This verse was a final hurdle for me for understanding predestination. Your explanation that "according to foreknowledge" may not refer to the elect, but to the scattering of the Jews was such an eye-opener. I checked it in the Greek too. I know this is not certain, but a possibility. At least for me, the final jigsaw piece refuting both Calvinism and Arminianism has fallen into place. Thank you so much for what you do. From a nobody Brit who is trying to minister to broken people in Hungary.

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

Yea!!!!!!!! I'm sooo glad!

@tashv2627

2 жыл бұрын

you're not a 'nobody Brit.' You are VERY IMPORTANT. God can do so much with you. Never think that one person doesn't matter. Look what God has done with Flowers' life - that's one person...look at all the believers of the ages...each one was just one person. God needs you - that one person!!!!! You are the only one that he can send to each of the people that you minister to

@Apollos2.2

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheOtherCaleb interesting question 🤔. They are elect #1 because they are Israelites but the context seems to indicate more. Because just being one of the elect because you are Jewish doesn't save them. #2 They are elect according to foreknowledge or being foreknown, known before hand.. They are NOT elect according to the doctrine of election, or by an eternal decree. It just says elect (for what?) according to God's foreknowledge. And remember knowledge of something doesn't mean causing something. Two different things. Lots to ponder there....🤔

@TheOtherCaleb

2 жыл бұрын

@@Apollos2.2 I agree with you now. I’m a full Provisionist. 👍🏻

@TheOtherCaleb

2 жыл бұрын

Well I was a Provisionist, then I delved into classical Arminianism, and now I’m an even stronger Provisionist than before.

Your diagram might be one of the best things I've ever seen. You just spared me from having to wade through years of confusion. It is clear God has predestined you to lead many out of Calvinism. I am one.

@tashv2627

2 жыл бұрын

praise God for that. I agree with you. Flowers is God's trumpet and voice today.

Thank you. I have wrestled with this passage as the be leadership of my church have been working to move the congregation toward Calvinism. I feel as if I'm being moved aside and toward the door. It saddens me. Thanks again. Your sight has encouraged me so much. You're a blessing.

Ahhhhh what an interesting perspective! When I just reread it as Peter talking to Jewish believers in the dispersion still resulting from Babylon/Assyria time, it gives it a whole new meaning of promise! My mind is blown! I did this study of 1 Peter like 4 years ago when I was very Calvinist and everything I said was very Calvinist in my answers, but now looking at it from Peter being the apostle to the Jews, makes all the OT references mean something. Hosea 1, Deut. 32, Isaiah 28, Gen 6.

For the Calvinist their boast is that they are God's favourites, unconditionally chosen by Him.

@evanu6579

3 жыл бұрын

Ted Cortez I think you’re misunderstanding. Ted Bundy apparently came to Christ before he received the death penalty. Mother Theresa apparently didn’t (so many say. Couldn’t judge one way or the other myself). According to Calvinism, God loved and chose a serial murderer and rapist more than a woman who took care of orphans. He loved Ted so much that He died for him but hated Theresa so much that He appointed her to eternal torment. The discussion is about the love you received before coming to Christ. Btw, God and Christ are one and the same. God bless.

@jimdee9801

3 жыл бұрын

@@evanu6579 just an aside on Theresa - she is refuted to have kept all the generous donations and handed them over to the Vatican as she preferred to keep the orphans humbled in their dehumanised poverty. So perhaps not a great example of one deserving a better outcome than Hitler - millstone around neck and cast into the deep perhaps?

@evanu6579

3 жыл бұрын

jim dee Are you disagreeing with the point I made or just the person I used to make the point?

@ianmcdonald8648

3 жыл бұрын

@@hondotheology How can we finite and feeble creatures measure God's immeasurable love? Jesus instructed His disciples - "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." Matt 5:43 Jesus never told us to do somethig that He did not do Himself - this is why we are called His dsciples. We learn from Him - how He behaves, how He thinks, and we are required to follow His example. He loved His enemies. "So says Jehovah, Israel, the people, the survivors of the sword, have found grace in the wilderness, I will go to give rest to him. Jehovah has appeared to me from far away, saying, Yes, I have loved you with an everlasting love! On account of this, with loving kindness I have drawn you." Jeremiah 31:2-3 Here God is speaking about Israel who spurned God time and again, and in spite of all their abominations and unspeakable wicked devices, God still loved them. Yet Hosea says - "All their wickedness is in Gilgal, for there I hated them. I will drive them out of My house for the wickedness of their doings, I will not add to love them; all their rulers are revolters." Hos 9:15 However, He will love them Hosea says later - " O Israel, you are destroyed, but your help is in Me." Hos 13:9 and afterwards " Assyria shall not save us; we will not ride on horses. We shall not say any more to the work of our hands, Our gods! For in You the fatherless finds mercy. I will heal their backslidings; I will love them freely; for My anger has turned away from him. I will be as the dew to Israel; he shall blossom as the lily and cast out his roots like Lebanon. His branches shall go out, and his beauty shall be like the olive tree, and his scent as Lebanon to him." Hos 14:3-6 Such is the love of God for those found by Him, but turned away and was sent away with brutal force (by Assyria; and Babylon) for all their disgusting abomninations. But He will pity them and restore them to greater things than their former days. God hates all manner of sin. And yes the sins of Hitler, and many other like him, even our sins, are abhorrent to the Most High. God is merciful and kind to the unjust and cruel. God loves all His creatures. We cannot understand how God loves yet at the same time hates. It is enough that He does. He gives people breath, whoever, day after day and thus time to repent. But the day of repentance ceases for the dead. But God still loves His creatures. How can we finite and feeble creatures measure God's immeasurable love?

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

@@hondotheology I think you mistake God's love of the person with loving what said person does. Did God love Hitler? Yes. Did He hate what Hitler did? Absolutely. Was salvation through Jesus Christ available? Yes. I know that probably shakes you up. Use a Calvinistic approach. Take Romans 9. It's not to him who runs, but Him who showeth mercy. God can sovereignly choose the mechanism by which He saves. As it happens God sovereignly chose to make salvation available to "whosoever believes"

Glory To GOD!!! Thank you so very much Leighton Flowers! GOD is not a GOD of Confusion!

17:30 John Piper does something that other Calvinist preachers like Paul Washer often do. They cycle through a "voice of distress" and a "voice of triumph." It's melodramatic theatrics.

@brucejohnson1796

3 жыл бұрын

You are soooo right! Piper talks like this in normal discussions and conversations. Uses whisper technique to sound dramatic. He also stuffs as many polysyllabic words in his speech as he can to sound more authoritative. I think John might be kind of full of himself. I also get the feeling if he were to express his Calvinistic beliefs in simple, lunch bucket language his message would lose a lot of credibility simply because there is no "Good News" in the calvinistic gospel.

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

Lol, I saw Washer jumping up and down with a high pitched whiny voice (like a 4 yr old) yelling about provisionallist preachers "manipulating people" in an alter call, althewhile using the above theatrics to manipulate the people. I wonder, are some of these guys really believers in what they're doing? Or are they frauds. What they do is so laughable it makes me wonder.

@MarkVergini

Ай бұрын

Anyone can re - define anything, anyone , is not in a court of law one attorney is defending an accusation , while the other is arguing contrary , even though your trying to convince, there's another way to look at something , did not the serpent in the garden do the same , GOD'S WORD HAS ONE THEME , I , WITHOUT EVEN TAKING SIDES , FIND YOUR APPROACH , THE SAME AS WHAT THE ENEMY USED , I DISAGREE WITH YOU 100 PERCENT ( TWISTING SCRIPTURE )

@MarkVergini

Ай бұрын

Instead of wasting your time. Jusr give us teaching to grow in faith, to have all of these videos complaining about " THE WORD'S PRE DESTINED AND FOREKNEW, ARE WRITTEN IN BIBLE, WHAT DOES CALVIN HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING, MY DISCERNMENT IS SUSPICIOUS OF YOUR MIS LEADING OTHERS, ARGUING INSTEAD OF TEACHING

It’s undeniable that the διασπορά is a reference to the dispersed Jewish people of Israel. It was a well-established term used to refer to Jews living outside the land by the first century.

@jahiddle

3 жыл бұрын

That is why Piper is a poor eisegete!

@omnitheus5442

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah the NASB committee has a lot to answer for there. Awful translation work.

@bromineandtungsten

3 жыл бұрын

Josh Smith yeah, you’d expect that from the ESV, but they actually did a much more faithful rendering. Typically the NASB does the best translation work of modern English versions, but I wonder if they thought rendering it “scattered” would be more neutral. Not sure, but it’s obvious Peter was speaking to a Jewish audience. Whatever conclusions you draw beyond that (I see dispensational implications) is another issue, but the audience is clear.

@chuckd941

Ай бұрын

@@jahiddleit’s not just him. The amplified Bible and the NASB commentary both say “mostly gentile Christians”

Yes sir, the REAL theme song today!

Christians are not exiles from heaven, we are seated in heaven. We are ambassadors on earth.

Exiled FROM HEAVEN, is an impossible view. An exile, by definition, is one who was one in a place and is either unable to return due to proclamation of that place's authority, or inability to return (stuck on a desert isle, one is exiled from one's homeland. Since no living human, at any time (excepting Jesus) was cast out of heaven, thus none can be an exile from heaven. It kills me when Calvinists must invent new definitions because language, itself, does not permit their heresy.

Thank you so much for your insight into this topic.

Wow never thought of the Diaspora in that way! But it makes perfect sense including The Alexandrian council that put together the LXX in the 3rd Century BC was also reflective of this point. Well done Leighton! How you still only have 35K subs surprises me...

Good to hear the old music again and new outro music was good too🎶

@WarmtoiletseatOhNoWhooopsie

4 ай бұрын

Nah the intro was a war crime😅 great stuff tho

Excellent commentary. Thank you.

This was very helpful!

Enjoyed this teaching God bless you and keep you brother !

Great video. You should let us download that diagram. It is very helpful, God bless you.

I really wish you had condensed versions of your videos with all the highlights and bullet points so I had time to watch these !

@mrnoah1504

3 жыл бұрын

I watch them on 1.5x speed

The only "group" or "people" that I ever see having to caution their people about "boasting" in their salvation are Calvinists because their systematic lends or could lead someone to believe that they are in some way "special" because they were "chosen" while others were not. Also, Hebrews (which the brother quoted in support of the idea that we are all "strangers" in this world) was written to Hellenistic Jewish coverts who would have understood all the language and Scripture references that we find in Hebrews. And when seeing how a writer "uses" different phrases, etc it is important to find that "same" writer using that type of language elsewhere to confirm your "belief." Referencing Paul or Hebrews (notice the name of the letter folks...the letter to the Hebrews) isn't a solid hermeneutic at all. And...because scholars are in agreement about who Peter was addressing as the apostle to the Jews....to go against that means that this is John Piper's theology and it is based upon what he "thinks".

19:16 Encouraging them to 'feel' chosen...elect...by God from before the foundation of the world. In essence, 'more 'lucky'... than others and then having to caution them to remember 'unconditional election'.. to bring them back down to earth... sets the stage for the false humility and denies the other shoe all 'thinking' Calvinists are listening for... NEVER knowing for sure if they have been given the 'gift' of Perseverance.... He says he's 'ELECT', they all do...but he really can never know for certain, he can only hope he's not experiencing an episode of 'evanescent grace'.🤔 As a full blown theistic determinist, John Piper would ultimately affirm that whatever he believes about God today is only what God determined for him to believe, (it's all God). But the same must also be true for Tyler Vela, Derek Webb, Paul Maxwell, etal... and other well respected Calvinists who have recently left Calvinism. And many of them now even deny Christ... also by God's decree according to Piper... How does Piper know that won't happen to him... for certain?🤔 He doesn't, and neither does anyone else affirming TULIP as truth. Dr. Piper's very smart, and full of compassion to a fault as a person, it's just a shame to see him waste the good mind God gave him believing and promoting this nonsense.

Elect -- cause to stand out by virtue of responsibility and purpose. Purposes set beforehand for the full functioning of the messiah's congregation. Some are elect to be preachers, teachers, decons, helpers.

@graceoverreligion2509

3 жыл бұрын

@@reynaldodavid2913Jo would you believe it if I said there's a concept in the new testament where a person is being saved after he has put his trust in Jesus not prior?

@graceoverreligion2509

3 жыл бұрын

@@reynaldodavid2913Jo nope.

@graceoverreligion2509

3 жыл бұрын

@@reynaldodavid2913Jo hey it's all good. I hope you and your family are well, brother. Yourself as well. I've just seen vincent van gogh's life documentary. I didnt realize he tried to be a minister and how his life seemed like him struggling to be free and such.

@graceoverreligion2509

3 жыл бұрын

@@reynaldodavid2913Jo yes the painter.

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

@@reynaldodavid2913Jo "Destined " is in the passive tense. Meaning it's something they did themselves, and not done to them. You maybe never heard that before, but it refutes predestination to salvation. I don't know why it's rendered the way it is in English. Probably that English doesn't have as many verb tenses. I have a card with all the greek verb tenses. There's 2 or 3 dozen if them. Maybe more God Bless you

“Elect according to…” Doesn’t really matter what follows. It proves conclusively that election cannot be unconditional.

@osmundsindland4596

Жыл бұрын

Unless it’s according to a condition which God meets. Unconditional election is unconditional in relation to what we provide to our salvation; it’s conditioned upon God’s good pleasure and in this case, foreknowledge

Foreknowledge: to know before hand, to know prior to, ordain, to know before, in applications of: above, ago, before, or ever.

Why would gentiles even be referred to as scattered?

@marcyoverby3120

3 жыл бұрын

Scripture says it was the Jews who where scattered because of disobediences

@paulgarduno2867

8 ай бұрын

Exactly! We gentiles NEVER were given a law warning us to lose our country. Israel is a living proof that God plays no games World wide dispersion 70AD. To. May 14 - 1948

@amikkelsen

3 ай бұрын

Tower of Babel?

How can I get a copy of the chart presented? Thanks!

Regarding the sprinkling and the spotless lamb without blemish. Wouldn't both of these thing be well understood by Jewish people rather than by gentiles who aren't familiar with the sacrificial system of the Jews? Thanks for your work brother Leighton.

@naturallycurly2384

3 жыл бұрын

That was my thought, too. Sprinkled with the perfect sacrifice. It wouldn't necessarily make sense to a Gentile audience. Seeing the audience as Jewish makes several things in Peter make more sense. At least to me. :)

I would love to have the intro to play in my car,

Curious what is Dr Flowers eschatology?

If piper kept reading to chapter 2 v 11:12 peter speaks of the audience living as foreigners in a pagen land, presumebly rome, some say babylon is a term for rome Like it doesnt make sense it would be from heaven in this sense since they were far from the holy land Jerusalem. They were in lands that were heavily pagen influenced

Pls do a show where God says he regrets. Was reading 1 Samuel 15 and Lord said he regrets making Saul King. I just want understand

@ianmcdonald8648

3 жыл бұрын

Until Leighton can do what you ask - ponder on the following: Using other translations that use the word repent (eth - like KJV) "It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night." 1 Sam 15:11 " It repenteth me" (KJV) Hebrew Strong's number system 5162 - the Hebrew word is "nacham" ; it properly means to sigh, that is to breathe strongly. If you understand voiced sounds that are harder in sound, in the English language like 'Th' in 'Thursday', or 'th' in 'that' (+ those, this, then, breathe) as opposed to the unvoiced, soft sound of 'th' in 'thing' (+ thimble, thesaurus, breath), that might give you an idea of the "to breath strongly". It can difficult to express such terms in modern laguage. The word repent(-eth/-s) {or regret which you show - God's Word) is the best the translators could put it; although they could have simply translated it as "I breath strongly - that I have set up Saul". But few would have any idea what that meant. If 'repent' is a good translation, it is certainly not the same concept as the necessity of our repentance. God does no evil thing to repent of. But God can express Himself with emotion, feeling, more perfectly and more righteously than we can understand. If you were to breath strongly, that is voice out your inspiration and expiration - using the back of your throat so that it vibrates with sound, it may help you to get a sense of what the Hebrew contains. ...just some thoughts...

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

@@ianmcdonald8648 Yes. To me it reads like disappointment. 👍

I went to a pentecostal church and they where saying that God can remove the holy Spirit like he did with King Saul?

Is Peter not talking about the remnant of Israel? Both Jesus and Paul talked about a blinding of the Jews (before the cross), and a partial hardening (after the resurrection). Only those drawn by the father can come to Jesus, but once he is lifted up he will draw all men to himself, then in Acts Peter preached and thousands of Jews believed, these are the remnant, elect by God to spread the Gospel to the nations through the dispersion. No need to argue whether they are elect for service or salvation, it’s both, and yes God chose them according to his foreknowledge, he chose the Remnant of Israel so that His message would spread. That does not necessarily mean the same is true for gentiles as we are not being blinded or hardened (by God anyway). My 2cents, but I’m still working through it.

33:19 "OBEDIENCE".. ??? John Piper is a strict determinist. "God knows the future because he performs the future", quote John Piper. However, one cannot be 'obedient' by definition if 'disobedience' were not a true option. Considering his definition of God's sovereignty, it is ironic at best for him to suggest any person can actually be obedient. I'm truly beginning to question his intelligence has been undermined by his allegiance to the ideological possession of Calvinist doctrine. His comment at 33:54 re; a believer's 'disobedience' is "scorning the blood" of Jesus.... which in turn could only be BY GOD'S ETERNAL DECREE FROM BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD! Does this man ever listen to what he's actually saying????? Delusional is too kind of a word, bless his heart.🤦🏻‍♂ I know he thinks he's being honest ... but it's a form of insanity. mined by his allegiance to the ideological possession of Calvinist doctrine. His comment at 33:54

When you need to affirm dispensationalism to save your synergism.

@evanu6579

3 жыл бұрын

I don’t affirm dispensationalism yet I still don’t see how Calvinists can use 1Pe 1:2 as a proof text. Maybe you could enlighten me. Thanks.

What's Calvanism ? Please

@Ken-do4oy

10 ай бұрын

It's about a "Christian" man who burned his brother alive because he disagreed with him in theology.

@roxannaortiz4009

10 ай бұрын

@@Ken-do4oy ouch

For the sake of consistency, did Adam choose to be created? Did Abraham choose to be the father of the Saints? Did the Jews choose to be God's chosen people? Did David choose to be King? Did Saul choose to become Paul? All of scripture points to God doing all the work.

@andyayala5639

2 жыл бұрын

Did you choose to say this?

@bayardblack4930

2 жыл бұрын

@@andyayala5639 No

@andyayala5639

2 жыл бұрын

@@bayardblack4930 lol you know that’s a lie. The answer is yes, they all chose to do and be who God said. We get to choose to agree with our Creator or rebel against our Creator.

@bayardblack4930

2 жыл бұрын

@@andyayala5639 Without God's grace I will always choose to rebel against my creator. Other than Jesus, can you name one person in all of History who has not?

Did Leighton call Dr Piper Dr. Hyper?

Does he think the church replaced the Jewish people??

Just to clarify. Conformity to Christ in Romans 8. Is taking about glorification.

Man my Fiancé is Calvanist and I have discussed some of these things with her, I am not able to nunchuck flip around scripture at this point yet but she gets very cold towards me and treats me as of I don't understand scripture when we have discussions and I point out how TULIP makes 0 sense when we take into account the whole council of scripture and God's heart and proclaimed desire for all people

@jay1871

11 ай бұрын

It’s been 5 months brother. How is this playing out?

@loleki737

4 ай бұрын

I'm sorry to hear that. Praying the Lord is waking her.

According to The Inspired Words of The LORD Himself in The Bible, "many are called, but few are chosen"(Matthew 22:14), and the few who are chosen (Romans 9:11-23), were already individually chosen in The Lord by name (Romans 16:13), according to His foreknowledge (1 Peter 1:2, Acts 2:23, 15:18), before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-11), which was before time began (2 Timothy 1:9-10). _______________________________________________ Election : 7 quick-reference Questions & Answers with exact Scripture references - 1. Does God choose everyone? No : many are called, but few are chosen (Matthew 22:14, cf. Deuteronomy 7:6-8, 10:15, Acts 10:41, Romans 9:11-23). 2. Does God choose anyone? Yes : certain angels (1 Timothy 5:21), and specific individual people by name (Jeremiah 1:5, Acts 1:24, 9:15, 22:14, Romans 9:11-23, 16:13, Galatians 1:15, cf. Luke 10:20, Philippians 4:3, Revelation 3:5, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12-15, 21:27). 3. Why does God choose specific individual people by name? Because He loves them (Deuteronomy 7:6-8, cf. 4:37, 10:15, Romans 9:11-23, 1 John 4:19). 4. Where does God choose specific individual people by name? In The Lord (Romans 16:13, Ephesians 1:4). 5. When does God choose specific individual people by name? Before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-11), which was before time began (2 Timothy 1:9). 6. How does God choose specific individual people by name? According to His foreknowledge (1 Peter 1:2, cf. Jeremiah 1:5, John 6:64, Acts 2:23, 15:18, Romans 8:29, 11:2). 7. What does God choose specific individual people by name for? Salvation (2 Thessalonians 2:13-14, cf. 2 Timothy 2:10), and holiness (Ephesians 1:4, cf. 2 Timothy 1:9)...

@marisademore468

Ай бұрын

God doesn't choose some for salvation and others for damnation. If I were a PE coach and wanted a class full of 30 children to volunteer in the football games I hoped to arrange, I would call all 30 children. But if only 10 responded, I could choose only those 10 to join me. I called them all, many, but could choose only 10 willing volunteers. God never created anyone to send them to hell. He wants all men to be saved, and Jesus died for the sins of the world, for everyone. God wants and calls everyone, but He can only save those who want Him. This is what the Bible means when it says many are called but few are chosen. It's not God who says 'no' to anyone, it's the individual's choice who says 'no' to God which keeps them out of heaven. That's how I understand it. God's blessing to you in Jesus 🙂

19:27 "Feel your election? Wwutt??? Piper is so far afield! His book on Sovereignty (900 pages!), his books and preaching on Christian hedonism... I could go on. It breaks my heart the Piper et al, twist the word of my God like this. I pray he stop preaching out of his screwed up mind and receive the love of the truth.

How about doing a video on Christian Unatarinisim. They think Jesus was only a man.

And they say that you cant accept the sovereignty of God because of human pride,just saying.

So what you are saying is that the primary receivers of this letter were Gentiles. Peter is then probably teaching that the church (including Jews and Gentiles) of Jesus Christ is the new Israel. Is that what you are saying?

I am a 4-Point Calvinist. I am not seeking to cause contention. I am only trying to give the Calvinistic view a platform in this comment section and to stimulate fruitful thought. Many things were said in this video, so I cannot get to them all, but a few things stuck out to me. Dr. Flowers frequently said that "elect" does refer to election to salvation, but rather to Israel as the elect people. Indeed, the Jews are God's elect people; however, this cannot be what Peter is referring to because the modifying phrases he uses for "elect" are all salvific in their use. Foreknowledge, sanctification, obedience, and sprinkling are all words that relate to salvation. The verse is a depiction of the Triune God working to fulfill each Person's role in relation to these believers' election. 1 Peter 1:2 looses its meaning if "elect" is only referring to Jews as God's elect people since not all Jews receive the benefits of salvation. No doubt Peter's main audience is Jews, but instead of understanding the text as referring generally to Jewish exiles, it should be taken to mean specifically as the "elect" Jewish exiles. In other words, there are Jewish exiles; some are elect while some are not elect. This letter is to those who are elect of the Jewish exiles, i.e., Jewish believers. Dr. Flowers had a lot to say about "foreknowledge," but, from what I got, it did not seem like he actually came to a conclusion. I find it ironic that after Dr. Flowers makes such an emphasis about this being a very Jewish epistle, he seemingly dismisses the Calvinistic "intimate knowledge" view, which would in fact be the most "Jewish" of all the interpretations since it is rooted in the OT. For example, Genesis 18:19 says that God has "known" him [Abraham]. This knowing is not a mere factual knowledge about Abraham, but it is an intimate knowledge with God acting upon Abraham which brought about the effects said in the verse. This "knowing" could also be thought of as "covenental commitment" or "a choice to know personally." Another example is Jeremiah 1:5, which states that God "knew" Jeremiah. Again, this is not merely factual knowledge. God actively "knew" Jeremiah in the same active way He "consecrated" and "appointed" Jeremiah. I point these out because many non-Calvinists dismiss anything to do with individuality as foreign to Jewish thought, yet here are two examples of individuals whom God "knew." Here are others (Exod 33:12, 17; 2 Sam 7:20). This active "knowing" is also used to describe God's knowing Israel as in Hosea 13:5 and Amos 3:2. Amos 3:2 is a great example of God's "knowing" being used as "a choice to know personally." In this verse, God is the One who chose Israel. As Dr. Flowers mentioned, prognósis is the noun form of proginóskó, which means "foreknow." In Romans 11:2 Paul uses that word proginóskó (foreknew) to describe what God did to His people. Romans 11:2 is not describing God seeing something that Israel will do in the future. It is describing God's choice to know Israel just like Amos 3:2 uses "known," which is the reason God will ultimately restore Israel--not because of anything good that God saw the Jews would do (Ezek 36:22-32). This meaning of proginóskó (foreknew) is used in Romans 8:29 as well. Coming back to 1 Peter 1:2, it is best to interpret "foreknowledge" as intimate knowledge based on the Jewish use of "know" rooted in the OT and reused in the NT as proginóskó (foreknow) and based on the context of the working of the Triune God in election found in 1 Peter 1:2. Dr. Flowers often speaks of election for service or obedience, and he said it again in this video. However, perhaps a more accurate interpretation of the phrase "for obedience to Jesus Christ" is "faith in Christ," which is in continuity with Peter's Triune God's working in the elect person. Obedience is very commonly used in place of faith to emphasize the obligation to believe (Acts 17:30). Paul uses "obey" for saving faith, like in Romans 1:5 and 10:16, and so does John (John 3:36), Luke (Acts 6:7), and more important to this discussion, Peter. Peter writes in in 1 Peter 4:17 that the gospel is something to be obeyed. In 1 Peter 2:7-8, the word "disobedient" is used in contrast to those who believe. Even more convincing though is that in 1 Peter 1:22, he says that these Jews have "purified their souls" by obeying the truth. This verse is found within the greater context of 1 Peter 1:20-25, which is a section dealing with the salvation found in Christ by the new birth through God's forever-enduring word. Knowing that "obedience" is often used in place of saving faith, as well as demonstrating that Peter himself uses "obey" in that sense, it becomes clear that Peter is saying these Jewish believers were elect "for obedience [in the gospel] of Jesus Christ." "I have yet many things to say to you," but I think I have said enough of the video for now. Perhaps some of you are coming from the non-Calvinist perspective seeking to prove Calvinism wrong. There has been a lot thrown around about Calvinism (some true but a lot more false), and I understand that Calvinism appears to many to be this cold or harsh system that makes God to be a tyrant. I wrestled with it myself for quite some time. What I suggest for you is instead of trying to escape any Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture, investigate the matter prayerfully and weigh your study carefully. Don't make quick decisions. I did intensive research on both sides for over a year before settling with Calvinism. If you become weary in your search for truth, it is good to lay aside your investigation for a time and come back to Psalm 131 to pray through. Jonathan Edwards, when he was coming to age, remarked how much he hated and dreaded the doctrine of election, thinking God to be cruel, but when he truly came to understand Calvinism, he called election the sweetest of all doctrines to him--a doctrine he embraced. Romans 8:28

@TURKISHSAILORo

2 жыл бұрын

I also studied both sides, I guess if my provisionist view is correct then great! If Calvinism is true, then God determined for me to be a provisionist, and who am I to question God?

@kevinkendziora5109

2 жыл бұрын

@@TURKISHSAILORo Ah yes, a predestination joke. I do enjoy those from time to time. One thing I think a lot of people overlook though is that non-Calvinists deal with the same problem. If God has exhaustive knowledge of all actualities of everything that has, is, and will happen and how people will respond in their given circumstances (and He does have this knowledge), it is because God has determined at the point of creation all that ever will be, including our free choices. Everything that will happen in the future was always going to happen because that is how God determined it would be from eternity past at the point of creation, and it would be no other way. Even Jacob Arminius believed in predestination. He only interpreted it differently based on his belief of prevenient grace. Here, the difference between Calvinist and non-Calvinist predestination deals with soteriology. The other difference between the two is that Calvinists believe that God has a purpose for everything that ever happens in all eternity whereas non-Calvinists cannot say this. Most Arminians and other non-Calvinists do not realize this though. The only people who can escape the reality that God has determined all that will come to pass are the Open Theists, and they most certainly do not hold a biblical view of God's sovereignty and foreknowledge. This doesn't mean we did not make free choices. No one coerces us into doing what we will do. We make our own choices. Rolland McCune makes a very helpful distinction regarding God's decree when he says, "Predestination implies certainty, not pre-necessitation or compulsion." Here is an illustration. Let's say you are eating an apple. Well, that apple came from a truck that distributes apples. The truck took them from a processing facility after being picked. The apples themselves were picked from a tree, and the tree grew because of photosynthesis from the sun. If we connect the long chain of your eating an apple to the time the sun caused the tree grow by photosynthesis, we see that the sun influenced you in an indirect way. On the other hand, you could go outside on a summer day and get a sunburn. In this instance, the sun had a direct impact on you. That is sort of how God influences us. All things that ever happen in life proceed from God whether directly or indirectly. God's providence is merely the continued intervention in time to influence in various ways to bring all things to His desired outcome. I believe the mistake we make is that when we think of free will, we naturally think of absolute free will, that is, free will without any influence upon them. God is the only one who is not influenced by others since He is self-existent. We on the other hand of many influences on us. We have a body with various functions which themselves influence how we make our choices whether those choices be what to eat, what to wear, when to sleep, and so on--not to mention our genetic background, our geographical background, and our distinct personalities. All of these have a tremendous impact on the outcome of our lives. For example, God does not directly make us eat. We eat because we are hungry. The efficient cause of our eating is the hunger that originates inside of us. On the other hand, God indirectly does make us eat in the sense that we get hungry because that is the way God has made us and He brought us into the circumstances that led us to hunger. We are limited to choose to eat if we want to live, despite having the option of not eating. With that in mind, it is possible to calculate all actions that will ever occur based on the influences we have around us. Of course, God does not have to calculate since He is not bound by time, but I am speaking from our perspective. Adam, I'm glad to hear that you have taken time to wrestle with these issues. Even I continue to wrestle with how God's sovereignty works, adding to my view a new wrinkle to help me comprehend, and I think that's how it will always be. God bless!

@TURKISHSAILORo

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinkendziora5109 Wow that was a long reply. Non-Calvinists do not have the same problem though. Are you saying God was incapable of making a world with free creatures? Also, no one is arguing that we aren’t influenced by outside forces.

@kevinkendziora5109

2 жыл бұрын

@@TURKISHSAILORo Good question Adam. I am not saying God is incapable of creating free creatures. It is quite the contrary. He has created free creatures who make their own choices. However, those free choices are determined by the circumstances God has placed them in and they make choices based on the personality God has given them. A free creature makes decisions from the options available to him based on the influences upon him which limit his choice to the one they make. It is like algebra. Let's say a free creature is P (for person) and our determined circumstance is C and the outcome is O. The formula would be PxC=O. Let's say God has determined our total being, which is P, to be 5. Then God places us in C, which we will say is 7. When P is placed into C, the only outcome could be 35 because that is the choice P would make based on his makeup. God creates our personalities and places us into His desired circumstances. Those persons then freely choose from the available choices. Thus, we are the efficient cause of our choice, but God has guaranteed that we will make our choice because that is how we were made. Of course, algebra is a very simplified way of calculating how personalities would respond in their environments, but it is a helpful illustration. Proverbs 16:9 says "In his heard a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps." In this verse we see that the source of man's decisions are from within himself, but God is the one who ultimately determines where those steps will go because of His divine providence. Like I said in my last comment, God is more directly involved in some things than others--like how Satan afflicted Job. God was indirectly exercising His providence in Job's life by allowing Satan to be the direct influence on Job's life. Here is my question to you: Do you believe the future is open to change?

@TURKISHSAILORo

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinkendziora5109 You presuppose Calvinism. I asked you if God could create creatures with true libertarian free will? What you described is not libertarian free will.

This is a example of vain jangling. What pray tell do you respect about piper ? Is it his ability to lie? His bank account or his position in a apostate church? There is not a liar on the face of the earth that I respect.

I believe in predestination, I believe we were all pre-destined to go to heaven because Hell was not created for mankind in the first place, it was created for Satan and his angels ...so if you choose to go there you’re walking outside of your pre-Destiination.

His bias against election to salvation has caused Flowers to read the theme of service into this and many other texts of scripture to include Romans 8. This is a good video to use as an example of Flowers eisegesis.

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

I see this a lot with Calvinists. I think you are taught something that I don't believe you realize maybe what you're saying. I would like to clear things up. Maybe you could help get the word out.... What it is is this: You say we provisionists, like Leighton, I am one also...that we deny Election. So let me stop there please. Leighton myself, or anyone else who believes like I do don't deny Election or predestination or any other biblical word or concept. I mean it's in the bible, right? The difference is in how one defines these words. Election in our view means Election for something or to something. Peter is speaking to his peeps. They are outside of Israel, in the regions he lists. They are Christians. The jews are The Elect of God, or His Chosen. Jesus was also Elect of God. When we get saved we are then Elect but only because we are then seen by God as "in Him" (eph.1). Anyway. You've probably heard this definition before. So you see, provisionists believe in Election. We just have a different definition than you do. So, would you mind, mayebe not saying we "don't believe in Election"? And could you pass this on to your friends. I do hear that objection quite often? And tbh it isn't helpful in the discussion. Thanks, Bob

@gatlas720

3 жыл бұрын

@@shredhed572 I said that Flowers’ understands this text as election to service. Everyone who professes to believe the Bible must affirm election of some sort as the term is in the Biblical.

Snotty proud? I am proud...proud of what Jesus did in my life. If you want proof just look at my life before I received Him. There's no doubt who gets the glory! Didn't paul say he boasted in God! But then, I forgot. Piper doesn't actually read his bible. Context and Calvinisism do not mesh

Those He foreknew He also predestined. Not those he predestined he also foreknew. Those who believed in His name He gave them power to be sons of God. Not those He made sons of God then were made to believe.... Pft... Calvinistic predestination is not orthodox.

Exiles = Lost sheep of the house of Israel. Those 10 tribes previously divorced by Yahweh (Jer 3).

Jesus Christ was chosen by God before the creation of the world for the foreknown sons of the promise, who are His elect. To them was pleased to reveal Himself to them (Romans8:28-30;9:8;10:20;11:2)

The Greek does NOT and CAN NOT be read as elect exiles. Elect is not an adjective in this phrase, but it is a verb.

@buzzbbird

2 жыл бұрын

So what we have as three possible things that are according to (in the Greek, IN AGREEMENT WITH) the foreknowledge of God. 1. Peter, an Apostle of Christ 2. The Diaspora 3. Elect Is Peter saying, in his greeting, that he is an Apostle in agreement with God's foreknowledge? Is Peter saying that being dispersed is in agreement with the foreknowledge of God? Or is Peter saying that they are elect, in agreement with God's foreknowledge? ALL Greek manuscripts has elect in the verb form, not the adjective form and its placing is divorced from the Diaspora, grammatically. It just is not linguistically possible to pretend that elect is an adjective to the word Diaspora. God has the twins to choose from and he rejected Esau and elected Jacob. This election fully agrees with foreknowledge, as the story of Esau is the story of a man who committed most, if not all, the 7 deadly sins, while Jacob did not.. God's choice agreed with his foreknowledge, whereas if God had chosen Esau, that choice would not be in agreement with what God foresaw about the two. It is important that Paul reminds the Jews he is writing to in that portion of Romans in Romans 9 that the choice was done prior to their having proved themselves good or bad. It proves that through foreknowledge, God chose and that his choice proved to be the correct choice. Elect exiles can not be the reading, not linguistically nor theologically.

U want the definition of elect?? Read your bible(KJV) it gives definition in Mark 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days. The elect are those whom God has chosen.

I’ve never heard this passage presented in such a way and I’ve also never studied Calvinism until recently. So far, it seems to me that this doctrine is something that must be taught and therefore, imposed on the text in order to give it a particular meaning. Dr. Piper may be a decent and brilliant man but this teaching seems ridiculously farfetched to me.

Was Judas chosen in John6v70 What was he chosen for? I'm afraid it was his destiny appointed by God.

My brother, I'm forced to disagree with you as to the point of "the strangers" (KJV 1P 1:1) being the Jewish diaspora. I believe the reference is to believing Gentiles, note Eph 2:12-13 ...strangers from the covenants of promise...NOW in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 2Peter 2:10-11 Which in time past were not a people, but are NOW the people of God...strangers and pilgrims. To my knowledge the Jews were always the people of God. "In time past were not a people" therefore must refer to the Gentiles and not the dispersed Jews. By the way I suspect that I'm more inline with your take of Calvinism than with brother Piper, so, mine is not a Calvinistic perspective.

Not Jews, they were Israel, the northern kingdoms dispersed after the Assyrian captivity, mixed genetically in with the gentiles as through Abraham's seed, the gentiles are blessed

Fir this 71 year old school the theme song is no good

Christians exiled from Heaven……say what!?!?

“Elect for service”?! That is not what it says. It says Elect to obedience and the sprinkling of Christ’s blood. That is election to salvation NOT election to service. The whole context is salvation NOT service.

John Piper has a habit of spewing nonsense, and I dont have the energy or patience to sift through the piles of horse dung to find a little snippet of truth.

“Elect for service”?! That is not what it says. It says Elect to obedience and the sprinkling of Christ’s blood. That is election to salvation NOT election to service. The whole context is salvation NOT service.

@shredhed572

3 жыл бұрын

If you understand that he's writing to messianic jews, then it's not saying elect unto salvation. It's a reference to their Israelite heritage. Obedience and the sprinkling of blood is what God required under the Law. This would have had a deeper meaning to these Christans than it does to us westerners. Something you might consider.......is that there is a tendency in western, modern Christianity to read Scripture as if it were written to us today, but understanding the context and asking the 4 Ws...who, what, where..etc shines a new light on the meaning of Scripture. It helped me a ton. Edit" I just went back and read it. It says "in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling..etc. So it's Elect to sanctification. Sanctification to obedience and sprinkling. So Election (he's writing to saved jews) is to sanctification... How?.. Obedience and the sprinkling.... It's simple once we take the time and let it say what it says. God bless you🤙

@gatlas720

3 жыл бұрын

@@shredhed572 It says, “Elect....unto obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:” The obedience is obedience to the truth, 1 Peter 1:22 “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth..” The context is about election to salvation not service, 1 Peter 1:5 “.. through faith unto salvation..”

@kentonletkeman7305

9 ай бұрын

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the choice sojourners of the dispersion of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1 Peter 1:1 YLT98 I thought the gentile Christians were exiled by order of the Roman Emperor.