This is the fourth part of the response to Leighton Flowers video in regards to Luther vs Calvin (two Reformers who carried forth two different stream of Augustinian predestination thoughts). The first part is a defense of Augustine found here:
https://g2witt.blogspot.com/2020/08/response-to-leighton-flowers-video-on.html?m=1
The second part refuted his caricatures of Lutheranism:
https://g2witt.blogspot.com/2020/08/response-to-leighton-flowers-video-on_29.html?m=1
The third part debunked Flowers’ false claims that Martin Luther held to Calvinist views like limited atonement and God’s saving and effectual grace was only intended for the elect, as well as his slanderous cheap shots at him where he accused him falsely of trying to “hide” such beliefs that he didn’t even affirmed:
https://g2witt.blogspot.com/2020/08/response-to-leighton-flowers-video-on_21.html?m=1
Flowers’ video can be found here:
https://youtu.be/pZrTO88WmDg
This part will deal with Leighton Flowers, though Provisionist in holding to man’s freewill is capable of choosing faith without any prevenient grace, inadvertently took the hypercalvinist position of Matthew 11:25-26.
At the 47:30 minute mark,
Flowers stated the reason that Jesus spoke in parabolic language was so that the Pharisees of that day would not recognize Him as their Messiah, or otherwise they would not have crucified Him.
Let that sink in. According to Flowers, God withheld the truth from some to leave them in their unbelief for which they would be judged for if they don’t repent later, when had He not done so, they would have recognized Him as their Messiah. For all Flowers’ attacks on Calvinism and his false (and mocking) accusations at Luther of holding to God’s divine grace was effectual to save through giving faith only for the chosen elect (and of trying to hide such views that Luther didn’t actually affirmed), Flowers took the Calvinist view of this passage of God withholding saving grace (though they defined grace differently with Flowers treating grace as revelation giving people opportunity to choose Christ) so that some (in this case, Pharisees) remained in their unbelief.
If anything, if we take into consideration his Provisionism, his view stated here is way worse? Why? According to him, all humanity is capable in of themselves to believe or not believe, and God doesn’t need to work inwardly in them to give them faith but His grace is located in His word preached that gives them the opportunity to believe or not. Yet, here, he was saying though they have such ability to believe, God prevented them from that opportunity so they would not believe (and for which He would judge them later, unless then repent). Aren’t hyper-Calvinists criticized for holding to God directly causes people directly to disbelieve whereas they would have believe?
Saying it was for God’s purpose that Christ being crucified for our sins does not change that fact. It was still acts of evil of men to crucify Him at the cross. According to Flowers, God withheld revelation from them so that they remained in unbelief and so they would crucified God the Son Incarnate, when they have capacity to believe and would have believed if given revelation that was withheld from them.
The Calvinist position isn’t that they would have believe had they been given revelation via word preached beyond parables (though without prevenient grace) but they would continued to reject the truth as given them, unless God works to change their hearts. While Lutherans here disagree with Calvinists on whom God wants to give saving grace, they agree with each other that apart from divine prevenient grace (properly defined by Augustine and Aquinas without the synergistic baggage that was added to it later), man is incapable of believing the revelation given him by word being preached. In such views, God didn’t cause them to reject Him by withholding revelation as Flowers defined it as his view whereas they would accept it had it has been shown it to them.
Contrast what Flowers said with what monergist Luther’s view of universal saving grace in 1538 on Matthew 11:25-26:
"Christ speaks especially against those who would be wise and judge in religious matters, because they have on their side the Law and human reason, which is overwise, exalting itself against the true religion both by teaching and by judging.Hence Christ here praises God as doing right when He conceals His secrets from the wise and prudent, because they want to be over and not under God.Not as though He hid it in fact or desired to hide it (for He commands it to be preached publicly under the entire heaven and in all lands), but that He has chosen that kind of preaching which the wise and prudent abhor by nature, and which is hidden from them through their own fault, since they do not want to have it-as is written Is. 6, 9: 'See ye indeed, but perceive not,' Lo, they see, i.e., they have the doctrine which is preached both plainly and publicly. Still they do not perceive, for they turn away from it and refuse to have it. Thus they hide the truth from themselves by their own blindness.And so, on the other hand,He reveals it to the babes; for the babes receive it when it is revealed to them. To them the truth is revealed since they wish and desire it."
Here we stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment