Recently, Leighton Flowers has been presenting a defeater for the belief that regeneration precedes faith. It comes from Colossians 2:12-14: Those that worship Leighton as God’s new prophet have voiced their praise for this argument. I think it is a … Continue reading Circumcision Performed Without Hands
Click Here to watch on youtube: Continue reading Is John 6 Only About the Apostles?
I recently had an exchange with Leighton Flowers over the issue of a serious mistake Leighton has made for years. This is conflating the inability to believe with the inability to understand. That often leaves Leighton’s arguments confused and misguided. … Continue reading The Natural Man: Calvinism and the Ability to Understand
This was written by Colton Carlson in response to Leighton’s argument that Calvinism entails fatalism: I will point out one problem that I heard, and kept hearing, around the 20-30 minute mark, and that is when Flowers attempts to argue … Continue reading Does Compatibilism entail Hard Determinism?
[responsivevoice_button] I wish to collect the ideas of John Cranman and the critiques of him that I find most successful. We have had some extensive dialogue with him and his friend and I think we can codify some of these … Continue reading Divine Intentions and Human History
This is literally everything I’ve been saying about Leighton Flower’s view for the last 3 years. That it reduces the spiritual problems of mankind to epistemological problems. I even got into a disagreement with Sean Cole over the issue. I’ve … Continue reading Is Traditionalism Pelagianism?
There are some responses from Leighton in the comment section that we can also clean up: “A bypass of God-given character and desires” So presume the mad scientist doesn’t bypass you’re God-given character and desires but by means of the … Continue reading (Part 2): Guillaume Responds to Leighton Flowers, Tim Stratton, & Braxton Hunter.
I recently discussed the issue of 1 Cor. 10:13 again with John Cranman: John Cranman TheSire, the first paragraph is not what I’m arguing. All I’m saying is that this verse affirms PAP/CCFW, and is thus incompatible with compatibilist determinism. I am not arguing for moral responsibility. I am only arguing that it supports the idea that believing agents had two or more options they could’ve chosen – which falsifies compatibilist determinism. TheSire: The article argues the freedom Paul writes is that of believers. But usually, your side maintains all mankind has LFW. So, unbelievers would lack LFW. John Cranman: … Continue reading ‘Provide the way of escape’
There was a thread on Facebook that I participated in discussing Calvinism. Here is my edited helpful form of a confused conversation: Leighton Flowers: If you redefine human freedom to mean “doing as one desires when those desires are theistically determined,” then sure. But normal people don’t do that. Just Calvinists. Brian Knapp: Leighton Flowers actually no – not all compatibilists are calvinists. And to say “redefine” is to beg the question. And to use the word “normal” as you did is to poison the well. Congrats – you’re 0 for 3. Phillip Jackson: Brian Knapp what poor refutation, my … Continue reading Traditionalist Intuitions
The Council 
You must be logged in to post a comment.