I found the above short clip in which Leighton Flowers attempts to answer a typical Calvinist question put to him as follows:
“Leighton, if we are condemned because of our sin, how is God unjust for choosing some and not others, if all have sinned?”
The question relates to the Calvinist doctrines of “Total Depravity” and “Unconditional Election”. The theology is centered on two propositions: (1) All mankind are sinners without exception, and deserve damnation and hell. (2) Therefore God is not “unjust” to arbitrarily decide to “save” some, and “pass over” others, and leave them in their state of damnation. The argument is that since they are all condemned anyway, and deserve damnation, it does not make God “unjust” to arbitrarily and unilaterally decide to save some, and not others—without regard to any potential merit or demerit on their part (which is the Calvinist theological position). The questioner is basically trying to justify Calvinism by asking that question, to which Leighton Flowers for the most part gives the wrong answer. The error in that theological statement is that it goes counter to the essential attribute in the character of God, that he is “no respecter of persons,” and that “in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him” (Acts 10:34-35). See further Rom. 2:11; Eph. 6:9; Col. 3:25; James 2:1, 9; 1 Peter 1:17.
“No respecter of persons” means that God does not discriminate, he does not have favorites. He treats everyone alike, and judges them on an equal basis. He applies the same standard of judgment to all. He condemns the wicked for their wickedness, and saves the righteous for their righteousness. Acts 10:34-35 contradicts both of those two tenets of Calvinism: “Total Depravity” and “Unconditional Election”. The story of Cornelius falsifies both tenets. Both are heretical, false, unbiblical, and incorrect. Leighton Flowers for the most part gives the wrong answer to that question. His answer begins as follows:
“Well, one, I would say, l am not sure that we are condemned ultimately for our sin. And l am not trying to say, we are not condemned for our sin. What l am saying is, ultimately John chapter 3 says, You stand condemned already, because you did not believe. You perished because you refuse to love the truth.”
That is incorrect. We are condemned for our sins. John chapter 3 is referenced out of context. In that chapter, Jesus was referring to people whose primary sin, or cause of condemnation, was unbelief in him. That is a common theme that runs throughout the Gospel of John. See John 5:37–40; 6:36–40, 44–45; 8:23–24; 10:24–29; 12:35–37, 42–43. It does not mean that unbelief is the only sin for which people are condemned, or held accountable; or that “faith,” or “belief” alone is sufficient to save anyone—apart from genuine repentance. None of that is suggested by John chapter 3. He has overlooked verse 21 for example, which makes it clear that everyone is not wicked, evil, and sinful, and prefers “darkness” rather than light. Some do, and some don’t. He continues:
“So there are sinners in heaven and hell, we all agree with that.”
Not true! There are no “sinners” in heaven. All that are in heaven have repented of their sins, which means that they are no longer “sinners”. True repentance cleanses one of sin, which means that the person is no longer a “sinner”. Sins genuinely repented of are forgiven and wiped clean, so that it is as though they were never committed. That is the biblical doctrine. In the abominable heresy of Calvinism, however, repentance doesn’t do anything. It doesn’t even exist. It is all “faith,” and nothing else! “Repentance” is something that just happens to you whether you like it or not just became you have “believed!” He continues:
“Matter of fact if you were comparing the morality, the numbers of sin of those in heaven and hell, you would find l am sure many people in heaven like David, who did so much worse sins on the scale of sinfulness—adultery, murder, these kinds of things, of people in heaven, compared to this you know sweet little old lady who never murdered anybody, or committed adultery with anybody. The only sins she ever committed were these little white you know lies, and these little bitty sins over here, compared to those really bad sins of David for example. And so if you are getting into a comparison game, ultimately you don’t go to hell because of sin, because there are people like I said in heaven and hell that have sins. Sin is not the common denominator, okay. I mean, sin is the common denominator of those in heaven and hell. So therefore it is not the ultimate reason one is condemned.”
Not correct, see above. People go to hell because of sin, and for no other reason. All that are in heaven have repented of their sins, which means that they are no longer classed as “sinners”. He continues:
“What is the ultimate reason? Unbelief. It is the unwillingness to believe and trust in God that will ultimately condemn you. And so that is the first point I would point out, is that your ultimate reason for you being condemned for your sin is because of unbelief, not because of the sins, or the number of sins, or Adam’s sin, or anything like that; so your condemnation is ultimately for unbelief.”
Altogether wrong! That is still Calvinism. “Faith alone” doesn’t save anyone, but genuine repentance does. You can’t defeat Calvinism with one foot stuck in it. He wants to be able to oppose and defeat Calvinism, while still having one foot stuck in it. That is impossible. It can’t be done that way. He continues:
“And then you could say, How is God unjust for choosing some and not others? Well one, the other thing I would say is that God does choose some and not others. Some people try to think that is uniquely Calvinistic. No, we believe God chooses some people and not others. Unless you are a universalist, you have to believe that God chooses to save some people and others. We just believe we know who he chooses and why, because the Bible tells us. He chooses those who humble themselves and trust in him. He chooses believers; and so he does choose some and not others; and so that would be the other part of that.”
He has got that partially right. It is true that God chooses some and rejects others, or saves some and condemns others. But he does so on the basis of the criteria expressed in Acts 10:34-35, not “faith alone”. That is still Calvinism. He still has one foot stuck in Calvinism. He continues:
“What I assume you mean is, How is God unjust for unilaterally or unconditionally picking to save some people and not others. I guess that is maybe what you mean. And I don’t know that that is necessarily unjust, as much as it is unbiblical, and unchrist-like.”
That is what he does mean, which is both “unjust” as well as “unbiblical”. It would make God a “respecter of persons,” which of course he is not—and which would indeed make God “unjust” if he was. He continues:
“Christ said to stop and help your enemies, not to pass by them on the other side of the road; and yet you have Calvinism ultimately passing by all the reprobates on the other side of the road, and not really loving them; and that is not a biblical concept. It is not a Christian concept. It is more unchristian, it is unchrist-like, more so than it is unfair or unjust.”
He has got that bit also partially right. God is not only merciful and kind, but also just. He judges people according to their works: “they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29). He continues:
“But not only that, the reason that there is the call of injustice with regard to the arbitrariness of God on Calvinism, is because of the fact that the reason people sin, and the reason people reject the gospel on Calvinism, is because God decreed them to do so on Calvinism. And that is what is explicitly unjust in our estimation; not only unbiblical, but unjust as well. So it is not just this, his picking of people who are righteous or unrighteous, or his picking of people who are believers or unbelievers, or his picking of certain people for no apparent reason whatsoever. It is the fact that Calvinism maintains that God is ultimately the decreer of people’s rebellion and their unbelief; and yet also judging them for their rebellion and their unbelief; and that is intuitively unjust—not only intuitively unjust, I think there is biblical examples of how God would call that unjust for people to do such things; and therefore we would have to have a really good didactic text teaching us that God somehow supersedes the very laws and explanations of what he expects people to be and to do with regard to what is fair and just.”
He has got that bit of it right. That is the only bit that he has got right. But ultimately, his biggest theological error is that he completely overlooks repentance, which is a central tenet of the biblical doctrine on the subject. Salvation is not through “faith alone,” but genuine repentance. Calvinism is antithetical to repentance; and he can’t defeat Calvinism while having one foot stuck in it. He needs to come out of it completely to be able to defeat it thoroughly and comprehensively.
No comments:
Post a Comment