05:00 and thereabouts concerning the worst addition to what you said -- the blood of all the righteous from Abel to Zechariah, son of Berechiah was to be upon the murderers of that wicked generation . The haters of God and man today are taking their cues from that generation. Why are they attempting to rob God of His glory ?

[ChristAloneNoRome]

You have to wonder: If a guy like stand up guy like BTF believes he is intellectual, and understands spiritual realities, and abides by them, how could he parrot the typically wrong definition of 'Total Depravity?'
I mean, he must have purposely stated it the way he did at 2:14:40 - he had to purposely lie about the term to nefariously influence his viewers to believe that falsehood -- right??
Considering he knows all about epistemology, good theology and bad theology, Pelagius and Augustine -- right?

[slothdawg]

I don't know Greek, but Arby's is mid. James White refuted.

[sngehl]

@8:47

You cannot, for the life of you, get a complete thought out of this statement :

God works in all things with those who are called according to His purpose for good.

A little punctuation helps

God works, in all things, with those who are called according to His purpose for good.

On what does God work? All things.

Who does God work with? Those called according to His purpose for good.

This "translation" tells us that God works WITH those called according to His purpose for good.

It's not that hard to follow my man.

You may disagree with it. James saw an easy out by making Tim translate it on the spot because he didn't think Tim knew Greek. He was going to throw that point out if Tim didn't know Greek, but Tim very much did, and it would have given more weight to the translation Tim offered.

I think James knows the translation Tim offered is viable, and Tim was going to be able to demonstrate it was, which would have hurt James so he abandoned the line of questioning.

Also - no one was saying James brought this up out of nowhere. James made the error on thinking Tim borrowed this point from someone else and didn't know Greek.

[igregmart]

I am Calvinist, and also KJV Only, and I do think White is a bully. I can't stand the guy.