“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.