How Calvinists Caricature Arminianism | Dr. Leighton Flowers | Soteriology 101 | Calvinism

Dr. Leighton Flowers, Director of Evangelism and Apologetics for Texas Baptists, talks about how Calvinists through the years caricature Arminian theology and paint it in a light that differs from what Arminians actually believe.

Check out the full interview with @ApologiaCenter here:

DOWNLOAD OUR APP:

Or @soteriology101 on Twitter

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

#Calvinism #Shorts #LeightonFlowers #soteriology101

[sethpawlik]

God created time. God is greater than time. Whether you want to say "looking through the corridors of time" or some other phrase the fact is that God has complete foreknowledge.

[cecilspurlockjr.]

GOD doesn't have to look through the corridors of time because HE IS outside of time . GOD doesn't have to predetermine every little action in order to accomplish HIS will like a gnostic type of god does.., HE'S much more powerful and sovereign than that . I cant imagine YHWH not being powerful enough to control the destiny of HIS free will creation or being surprised by their actions like james white claims HE would be .
GOD bless you brother Leighton

[elbertsorrell]

I have yet to find a hard Calvinist that doesn't mischaracterize Arminius & Arminianism. I think it's also the same on the other side as well. I often wonder how different Calvin & Arminius were in temperament & personality. From history's perspective, I think Calvin was a much more austere & rigid person in various matters, including government, theology, etc. Arminius may have been the more cordial & humble of the two to deal with.

[bobbyadkins]

I'm thankful that God didn't just (foresee), but also (foreknew) His children.

[climatematters]

Spoiler alert ! Arminius himself considered he was Reformed in his theology! So Arminianism cannot be characterised in terms of being the opposite of Reformed theology! 😮😊

[maximusvonce]

God knows who will respond, and I believe He predestined those who would respond and believe.

[tolife]

Meanwhile, nobody is preaching the Gospel. Everybody is busy protecting their theology that has skewed the Gospel. 🤦‍♂️

[gabrielbridges]

The human will acts according to the predetermined plan of God,

“When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭13‬:‭48‬ ‭
God does not make a plan for someone after someone wills and lives there own life.
Notice how those who where appointed to eternal life believed, the scriptures does not say those who believe are then appointed the eternal life.
Predestination means to predetermine, it is not a synonym to prescience.
Arminianism and provisonism are not a doctrine of predestination but a denial of it.

[maximusvonce]

Timothy completely destroys Calvinism. " For its God's will for ALL to be saved and to come to repentance "

[reformed]

Classical Arminianism understands the difficulties with man having Libertarian Free will, and God having infallible foreknowledge of the future: The two views are not compatible. Hence why you can't get out of them, a definite answer of how exactly it is God knows the future. Logically you will either have to affirm God is limited of future events, or man's freedom of choice is limited.

[Declared-righteous]

Is a matter determined before it happens? If it is not, then how could God have foreknowledge? How could God provide an accurate prophesy?

[intheschoolofgodandnature]

Why so many only choose arminian or Calvinism? There's the Lutheran view...monergistic as to salvation, synergistic as to dammation..

[toughbiblepassages]

the entire debate only works with a “corridors of time” view. Trying to have this debate from the perspective of all events in history simultaneously co-instantiated with the future (an atemporal view of time from God’s ontology) then the debate is meaninglessly moot and impossible to have. The debate is over how God interacts with humans IN space and time concerning soteriology.

[adamandsethdylantoo]

The best way I can explain Romans 8:29-30 from an Arminian (and, particularly, Wesleyan) perspective is that, knowing the free choices that Man would make in his life, God predestined a glorious future for those who would follow him, with our Justification in Christ at accepting his Call and a lifelong second work of grace in purging us of sin, and our eventual Glorification in heaven (or, if you're a Holiness Pentecostal, here on earth with the Baptism of Fire). I can easily see the Calvinist viewpoint as being that the foreknowledge and Predestination are a single action of choosing and preserving the elect, with Justification being Jesus' death on the cross for those elect and Glorification in heaven. Both viewpoints share some similarities, and really hinge on whether "foreknew" means knowing who WILL CHOOSE God and set up their lives accordingly (with them being able to backslide and fall out of his grace), or if God PLANNED those who would enter into Heaven and that nothing they can do will take them out of that plan.
In the end, I feel like the debate, while seeking to either defend God's Sovereignty or His Mercy respectively, is over things that we can't know this side of the veil with certainty, and can easily get messy. The way I see it, as long as you preach Christ and Him Crucified and that His work is evident in your life, you shouldn't worry about going to hell. Calvinist or Arminian, God is merciful when we repent, and will restore us to the place he has set us up to be.

[marorey-ycqx]

I only got interested in Calvinsm lately but when I read about John Calvin being murderer, it shuts Calvinism down.

[izahrawr]

I don't see why God looking through the corridors of time be "insulting". I'm pretty sure God could do that ... in regards to his foreknowledge

[dougdozier]

"looking through the corridors of time" would be just foreseen faith said in another way, right? Or am I wrong on that?

You on foreknowledge

"What we say is: he knows it because he’s God. Because he’s omniscient… We don’t say he knows it because he foresees it and learns, like that maybe the foresight-Arminian would say (the classical Arminian). We don’t say he determines it because that would make God the author of sin. But we say he knows it, and it’s a mystery as to how [he knows it].” (May 9, 2022,  YouTube 50:30)

[JamesMC]

The Calvinist objection is not to the use of a phrase, but to the substance of the doctrine implied by that phrase. Which appears to be Molinism in some form.

And the objection Calvinists have to it is, that it makes God’s predestination of souls dependent on God’s knowledge of how souls will act; and thus, dependent on human merit & demerit; and thus, on something in man. Rather than predestination and the other works of God being dependent solely on God’s grace, & thus, on nothing in man.

The only reason needed for why God gives grace as he does, is that it is His good pleasure so to do. To argue with God as to why he does not give grace other than he does, suggests a certain measure of lack of trust in God. If human beings don’t like that, too bad. To their credit, Calvinists do at least not forget that. Either we believe that God knows what he is doing, and is fully in charge of all that he does; or we do not.

That at an Armenian can point out that the phrase in question is not used by Arminian authors, does not deal with the theological problem which the phrase expresses.

[Lurkingdolphin]

So Glad I found provisionism . Arminianism and Calvinism seemed like both terrible options . Funny enough from 5-14 when I was nominally Roman Catholic (I was born one ) and even when I learned about the reformation, I always thought intrinsically God would be like provisionism teaches, a loving Father and his Son was loving too and obviously Holy Spirit is God too, when I came across Calvinism I was very weirded became a Protestant and I thought Calvinism looked biblical. Funny how a child would never think of Calvinism when it comes to God but would think of provisionism .

[jrmitchell]

Ok, perhaps it would have been better to say what you actually believe rather than what you don't so that it can be corrected.