Answering Arminians on Total Inability | Dr. Leighton Flowers | Soteriology 101

Responding LIVE to a discussion of Arminians confronting the Provisionists view of man's nature and refusal to adopt the Reformed doctrine of Total Inability. JOIN US LIVE!


Or @soteriology101 on Twitter

Please SHARE on Facebook and Twitter and help spread the word!

Thanks for watching.

#Leighton Flowers #Predestination #Calvinism #Provisionism #Calvinist #Salvation

[RealSeekers]

Wonderful, I had heard that we were taken to task in this video here, but having watched the full video, I thorooughly enjoyed it and found it to be informative as I learned more about the Provisionist position that make a lot of sense to me though need some time to think it through Biblically- but I defaintely do see my own calvinist-infused upbringing effecting some of my pressuptions here on the question of inability at birth for sure that I want to think through.

There was one point when you thought I was a calvinist with the drawing- I will just say not at all and I never personally believed in calvinism. I'm a hard core Molinist without doubt. That said, I wanted to post the process as I see it and if Flowers reads these, would love to see what he makes of it. Here are the steps in justification as I see it (or at least saw it at the time of the show);

1. Born as a natural man utterly unable to fulfill the Biblically prescribed conditions for justification (E.g. place faith in Jesus, believe He rose from the dea or repent).

2. The Holy Spirit gives all men grace to be enabled (to varying degrees) to freely choose to be a "Real Seeker" or not. A Real Seeker is someone who is sincerely open minded to learning God's truth, actively does their best to reasonably seek God's truth and finally is willing to obey/follow that truth upon discovery in whatever way is appropriate.

3. The Holy Spirit, in God's providence some point before the point of no return (biological death presumably), then "draws" or testifies to the truth of God's Gospel message to our spirits upon our being presented with it and it thereby produces a warranted true belief in the essential Gospel message and a desire to fulfill the essential pre-requisites for justification.

4. We freely choose to fulfill those requirements upon discovery of the truth of the essential Gospel message.

I understandthe Real Seeker notion is a bit of head canon, but I feel there are Bible verses supporting the three requirements there and I think it is important to use them as a means of being inclusive of some people, who through no fault of their own, don't fulfill the Biblically prescribed conditions for justification (like beleiving in Jesus when they never heard of Him for example).

Anyways, interested in your take here Dr. Flowers and how this schema might fit with your own Provisionist framework as I've been told by one of your Masters studients that you and I are roughly on the same page on this front- I'm not totally sure about that, but any thoughts on your end?

[BeinirHentze]

Benghazi, lol! I was fairly disappointed by Dan's non-answer and nitpicking the term 'believable'. I thought it was a good question too, glad you liked it :)

[BEABEREAN]

Let's just start quoting this: Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, AFTER you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

The Gospel comes first, then beleiving, then the work of the Holy Spirit IN us.

I would caveat that the Word of God is powerful because God's Spirit is never separate from the Word, but it's not a work of regeneration at this point. Regeneration clearly comes after we hear and beleive.

[delbert]

“And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed”

[nathanhellrung]

What drives me crazy is how often we debate John 6:44 and the meaning of drawing without even looking at Jesus' own commentary and clarification for it later in the same passage, in verse 65.

John 6:65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”

Shouldn't we take Jesus' own use of "granted" to help us understand what He meant by "drawn?" If drawn is something of a force as if we are being pulled on by it, then how does that jive with the clear meaning of "granting?" And doesn't this fit the Provisionist's understanding of the passage better? In that during this time God was not granting all to come to the Son but only those who had heard AND learned from the Father, who believed Moses and were faithfully following the Father prior to the coming of the Son? Those granted would be those who were not being given a spirit of stupor, given hard sayings so they wouldn't understand so as to believe (come to the Son).

The idea of the drawing being a force due to an inborn inability in man seems to be read into this text with no other good exegetical reason for it to be. And the Arminian plays right into the hand of the Calvinist in that they use the same understanding of "drawn" but run into problems because then the Arminian cannot claim that all are drawn or else it would lead to universalism, which Calvinists rightly point out.

Ultimately, I believe Arminians are at the root no different than Calvinists in that they stem from Augustinianism. And many are too afraid to admit it because in doing so they'll be labeled a "Pelagian." They are afraid of the boogey man. Drop your fear of labels and you'll find so much more freedom in interpreting and understanding the Bible. Until then, you'll keep getting carved up by Calvinists and continue losing the debate.

[GhostBearCommander]

After watching a few of these debates, I've come to the conclusion that Arminianism is just "Calvinism-lite."

I know that comment's gonna earn me some arrows shot in my direction, but that's just what I've gathered.

[TheOtherCaleb]

The hypothetical deism point is so unhelpful. All it did was cause more confusion. I have no idea why Dan posited that to be the ultimate point of contention. It certainly isn’t.

[titosantiago]

15:55 indeed Holy Spirit uses humans to proclaim the Good News which is the power of salvation.
"When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
—Acts 2:37

[kimberleerivera]

Thank you Leighton!
Very impotant catch!

John MacArthur -
(in his earlier years) of preaching and teaching the GOSPEL - John did not teach Calvinism - and those sermon messages are fantastic!

I found some of John MacArthur's dad's sermons in the archives on Grace Church - and he was not a Calvinist.

[NigelU]

First, I'm on the provisionist bandwagon. But to use the question of why we can respond to the Quran and not the Bible is a frustrating argument to me. Because of the darkness of our hearts, we are prone to evil and disobedience which makes us susceptible to deception. We are easily deceived into evil and often unwilling to be convinced of what is good. I don't think it's a matter of inability, which is why I'm provisionist, . It's the matter that believing in the gospel for salvation results in supernatural rebirth while believing in Islam versus any other religious construct is a continuation of an ungodly mindset. Switching allegiances within the worldly system is just a matter of changing our mind not changing our hearts. To depart from the worldly system to be adopted in the kingdom requires a changing of our hearts. This only God can do. I think this illustration actually plays into the hands of the Calvinist's argument.

[janetdavis]

I find it interesting that Dan knows exactly how all unbelievers think, and what they all want to do. Generalizations.

[michealmatt]

Just food for thought I say this humbly not arrogantly and I'm not a theologian. I do not think prevenient Grace is such a thing. As a continuationist/charismatic I think it would be really cool to add all the Gifts of the Spirit into the discussion. Like Acts chapter 2 and 1st Corinthians and all the gifts of the Spirit that are meant to build up the body as well as reach the lost, Gods powerful means that give us a taste of the Kingdom now and the Kingdom yet to come.

[michaelcarpenter]

This is why I consider myself a Bible nerd and not a theology geek

[BloodBoughtMinistries]

Where can I get one of those provisionist t shirts?

[heyman]

Arminian depravity is not a tenet of its soteriology. It's not soteriologically prescriptive. It's not a soteriological criteria either. This is the major problem here. The apostle Paul's public ministry was vastly different than his observations and explanations of faith, belief, and depravity but he never conflated the two. Everything in Calvinism is soteriological; you are viewed as not having saving faith unless you subscribe to its view of depravity because they accuse you of either denying your need for God, subverting the grace of God, or rejecting the grace of God. There is no such philosophy or ideology in Arminianism. At the end of the day Arminianism is still, Biblically literal, free will, personal responsibility salvation. Arminian soteriology is not proportional to depravity.

[janetdavis]

Isn’t John 6:44 irrelevant based on further reading that says Jesus will draw ALL men to himself?

[larrybedouin]

Thank you for bringing up this distinction between Provisionist and Arminians.

If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which *he hath testified of his Son*

He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record (in the scriptures) that God gave of his Son.
{1 John 5:9-10}
^
I don't see anything about he *couldn't* believe.

He (that believeth not) chooses to believe not, and he that believeth on the Son of God, chooses to believe the witness God gave of his Son.

[heyman]

For those who deny prevenient grace:
Why are there so many Christian ministries who try to reach people with the gospel by first meeting their needs such as food, shelter, medicine and friendship/love?

[sheilasmith]

Stop listening to the book reviewers (preachers) and go read for yourself, the author of the book.
Evidence of truth is within all the stories of scripture.

[jonebevr]

I'm sure, for those that say they hated God from the beginning, could explain why they eventually hated God. Something may have happened in their life, whether by their own decision or others. It's not something they were born thinking. They got there over time. But being explained the true gospel can tear away the lies and misunderstanding of God.