When Leighton Flowers Lost to James White in 2024

This is the most crucial 5 minutes of the entire debate on John 6 between Leighton Flowers @Soteriology101 and James White @AominOrg

Calvinist Dr. James White dealt with the text of scripture while Provisionist Dr. Leighton Flowers seemed to have another agenda, and even lost the side debate that he had been having with himself.

#debate #bible #reformedtheology

[timothykring]

I will put this as intellectigentally as I reckon I was the most best arguer I ever done seed ever, if not ever never didn't seed. He didn't never not resort to any dumb divergencies from topic -- he was on topic most best consistently of all two of them and never done mentioned any topics like what happens to dead babies. I hope I've made my points clear to all of my free willie brothers.

[julienstevenson]

All White did here was say "What if my interpretation of these verses is correct?" in a condescending manner, to which Flowers responded "then you'd be right." This was a pointless question and did not further the debate at all

[LoveAndLiberty]

Flowers answered the question. It just wasn't the answer White wanted to hear.

[JD-xzmx]

There are people who actually think White won this debate?

[numbers]

James is clearly the more skilled debater however I'm afraid he was outdone this time.

[ewallt]

This actually seemed like one of the weakest points for White, and even weaker in the closing statement where he pointed to this moment as “winning the debate.” Here are problems with this assertion:

1, He did a very poor job framing his hypothetical question. He goes on incoherently for about a minute, and then backs off, and the whole thing was “What in the world are you trying to ask?”

2. The hypothetical he posed was “What if my presuppositions are correct?” to which LF responded “If your presuppositions are correct, then your position is correct. But I don’t agree that your presuppositions are correct.” That’s not “winning a debate.” It’s both bizarre that JW would assert that this is winning a debate, and that anyone would buy this.

3. JW’s whole argument is predicated upon the idea that learning is passive, which is absurd idea as we all know by experience that this is false. Learning is always active. LF pointed this out.

This is where JW’s whole argument falls apart. If learning is active, and not passive, then JW’s argument is one good, because his premise is false.

[honestchristianity]

Having viewed this debate again it has become clear to me that James White’s exegetical explanation of this passage is impossible to understand. It is impossible to understand because JW has not taught in a clear, understandable manner. It is utterly nonsensical.

It seems to me that there are reformed believers who can’t understand JW either and rather than admitting so, they seem to be assuming that JW must be interpreting the Bible correctly because he can read the Bible in Greek.

I appeal to my fellow reformed brothers and sisters. Whether you think you are smart or dumb, you are all capable of asking questions of your teachers. In that vein I propose the following:

1. Do you think that JW established from the text (or any of his other OT references: Isaiah 54:13, Jeremiah 31) that John 6:44 teaches unconditional election? I would say not even close. JW claimed that he was dealing with the grammar of the text, but in no way whatsoever did he demonstrate that the grammar of the text taught that God elects people unconditionally. As a non-Calvinist I could have even done a better job of conjuring up a semi-literate Calvinistic interpretation here.

JW asks LF to “Show me where from the text you make the distinction that is absolutely necessary for your position”. LF responds: “and they will all be taught of God” and that means that everyone of them, have no excuse because they have heard what they need to hear. Everyone has been taught of God. “Everyone who hears from the Father and learns comes to me”. Not everyone who is taught will listen and learn. Some of them will close their eyes. I don’t know how that can be more clear Dr White?”

It’s embarrassing to say that this was simply a reading comprehension exercise and JW failed spectacularly. To post this video as something of winning moment for JW is one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen on the internet. It seems to me that many reformed believers are ideologues who are not willing to challenge their worldview, even in the face of simple reading comprehension instances.

[biblefacts]

LIKE IT OR NOT Leighton Flowers WON THE DEBATE! #FACTS

[SisterBaby]

What I see here is White not ACCEPTING Flowers' answer and then White re-asking the question, using more complicated wording and more complex demands ("Either show me the Greek, or say you don't know"), and when Flowers answers, forthrightly, that God is NOT the disingenuous Teacher that White portrays (allowing only certain ones to actually learn), White is caught and he surrenders.

I say to Leighton Flowers, "Yes, that WAS clear enough. God is a teacher who does not withhold truth nor withhold the ability to learn it or receive it. Thank you for making that clear." Well done.

@Soteriology101 and @AominOrg

[kenbeach]

I am not altogether suprised at Leighton Flowers showing emotion - he will know from his YT channel and general contacts amongst the evangelical scene the damage Calvinism can do to a believer's faith. I speak from experience, and it can take years to get away again from an angry, ironically _ungracious_ God and above all a God _lacking in kindness_ . Too sovereign to be approachable.

It is legitimate to argue for and against differing interpretations, but not to make them an idol. You can see this with Calvinists in any YT comment section where someone has dared to go public that they no longer espouse Calvinism. They are often sadly subjected to a hard, often Pharisaiacal judgementalism, and it is not difficult to find examples of this even in these comments. Turning from Calvinism is not apostacy!

We ought to be aiming to get at the truth, not winning an argument for 'our' side, which applies to both sides any debate where Christians have differing interpretations or opinions.

[soundwaynes]

Calvinist always putting the cart before the horse every time they read the way of salvation in the bible..

[gordon]

The debate was lost when White couldn’t handle the heat and appealed to the moderator….that was a really weak moment for him. I honestly thought he was going to walk out of the debate when he closed his Bible, but then Leighton backed off because he didn’t want White to leave.

[rosemarie]

The most ironic part was when Leighton was trying to explain that people could hear but refuse to believe, while James White was hearing but pretending to not understand so that he wouldn't have to concede the point. It illustrated Leighton's point perfectly.

[rebukeandreprove.]

This was fun to watch. Dr. White should do this to Leighton every year.

[reformed-slave]

I tried to read John 6 plainly as I saw the comments here defending LF and saying he won...but tbh, I don't know how he came up with that interpretation..I'm a simple person with a basic understanding of the story of the Bible, and by reading, and following the text, it is clear that it teaches that the Father assuredly draws people to the Son. It was made worse by LF's analogy at the end, where he missed the point of Jesus quoting Jer 31.

Remember we all lose if we don't exhibit love and grace to one another so lighten up and engage in fruitful conversations. Greetings from the UAE 🇦🇪

[manualboyca]

That is Dr Flowers’ argument to many Calvinist passages: “I don’t understand how that could be true, therefore it must mean something else.”

[heyman]

James White is relying upon absences in the text. If he sees the absence of personal responsibility in the text, he thinks personal responsibility doesn't exist whatsoever. It may not exist in this particular text, but theres no text in the Bible that includes all points and all factors.

[kinthecountry]

Well done, Leighton! It makes perfect sense that a teacher teaches but some don’t learn. As a parent I experience this a lot.
Thanks for posting this clip.😊

[jonlambert]

Flowers does not biblically debate a theological subject, he emotes philosophy from his understanding...

[gordon]

Leighton lost at this moment ??? All White could do was micro analyze the text using technical jargon. Yet the Bible has to be read as a whole and he knows this. It is extremely difficult to build a theology on two verses, you have to bring in context from elsewhere which White did not do, likely because his only defence was to keep the rest of scripture out.