Warren Mcgrew says Calvinists are like Baal Worshipers? || Infant Damnation & #Baalgate @IdolKiller

More from the channel:

John Walton Puts Genesis 1 in Context

Were Adam and Eve Historical?

Genesis 1:1 Correctly Translated (“When God began to create”)

What is the meaning of “Day” in Genesis 1?

▬ Contents of this Video ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
0:00 Intro

To listen on...

Support is greatly appreciated!

Join this channel to support the channel and get access to perks like Ken Ham and Michael Heiser emotes :

[IdolKiller]

The thumbnail can be broken down as Calvinists vs non-Calvinists (I'm out numbered) glasses vs 20/20 (I'm in the majority), the bald vs those with hair (im in the majority) and collared shirts vs no collar (again in in the majority)... and as truth is determined by popular concensus, I come into this video with the odds in my favor.

[GhostBearCommander]

If Calvinism is true, then I can only reject it for one reason…

…because God, from all eternity past, did Soverignly and unchangably decree that I would reject it.

That being said, I dunno why Calvinists get mad about me for rejecting Calvinism.

If they’re right, God made me do it, and since I apparently have no free will (and thus no choice in the matter), there’s nothing I can do about it.

These days, when Calvinists ask me why I’m not one of them, I just tell them, “If you’re right, God predestined me to permanently reject Calvinism. Who are you, oh man, to answer back to God?”

They haven’t caught on to the irony yet…

[ravissary]

Its been weeks and those who fumed and accused Warren of things he didn't do are STILL unwilling to accept explanations of intent and STILL demand apologies.

[thirdplace]

He specifically said people teaching/espousing infant damnation are. And he’s correct.

[drinkingfromtherock]

Excellent take on this situation. I found a new channel to subscribe to.

[wheelz]

A distinction without a difference. This is a theological argument not a linguistic one. Cutting through the choice of words to get to the ultimate meaning should be the goal. If one believes in individual election, he cannot logically deny individual reprobation. Calvinists are "okay" with predestined damnation because it glorifies God. I've heard it from their lips, from graduates of Master's Seminary with a D.Min. The logic would have to carry over to children and even their own children. Saying you believe election to salvation without believing reprobation to damnation is like believing in Heaven and not Hell. To believe in adult damnation and not infant damnation is saying damnation depends upon size and age. What? That makes no sense. God has given us reason in his image. We need to use it.

[Crimsonlupus]

Even for me, as someone who genuinely hates, and I mean HATES Calvinism for personal reasons as it can cause a lot of what some ppl call scrupulosity, something I have always struggled with, the idea that it’s comparable to the same mentality as Baal sacrifice is a stretch. Although i will be honest, most Calvinists I’ve come across are pretty cold and apathetic towards ppl who are struggling with faith and sin, and often just slap a whimsical one liner that only makes the person more worried and feel worse.

[cassidyanderson]

Those upset at Warren’s comments thought he was claiming that Calvinists sacrificed babies? Who could conclude that. He clearly says “same mindset, ” and he makes a valid point. The Synod of Jerusalem (1672) tells us what to do with Calvinism. You wouldn’t give a Mormon or Jehovah’s witness the time of day and the Church views them in the same category as Calvinists. God has apparently predestined the majority of them into the heresies of women’s ordination, gay marriage, and humanism. Stop fighting God’s plan to destroy them from within. God is sovereign, you know.

[Jennifer]

First few minutes I think you misrepresented a little bit Election is election. It’s not about age of accountability. Either you are elect for salvation or you are not in that system. If they are consistent it applies to babies and the unborn as well. This isn’t every Calvinist for sure. But any that stay with that line of thought and application.

Also at the end your final point. Is fantastic. An emotional reaction is a signal that you are emotionally attached and need to pause for evaluation.

[Yaveshtolethien]

Sounds like Calvinists are taking a non-Calvinist out of context. Shocker. Let me ask... does James White also launch Ad Hominems in response? Equally shocking, if true. :)

[paulring]

MeThinks many Calvinists who are offended by this aren't thinking it thru; otherwise you wouldn't being saying he made a direct comparison. The analogy was of the attitudes and the mind-set people have if they just blithely accept that their children are being re-probated by God, as long as they have salvation. It's another way of saying "if you'll accept that is actually who God is <despite what the Bible says>, then how what else would you have accepted in the past?"

[js]

Yeah, this is quite a morbid topic...

On the other side of the topic, I recall that Dr. Heath Dewrell, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at The University of Texas at Austin, has written "Child Sacrifice in Ancient Israel", which has become a leading piece of scholarship on the topic. Interested on having him on a guest?

[r.a.panimefan]

There once was a live stream with three men.

U should have rolled that song further it was catchy lol

[CT-]

While i (now) understand what Warren ment, i think he was unwise with his phrasing and was very tone deaf to the emotions of Calvinists who were huet by this. His points, if properly understood, were not the problem. It was the tone and irreverence towards those who were genuinely bothered by this.

[js]

How is the commentary on the Hugh Ross vs Marcus Ross-debate going?

[evanminton]

Like you, I hadn't really followed this. But I also kept seeing posts and memes and people getting butt hurt. I haven't really been into the Calvinism/Arminianism debate for a while. I spent the last year studying the historical reliability of the gospels, and before that, I did an intense study on Jesus' Sermon On The Mount (both of which culminated in 2 different podcast series). I poked my head in a little bit to review some of Tim Stratton's videos, but I we're at not for all of the backlash that Warren McGrew was receiving, I probably wouldn't have even known that this episode existed. I don't follow this podcast, and I don't really watch that many apologetics or theological videos on YouTube to begin with.

I think this is honestly a bit overblown. This is not a point that I probably would have made. I probably wouldn't have made this analogy. And it's not because I'm easy on Calvinist. Anybody who has read my blog post or I've listened to my podcast know that I am just as opposed to this theological view as Flowers and Warren are. I wouldn't have made it; because, unless you are a liberal universalist, you are going to have to accept some unsavory things about the eschaton. Even as an Annihilationist, I have to except that not all of my friends and family are going to make it into heaven. I grieve for them, but I'm "cool with that" in the context of knowing that God is ultimately righteous and justice that this is what they deserve. I deserved it too, but I accepted Christ and his blood covers me. So am I, an Arminian Annihilationist someone who has the mindset of a "Baal Worshipper?" I think Warren's argument is almost a universal acid that affects everyone but the inclusivistic universalists who think everyone will be saved no matter what. Don't get me wrong; infant damnation is un biblical and morally indefensible. I dedicate an entire chapter to refuting it in my book on Hell, "Yahweh's Inferno: Why Scripture's Teachings On Hell Doesn't Impugn The Goodness Of God". But saying that Infant Damnation adherents have the same mindset as Baal worshippers isn't a helpful thing to say. At the same time, I think it is ridiculous that people have just absolutely lost their mind over this. I've been seeing things about this for like three weeks now it seems!

[TheRomansGuy]

McGrew was referencing all Calvinists not just ones who believe in infant damnation. And the rebuttal that no Calvinist would say that doesn’t really really work. McGrew is pointing out that if you extrapolate the Calvinist beliefs, that what it ends up is what he’s talking about.

Personally, with this incident, if it can be called that, I got tired of all the 💩 tossing from either side. I'm done with it. I have my theological position, sure, but things are just beyond ridiculous now. The internet is just a cesspool, and many Christian channels clearly are no different.

[JohnQPublic]

*BAAL GATE EXPLAINED:* In the exact same way the heathen barbarian Baal God had the Canaanite peoples sacrificing their newborn infant babies to him like they were goats, the Reformed Theology sovereign Calvinist potter Baal God intentionally, hatefully, mercilessly and unjustly predestines and sacrifices, to barbecue in Hell, the human souls of nonchosen non-elect newborn infant goat babies, of philistine Calvinist parents, on the alters of the sovereign Calvinist potter Baal Gods own good selfish glory and his own good sadistic pleasure.

[omnitheus]

He made a valid point Wazza. What he said had nothing on how Chris Date treated Warren in their debate. Disgraceful. Warren was so humble in that.