Podcasts about has paul

These verses get skipped in most Christian churches in North America today. They are too much for listeners and for the clergy called to preach them. Why are they too much? Has Paul gone off the rails? Or have we? This sermon examines these questions in light of the gospel of Christ and emerges on the other side, showing that Paul's teaching is Christ-centered, loving, and powerful in the Christian life.

Many of us agricultural metaphors are intelligible yet not relatable. What I mean is that we can understand the concepts that are being expressed but we have very little first-hand experience with the actual phenomena. In our passage for this week Paul uses a common biblical metaphor or reaping what you sow. The modern reader can comprehend what he means. If someone were to plant corn, there is no chance that when harvest time comes, he will get wheat. With our knowledge of genetics and the inner working of DNA, we might even be in a better place to acknowledge the truth that what one sows, they will reap. Nevertheless, very few of us have personal knowledge of raising crops for our livelihood. If we want corn, we don't have to make plans six months ahead of time. We don't have to buy the seed, prepare the soil, sow the seed, tend the ground, water, fertilize, and finally harvest. Rather we just go down to the store and buy whatever variety of corn we desire; canned, cream, frozen, on the cob, niblets, yellow, white, or sweet. This relationship with agriculture means that we get the concept behind the metaphor, but we haven't had the experience undergirding the metaphor. Paul's aim in our passage for this Sunday is to encourage the Galatians to persevere in doing good. It is easy to become discouraged in doing good when you don't see immediate results. You can give up because it seems that there will be no return. However, Paul says that our actions now will result in a harvest later. We are sowing seeds that will germinate and fruit in the future. If we do good, then there will be a harvest of life, yet if we do evil there will be a harvest of destruction. We who are so far removed from the life of agriculture must listen carefully. In the day of harvest, we will not get to pick what we reap. We will reap what we have sown. The day of harvest is not like going to the grocery store and choosing whatever you like. Rather you will receive from what you have done whether good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10). Some may argue that this concept communicates a works righteousness system of belief. Has Paul spent five chapters arguing that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone only to undermine his whole argument by insisting on eternal rewards based on good deeds? Not at all. Rather Paul is communicating a spiritual truth, that those who have been accepted as righteous and given the Spirit of Christ must now live by the Spirit. The reward of harvesting eternal life is not earned through good works. Rather good works are a result of God's grace to us in Christ. The result of that grace in us is the fruit of the Spirit borne through us. We are not saved by good works, but we are saved to good works. If you desire corn, you must plant corn. If you plant weeds, when the time of harvest comes that is what you are going to get. Therefore, do not grow weary in planting good seed for there will be a day of harvest in which you will reap eternal life. To come prepared for the sermon take time this week to read and to meditate upon Galatians 6:7-10, Psalm 16:11, Hosea 8:7, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Ephesians 2:5-6, and Westminster Confession of Faith 33.1.

On a Monday Edition of The Jordy Culotta Show, we have on future LSU Quarterback Walker Howard. He gives us the lowdown on the recruiting weekend after LSU football was finally allowed to host a gaggle of prospects in Baton Rouge. Recurring guest Rep. John Stefanski comes in to discuss the Name, Image, and Likeness bill that is coming to pass in Louisiana. He also talks his sports gambling bill that also passed, as well as the Ma ma ma Mary Jane looking to get legalized. Don't let LSU Baseball get hot.. Wait, they are! LSU rolls into a winner take all in Eugene vs the Ducks tonight at 9 P.M. (That's Paul Mainieri time) and former LSU Baseball All-American Mason Katz joins the show to preview the quackers and the Tigers. Has Paul officially cast the spell for some Mainieri magic? Finally, we hit the recruiting trail with the OG in the game, Sonny Shipp. He details everything that went into LSU Football's first camp since COVID halted the world. Did the Tigers take advantage of the visits? 0:00 - Capital City Soul 2:30 - Welcome In! 10:00 - LSU Baseball Train 16:00 - Mason Katz on LSU Baseball 33:15 - LA. Rep John Stefanski 59:00 - PS5 Wholesaler Walker Howard 1:14:00 - Geaux 247's Sonny Shipp on LSU Recruiting

In this series wrap-up, Paul and Steve discuss their favorite stories in this series. Has Paul managed to turn Steve from sceptic to fan? What do the two friends see as the future of comics? Give a listen and find out. Thanks for listening to this twelve episode podcast series that was a year in the making and a labor of love for us here at Big Broccoli Studios. There are plenty of other stories to tell, so if you would like a second season of We’ve Got Issues, let us know. For more great shows or to connect with Paul and Steve, go to BigBroccoliStudios.com

Hello there friends and weirdos! In this episode, friend of the show Jules returns to discuss one of her favorite topics with the Weird Boys: the Beatles! Kyle cracks open his sixth grade project on the Brit teenyboppers to assist with the story and explain...did Paul McCartney die and get secretly replaced by a doppelganger? We search for the truth in what may be the first conspiracy Kyle took interest in, trying to uncover the hidden clues in Beatles lyrics and album artwork! Has Paul been dead all these years? How does sixth grade Kyle's project hold up? All this and more!

As a preamble to this episode I wanted to mention that it was recorded before the issues that arose within the Performing Arts community last week, with a lot of productions being postponed of closing down. One of those productions is ‘Tell Me On A Sunday’ with D2 Productions starring Nikole Music. Nikole is my guest in today’s episode, and we discuss the Top 5 Break Up Songs in Musical Theatre. The performing arts space is doing it tough at the moment. One thing I’ve recognised In the 25 years that I’ve been involved with musical theatre is that we are a wonderful community who always look out for each other. We are all in this together. Fantastix as a company was set up to help people put on a show. Since there are no shows at the moment, I still wanted to fulfil my commitment to musical theatre and produce a podcast episode every fortnight. I did consider not releasing episode 33 but Nikole was such a wonderful guest, the conversation was great and the top 5 Break Up Songs make up a stellar list. The music is amazing! Look out for each other. The performing arts industry will rise above this and we will all emerge victorious. I have no doubt about that. Nikole’s top 5 Still Hurting – Last Five Years I’m Here – The Color Purple Get Out & Stay Out – 9 to 5 Burn – Hamilton Tell Me On A Sunday – Tell Me On a Sunday  Paul’s Top 5 Take Back Your Mink – Guys & Dolls Gonna Wash That Man – South Pacific Serious – Legally Blonde Still Hurting – Last 5 Years Get Out & Stay Out – 9 to 5 5b. Somebody Kill Me – The Wedding Singer FANTASTIX BITS IN THE INTERVIEW The podcast must go on Which Aussie animal was Nikole in her Kindergarten play? Vulnerability of one woman shows D2 raw performance production style Women in theatre Singing in the car, everyone does it What is it about watching someone performing a breakup song? Have you ever experienced being part of an audience that gave a standing ovation mid song? Nikole has and tells us about it Which big risk earns the no 1 position in Nikole’s count down? I’m not crying, you’re crying Nikole’s Social Media Poll insights That towel dance! Has Paul put a Guys and Dolls song in EVERY episode so far?????? Have you ever been stuck in a lift? Did you know there is a musical about that? Lovely symmetry with the fast five and top five Remember to subscribe to all your local theatre groups newsletters so you are the first to know when you can get back into a theatre near you! SHOW NOTES Stephanie J Block – Get Out and Stay Out (9 to 5) D2 Productions Love Fantastix? Support the show! Join the conversation in our Fantastix Cast & Crew Community Group on Facebook Follow our Facebook Page Leave a rating or review in iTunes Keep listening: Subscribe via iTunes Subscribe via Spotify Subscribe via Stitcher

How many characters can CheapShow sustain? Has Paul created one too many pointless, annoying characters? Eli seems to think so, in this, our magnificent 83rd episode! It's all the usual larks and laughter, covering all your favourite segments... and even some you probably hate too. We have Tales from the Dancefloor, "Mi Casa, Su Casa", Cheap Eats and The Price of Shite. It's a ruddy packed show! Eli huffs some potentially poisonous fumes, Paul decides to turn every single bloody moment into an opportunity to make more infuriating animal sounds and voices and it all leads to CheapShow's typical concoction of comedy and violence!

Hello All! Thanks again for listening and sorry it's been such a long time since the last episode. The summer season tends to do that to us wedding photographers. All work and no play makes for two very dull podcasters. Dave and Paul meet up to watch the new Bladerunner movie so as we had a bit of time prior to the movie we started recording. We continued the rest of the podcast a day or two later. This week we catch up on a load of new tech. Paul got the new Apple iWatch (3rd generation) and tells us all about that. Dave talks about the new Fuji XE3 - he hasn't bought it - yet. The D850 is a hot topic. Has Paul went and got one already? You'll find out soon enough. We also cover the new phones from Apple and Google and well as bunch of other little bits and pieces. Thanks again folks for listening - and we'd love it if you could write a little review on itunes. Every little helps. Dave and Paul. And where to find more from the Raw Podcast Web - www.rawpodcast.com Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/rawpod/ Instagram - instagram.com/_rawpodcast_ Twitter - twitter.com/raw_podcast So then, where to find more from Paul. Web – mhphoto.ie Facebook – www.facebook.com/Moathillphoto Instagram – instagram.com/Moathillphotography Tumblr – moathill.tumblr.com Snapchat – Paul – Moat hill (pmon-aul) And where to find more from Dave. Web – www.davidmcclelland-photography.com Facebook – www.facebook.com/davidmcclellandphotography Tumblr – davidmcclellandphotography.tumblr.com Instagram – instagram.com/davidmcclellandphotography

It's time for Part Three of our epic Comic Movie Countdown! This week, we look at numbers 50 through 26 on the list as we work our way down to the cream of the crop. What made the cut? What didn't? Has Paul actually seen any of them? Listen in and find out. Thank you again to Michael Bailey, Scott Ryfun, Arthur Ratnik, Jason Sandberg, Kirk Greenfield, Mike Zummo, Jason Wood, Alan Middleton, David A. Pascarella, Ryan Daly, Charlie Niemeyer, Chris Tyler, Lee Busby, Andrew Leyland, Russell Bragg, Derek William Crabbe, Kim Sedano, Al Sedano, Mark Kalmbach, Kyle Benning, Jon M Wilson, Theresa Pascarella, W. Blaine Dowler, Melissa Spataro, Shagg Matthews, Gene Hendricks, Michael Sciddurlo, Micheal Paul Leyland, Derek Coward, Scott Shearer, Chris Franklin, Brian Hughes, Ian Levenstein, Zaki Hasan, Matt Hunsworth, Jason Jaconetti, Jim Dietz, Kris Keith, David Price, Jan-Roman Pikula, Tom Panarese, Luke Jaconetti, Blake M. Petit, Jonathan Crites, Dario Gonzalez, Ruth Sutherland, Darrin Sutherland, Dave Atteberry, Paul Smith, Christopher J Warden and the Solid Gold Dancers for making this list possible!Feedback for this show can be sent to: bins@twotruefreaks.comTwo True Freaks! is a proud member of BOTH the Comics Podcast Network (http://www.comicspodcasts.com/) and the League of Comic Book Podcasts (http://www.comicbooknoise.com/league/)!! Follow the fun on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/113051642052970/ THANK YOU for listening to Two True Freaks!!

It's time for Part Three of our epic Comic Movie Countdown! This week, we look at numbers 50 through 26 on the list as we work our way down to the cream of the crop. What made the cut? What didn't? Has Paul actually seen any of them? Listen in and find out. Thank you again to Michael Bailey, Scott Ryfun, Arthur Ratnik, Jason Sandberg, Kirk Greenfield, Mike Zummo, Jason Wood, Alan Middleton, David A. Pascarella, Ryan Daly, Charlie Niemeyer, Chris Tyler, Lee Busby, Andrew Leyland, Russell Bragg, Derek William Crabbe, Kim Sedano, Al Sedano, Mark Kalmbach, Kyle Benning, Jon M Wilson, Theresa Pascarella, W. Blaine Dowler, Melissa Spataro, Shagg Matthews, Gene Hendricks, Michael Sciddurlo, Micheal Paul Leyland, Derek Coward, Scott Shearer, Chris Franklin, Brian Hughes, Ian Levenstein, Zaki Hasan, Matt Hunsworth, Jason Jaconetti, Jim Dietz, Kris Keith, David Price, Jan-Roman Pikula, Tom Panarese, Luke Jaconetti, Blake M. Petit, Jonathan Crites, Dario Gonzalez, Ruth Sutherland, Darrin Sutherland, Dave Atteberry, Paul Smith, Christopher J Warden and the Solid Gold Dancers for making this list possible!Feedback for this show can be sent to: bins@twotruefreaks.comTwo True Freaks! is a proud member of BOTH the Comics Podcast Network (http://www.comicspodcasts.com/) and the League of Comic Book Podcasts (http://www.comicbooknoise.com/league/)!! Follow the fun on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/113051642052970/ THANK YOU for listening to Two True Freaks!!

Dr. Flowers begins playing a clip from John MacArthur from this sermon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CkX0kCPwnI And then goes on to read this from www.soteriology101.com “WHY DID YOU BELIEVE THE GOSPEL, BUT YOUR FRIEND DID NOT? ARE YOU WISER OR SMARTER OR MORE SPIRITUAL OR BETTER TRAINED OR MORE HUMBLE?” This is typically one of the first questions a Calvinist will ask a non-Calvinist when attempting to convince them of their doctrine.[1] In fact, when I was a Calvinist, I used this argument more often than any other, and it was quite effective. However, I have come to believe there are at least four significant problems with this line of argumentation: 1) QUESTION BEGGING FALLACY: As we have discussed HERE, this is a game of question begging because it presumes a deterministic answer is required. It is tantamount to asking, “What determined the response of you and your friend?” As if something or someone other than the responsible agents themselves made the determination. The question presumes determinism is true and that libertarian free will (self-determination) is not possible. [2] I believe that the cause of a choice is the chooser (or the cause of a determination is the determiner) and accept the mystery associated with the functioning of that free will in making its own determinations.[3] Now, Calvinists will often challenge my appeal to mystery at this point as if it is a weakness unique to my libertarian worldview. This is a very shortsighted argument, however, which will be made abundantly clear in the next point. 2) CALVINISTS ULTIMATELY APPEAL TO THE SAME MYSTERY: While the Calvinist may feel he has the “upper hand” when asking about the “decisive factor” in man’s choice to reject God’s words, the role reverses quite dramatically when the conversation shifts to man’s first choice to reject God’s words. Whether discussing Satan’s first act of rebellion or Adam’s first choice to sin, it becomes quite evident that the Calvinist has painted himself into a corner by denying libertarian free will. While on the one hand arguing that mankind will always act in accordance with his nature (assuming the nature could not be libertarianly free, mind you), the Calvinist has no rational answer as to why Adam (or Lucifer) chose to rebel. [4] For instance, John Piper openly admits: How God freely hardens and yet preserves human accountability we are not explicitly told. It is the same mystery as how the first sin entered the universe. How does a sinful disposition arise in a good heart? The Bible does not tell us.”[5] And RC Sproul similarly teaches, “But Adam and Eve were not created fallen. They had no sin nature. They were good creatures with a free will. Yet they chose to sin. Why? I don’t know. Nor have I found anyone yet who does know.”[6] As you can clearly see, the Calvinist has just “kicked the can down the road,” so to speak, when it comes to appealing to the mystery of free moral will.[7] They eventually appeal to same mystery that we do, all the while thinking they are taking the higher moral ground by giving God all the credit for the Christian’s choice to repent and trust in Christ. In reality, however, by not accepting the mystery of man’s free will, the Calvinist has created a new mystery that is simply not afforded by the text of scripture. This problem is made evident by turning the question around and asking this of the Calvinist: WHY HAS YOUR LOST FRIEND CONTINUED TO HATE AND REJECT GOD? Most Calvinists do not want to admit that the reprobate of their system ultimately hates and rejects God because God first hated and rejected them. Calvinists would rather focus on the elect who are saved by deterministic means while ignoring the inevitable conclusions about the non-elect who remain damned for the same deterministic reason. In my opinion, this is a dilemma unique to their worldview, not a tension created by the teachings of scripture. So, the Calvinist rejects the mystery of libertarian freedom only to adopt another even more difficult mystery. One that arguably brings into question the holiness, righteousness and trustworthiness of our God — namely the suggestion that God is implicit in the determination of moral evil, as evidenced by John Calvin’s own teachings: “…how foolish and frail is the support of divine justice afforded by the suggestion that evils come to be, not by His will but by His permission…It is a quite frivolous refuge to say that God otiosely permits them, when Scripture shows Him not only willing, but the author of them…Who does not tremble at these judgments with which God works in the hearts of even the wicked whatever He will, rewarding them nonetheless according to desert? Again it is quite clear from the evidence of Scripture that God works in the hearts of men to incline their wills just as he will, whether to good for His mercy’s sake, or to evil according to their merits.”[8] Which mystery is more difficult to swallow? One that seemingly suggests mankind might have some part to play in reconciliation (the bringing together of two parties) or the one that suggests God is the author of evil (that which divided to two parties to begin with)? More importantly, which of these mysteries does the Bible actually afford? (Listen to THIS PODCAST to better understand why a defense of free will is actually a defense of God’s Holiness, not merely an appeal to mystery.) 3) BETTER BY CHOICE OR DIVINE DECREE IS STILL BETTER: Calvinists seem to think there is something morally wrong with admitting that a believer is better than an unbeliever. Of course it is better to believe than it is to “trade the truth of God in for lies.” Whether one believes because they were sovereignly made to do or simply given the ability to do so freely does not change the fact that believers are better. But, as we will discover in the next point, better does not mean worthy of salvation. So, even if the non-Calvinist were to say, “Yes, I’m more humble or smarter,” he would ultimately be saying the exact same thing a Calvinist has to say. The only difference would be that an unbeliever could rightly say to the Calvinist, “How arrogant of you to think that God made you more humble or smarter,” whereas if they said that to the non-Calvinist, we could rightly answer, “No he didn’t, you have no such excuse. You have just as much ability to humble yourself and understand the gospel as I have.” We (non-Calvinist) are too often accused that we could/would boast in our salvation because we affirm that it is our responsibility to freely respond in faith to the gracious Holy Spirit wrought gospel appeal. Is this really boast worthy? We are the ones who believe anyone can believe the gospel. Why would we boast in doing something anyone is able to do? It’s the Calvinists who believe this ability is uniquely given to them and not most people. It makes much more sense for a Calvinist to boast in an ability granted to him that has been withheld from most others. A great singer, for example, is a given a rare gift from birth and can often become proud or boastful due to that unique gift. But if everyone was born able sing that well whenever they wanted, then boasting in that ability would not make any sense. Thus, Calvinism leaves more room for boasting than does our soteriological perspective. (Though I don’t believe true Christians from either soteriological system would boast in such things: SEE HERE) This speaks to the biblical teaching on the attainability of goodness or righteousness, which we will discuss in the next point. 4) A DECISION DOES NOT MERIT SALVATION: What is the underlying motivation for asking the question, “Why you and not another?” The implication seems to be that one who makes the libertarianly free decision to accept the gospel appeal is meriting or more deserving of salvation? As if the decision to repent somehow earns or merits one’s forgiveness. Think of it this way.  Did the prodigal son earn, merit or in any way deserve the reception of his father on the basis that he humbly returned home?  Of course not. He deserved to be punished, not rewarded.  The acceptance of his father was a choice of the father alone and it was ALL OF GRACE.  The father did not have to forgive, restore and throw a party for his son on the basis that he chose to come home. That was the father’s doing. Humiliation and brokenness is not considered “better” or “praiseworthy” and it certainly is not inherently valuable.  In fact, one could argue that it was weak and pitiful of the son to return home and beg his daddy for a job instead of working his own way out of that pig sty.  The only thing that makes this quality “desirable” is that God has chosen to grace those who humble themselves, something He is in no way obligated to do (Is. 66:2).  God gives grace to the humble not because a humble response deserves salvation, but because He is gracious. Calvinists often conflate man’s choice to confess with God’s choice to forgive while labeling it all “salvation.”  They go on to convincingly argue that God is “sovereign over salvation” which actually means “God is as much in control over His own choice to forgive as He is over man’s choice to confess in faith.”  It’s difficult to argue with someone who is making the case that God is “in control of salvation” and is “the One who gets all credit for salvation,” but that difficulty only exists due to the conflating of man’s responsibility to believe/confess with God’s gracious choice to save whosoever does so.  Of course Salvation is all of God, but that is distinct from man’s responsibility to humbly trust in Him for salvation. WE ALL AFFIRM THAT SALVATION BELONGS TO THE LORD, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN SIN AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO REPENT FROM SIN DOES NOT BELONG TO THE SINNER. Clearly scripture calls us to humility and there is nothing which suggests we cannot respond in humility when confronted by the powerful clear revelation of God’s convicting life-giving truth through the law and the gospel.  Consider what our Lord taught us in Luke 18:10-14 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. “The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.  ‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’  “But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’  “I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.” Did the tax collector deserve to go home justified because of his humble admission of guilt? Of course not. If that were so, then his confession would have merited his salvation and there would be no reason for Christ’s death to atone for his sin. He went home justified because of God’s grace and provision alone! Maintaining man’s libertarianly free responsibility to repent and believe does not negate the truth that salvation is completely and totally of God alone. Throughout the scriptures we see examples of God “finding favor” in believing individuals (Job, Enoch, Noah, Abram, etc), but these men, like all of humanity, still fell short of God’s glory and were unrighteous according to the demands of God’s law. They needed a savior. They needed redemption and reconciliation. Even those who believe the truth of God’s revelation deserve eternal punishment for their sin. What must be understood is that no one was righteous according to the demands of the law. However, that does NOT mean that all people are unable to believe God’s revealed truth so as to be credited as righteous by God’s grace. Paul taught that no one was righteous in Romans 3, yet he turns around and declares in the very next chapter that, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (4:3). How can that be? Has Paul contradicted himself? First he declares that no one is righteous and then he tells us that Abraham was righteous? Which is it? Paul is drawing the distinction between righteousness by works (Rm. 3:10-11) and righteousness by grace through faith (Rm. 3:21-24). The former is unattainable but the latter has always been very much attainable by anyone, which again, is why ALL ARE “WITHOUT EXCUSE!” (Rm. 1:20) God can show mercy to whom ever he wants to show mercy!  We happen to know, based on Biblical revelation, that God wants to show mercy to those who humbly repent in faith, which is man’s responsibility not God’s! If you wait on God to effectually humble you, it will be too late. 1 Peter 5:5-6:  “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.” Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Isaiah 66:2: “These are the ones I look on with favor: those who are humble and contrite in spirit, and who tremble at my word. James 4:10: “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.” 2 Kings 22:19: “Because your heart was responsive and you humbled yourself before the Lord when you heard what I have spoken against this place and its people—that they would become a curse and be laid waste—and because you tore your robes and wept in my presence, I also have heard you, declares the Lord.” 2 Chronicles 12:7: When the Lord saw that they humbled themselves, this word of the Lord came to Shemaiah: “Since they have humbled themselves, I will not destroy them but will soon give them deliverance. My wrath will not be poured out on Jerusalem through Shishak. 2 Chronicles 12:12: Because Rehoboam humbled himself, the Lord’s anger turned from him, and he was not totally destroyed. Psalm 18:27: You save the humble but bring low those whose eyes are haughty. Psalm 25:9: He guides the humble in what is right and teaches them his way. Psalm 147:6: The Lord sustains the humble but casts the wicked to the ground. Proverbs 3:34: He mocks proud mockers but shows favor to the humble and oppressed. Zephaniah 2:3: Seek the Lord, all you humble of the land, you who do what he commands. Seek righteousness, seek humility; perhaps you will be sheltered on the day of the Lord’s anger. Matthew 18:4: Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:3:  Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 23:12: For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. Luke 1:52: He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. Luke 14:11: For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” Luke 18:14: “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” James 4:6: But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.”   [1] John Piper said, “More specifically, I rarely meet Christians who want to take credit for their conversion. There is something about true grace in the believer’s heart that makes us want to give all the glory to God. So, for example, if I ask a believer how he will answer Jesus’s question at the last judgment, “Why did you believe on me, when you heard the gospel, but your friends didn’t, when they heard it?” very few believers answer that question by saying: “Because I was wiser or smarter or more spiritual or better trained or more humble.” Most of us feel instinctively that we should glorify God’s grace by saying: “There but for the grace of God go I.” In other words, we know intuitively that God’s grace was decisive in our conversion. That is what we mean by irresistible grace.” (http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-we-believe-about-the-five-points-of-calvinism#Grace) [2] Libertarian Free Will is “the categorical ability of the will to refrain or not refrain from a given moral action.” See: https://soteriology101.wordpress.com/2016/05/11/philosophical-reflections-on-free-will/ [3] Question begging is the logical fallacy of presuming true the very argument up for debate. By asking what determined a man’s choice, the questioner is presuming someone or something other than that man made the determination, thus presuming true the foundation for deterministic logic (i.e. “a theory or doctrine that acts of the will, occurrences in nature, or social or psychological phenomena are causally determined by preceding events or natural laws [or Divine decree].” Merriam-Webster Dictionary). While a determiner may state reasons or influential factors for his or her own determination (i.e. I chose to overeat because it tastes so good) that does not mean the factors listed effectually caused the determination (i.e. the taste of food determined the agent’s choice to overeat).  The agent alone made the determination based on the factors taken into consideration and deliberated upon. To presume without proof that something or someone outside the agent himself made the determination (i.e. was the “decisive factor”) is question begging. [4] On the one hand, Calvinists argue that mankind always chooses according to their greatest inclination which is ultimately determined by their God given nature, yet on the other hand they affirm that Adam “was perfectly free from any corruptions or sinful inclinations,” and that he “had no sinful inclinations to hurry him on to sin; he did it of his own free and mere choice” Jonathan Edwards, ‘All God’s Methods Are Most Reasonable’, in Sermons and Discourses: 1723-1729, ed. by Kenneth P. Minkema, Works 14 (1997): 168.) How does the affirmation of Adam’s freedom to sin or refrain from sin not violate the Calvinists own definition of human will and choice? For Adam to choose to sin he must violate the law of his own nature, as defined by the Calvinistic systematic. [5]John Piper: http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/the-hardening-of-pharaoh-and-the-hope-of-the-world)) [6] RC Sproul, Chosen By God, p.31 [8] John Calvin, “The Eternal Predestination of God,” 10:11