Soteriology101: Semi-Pelagian Flowers and Flower Patch Kid Eric Kemp still believe John 20::31 is talking about believing the Gospel and is speaking to all sinners without Exception in the immediate Context.

I had already responded and refuted this soundly on Soteriology101 but it seems Eric Kemp just cannot seem to understand and get it.

Flowers has very sloppy Exegesis on this and Eric has no Exegesis on this verse at all. He just assumes as a Flower Patch Kid that Flowerism is right. Even now Eric will most likely not read this because does thinks he is smarter and more kind and loving that Christian Calvinist. I have proven he is not in my previous articles. Eric does not want the truth. ERIC KEMP CANNOT HANDLE THE TRUTH.
Eric Kemp quotes the reverence to this verse in his most terrible shallow and full of tradition article written in his article entitled: “A Charitable Discourse: Is Humility Bad”

Flowers quoted this same verse in an article he wrote entitled: “1 John: 1 Does Not Teach Pre-Faith Regeneration or he least alludes to it.

Both Flowers and Kemp continue to show that their Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Exegesis skills and very weak, lacking and shallow. They see through the eyes of Traditionalism what they want a particular passage of Scripture or verse to say. This I will show once again concerning this verse as it was taken out of its immediate and surrounding context. Not to mention the wrong audience is mistaken by Dr. Flowers.
As for Eric Kemp. We do not know what his understanding of this verse is within the context of Biblical Exegesis in its immediate and surrounding context. Eric just gave us a scattergun of proof-texts without

Kemp as said with these verses in mind: “An ability that every single person who has ever been or ever will be born possesses since they were made in the Image of God and that characteristic was given to them by God.”
Tradition. I was taught a long time ago to watch out for proof-texting and the scattergun debate technique without any Biblical Exegesis within its immediate and surrounding context. You can be sure that a person who does that is pushing forth some tradition or philosophy. Here it would be the Philosophy of Flowers.
Does John 20:31 have the interpretation and relates to Kemp theory of Flowerim as stated above which is a quote from his article. That is, “An ability every single person who has ever been or ever will be born possesses since they were made in the image of God and that characteristic was given to them by God.”
Quite a statement and assertion that none of the verses he quotes bears out and he knows it. Kemp is not very good at Biblical Exegesis. This I know from debating with him. He may actually know how to do it right but to do so would lead Kemp to the truth I hold and Kemp cannot handle the truth.
So let us just take one verse Kemp uses to prop us his Philosophy and theory of Flowerism and see if it is Biblical or just a tradition of man that makes the word of God of no effect.
John 20:31 – But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God and that by believing you may have life in his name.

But I would like for you to see John 20:31 in more of its immediate context that Professor Flowers did not give to us. Look at verse John 20:30.

John 20:30 – Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.

You see Kemp, the immediate audience Jesus was talking to was his disciples that he had chosen. In this verse, it mentions the many signs (wonders and miracles) that Jesus did in the presence of His disciples that are not even recorded in the Bible. Read the end of verse 30. The gospel was sealed with a vast number of miracles by Jesus that are not recorded or written in Holy Scripture.
 Then in verse 31, Jesus says these are written (Flowers calls “these” “the gospel”) a complete ill-informed, misunderstanding and superficial studying of the text. Jesus is not speaking of the “gospel”. He is speaking of “these”. miracles, signs and wonders and the fact that he had risen from the dead and had been appearing to them while they were in a closed room. Jesus would just manifest and materialize. These, what I wrote above were written that they may know that “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”

“These” (miracles) were written to satisfy the disciples that “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” “it is abundantly sufficient for confirming the faith” Calvin Commentary On John.

Calvin goes on to say, faith is not founded on miracles, but our faith should rest exclusively on the word of God,” the Gospel, so yes in that sense Kemp and Flowers are right. But not necessarily the context in this verse.

Calvin goes on to say, “That miracles and signs are to be “aids and supports” to faith, that “that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. They prepare the minds of men, that they may cherish with greater reverence the word of God, and we know how cold and sluggish our attention can be if we are not excited by something else.

And from a passage of scripture in Mark 16:19-20 which reads:

19 So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen

God did stretch out his mighty hand and do miracles, as it says the Lord working with them and confirming the word through them with the accompanying signs, (signs, wonders, and

and miracles) And they were numerous in the book of acts affecting those whom the Lord chose the signs, wonders and miracles were to have their intended effect upon.

As you probably know, miracles were not always effective in the gospel, with Jesus being the one performing them.

Matthew 11:23 – And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works are done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.

See in Matthew 11:23 Jesus, the Son of the Living God the Father, did mighty works, (signs and miracles) but the people remained hard-hearted and did not repent.

But Jesus, who we know is “truth personified” spoke with integrity and honesty and told the “people of Capernaum who remained disbelieving after seeing Jesus’ mighty works) said Sodom (with Gomorrah) which was destroyed with fire and hail” would have repented and

remained to this day” if they saw the “mighty works of Jesus, the Son of God’

 Strange how God could have caused these two nations to repent and remain to this day but chose rather to “destroy them” If God truly desires all to repent, that is every single individual without exception, he missed a golden opportunity there. But the “Will of God” for Sodom (and Gomorrah) was not repentance but God’s wrath, vengeance (vengeance is mine, the Lord says) and eternal destruction. Jesus said Sodom would have repented. WE KNOW GOD REVEALED WILL IS THAT ALL MEN REPENT EVERYWHERE. BUT IS  OBVIOUS AND CANNOT BE DENIED THAT GOD SECRET WILL OF DECREE WAS THAT SODOM AND GOMORRAH NOT REPENT BUT DIE IN THEIR SINS. IF THAT IS NOT THE TRUTH BECAUSE JESUS SAID THEY WOULD HAVE REPENTED IF THEY HAD SEEN HIS MIRACLES THEN WHAT OTHER ANSWER CAN KEMP OR FLOWERS GIVE?

But not Capernaum, who remained disbelieving after seeing the mighty works of God. Read the entire passage below in its immediate context.

 Matthew 11:20 Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done because they did not repent:

21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

22 But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.

23 And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be brought down to Hades; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you.”

So, “these” speaking back to John 20:31, is miracles, signs, and wonders and are only going to have their intended results on whom God has chosen, that it will show them that. “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” Not all individuals as proven in Matthew 11, but those whom God has chosen, it will stir them and show them he is the Christ.

To show the proof of what I just said, let us read one more passage of scripture in Matthew 11.

Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank You, Father,,, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes.

26 Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight.

27 All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

You see Kemp, right here Jesus in connection and in context with the miracles he did in Capernaum prays to His Father saying,

“I thank you, Father, that you have hidden “these” (the word these again) things (what things, maybe mighty works and miracles in context, I could be wrong if someone will show me) from the wise and prudent and revealed them to babes.
You see the Father can hide the intended effects from those he chooses, examples, Sodom and Gomorrah, (who would have repented and remained to this day) Jesus said if they had seen His mighty works, and also Capernaum who is in the immediate context of what Jesus just said about miracles and praying to the Father about “hiding these things” (John 20:31, the things that were written to stir and show Jesus was the Son of God) The mighty works were ineffective to Sodom and Gomorrah and Capernaum. They continued rejecting Christ, remained in their disbelief with the wrath of God abiding on them. And it going to be bad for Capernaum come judgment day according to Jesus, more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in Hell than this city here, because Sodom and Gomorrah would have repented and Capernaum hardened their heart and these mighty works did not show them Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God as it did the disciples in John 20:30-21 and many through the book of Acts, and maybe down through the history of time, cannot prove that, but I do not know what all God has done in His Sovereignty. God does not need miracles now with theregenerating power of the Holy Spirit who quickens and makes spiritually dead wicked God-hating sinners alive while still in their trespasses and sins, (Ephesians 2:1)

Also, notice Jesus says in Matthew 11:26, praying to the Father, “it seemed good in the Father’s sight” God’s will to blind and not open the hearts of the people to Capernaum through his these “things” Christ’s mighty works. Jesus goes on to say in verse 27. that no

one knows the Father except the Son and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him. So mighty works will not work for everyone and not reveal Jesus is the Christ Son of God the Father, and only Jesus through His will chooses who he will reveal the Father too.

 Through the instrumentality of the word of God, the law and the Gospel being preached externally by God’s ministers. the Holy Spirit makes use of the external word and opens the hearts of sinners to believe as he did Lydia

4 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.

See God has to open the heart before one can by faith see and understand and believe in Christ. This is done by the Holy Spirit in connection with preaching the law and Gospel Is this not what Jesus said in the Gospel of John Chapter 6

John 6:63 -63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

 See, it is the Spirit who regenerates and gives life, and then Jesus says the words he Speaks are spirit and they have life. The Holy Spirit and Jesus are one in essence and the regenerating quickening life-giving power of the Gospel is through the agency of the Spirit of God and the instrumentality of preaching the Gospel. Just like Lydia though, the heart has to be opened first by the Holy Spirit to understand and attend and have faith in the Gospel of Christ.

Remember Christ Professor Flowers references in John 20:30 in connection with verse 28 & 29 in connection with what has been said above. In Flowers Article mentioned above.
28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

That You May Believe
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book;

31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

The disciples were crushed in spirit and doubting about Christ, because of Him being on the Cross, but he reminds them that he is the Christ, Son of God and as Professor Flowers said, “that believing you may have eternal life.”

This still in no way proves faith precedes the regenerating quickening, life-giving power, opening of the heart and giving of faith ability of the Holy Spirit that is absolutely necessary to believe the Gospel and Jesus is our Savior. Professor Flowers is really reaching and reading His tradition into this verse. It is not good to just quote proof texts on such an important and (Spiritual life and death Subject) It must be engaged in depth and in context and tradition must be excluded. Not saying I don’t have tradition because we all do. I just believe Professor Flowers was very superficial in just quoting this verse and saying it means.“faith precedes regeneration” when it in no way in context teaches or implies that.

Miracles can be dangerous unless directed under God’s control to execute their intended effect for the people the Lord has chosen “the mighty works” for. They can cause mere admiration. We now have the promised Holy Spirit, the law and the Gospel which is effectual in saving people without miracles, although I am open but cautious, knowing that God can do all things and if he has so decreed in His Divine Holy Will in Christ before eternity can and will use the “mighty works, miracles and signs, these things that are written” to stir sluggish and cold-hearted unbelieving sinners to believe Jesus is the Christ, but all of this is the Mighty Working of the Holy Spirit. As the Spirit was given to Jesus without measure.
John 3:34 – For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure.

So the meaning of the verse Professor Flowers quoted above in connection with verses 29 through the rest of the chapter means this and only this I believe.

And only when God the Holy Spirit opens the heart first, (regeneration preceding faith.)

“By believing you may have eternal life” I wholly agree with this, it is thus saith the Lord  God’s word but does not prove faith Precedes the life-giving, the opening of the heart and regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. That is eisegesis, reading into the text what is not there.

John Calvin continues by saying, “Here John repeats the most important point of His doctrine, that we obtain eternal life by faith because while we are out of Christ, we are dead until restored by GRACE THROUGH FAITH. NOTICE GRACE, THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT GRACE PRECEDES FAITH.

 Ephesians 2:8 – 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Notice again grace necessarily precedes faith which is the work of the Spirit of Grace. Our entire salvation is of the working power of the Holy Spirit and the disclosing of the law that we are wicked sinners in need of a Savior, it is the gift of God.

 This eternal life is given to all the Father has given to Jesus, (See John 6: 37-39, 44, John 17:2) Jesus gives eternal life only to those the Father has given him. This truth and important doctrine are also stated in John 10, you should read it.

2 Timothy 2:10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

 One last passage of Scripture that illuminates the other scriptures and strengthens my argument.
according to to2 Timothy 1: 9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,  Biblical Greek- Before times eternal

10 but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

This passage of scripture says God has saved us and called us with a holy calling, (that internal calling, effectual call of the Holy Spirit in connection with the preached word, the Spirit gives understanding and faith in Christ who is the gospel)

It goes on to say in verse 9, “grace was given to “us” (the beloved, the elect, the given ones, the coming/believing ones. John 6:37-39, John 17:2, John 10, the sheep Jesus died for whom the Father has given to Him and gives them eternal life, not all people without exception)

Jesus did not come to make “salvation a possibility” (possibility salvation) through the sinful voluntary enslaved will that loves and takes pleasure in sin. That is through the sinful will evil wicked man repenting of their sins and believing in the Gospel. Remember 6:63, it said the “the flesh profits nothing, it is the Spirit that gives quickening life to repent of sins towards God and embrace Christ through faith in the Gospel.
Chosen ones, (John 6:37-39) has always been graced from eternity in Christ when they were chosen or2 Timothy 1:9 says grace was given before time began, before time eternal, the interlinear bible says, it was in the mind of God, (his intent) from all eternity to grace to the elect before time began in eternity in union with Christ. The elected in Him and when they are saved in time and history. We are saved by the grace of God, through faith in Christ, Because of Christ, to the Glory of God. I could give you other scriptures that  2 Timothy 1:9 says grace was given before time began, before time eternal, the interlinear bible says, it was in the mind of God, (his intent) from all eternity to grace to the elect before time began in eternity in union with Christ. The elected in Him and when they are saved in time and history. We are saved by the grace of God, through faith in Christ, Because of Christ, to the Glory of God. I could give you other scriptures that says we are not born of the will of man, but we were born of God and that is is because of God that we are in Christ Jesus and that not of ourselves it is the gift of God, from beginning to end and everything in between

But something very interesting is said in verse 10 of 2 Timothy. Paul says, “by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ (who is a perfect savior and will save His people from their sins and his soul will be satisfied (Matthew, Isaiah 53.

Verse 10 goes on to say this, and I emphasize not shouting, (life and immortality were brought to light through the gospel.

The life quickening power of the Holy Spirit that enables us to believe and come to Christ through the instrumentality of the preaching of the Gospel brings to “light” the “life” that has been given us by the Holy Spirit by believing the gospel.

John Newton, a Calvinist, who wrote the probably the most famous Christian hymn of all time, wrote in that song, “how precious did, that grace appear (saving grace) the hour I first believed. (in the Gospel)  Amazing Grace

See there is life-giving regenerating power within us before we believe and embrace Christ as our Saviour through the preaching of the Gospel.

But the “life, grace” did not appear or be brought to life (2 Timothy 1:10) until we believed. The spiritual life regenerating of the Holy Spirit was there but the sinner is not conscience until he believes in Christ his Savior. That happens when he believes and life is brought to life and made apparent to the sinner that he is now in Christ.


Soteriology101: Probable Heretic Eric Kemp -In every fallen sinful wicked sinner there is an innate natural ability to “faith” in Christ

You say this is because of the “image of God” that remains in every human being that has ever existed, presently existing or ever will exist.  Do you mean that due to the image of God in mankind  God has given every single person without exception the ability to believe in Christ if they want to? Or they have the ability to respond in faith to the message of the Gospel due to the “image of God” if they want to?  

Which may be saying the same thing.
But where is this mentioned in the Holy Scripture?  That mankind before being “in Christ” has “innate faith’ or the “natural ability” to believe in The Good News of the Gospel? Because of the “image of God?
I know you may respond saying you do not care to correspond with me or maybe will just ignore me That is fine.
But if you do I would ask you do not just give me a “scattergun debate tactic” of a whole bunch of proof text Verses of Scripture that you do not perform Biblical Exegesis within its context showing how it relates to the IMAGE OF GOD. I do not think you will respond because you cannot connect it to the “image of God” within the wicked evil sinner who is hostile to and hates God and the message of the Gospel.
This is in response to your article on Soteriology101. “A Charitable Discourse” Something to do with humility if you need to review.  I am not concerned with the humility part. I know you along with Flowers believe that the sinner who hates the light of Christ and will not come to the light and loves the darkness of his or her sins and takes great pleasure in them can humble themselves before God apart from any work of The Spirit of God wielding the Word of God, the Gospel of Christ,
I am interested in this understanding of the sinner who still has the “image of God” and has innate faith and the natural ability to believe apart from a work of Grace, God’s Spirit and the Gospel. You did say the “the Faith and the Ability to believe was due to the “image of God” in every sinner alienated from Christ.
I find your article to be faulty and highly asserted on the foundation of your own opinions and the philosophy of Flowerism.  I will be doing a whole rebuttal of it in the future. Was just hoping you could help me understand about “saving faith being with every sinner naturally from birth due to the image of God”.
Maybe just clarify in a biblical manner.
Thanks and God bless Eric


“Can the Lost do What is Right”
So many flaws and misunderstandings you have in this article. Not to mention your latest one on John Piper. Piper has been under scrutiny for years by the Reformed Community if you had done your research instead of cherry picking one article. He has gone back and forth on the “Doctrine of Justification” But like Flowers will never tell the whole story only that which is convenient and suits your life’s crusade in trying to destroy Christian Calvinism. Let’s look at other Christian Calvinist who have critiqued Piper on his wishy washy back and forth even heresy on the Doctrine of Justification. Yes Piper has said many good things. But I a long time ago began to feel very uneasy when he would speak on the Doctrine of Justification. Piper has had many fooled for years but he is not that big of a hero as you think among Reformed Believers. Of course there are the die hard fans that will remain loyal as there is for Leighton Flowers. The gospel of Leighton Flowers and the Philosophy of Flowerism. Both the Calvinist and the Arminian (Olson) have said that “Article Two” of the Southern Traditional Baptist Articles of Faith is Pelagian and cultist.
Eric it is not “Faith alone that justifies” Well in a sense that is just short hand for saying Faith alone in Christ that Justifies the ungodly and Christ righteousness is imputed to the wicked God hating Sinner through the instrumentality of Faith. Why can you seem not to be able to grasp this. You want it to be man’s faith that justifies and it is the object of saving faith that justifies the sinner That object being Christ.
Look at what the Reformed Theologians have said about John Piper.
The link above is a new book out by a Reformed Theologian refuting John Piper and his take on the “Doctrine of Justification” I advise you to get it so you yourself will understand Piper’s confusion, your own confusion and truth of this doctrine.
The above is a re-post on one of your favorite sites Bible Thumping Wingnut. Not really one my favorites either but the article does expose Piper straying from the Doctrine of Justification through faith In Christ.
This is only Part 2, I advise you to read part one of Piper’s compromise on the Doctrine of Justification. It is entitled above:

When Protestants Err on the Side of Rome: John Piper, “Final Salvation,” and the Decline and Fall of Sola Fide at the Last Day (Part II)

Above link is from a Reformed Site on John Piper comprising Sola Fide?
John Piper denies Justification by Faith above. Of course that is saving faith in Christ justifies the ungodly apart from works,
John Piper’s forward to Tom Schriener’s New Book on Justification by Faith Alone above.
Piper: Salvation by Faith alone and a little bit more? above
Does John Piper Believe in Salvation by Works? above
These are just a few of the growing concerns of Piper’s departure from Doctrine upon which the church of Jesus Christ stands or falls. He is has been very confusing, going back and forth. Basically saying that initially the sinner is saved by faith alone in Christ and is justified but good works are necessary for the saved sinner to receive final salvation. He is saying these works justifies the Christian before God for final Salvation. We can never ever!!!! be justified by works before God. Our righteousness even those done in cooperation with and by the means of the power of the Holy Spirit still do not justify us before God. God accepts them yes. But God has not lowered his Standard of Holiness. It is still, “You shall be Holy as God is Holy and be perfect as your Father in heaven is in perfect.” Which is what we always strive for on this side of heaven but will never achieve.  Even our works done by walking in the means and power of the Holy Spirit we still fall way short of God’s Standard of Perfect Holiness that only God Himself Possesses.  Works are necessary to salvation in one sense and in one sense only Not to justify. But to show that you have been justified through faith in Christ and His imputed Righteousness. This is shown by the Apostle James.  By works we are justified before men but never before God. It is Christ alone and is righteousness that was sufficient when we were first saved and it will be Christ alone and his righteousness that justifies us before God when we are glorified in the finality of our Salvation being delivered from the pretense of sin forever.  I will say this emphatically. That without Justification there will be no Sanctification. And if there is no Sanctification there never was any Justification. 
So you can take this to the Flower Patch kids if you want so they can make you feel better and confirm you but Eric what you did was just cherry pick as Flowers does like getting certain people to interview who have left Christian Calvinist (that they said they hated, that makes a lot of sense) but you should have done your homework on Piper. No one is perfect and everyone is subject to apostatize from the faith. Am I saying that Piper truly has? The jury is still it out but it seems he has but maybe he will see that he is confusing things and leaning toward the Federal Vision (of Doug Wilson) and will repent.
But trust me Eric, you, Wagner and Flowers are in the same boat in my opinion in denying the faith that was once delivered to the saints being very Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian in your stance in going to the extreme left like Democrats to combat Calvinism.  Yes I am speaking of the boooogieee maaan!!!!
And Flowers having these so-called ex-Calvinist who say they hated Calvinism as they preached it Wow that makes a whole lot of sense. Do you see any Reformed people interviewing Traditionalist or Arminians who have become Calvinist. That is so weak and petty of Flowers but not in the least surprising. Flowers is so desperate he will interview anyone like Andy Stanley who makes a big donation and says during the interview that he really does not know or understand anything about Calvinism. Flowers just sits there shaking his head up and down agreeing with Stanley as he says so many things that are not in line with Christian Calvinism. Flowers will interview a Muslim or some other faith that he knows is a doctrine of demons but as long as they come out against Calvinism it is all good. They definitely had some weird man-love going back and forth at the beginning of that interview.  Not to mention Stanley trying to do away with the Old Testament and his promoting of Homosexuality. But this does not matter to Flowers as long as they stand with him with his life’s crusade of destroying Christian Calvinism.
Then Flowers will use someone like Derek Webb who never was really saved but gave mere intellectual accent to the Doctrines of Grace (which is done in every denomination I will prove it). This was really sad and pathetic to use something like this and blame on Christian Calvinism. From every denomination and every system of faith there is apostasy. This was so disingenuous and just down right pathetic and shows how low Flowers is willing to go in playing his “One string Bangor” All because of the resurgence of Calvinism in the Southern Baptist Denomination.
Flowers forgot to mention “Matt Dillahunty” I am sure you have heard of him Bearded Seminarian. He has debated Matt Slick who has defeated Flowers in debate many times. Matt Slick that is. 
Matt Slick was a “professing Christian” in the Southern Baptist Denomination for about 20 some years. He even considered going to Bible College and becoming a Pastor. But the more he studied and mediated he realized this God-stuff was just one big fairy tale the Southern Baptist Non-Calvinist side was trying to sale him So now he is a very infamous “Atheist” debating Christians that there is no God and convincing many people to depart from the faith and confirming those who already believed there was no God that they were right. I blame this on the teachings of the Non-Calvinist Southern Baptist Flowersim  See how it goes Eric Just plain stupid of Flowers.
So much more could be said of Flowers under-handed ways and his dishonesty. Most of all his articles and videos are nothing but repetitions of what he says over and over. That has been established by many. He just wants to make a name for himself as I think the possible and plausible heretic Brian Wagner does who holds to the teaching of the diminuished humanistic heretical god of Open Theism.
And Eric you do know your belief in your god’s infinite foreknowledge makes him the author of sin right and guilty by association. After all he DETERMINED to created that which he knew would be from all eternity. Even the articles of faith of the Southern Traditional Baptist says that God knows the actions of people beforehand. That is before they actually do them good or evil. So God knew when he DETERMINED to created the world what it would be like and he created anyway. With all the evil and sin causing much pain sorrow and misery. This loving god of yours just sits on the throne with his omnipotent power and does nothing with what he created which lead to the evil and sin that came into existence, Your god is all-chowing so he knew from eternity what would be So he is the author of sin and guilty by association. Saying man has free will and your god will not violate that will not do. Because you and I both know if a child was being molested and beaten next door to us we both would run next door (as we heard that child screaming) calling 919, kick down that door and violate that criminal’s free will to do evil and sinful acts to that child. You are more loving and merciful than the god you worship and serve Eric 
These are questions you have to answer. Not just evade and change the subject. Or say well the Calvinist has problems to. Take care of your own system of belief first and then come talk to us. How bout that Eric.
Let R.C Explain to you Justification though faith in Jesus Christ

It’s Not the Doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone that Saves—It’s Christ Who Saves

Really hope to hear back from you but I know you cannot answer the above. Quit being a Flower Patch Kid. Stop following Flowers and worshiping the god of Flowers. Sounds familiar on Soteriology101. That crap that you guys allow while you ban those who make arguments you cannot refute.

How to flunk Soteriology101? By the Council

I will criticize Dr. Leighton Flowers based on bad argumentation and faulty reasoning. I have talked to him and he seems like a nice guy. He just has the strangest way of being obsessed with Calvinism. This will hopefully be a good resource for those who deal with Dr. Flowers or any of the flower patch kids. They seem to defend things I believe they don’t comprehend and this will be an article to share with them to be more informed on issues of the reformed faith.

1. Always conflating Calvinism with determinism

Every time I listen to Leighton Flowers speak, he conflates Calvinism with determinism. Calvinists tend to be divine determinists, but the view itself doesn’t necessitate a view of causation. I do hold to divine determinism and I am willing to defend it. I just find that Dr. Flowers is not being precise and overstates his case.

2. Unrealistic expectations

He seems to think that if the Bible isn’t professing Calvinism or Divine Determinism in every verse, then those beliefs are unbiblical. This refutes his own belief system as well. These are double standards that arise in his talks and other works that simply make him hypocritical and difficult to listen to.

3. Burden shifting

He believes his view is clearly laid out in the Bible and, as such, acts as though he doesn’t have to prove it. This ties in with the previous point. It makes conversation nearly unbearable and completely useless.

4. Tu Quoque

He thinks Calvinists commit this fallacy when showing the freewill theist bears a double-edged sword in some of his criticisms of determinism. The issue is whether the Calvinist reconciles the problem on his own system and if the indeterminist wishes to present self-refuting criticisms. The point is the this is an informal fallacy. That means it isn’t always fallacious to point out a debaters hypocrisy. A tu quoque can be used as an argument according to philosophers like Peter Geach.

5. Incoherent Doctrine of God

He holds rather problematic views that cause much confusion in his own doctrine of God. For instance, he can’t figure out how God can think if he is a timeless being. He believes that if God does think, it would require a temporal process (as if he needs time to move to new thoughts). This is rather incoherent. God knows all things from a divine perspective in a logical moment and this requires no time. But while maintaining God is timelessly eternal, he also believes in Divine Passibility and denies a strong form of immutability. The issue is that if you accept the proposition “God is timelessly eternal”, then you can’t maintain God is a changing temporal being. Dr. Flowers should look at why scholars maintain these beliefs, what those beliefs entail, and why his beliefs leave him with an inconsistent doctrine of God.

This was also apparent in this conversation with Brother Chris Harris. He imputed to God human emotions. That would entail that the creation at certain times makes God sad and at other times makes him happy. That requires that God changes based on what creatures do. At one moment he is x and at the next moment, he is ~x. So, is God timeless or is God temporal? How can Leighton maintain divine timelessness and still have God being temporal? He wants to have his cake and eat it too.

6. Bad philosophical responses

He presents philosophical ideas that he is not willing to defend, but only to appeal to when challenged on issues regarding foreknowledge and the problem of evil. The only defense for such doctrines he has is to chalk it up to “mystery”. Promises that these contradictions fade into the mist without any justification. The arbitrary appeals to the mystery are quite annoying and make any serious claim to mystery indistinguishable from either being an arbitrary claim or an actual mystery.

7. God and Causation

He will ask if God ordains (or causes) evil and the Calvinist will usually answer as the Westminster Confession of Faith states:

I. God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

– Schaff, P. (1882). The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Evangelical Protestant Creeds, with Translations(Vol. 3, p. 608). New York: Harper & Brothers.

He argues that if in Calvinism is true, then God causes evil, and he, therefore, is evil as anyone who would cause evil would be evil. This isn’t a new response to Calvinists. The Calvinist will try to distinguish between primary and secondary agency as a possible solution to this conundrum. Leighton knows this common response and will point out that David was the primary cause of the death of Uriah, but isn’t the secondary cause that brought about his death. He then points out that God held David accountable for his actions which is correct of Leighton to do. This is why when Dr. Flowers and I spoke, I adopted Dr. James Anderson’s view: we need metaphysical categories for God himself and that creaturely causation is not designed for the way God causes events. God isn’t a being like creatures and we need to remember the Creator-Creature distinction. This is nothing new to the issue of causation, as philosophers have long differentiated between different types of causation. Aristotle, for example, distinguished between material cause, efficient cause, formal cause, and final cause. The discussion needs to turn to what type of causation is used by the Creator of all things. Calvinists suspect that divine causation is such of a type that would not read moral culpability back into God’s causation, as we do for other types of causation. We can’t assume that it is always correct to transfer moral responsibility to an agent because he is the cause of something.

Leighton believes that Calvinism makes God the “Author of Sin”. He resorts to phrases without explaining what the charge means. Hays wrote an article about that hereherehere, and here. It has also been pointed out that this objection (that God causes evil) refutes free will theism as well. In free will theism, God is also the “Cause of Sin” and “Author of Evil” which I have addressed before:

The thunder rolls

Fellow council member Chris Harris sent me statements of Leighton Flowers. So, I decided to respond. LEIGHTON FLOWERS said: “Chris, haven’t you ever seen a cop show where the cops threaten one gang member by suggesting they will put them … Continue readingThe thunder rolls

Soteriology101: Probable Heretics Leighton Flowers, Eric Kemp, and Open Theist Professor Brian Wagner Misunderstanding of 2 Peter 3:9

Not Wishing For Any To Perish

Posted on February 5, 2019 by TheSire

“Not Wishing For Any To Perish”

by Chris Harris

2 Peter 3:9. Is it a good passage for the Lord wanting all men to be saved? Let’s look at it.

I believe everyone knows that I am a Calvinist so I will offer how I see this passage as a Calvinist would. The thing is that we aren’t using some “special” hermeneutics to do so, rather just allowing the text to speak without allowing our presuppositions to force us in any direction.

So, let’s look at the passage.

2 Peter 3:9 (NAS): The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Now, notice that the subject of the Lord’s promise and patience. The subject is the pronoun “you”. Pronouns have antecedents, so we need to understand who it is that this pronoun represents in order to know who is the subject of the Lord’s promise and patience. So, who does this “you” represent?

Let’s look at some prior context.

2 Peter 3:8 (NAS): But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved

Just the prior verse gives us the pronoun “your”, and Peter tells us who this is. This is the “beloved”. Now, we can continue to probe more about who it is this pronoun refers to by continuing to look at the prior context, but at the moment it seems to be that the pronoun “you” refers to the “beloved” in specific, which would remove the possibility of verse 9 being universal.

Let’s look some more.

2 Peter 3:7 (NAS): But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

Notice that in verse 7 Peter mentions “ungodly” men in specific, which if the “you” of verse 9 is universal should include them as well. But Peter uses these “ungodly” men in contrast to the “beloved” of verse 8. So, we can say that these ungodly men are not included in the “you” of verse 9.

Let’s continue.

2 Peter 3:3–5 (NAS): Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts,
4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? Forever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”
5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of the water and by water

Notice in this set of verses we have a different pronoun used, one that denotes another group. The pronouns are “they” and “their”.

It is clear by the context that these pronouns refer to a group other than the “beloved” of verse 8. These people Peter calls “mockers” in verse 3 and also says that they follow after their own lusts. Which again should be representative of all men outside of Christ and should be included in the “you” which is the subject of the Lord’s promise and patience of verse 9 if the application is universal. It doesn’t seem that Peter has that in mind though.

Let’s continue.

2 Peter 3:1–2 (NAS): This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder,
2 that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles

Verse 1 introduces us to the “beloved” in this chapter, which can be traced back to the first 15 verses of chapter 1 where Peter makes it abundantly clear that these he calls beloved are indeed fellow believers in Christ Jesus. In Chapter 2 he introduces another group, the same group of the “they” and “their” of chapter 3, which are not fellow believers but rather wicked men.

So, in conclusion, we must, according to syntax, grammar, and surrounding context following basic interpretation rules, conclude that the referent of the pronoun “you” in verse 9 can be no other than the Beloved of 3:1 and the same as the “you” of 1:1-15. We cannot see the “you” as being universal, but rather as those who were chosen, 1:10, and as such the promise and patience of the Lord belong to them and not to the wicked who Peter has so painstakingly contrasted against the beloved. God has patience with the beloved by enduring the wicked until the fullness of His people has been fulfilled, and all of the elect have been saved. He wishes for none to perish, as would be the case were He to prematurely judge the earth.

Christian Calvinist continues to scare a Flower Patch Kid: Eric Kemp

Eric Kemp seems to think that Soteriology101 is successful because it daily gets a lot of hits and visits. So much misunderstanding by the cultish minded group on the web that adheres to much of what Pelagian has said. Leighton Flowers has even said that If Pelagius had been given a fair trial he would have been seen differently in his views. His philosophy that was not biblical and that Flowers has much in common with along with the Flower Patch Kids on Soteriology101 and their Pelagian comments would possibly be the standard of the day.

Eric Kemp does not seem to realize that just because you get a lot of “daily hits and visits” to your sites does not mean the site is “successful.” Far from the truth. Eric needs to look at the Muslims and how large of a religious sect they are in the world. Or the Jehovah Witnesses. Or the Mormons I would say they are very successful also but also along with these other false religions are “Doctrines of Demons.”
Just as Matt Slick has said in calling Leighton Flowers to repentance in being used by demons to divide the body of Christ and pretending or at least twisting the truth of Christian Calvinist Doctrines of Grace. Not to mention dividing the body of Christ. This is not being successful It is being used by Satan and disrupting the work of God the Holy Spirit which far exceeds Christian Calvinism.
I would even think that Leighton Flowers and Eric Kemp would use this passage in Acts to prop up what they feel is the success of their ministry.
Acts 5:38 – “So my advice is, leave these men alone. Let them go. If they are planning and doing these things merely on their own, it will soon be overthrown.
Acts 5:39 – but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!” So they took his advice,
I can see Flowers and Kemp saying their ministry of destroying of what they have called their Calvinist brothers in Christ is of God on these two verses on advice given by a man who was a heathen of the high Jewish Council.
It is man-made ungodly minded advice that was thought to be of God. Then we still go back to the thriving false religions of today and this verse does not fit and shows to be bad advice from an ungodly wicked man. Have you ever notice that when Flowers or Eric talk about sinners that can never describe them as being Wicked ungodly sinners who are hostile to and hate the Holy loving living merciful God of heaven. Interesting. Because they feel the sinner is not as bad as the Christian Calvinist makes him out to be although Scriptures paints a different picture. Which I plan to show. It is Total Depravity and not necessarily TOTAL INABILITY BUT SPIRITUAL INABILITY. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
1 Corinthians 11:19 – For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.