Boyce Vs. Flowers Debate Review

"Dr. Stephen Boyce Vs Dr. Leighton Flowers: Regeneration and the Gospel" (here) is a debate on Calvinism.

Though I am Calvinist, I must say that Calvinist Boyce lost his debate with Flowers on several points in the Calvinist Arminian debate, especially as it relates to the "ordo salutis" and whether regeneration precedes faith.

Flowers is a former Calvinist who now labors to convert Calvinists to Arminian thinking. Flowers calls himself a "provisionist."

Flowers gave several scriptures that plainly put faith prior to obtaining spiritual life. Not a single one of these were challenged by Boyce. In fact, surprisingly, he did not push his "born again before faith" idea further.

Both agreed that man is spiritually dead and impotent. They both agreed that God must initiate the work of turning the sinner around. About the middle of the debate, they got to the point of agreement in affirming that God does some work on the hearts of sinners prior to their regeneration.

This pre-regeneration work, including conviction of sin, is resisted by some so that they do not experience regeneration, while others do not resist, but give in to it, and are regenerated. So, this is where the discussion should have focused. And, the question should have been pursued at this point is this - why did one continue to resist so as not to be saved and another quit resisting so as to be saved? And, at this point I would have raised I Cor. 4: 7 where Paul asks "who makes you to differ from another?"

One of the errors of Flowers was his seeming promotion of the Campbellite "word alone" idea. His idea was that the word is sent to all men, depraved and dead as they are, and this word is "sufficient" to counteract the effects of the fall and original sin, so that they are able thereby to overcome natural inability. This was the view of Wesley. It comes under the umbrella heading of "prevenient grace."

I would have questioned Flowers in regard to whether God has given a chance of salvation to those who have never heard about the one true God and about the gospel. I would have questioned him about whether God gives to all an equal chance to be saved. I would also have questioned him about the "word alone" view that he seemed to be promoting.

Again, it was a good debate. Boyce did not seem to know his subject that well. Flowers did a good job defending his view, though he should have been challenged on several issues. Both men were very courteous of each other and this is the kind of discussion we need in the Christian brotherhood.