40 Minutes on God's Decree and Man's Free Will

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona, this is The Dividing Line.

The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us, yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence.

Our host is Dr. James White, director of Alpha Omega Ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.

This is a live program and we invite your participation. If you'd like to talk with Dr. White, call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll free across the

United States. It's 1 -866 -854 -6763. And now with today's topic, here is

James White. And good afternoon and welcome to The Dividing Line, this week catching up on various sundry topics that we have not had the opportunity of getting to the past few weeks, especially as we have been addressing the new

Dave Hunt book, and I would like to say that the response we got to last week's program was just incredible.

Not only the calls we got during the course of the program, which were very encouraging, but the tremendous number of emails that we received to all of you who feel that I'm depressed and I'm down.

I'm really not. That wasn't really what I was trying to communicate. It was great to get all the encouragement, but really

I was just taken aback by the suggestions that were made in the email that I presented and really just the whole attitude of many people in regards to engaging in theological dialogue and how it should be done and what our ultimate priorities should be and all sorts of neat, wonderful, fun things like that.

As I said, the response was just absolutely overwhelming, very, very encouraging, very appreciative for all those folks who took the time to call or to write all the emails we got and so on and so forth, so very, very, very pleased about that.

When I say catching up on things, the Dave Hunt saga is not the only thing that has been going on, of course, over the past month or so.

In fact, during that period of time, there have been a number of things and we haven't really talked about them.

For example, as many of you know, in April, the

Alliance Defense Fund filed suit against Barry Lynn in federal court looking for a declaratory judgment in regards to the distribution of the videotape of the debate that Mr.

Lynn and I had in, well, it was a year ago yesterday. I hadn't recognized the passing of the date, but a year ago yesterday,

May 24, 2001, Mr. Lynn and I had a debate on the subject,

Is Homosexuality Compatible with Authentic Christianity at a PCUSA church in Long Island?

We began making that debate tape available, I believe, in December of 2001 and then back in February, we received cease and desist letters from Mr.

Lynn's attorneys and that has led to this whole situation. It is my understanding that there has been somewhat of an extension as far as how much time

Mr. Lynn has to respond to the filing until this coming

Friday, the 31st, and now out to June 10th.

You know how legal things are, they just keep going and going and going, so I honestly can't tell you what the situation is because there has not been a response given as of yet.

And so we're looking at a number of more weeks before we even know what the exact response is going to be.

Of course, my hope and prayer is that Mr. Lynn will just do the right thing. I don't think there's anything wrong with people contacting

Americans United and encouraging to just do the right thing. Try being consistent with your own position, in fact, and allow people to judge for themselves.

It is very, very obvious that Mr. Lynn knew exactly what he was getting into. It was very obvious he knew it was being videotaped.

It was very obvious he knew he was going to be getting his own copy of the videotape. It was very obvious he knew he'd be able to distribute that videotape, etc.,

etc., etc. Just because the debate did not go the way he wanted it to go is no reason to attempt to suppress it.

That's not the first time we've seen that happen. Some of you may not be aware of the fact that, for example, the videotapes of the debates that I did with Mitchell Pacwa on justification and the mass sit languishing somewhere on a shelf.

The Roman Catholics who paid for that videotaping have never distributed the videotapes of those particular debates.

I think they should be distributed, but those are out there. And then we have, of course, the infamous videotapes from the debate with Tim Staples in July of 2000 on the subject of papal infallibility, which were promised to us.

And to this day, St. Joseph's Communications has refused to act with integrity and keep their own word.

And that's why we cannot have anything to do with them in the future, because they may tell you, we'll do

X, Y, and Z, and then turn around and say, you know what? We don't want to do X, Y, and Z. And so there's nothing you can do about it.

You can't trust those folks, and therefore you cannot deal with them. And we talked about that a couple weeks ago when we discussed the possibility of a debate on the subject of Mary or on the subject of procrastination with Tim Staples.

So anyways, that situation continues. It is ongoing. Now, we are famous or infamous, depending on which direction you put it, we are infamous in not doing a good job in keeping a calendar current on the website so people know what in the world is going on.

And so just to let you know, for those of you, especially back in the New York area, we did not skip this year's festivities, shall we say.

We, in point of fact, have moved, yes, coming up in May of 1991.

That is probably what's on there someplace. Anyways, normally the debate, the great debate takes place in May and didn't this year because I'm still teaching.

I'll be done teaching. Thank you. I'll be done teaching here next week. The week after next, actually.

And so everything is in July. I, in fact, will be gone all of July.

I mean, basically, I think I'm home maybe three, four days in all of July, grand total.

I first head off to Georgia and I'm practicing my southern accent so that I can preach to the folks down there in Georgia and understand what

I'm saying because I think I just put too much enunciation of what I'm saying when I talk like this, when I normally talk, you know.

So that was pretty good. That was anyways. I don't know if we'll be doing any dividing lines in July.

Actually, I'm sure we will be. I just think we need to get some other people to finally step up to the plate.

You know, we have good old clay toss that might be able to do some things and, you know, we could always get some people to participate in the program that maybe haven't in the past.

But we'll do something and we'll be covering that. But the big debate right now, we wanted, thank you very much,

Sky Man, just said that my accent stinks. But then again, who's to define what the Georgia accent is supposed to sound like anyways.

But anyways, the big debate is July 11th on the subject of the veneration of saints or the communion of saints, as Roman Catholicism likes to put it.

And I was doing some preparation on that this week. And in fact, for those of you, and I think this would be sort of interesting for some of you to do if you're interested in, you sound like Forrest Gump.

Well, I did sort of sound like a little bit like Forrest Gump. Forrest Gump was down from that direction. That's why I sound like Forrest Gump.

Oh, I tell you, critics everywhere, there's critics around the corners, critics in the chat channels, critics everywhere.

It's it's terrible. Anyways, it's interesting. The debate in July is on the subject of the communion of saints and it's with Patrick Madrid.

Now, Patrick Madrid has written a book. Any friend of God's is a friend of mine. So I sort of think

I have a fairly good documentation here as to exactly where Mr.

Madrid is going to be going. And thank you, John, a

Californian just told me that my Georgia accent was good, so I'm not sure exactly what that means, but I will

I'll let that slide. Anyways, I was doing some preparation just this this week.

Some of you who are not familiar with this subject might find taking a look at Madrid's book.

Any friend of God's is a friend of mine as a a way of sort of preparing to listen to the debate.

I have some background. I really think a lot of folks would get more out of the debates if instead of it being the first time they heard about the subject, they might they might try to stop reading the channel because now

I'm being offered roadkill when I go to Georgia. And that's just just I've already asked, do you have

McDonald's in Georgia? And I've been told they do. So I think I will be able to survive even if I have to sneak out at night to get my one day worth of sustenance.

But anyhow, I think I think a lot of folks would probably get more out of some of these debates if it wasn't the first time they'd heard the subject, if there was if there was some preparation, some some reading into the the subject prior to the examination of it.

I think that might actually help a lot in being able to evaluate the arguments. I think it's one of the problems that some folks have when they come to debates is if they're not even familiar slightly with the nature of the debate, then it's very, very easy to become confused by, well, cheap debating tricks,

I guess, is the way to put it. And so if you're interested in the subject of the debate we're going to be having on the community of saints, there is a there is a book that you could be looking at.

And as far as responses to that, I thought Calvin's response in the Institutes of the

Christian Religion was very good. And there are others like that. Most of the writers during the period of the

Reformation and in the centuries thereafter addressed the issue in one way, shape or form or another.

Let's see, what's some other subjects? I've got two books to tell you about and at least one, two debates to make sure you know are available.

Let's start with the debates. We received the CDs containing the audio portion of the

George Bryson debate. Have we gotten that posted anywhere yet? Are we is that going to be the first thing we do on MP3 or or no, we have not posted yet.

We're not selling it yet. Is that what's being what I'm being told? We're waiting, waiting to see if what we got was the final edition.

Is that what we're waiting on? Because it was so you can now make a decision as to hopefully we get the videotapes this week and maybe what you're thinking of is pulling some sound off the videotapes.

Yeah, I know. But that's that's what's available. And I don't know.

We're going to have to look this week, I guess, once we get the videotapes to see whether there's a section where the sound got bad for a while.

Don't ask me why. I mean, we're at the Anaheim Vineyard. It's not like they've not recorded things there before, but the sound got bad for a while and we're going to have to see if it does on the videos as well.

And if it does, then we just have to go with it. And there's really not much we can do about it. But those tapes should be available fairly soon.

I know you can buy them from other places, but it's going to have the editing issues when you buy from any place right now, unless we can do some some work on it.

I don't have any idea what happened. And I've noticed in listening just briefly to some sections of it, even when the sound is good, it sounds like George Bryson is right in front of you and I'm sort of down a hallway someplace yelling at you, even though we are both wearing lapel mics.

I don't really know how in the world that took place. But anyways, we are we have honestly been doing everything in our power to get those tapes and get them on the website and make them available.

Honestly, I've I've become a pain to the people in California who haven't been moving real fast to get us the information and get us the tapes.

We know there are people who want to hear this, especially those of you who would like to share them with family and friends, shall we say, who are constantly bringing up the same objections that Mr.

Mr. Bryson raised in that particular debate. So we are going to someone just said sell a sell a transcript of the tapes.

Well, he who suggests can then provide the transcript. So I bet you anything,

Mr. Pierce would not be opposed to the giving of a free set of the tapes to anyone who would then provide us the perfect transcript thereof.

I think that would be that would be very, very nice. The receiver from your lapel mic was messing up.

I saw them fiddling with it. Well, that's wonderful. That's that's good to know. I wonder how I ended up with that one.

I guess Providence or something. But anyways, we will have those available. Have we put the the video and audio of the debate with Gilbert Scharf's on the website as as yet, because that that one's all ours.

Not yet. Oh, OK. Not yet.

I will. Yes, I know that you will. But is this going to be like a Christmas offering or what?

OK, you're waiting till maybe someone passes from this earth to make it available. I think such a postmortem debate or something.

I mean, gracious. Anyways, it will be made available because, you know, the person that recorded it is is right here.

So we can't blame anybody else for not having it available. But those those will be made available as well.

Now, if you go to AOMEN .org. You will notice that we have items on the what we call the ad column on the right hand side, it keeps getting longer and longer and longer.

It's got the God who justifies and the soul scripture set. And I just keep cranking these books out.

And as a result, we have lots of things to offer. And I've hardly even mentioned, except in passing, the new books that have come out over the past couple of well, about the past month or so, they finally arrived here at our ministry.

And the first one that arrived from Bethany House Publishers, we've talked about it many times before, at least as far as the subject goes, is the same sex controversy, defending and clarifying the

Bible's message about homosexuality. I co -wrote this work with Jeff Neal, and I've done a couple of programs anyways on this subject on did

Janet Partial and possibly some other programs yet in the future that we will be looking at being involved in as far as discussion of this particular subject.

I was told I didn't see it, that there was a town hall type meeting on the subject of homosexuality that was broadcast last night.

And it is amazing. I've been watching some of the discussion about the possibility of a gay baseball player as well.

And it is amazing how it has become absolutely positively second nature to everyone in our society to simply say, well, you know, we've certainly gone, we've certainly grown past the days when we would have any problem with something like this.

In fact, here locally in the Phoenix area, I just happened on Friday morning to turn on the radio and a local talk show host was discussing this subject.

And a rather hot -headed fundamentalist called in, had a chip on his shoulder a mile wide and was more than happy to use all sorts of off -color language to describe homosexuals.

He obviously shot himself in the foot from the moment he got on the air. But the host, of course, ran with this and mocked

Christianity and so on and so forth, even though he was raised Southern Baptist, this particular individual was. And of course, the host had to also then begin to discuss theological issues, which is always a dangerous thing.

And he started to say, well, you know, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.

Everything Jesus ever said, he said, is found only in the four gospels. Well, actually, he's wrong about that there. He forgot about the

Book of Revelation. He forgot about the quotation of Jesus found in Acts, so on and so forth. But he assured us that all the words of Jesus are only in the four gospels and nowhere in the four gospels will you find a discussion of homosexuality.

And I was not in a position to call in and try to correct him at that particular point in time.

But it's very, very common to hear these kinds of things repeated. And Christians need to know how to give a response.

And that's what the same -sex controversy is all about. And we're making that available on our website.

And we really hope that it helps people to to understand what they believe and where they're going.

By the way, we're certainly open today for your phone calls and your participation in the program. 877 -753 -3341.

877 -753 -3341. That is a toll free number. 877 -753 -3341.

Yeah, I thought about sending a copy to that particular host, too, but I just haven't gotten around to it. There's lots of things I'd like to do and I keep forgetting them.

877 -753 -3341. If you have questions or comments that you would you would like to make, that's the number that you can call and get on the program today.

Then you'll notice a brand new book just appeared on the website. Well, actually, I think it went up a week ago

Friday, but we didn't see it until Wednesday. And my

I think this is my 18th book titled Dangerous Airwaves. Harold Camping Refuted and Christ Church Defended.

A title that I did not make up on my own, nor did I make up the same sex controversy.

In fact, I would probably never title a book with the word controversy in it because I'm sick of it.

But that's just the way it is. Anyways, Dangerous Airwaves. Harold Camping Refuted and Christ Church Defended is now in print.

We won't have to change that toll free number again. There are three sevens in it.

Eight, seven, seven. Well, not only that, but if you add three and four together, that makes seven and the three and the three and the one makes seven.

So there's actually there could actually sort of be more more sevens in it than that, if you if you look at it sort of like Gail Riplinger would see it.

But yes, it's divine because it's always above six.

So I've got to stop reading what you people are typing to me because it's really weird.

Anyways, Dangerous Airwaves obviously is a a a niche book.

That is, if you don't if you've never heard of Harold Camping, if family radio is not on in your area and if nobody in your area ever stumbles across family radio, you might not be overly interested in the subject.

Of course, we've discussed Harold Camping on the program before, and there is a defense of Christ Church, the perpetuity of Christ Church, the importance of church membership, the role of the church in God's plan.

So there is a. I think something to be very useful to to a wide range of folks, even if you're not familiar with camping, but if there's a family radio in family radio outlet in your area and there are many of them and especially in reformed churches, then

Dangerous Airwaves is a book you're going to want to look at. It will also help you to address the subject of allegorical interpretation and that, of course, is something that Mr.

Camping promotes tremendously. He doesn't call it that very often. In fact,

I don't think I've ever heard him call it that. But what he'll say is the spiritual meaning is this and the spiritual meaning is that so on and so forth.

And these these are allegorical interpretations that he offers. The actual meaning of the text is irrelevant to Harold Camping.

The only thing that matters is what he can see as the spiritual meaning. And you put it all together and and cobble together a theology.

And that's what Dangerous Airwaves deals with is Harold Camping's strange theology, wherein he is teaching that the church has ended.

There are no more elders, there are no more deacons, there is no more baptism, there is no more

Lord's Supper, etc., etc. That is what he's teaching. He is teaching people to gather together.

In fact, it was interesting. I just happened today to punch the button on my radio while I was actually going to pick up my bike at the bike shop and punch the button.

And up came the local family radio here. And the announcer at one point made the statement.

I'm trying to I want to try to be accurate here. He said something along the lines of you need to start your week in fellowship with God's people.

A week that starts with fellowship with God's people will be a good week or something along those lines.

And obviously it caught my attention because the fact that he wouldn't say you need to be in church on the

Lord's Day. Instead, you start your week with fellowship with God's people. And that's that's what camping is teaching is that now there is just these fellowships and all the rest of stuff.

Well, Dangerous Airwaves takes them on directly. And there's another reason why you need to get this book. OK, I mean,

I'm just going to I'm going to be very honest with you. Let's say you don't care about Herald Camping and you, in fact, cannot stand listening to Herald Camping, anything along those lines at all.

And let's say you just that just you do not want to to listen to Herald Camping saying, well, saying things like this.

Well, saying things I oh, you know, it would help if I did that right.

But I would have sounded so good. If you disobey again, I'm going to have to spank you maybe or to deprive you of something.

Maybe you don't want to hear Herald Camping saying stuff like that. And of course, out of context, if you listen to that, you just go,

OK, that was interesting. Oh, my.

Oh, my is true. Yeah. And as a result, you might just sit there listening to to something like that and and and do like this.

And that, you know, I did that a lot while writing the book. There were times I'd be listening to to Herald Camping and that's what

I would do. I would just I'd sit there and go, uh, and I didn't know how to how to respond.

Actually, seriously, you know where they came from. They those sounds came from.

I sent a. Well, this is one of the reasons you get the book, OK? That's that.

Yeah, sure. Sound off. Thank you very much, CDS, for playing that one on the air that actually came from a dividing line.

I cannot believe how good that sounded. I mean, that was recorded by somebody over the net and then sent back.

It really sounded really, really good. I've now turned all the sound requests off, sir. But who's playing sounds?

Sorry, they're not going to work. Anyways, the one of the reasons you need to get this book is one of the chapters is called the debate that almost was the debate that almost was.

I think there's someone in our chat show might not like the grammar of that. But anyways, the debate that almost was and what happened was

Chris Arnzen, who has called this program more than once. And Chris Arnzen, who is famous for his parody songs.

Chris Arnzen, who is famous for his comedy. Chris Arnzen, who is famous for many things that he probably wishes he wasn't famous for.

But the organizer of all the debates on Long Island, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Chris Arnzen called

Harold Camping. And that particular chapter is the result of that call.

And what we did was we sent that to someone who's in our chat channel.

Even now, he is the love child of Bill Gates. And he's that means he's a

Microsoft certified engineer, actually. But anyways, this poor, this poor persecuted man, he took the time to transcribe this entire thing.

And the man has been absolutely changed by that experience. I mean, he really has.

He will tell you to this day, he's got he's developed a facial tick and he's he has nightmares.

And in fact, I don't think he even wants this book because it will bring back the memories of having to listen to that material over and over again.

But I'm really glad that he did, because it provided an excellent chapter in the book. It was it was just really well done.

The opportunity of hearing Mr. Arnzen and asking all these these probing questions of Harold Camping.

And though MDH, the fellow in the channel, really gave his all for us to have that, you need to get the book for that chapter and one other thing.

But I've been told I need to take a break. And so I'm going to have to take the break before I tell you what the other thing is.

But we'll tell you on the other side of this break. We'll be right back. The history of the

Christian church pivots on the doctrine of justification by faith. Once the core of the Reformation, the church today often ignores or misunderstands this foundational doctrine.

In his book, The God Who Justifies, theologian James White calls believers to a fresh appreciation of, understanding of, and dedication to the great doctrine of justification, and then provides an exegesis of the key scripture texts on this theme.

Justification is the heart of the gospel. In today's culture, where tolerance is the new absolute,

James White proclaims with passion the truth and centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith.

Dr. Jay Adams says, I lost sleep over this book. I simply couldn't put it down. James White writes the way an exegetically and theologically oriented pastor appreciates.

This is no book for casual reading. There is solid meat throughout, an outstanding contribution in every sense of the words.

The God Who Justifies by Dr. James White. Get your copy today at AOMN .org.

More than any time in the past, Roman Catholics and evangelicals are working together. They are standing shoulder to shoulder against social evils.

They are joining across denominational boundaries in renewal movements. And many evangelicals are finding the history, tradition, and grandeur of the

Roman Catholic Church appealing. This newfound rapport has caused many evangelical leaders and laypeople to question the age old disagreements that have divided

Protestants and Catholics. Aren't we all saying the same thing in a different language? James White's book,

The Roman Catholic Controversy, is an absorbing look at current views of tradition in scripture, the papacy, the mass, purgatory and indulgences, and Marian doctrine.

James White points out the crucial differences that remain regarding the Christian life and the heart of the gospel itself that cannot be ignored.

Order your copy of The Roman Catholic Controversy by going to our website at AOMN .org.

This portion of the dividing line has been made possible by the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. The Apostle Paul spoke of the importance of solemnly testifying of the gospel of the grace of God.

The proclamation of God's truth is the most important element of his worship in his church. The elders and people of the

Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church invite you to worship with them this coming Lord's Day. The morning

Bible study begins at 930 a .m. and the worship service is at 1045. Evening services are at 630 p .m.

on Sunday and the Wednesday night prayer meeting is at 7. The Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church is located at 3805

North 12th Street in Phoenix. You can call for further information at 602 -26 -GRACE.

If you're unable to attend you can still participate with your computer and real audio at PRBC .org

where the ministry extends around the world through the archives of sermons and Bible study lessons available 24 hours a day.

And welcome back to the dividing line. My name is James White. Just now flying back into the chat channel since the through the wonderful facilities of Sprint I disappeared because well that just just happens far too often with Sprint than it probably should.

But anyways back in channel and I was here's here's the here's the rest the reason that you need to get hold of dangerous airwaves.

Here's the rest the reason. I'm sort of stretching this out just a little bit because it seems like we sort of Sprint fell apart there not only for IRC but also in live streaming what we were doing there.

I'm seeing people slowly getting the feedback. So someone please post the link.

I can't find it. I forgot what it was. Anyways here's the here's the rest the reason.

Sky man snuck in because somebody else got disconnected from the program. Here's the other reason you need to get this need to get this book.

Now not only did Chris Irons and call Harold camping and in the providence of God Harold camping kept turning the volume back up and letting him say something else letting him ask something else and there is this long interchange which rarely happens at all in these kinds of programs.

But the other reason that you need to get this book is because of the cover. I've never had a cover like this of course.

This cover was also done and in fact I asked people in the channel I said I wonder how many folks are going to notice that there is a chapter in the book that talks about someone named

Chris Irons and calling Harold camping and then the cover of the book has this really eerie looking radio that's sort of glowing with the fires of perdition and it's got a skull and crossbones on it and the title of the book is dangerous airwaves and if they look down the bottom left they see

Chris Irons in ought to for 2002 and I wonder if they're going to make the connection that maybe the guy that drew the cover is also the guy who was the one who called

Harold camping on the air because it is it looks like Stephen King cover.

Well it definitely communicates the idea that there is there is poison coming across the airwaves when you listen to Harold camping teaching that the church has has ended and has died.

So the cover is definitely very very unique you're going to enjoy it and so for no other reason you need to get hold of dangerous airwaves so that you can have a copy not the original mind you but a copy of an

Arnzen original and that is available on the website as well 877 -753 -3341 877 -753 -3341 get your line soon because as you know well actually they hardly ever fill up but do it anyways because it'll make me feel better 877 -753 -3341 let's go ahead and take our first phone call even though I have the foggiest idea what it's about and let's let's go to the drive -thru of the

In -N -Out Burger in Southern California. I'd like a hamburger and fries and a chocolate shake with that please.

And talk to Johnny Johnny do you have a few seconds to talk to us. Yes I do. You do. That's that's good.

So I'm supposed to ask if you want onions on that burger though. No I do not ever want onions on my burgers.

I want only cheese ketchup and mustard. All right. You don't you don't put that wimpy lettuce on do you.

Yeah we put some. That stuff's disgusting. That really is that that's not even really lettuce.

I mean that's I think anyways but but if I ever drive through and you see my smiling face at the drive -thru please make sure to take all the onions and the pickles and the lettuce off.

All right. Well I got to ask you something though. Did you did you enjoy watching Star Wars.

I most certainly did. And I saw the original

Star Wars 11 times in the theater in 1977 and I thought this one was was probably the best since the original.

The music was incredible. The special effects just absolutely positively amazing.

And there are still some people in the audience that haven't seen it yet so I won't get into a lot of detail but there's one particular action scene toward the end of the film that that made all the that made it all worthwhile.

It was it was it was tremendous and my daughter said that when that particular action scene took place and we all know what that one is when that particular action scene took place the first time

I saw to see it twice actually that I was sitting on the edge of my seat with my with my mouth hanging open the entire the entire time of that particular scene.

And it was it's just it just makes you want to want to be only about two and a half feet tall.

Well we were watching it the whole the whole place over at the theater was cheering on the two and a half tall foot person yes yes flying up in the air and everything.

Well that and the corny corny C -3PO comments during the huge fight scene. This is a drag beside myself.

I mean come on that was so funny. And I just hate it when people start jumping all over.

Well you know the acting I mean there's wasn't really any character development. People get a life.

I mean don't you remember the first one. Don't don't you remember some of the corny dialogue in the first one.

It's supposed to be that way. That's the whole genre. It's supposed to be you know remember Luke. Hopefully everyone's seen the original by now.

I mean there is one fellow in the chat channel CDS silly Brit you know. He may have seen the first one yet so I may be ruining something for him.

I don't know. But remember how she they swung across that chasm as the stormtroopers were coming after them and she gave him a big kiss right before they went across.

You know I mean that's all corny. I mean it's it's but that's what makes it so much fun. Yeah. So I thought

Michael Medved absolutely lost his mind when he started ripping on it and calling it snore wars and stuff like that.

I'm like what is your problem. I guess they just don't enjoy the story. I guess we're gradually getting to the point where and where Anakin is going to become

Darth Vader. Oh he's getting close. Did you notice that one scene where where he he kisses

Padme and it's done in the the shadow. You probably didn't catch that.

You got to watch that. There's a shadow thing and his shadow looks like Darth Vader. Oh really. I didn't know that.

The one part that was the most moving was when he saw his mother. I won't give anything else away. That's true. That's true.

That was the most moving part of the whole. Well let's just say at the next morning the Tatooine morning news headline was bad day for Tusken Raiders.

What about Spider -Man. I did not. I haven't yet. I think it's going to top everything else.

Well all I can tell you is there was not an open seat last evening when my daughter and I saw

Star Wars the second time. All right. Well my question is connected with an issue that I know we're not going to discuss but I'll stick to the issue of the covenant and the links between the old and new covenant which would be the atonement itself and it has to do with the doctrine of justification.

And basically it's this when when Abraham was justified he was justified by faith alone and he had

Christ's righteousness imputed to him. Well that's the only way it's ever been justified. Right.

The only thing is that in justification we have you know Christ's righteousness being imputed to us while our unrighteous sinfulness is imputed to Christ.

The only thing is that when in the old covenant Abraham did not have Christ you know the unblemished lamb

God's lamb being slain yet. And I don't know where you're coming from on your view.

I've come from a from a view where I've been taught and I believe this myself that prior to you know the new covenant people could not enter the presence of God yet.

You know I believe that there was a place called the bosom of Abraham. I know that there are some Christians that don't.

Right. Where do you stand on that. Yeah I don't I don't have a problem with that. I don't think that that's the reason why they quote unquote couldn't enter into the presence of God.

I don't see the the bosom of Abraham the place where Abraham was with with Lazarus as being somehow they were waiting for the sacrifice take place so that they then could be somehow cleansed or something and then enter in the presence of God.

I think Paul says in Romans 3 that that's the God that God had passed over those sins previously committed and specifically he uses the terminology in Romans 3 25.

This was to demonstrate his righteousness because in the forbearance of God he passed over the sins previously committed for the demonstration of his righteousness the present time so that he would be just and justified as one of his faith in Jesus.

I don't see that that's that that's really I wouldn't hold that position but I would hold that when

Christ led captivity captive that the person who dies after the cross of Christ goes directly into his presence that there is not a that the at least that section where Abraham and Lazarus were that that is not a a stopping point shall we say.

I'm only speaking from from the standpoint of the I guess you might say the typology of the book of Hebrews where it says that while the tabernacle is still standing we cannot enter into the place

I believe it's in Romans 9 8 I'm sorry Hebrews 9 8 where the tabernacle

I guess would be symbolic in a sense of the old covenant system and covenant where Christ does away with it on the cross sends to the right hand of the father and finishes everything leads the captive out of captivity and that's when we're we're we now have all of the things that that the

Old Testament things were promising I don't know if you I'm not sure if I'm saying it right well

I'm not sure I just don't I don't see that that the issue

I see nothing in scripture it says that the issue the reason why there has been a change as far as the the location of someone is is due to something hadn't been finished yet and therefore they couldn't enter the presence of God or something along those lines

I don't I don't see that that's I've just never heard of it before to be perfectly honest with you so I can't really comment on but I'm certainly never seen anything that would do it substantiate that but that's that's so you don't see any difference at all between the

I guess the conditions of Abraham's justification and ours no

I there's no other weather what other condition of justification could there be I mean I'm only saying because I think

I make the distinction and I'm willing to to be wrong but I'm willing to accept that I could be wrong in my interpretation of scripture but in reading the scriptures

I see a distinction between God's forgiveness of Abraham's sins in justification and the payment for sins that we read that we receive on the cross in other words

Abraham's sins are forgiven but Christ has not paid for them until he died on the cross well all of that is is trying to put things into some sort of temporal succession some sort of temporal order or something like that and and again the only only place scripture gets into that is the discussion of Romans chapter 3 and talking about passing over sins previously committed and I just don't see that the issue is well there was none there was the sins have been forgiven but they haven't been paid for I suppose in a some sort of temporal sense you could you could make that assertion but I I don't think

God is limited to that hello I think we lost Johnny there okay

I don't know what happened there but I just don't see Paul emphasizing that I really don't

I'm not sure what's going on with the beep beep there but maybe someone trying to call you nope okay well anyways so really don't know

I've never heard the position that you're that you're suggesting so I really don't really don't have a whole lot of comment to be able to make on it because I've just never heard of it before sorry all right then okay man thanks for calling us whether 877 -753 -3341 and I don't

I see lights but I have no idea if there's anybody else online nothing has been cleared as far as giving me information as to who's calling or what they're calling about but I know there's some more folks in there for some reason

I will now start singing so that someone can have time to you're probably hitting something you're unaware of causing that beep no

I've that that was coming into my headsets from some other place I don't know where it was coming from but don't exactly know what it was all right yes let's go ahead and talk with with Paul Paul you with us yeah how you doing sir

I'm okay how are you I'm not doing half bad okay well I was just calling in about the conversation that's asked yep may 20th yep

I've heard a lot about it in fact it's probably the the single call that I've gotten well

I'll take that back there's only been one other call that I've gotten more people asking me about it and that was when oh

I forget when it was and they replayed this program at least three times so it sort of developed a life of its own when

Norman Geisler in essence said that Roman Catholicism was Orthodox on most issues of the gospel and so on and so forth and and basically said if you make forensic justification an issue of the gospel then no one believed in the gospel up until the

Reformation and all the rest that stuff we even ended up doing a whole program on that back when we were on KPXQ because the

Bible answer man played the hour before we were on and that was last question and I was just like man

I got a I got to address this and we went nuts with it so I'd say this is the second most popular call as far as far as people calling us and emailing us and all the rest that stuff so yeah

I'm familiar with it well it was I mean I'm still investigating Calvin Hanks first objection to it was that God is responsible for evil as I understand there were a couple problems with the with the call first of all the caller was willing to accept that it is accurate to identify the

Calvinistic position as fatalistic determinism fatalism is impersonal fatalism is there is a vast difference between saying that God has a sovereign purpose in bringing about his own glory through the election of an elect people in Jesus Christ and fatalism you could not possibly identify those two things together so while determinism would be true that is that there is a decree that determines what takes place in time fatalistic would not be true because that would deny any personal element to the determination of what takes place so that was the first thing that the the caller accepted a designation that was just simply untrue that's the first thing secondly as I understand the statement that was made in fact

I saw it given in our chat channel a number of people actually went back and type the whole thing out to give us the exact quote and I don't have it in front of me but I think

I'm pretty close and that is Hank said I believe that Calvinists are believers are

Christians they just don't realize that the logical conclusion of their system is that God is the author of evil and Hank certainly does know that the

Westminster Confession of Faith for example very very clearly denies that a belief in God's absolute sovereignty makes

God the author of evil and I did hear a comment and it's very very common for people to make the assertion well what you're saying is that God forces people to be evil and that's where we need to I think provide a response to that kind of assertion it it it first of all it

I think it's just fair to say now reform people very very very strongly deny that they're making

God the author of evil but I a person could say I believe that they are wrong or I believe that they are they're inconsistent or whatever but it needs to be stated they they very clearly say they do not and it would be helpful if you'd also explain why they say that God is not the author of evil and that is that that God makes use of means that he reckoned that he that the reform position recognizes the role of free creatures not autonomous creatures and a lot of folks confuse those two those two terms and also to recognize the assertion of the deadness of man and sin and I think that's one of the main

I think it's the main area of disagreement with what what Hanks position is and the position of many non reform people is and that is that on the subject of the depravity of man they continue to cling to this concept of a free will even when they will say that man is dead in sin that man is a slave of sin

I'm not sure how anyone can can put those two terms together and say well you know you're a slave of sin your

Satan holds you in slavery but you're free anyways I think those two terms are probably about as self contradictory as you can get the main thing is that I would one of the first things that I would

I would go to is I would say look we need to we need to go to Scripture and when we go to Scripture we find a number of passages in the

Bible such as Genesis 50 Isaiah chapter 10 Acts chapter 4 where we are given a biblical paradigm and I've never never heard this happen in most these conversations with the exception of the debate that I had with George Bryson a few weeks ago we need to go these passages and we need to ask ourselves the question what is the

Bible teaching us concerning the relationship of God's sovereign decree and man's will and I would think that since we here have a discussion of intention in fact that very word appears in each one of those passages in Genesis chapter 50 you have the selling of Joseph into slavery and years later

Joseph saying to his brothers you intended this for evil but God intended it for good now here we have the

Bible specifically addressing the issue of intention we have the Bible specifically addressing the the issue of sin because obviously we know the selling of Joseph into slavery was a sinful act on their part and yet we have very clearly the assertion that not only did

God not force them to be evil it was their intention to be evil the desire of their heart was to be evil and I it was interesting this this subject came up with my high school classes recently both of them from my freshman all the way up to my my seniors and there was a lot of objections this very thing they said well it sounds like you're saying

God forces people to be evil no no no God has never stood behind somebody with a gun and said here go do this evil thing as I've emphasized them over and over again what we don't see is the fact that God is restraining the vast majority of the evil of mankind the

Bible talks about that that restraining power that God exercises and we never thank him for it because when he restrains that evil we don't see it but I am absolutely convinced if the evil of man's heart were allowed to actually be expressed in fullness none of us could walk across our front yards up being killed or molested or shot or robbed or whatever and in fact when we do see terrible examples of evil in in our world it's when

God has just in essence lifted his finger to remind us of the depth of the depravity of evil that fills the hearts of men and so I really think that that that hell itself the greatest the greatest suffering of hell will be that God has removed his hand of restraint and the hatred that fills the heart of man for God will will be unrestrained in its expression and yet that will be coupled with the realization that there's absolutely positively nothing that that man or that woman in hell can do to express their hatred that's going to do anything to God that tremendous frustration that tremendous emptiness in being filled with hatred for God but there's not there's no no means of expressing it is going to have any any type of accomplishments cannot accomplish anything at all and so keeping that in mind to see that's not a constituent part of the the theology of those who deny total depravity the idea that man is is that enslaved to his evil isn't there now it's very clear in Scripture but it's not there because I think primarily of philosophical commitments rather than biblical commitments and so when people say well you're making

God the author of evil if what they're trying to communicate by that is that God forces men to be evil that and that these men don't want to be they don't want to be evil there are these these new morally neutral maybe even good folks but there's this big mean nasty

God who just wants to get his own glory he wants to push his own agenda and so he forces people to be evil that is a caricature that is that is not even semi -accurate it is it is gross in its inaccuracy in its presentation of what it is we're talking about here and as I said to my high school students you know the thing that bothers me about this conversation is that most of the time the wonder that people express is that God would use someone like Pharaoh when in reality the wonder should be that he would ever forgive someone like Moses notice that we we get all bent out of shape because we feel our freedom is somehow being constricted when we see

God using Pharaoh for his own purposes but we don't wonder that he would ever forgive someone like Moses that shows how little we really know of our own sin and how how we don't take that seriously at all but when you think about it and this is what

I did my high school class again I said well let me ask you something would God have been just and righteous the first instant that Pharaoh sinned to have brought judgment against him and to have taken him from this world and they all to a young man and young woman said of course

I said okay so what do you call it that he didn't do that if he did not bring judgment to bear if he suspended judgment over Pharaoh Pharaoh sins and then he sins again and he sins again and he sins again and in fact

God has had to restrain the evil of his heart what is all of that and they all recognized it's it's called grace so God has extended grace to Pharaoh in all of these things and yet when we then see that he uses him to bring about his own glory and the good of the people of Israel upon what basis are we objecting when we admitted that God could have destroyed him the first instant he sinned and that does help to communicate to a lot of folks that you see

God isn't sitting here putting a gun to Pharaoh's back and saying come on boy come on boy you go do this now and you go do that now in no way shape or form is that what he's doing and yet that is in essence what is being communicated when you assert well you're making

God the the author of evil and it's what I really would like to see happen is

I'd like to see some give and take because when folks throw that thing out there those who watched or have heard the the debate and in Anaheim know that I then turned around said folks let's find out if the other side has an answer to this and we need to take a break and I will explain what

I mean by that when we come back as we continue talking with Paul and discussing the issue is

God the author of evil in reform theology he is not and how would you respond to folks and they raise that issue and we'll be back here in the dividing line right after this what is dr.

Norman Geisler warning the Christian community about in his book chosen but free a new cult secularism false prophecy scenarios no dr.

Geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called Calvinism he insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant in his book the

Potter's freedom James White replies to dr. Geisler but the Potter's freedom is much more than just a reply it is a defense of the very principles upon which the

Protestant Reformation was founded indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and layman alike can appreciate

James White masterfully counters the evidence against so -called extreme Calvinism defines what the reformed faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the reformers is the very one taught in the pages of Scripture the

Potter's freedom a defense of the Reformation and a rebuttal to Norman Geisler's chosen but free you'll find it in the reformed theology section of our bookstore at a omen org millions of petitioners from around the world are employing

Pope John Paul the second to recognize the Virgin Mary as co -redeemer with Christ elevating the topic of Roman Catholic views of Mary to national headlines and widespread discussion in his book

Mary another redeemer James White sidesteps hostile rhetoric and sites directly from Roman Catholic sources to explore this volatile topic he traces how

Mary of the Bible esteemed mother of the Lord obedient servant and chosen vessel of God has become the immaculately conceived bodily assumed

Queen of Heaven viewed as co -mediator with Christ and now recognized as co -redeemer by many in the

Roman Catholic Church Mary another redeemer is fresh insight into the woman the

Bible calls a blessed among women and an invitation to single -minded devotion to God's truth you can order your copy of James White's book

Mary another redeemer at a omen .org incorporating the most recent research and solid biblical truth letters to a

Mormon elder by James White is a series of personal letters written to a fictional Mormon missionary examining the teaching and theology of the

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints the book brings a relational approach to material usually presented in textbook style

James White draws from his extensive apologetics ministry to thousands of Mormons in presenting the truth of Christianity with well defined arguments

James White provides readers with insight and understanding into the Book of Mormon the prophecies visions and teachings of Joseph Smith the theological implications of the doctrines of Mormonism and other major historical issues relevant to the claims of the

LDS Church this marvelous study is a valuable text for Christians who talk with Mormons and is an ideal book to be read by Mormons letters to a

Mormon elder get your copy today in the Mormonism section of our bookstore at a omen .org

and welcome back to the dividing line my name is James White we're talking with Paul in North Hollywood regarding the assertion that the reformed position makes the makes

God the author of evil and we were talking about Pharaoh a little bit and we were

I didn't even get into Isaiah chapter 10 though I think that'd be one of the best passages to look at because it is so clearly addressing the fact that God has sovereignly brought the nation of Assyria down against Israel and yet they did not so intend and yet they're judged for the intentions of their hearts one action

God's desire in that action is good and just and righteous and then in the instance of the

Assyrians they are filled with pride etc etc and very very clearly recognizing these things what

I was pointing out was that in a debate you can actually get around to dealing with the fact that the the opposition which says oh we you know

I we there's no God had nothing to do with evil because of quote -unquote free will that in essence that's not an answer the this has really been brought out

I think by the the openness of God debate and it is if you're familiar with the openness of God the open open theism position the open theists are saying look

Armenians we are Armenians and we are consistent Armenians and the reason we're consistent

Armenians as we recognize that if you think that God really has a divine knowledge of future events if God really knows the future then when he created you are stuck with the

Reformed perspective you're you're you're stuck because if God knew what was going to happen when he created what is the advantage in saying oh yeah but he gave us free will but if he knew we were gonna do with it if he knew exactly what we were gonna do with it when he created then how is that accomplishing anything oh well it's not

God's fault it's it's it's it's it's our fault because our free will but wait a minute if God knew exactly what every single person was gonna do with his free will when he created which has historically been the

Armenian position then said then somehow sloughing that off and saying oh well

God didn't have anything to do with it all you're actually saying is God created it he knew was gonna happen he just didn't have any purpose for it how does that accomplish anything that doesn't accomplish anything at all you're still left with God having full and complete knowledge of what was gonna take place except now you've stripped them of having any purpose in it now evil has become purposeless and you're left with this idea of God trying to now that evils come into existence trying to to get around it somehow and maybe you know sort of redeem something out of all this mess well where does how does how does that answer the question at least when the reformed person looks at Ephesians 111 and says

God works all things after the counsel of his will and he's talking there about bringing about the salvation of his people at least you can say see there's a purpose here there's been a purpose from the beginning and in fact there's no such thing as an act of evil in this universe that is purposeless there is a purpose that God's going to bring bring out of all of this and hence the existence of evil has a rational explanation rather than well

God started it he knew is going to happen but he didn't really have anything you know he just sort of you know just sort of rolled the dice and it happened and that's all there is to it so the openness person is saying look that doesn't make any sense so we need to get rid of all that I get the evil part of all of this fatalistic and as you said it's not fatalism because where does human responsibility come in well remember human responsibility has to be determined not on the basis of some of statement says well philosophically man must be autonomous to be able to be held responsible

I think it is very rightly said that we are held accountable within the parameters that God determines will be held accountable for not that some human philosophy determines and so when we talk about human responsibility what are we what are we talking about that man acts on the intentions of his heart that is that really is when you think about is the only realm that we can be held accountable for you and I can't be held accountable for having knowledge of God's eternal decree because you and I are temporal beings and we do not have knowledge of what that eternal decree is outside of of course those elements of it that are revealed in scripture but as far as how it impacts our particular life we don't we don't see what that eternal decree is our our vision stops at the current second in which we live so we can't be held accountable for that so what is the

Bible tell us we are held accountable for we are held accountable for acting upon the desires of our heart the what is the intention that we have in doing what we do that's the only basis upon which we are judged we are not judged upon any other basis other than what our intention is and so when someone said when we look again at those passages when we look at someone like Herod Herod is judged on the basis of the intention of his heart now we know that what he did is what

God's hand beforehand determined would happen and I would challenge anyone who has a problem with this will tell me what acts for 27 to 28 says what what does it mean that's one of the biggest frustrations

I've had is I I tried to have a conversation with someone who works with Dr. Geisler this past week and could never get into the text was not allowed acts for 27 to 28

Oh where it talks about the fact that in in the crucifixion of Christ you had all these different people who were involved in bringing about the death of Christ and the specific text says for truly in this city they were gathered together against your holy servant

Jesus whom you anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever your hand and your purpose predestined to occur so look at the groups we've got we've got

Herod we've got Pontius Pilate we've got the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel's got the Romans we've got people in governmental authority we've got the

Pharisees and Sadducees and what they did in regards to Christ to do whatever your hand and your purpose predestined to occur acts for 28 and so when when people bring up objections and I'm talking about Christian people here when people bring up objections to the sovereignty of God the first thing we should do is to go into the text of Scripture where that decree is made reference to that's not what

I find happening instead for example this past week and in trying to have this conversation we could

I could I kept asking can we go into the text no no no we need to deal with the philosophical foundations of how we interpret the text in the first place well do you believe in grammatical historical interpretation yes

I do well then let's go into the text and let's look at some examples nope can't do that because the ultimate authority is philosophy the ultimate authority is philosophy and I and and there is just no conversation could end up taking place because the

God wasn't allowed to speak and I kept saying look I want to hear what God has to say God inspired the writing of acts for 28 what does it mean and then once we know what it means then we can move on from there

I'm sorry I'm just now that you read that verse this is what it sounds like to me and tell me if I'm getting this wrong it kind of sounds like that these men crucified

Jesus because in a sense God programmed them to do so is that right no not at all program them to do so those a number of those people would have killed

Jesus long before his hour came if God had not restrained them from doing so these these are not we are not robots to be programmed these are individuals who create the image of God as fallen children of Adam are rebels against God they hate his law even though many of them knew his law very very well that's why the strongest words of condemnation and judgment in the

Bible are directed toward those who possessed the scriptures and yet fulfilled their own lusts on the backs of others the

Scribes the Pharisees look at Matthew chapter 23 the woes that are that are announced upon them frightening frightening stuff these are not these aren't like a palm pilot that comes to you in a box without any programming and you just put the programs in that you want that sounds sort of like what you're what you're what you're thinking there no these individuals what the what the church is praying here is they recognize that Herod and Pontius Pilate and the

Gentiles and the peoples of Israel these people are culpable for what they did here are people who see the sinless

Son of God and they are so angered by his words they are so angered by his revelation of their sinfulness they are so angered and filled with hatred at his holiness that they nail him to a tree but in that one act while you see the evil intentions in their hearts which as I pointed out many of them especially the peoples of Israel would want to have carried out long before this remember when

Jesus healed the man in the in the synagogue and what the men do they just saw

God bring healing into a person's life and they went out of the synagogue and they took counsel together how they might destroy him

God didn't let him do it he restrained their evil he restrained their evil many times even when they took him to the brow of the hill they were gonna throw him off in Nazareth God would not allow them to accomplish their evil he didn't you know send fire down from heaven and consume them but he restrained their evil all through those things all through those those incidents until it was time for God to accomplish his purpose in the crucifixion and the crucifixion being the means by which

God brings about the greatest good he has ever brought about and so in one action

God's intention holy just and good the men's intentions evil and and and depraved one action two different intentions

God brings good out of it he judges those men not based upon anything outside of their control but for acting upon the desires of their hearts but weren't they born with only that evil well there that's because the federal headship and that's another thing that people object to is they object to this idea that well we were we were in Adam and that's that's that's not fair because my my nature was was depraved from birth well first of all you still do exactly what you want to do we do not in our laws because someone has a tendency for example toward sexual sin we do not excuse a person for raping children we shouldn't excuse people for engaging in repeated acts of adultery either but those societies that begin to crumble and ignore

God's law begin to do that and that's what we ourselves are doing as well but that's an objection to for example what happened to Akin that's an objection to when

Akin steals knowing what God's law is he steals from the the booty that's found in Jericho and he hides it and he has found out what happened to Akin Akin is stoned

Akin's wife is stoned Akin's kids are stoned Akin's doggies and kitties and cows and so on so forth are stoned as well and that's where people object because that's that's not fair people need to realize if you object against being in Adam well first of all you could not find a better representative but secondly if you object against being in Adam then you should if you're consistent also object against being in Christ but some of those objecting are the ones well that wouldn't be in Christ you know that's that's quite true and they will object until faced with the authority of the one against whom they're they're objecting and you know upon what grounds do they have how didn't didn't

Paul answer the final objection by saying who are you Oh man to answer back to God and it's not like man has the right or the ability to put

God in the dock to put God in the position of answering for himself along the lines of human human law which is actually derived from divine law but a lot of folks don't want to go beyond that and they want to say well look what about Adam and someone in the channel was saying you know try to address

Adam as well and I find that rather interesting because none of us are in Adam unless you're a

Pelagian and believe that there is no inherited depravity there is no

Adam on earth today there is no one who is born as that so that clean slate there is no one who is outside of Adam and this and of course you might even say since sin exists in the world you could not repeat the situation with Adam but they want to become theoretical they want to go well what about how can you say that God has this sovereign decree in light of Adam there's a couple things first of all for the person who is a who claims to believe in the

Bible I just stop them and say wait a minute are you saying the Bible does not talk about God's decree

I can never get these folks to actually address the the biblical passages where these things are just plainly laid out instead there's all these other objections that are thrown out out there and I would first start there because I you're not going to get anywhere unless you're willing to listen to Sola Scriptura and Tota Scriptura that's that's first and say secondly

I'd say now did the Apostles ever use Adam in the way that you're using

Adam is this a is this an apostolic thing or if you come up with this on your own and and hence maybe completely missing something there are only a small number of verses in the entire

Bible that even address the period of time between the creation and the fall and they tell us nothing about Adam at all instead you've got folks like Benny Hinn coming along and deciding that you know

Adam could fly and he could fly to other other planets and do all this other weird and fun stuff like that and and when the

Bible is silent people want to fill in that's why they're all the Gnostic Gospels the second century to tell us about what

Jesus was like when he was a kid because the canonical Gospels don't tell us and instead of respecting

God's right to reveal what he wants to reveal and to believe

Deuteronomy 29 29 that the things revealed belong to us into our children forever but the secret things belong to Lord our

God we want to pry beyond that God has not chosen to explain to us the nature of Adam prior to the fall all we know and because people say well you explain the existence of sin always in the fact that you know we have this tendency toward it and in fact

God's restraining us from a God's not forcing anybody but if you say that God had an eternal decree that preexisted the existence of Adam and if you say that he didn't put a gun to Adam's back then how is it that he could know that Adam was going to fall because and of course that's the open theist would say he couldn't the open theist at least is is consistent from a philosophical standpoint saying that when

God created Adam he didn't know whether he'd fall or not he didn't know was coming now that ends up shredding entire sections of biblical revelation concerning God's eternal purpose but you know that's the direction they want to go because they want to protect protect the autonomous will of man but for those who at least recognize that open theism is not a possibility in light of Isaiah and everything else and those who recognize the

Bible as a whole teaches God's sovereignty over human affairs and and and his eternal purpose then you have to ask the question okay well then how did

Adam fall was it did God know what's going to happen because it was a part of his decree or did

God just simply create and then take in knowledge of what was going to happen I don't see how that can even begin to to fit together how anybody can say well

God created is sort of like you threw the cosmic dice and then once it he he he created he went oh hey cool that that turned out well

I'll take I'll take credit for it you know that doesn't exactly lead to his glory either but isn't the bigger question how

Adam could choose to sin because wasn't it like I don't know Jonathan Edwards always choose according to our yeah and desire and and John Gerstner was exactly right in saying that one of the biggest things that separated

John Jonathan Edwards from John Calvin was that John Calvin would very frequently come to the point of saying look we need to make an end of speaking where God makes an end of speaking now

Edwards may have repeated that I've not read all of Edwards and hence I can't tell you whether he repeated that Maxim or not but on the issue of trying to figure out the will of Adam and how an unfallen will could freely fall and still interface with a divine decree

John Gerstner I think was quite right and he said even the great intellect of Jonathan Edwards at this point finds itself ensnared in endless self -contradiction that is

Edwards tried to figure it out may have even thought that he had figured it out but when you try to follow what he himself presented in regards to Adam and I would agree in in in regards to the to the will of man post fall that Edwards was right because that's the only biblical revelation we have is how that will functions we don't have any biblical revelation on Adams will pre fall

God has not chosen to tell us and so I find it rather intriguing that at least those who say they believe in the

Bible and they believe it's the Word of God would focus upon something that requires us to somehow make a presupposition about something

God has not even spoken about I find that very very interesting but I think Gerstner was right Edwards got himself into into an a complete bind in attempting to do what you know

I think Calvin had the brilliance to speculate on those things himself but I respect him more at that point for having said when the

Holy Spirit makes an end of speaking in Scripture we better make an end of speaking or we will end up being very foolish and that's why

I keep taking people back to the text is saying tell me what these passages mean tell me what they mean and if you believe that this is they are new stars why will

God breathe why will you not allow God to make an end of speaking here and I don't get responses to that and I was

I will say to anyone look show me exegetically where the text addresses

Adams pre -fall will and I'll follow you right but it's not there right we can only go with what

God gives us and it is arrogance on our part to think that if God is not given it to us that we somehow can fill it in out of our own philosophies that's why

I think the New Testament is so very frequently warning us against man's philosophies not that a

Christian philosophy is wrong but that man in his philosophy will almost always end up asserting that he is superior to what

God has revealed in Scripture that's been my experience anyways but with federal headship what we are saying is that every single person that is alive today would have made the same decision that Adam made in the garden right um

I think I think that it is well let's put this way that every single person alive today is held accountable for the decision that Adam made yes would they have each made that same decision

I I don't know that's necessarily a constituent part but we are treated as if we did

I mean that's how representative government works I mean when you're representative and you're you're in California I'm sorry this is a this is a real bad example for you but you know you know your representatives a few years ago regulated the electric electrical industry didn't they okay well well you're not giving yourself a lot of points for having moved there in the first place so I'd like to point out to you but I thought

I was getting in the film industry I probably wouldn't get too many more no there you go you're you just you're you're out the door but let's say you had lived there and when your representatives do things you live with the results there that's that's allegedly how representative government supposed to work as we elect these folks and since we cast our vote for them then they represent us and when they cast a vote we are legally bound by it and that's sort of how it works when you when you don't do that the the guys in the blue suits come with the guns and they put you behind those little bars and and it's not a good thing well in in essence what a lot of folks object to is that yeah well

I didn't vote for Adam well show me somebody you would rather have voted for a and be well

God doesn't care whether you vote for him or not God has placed you in the position of being represented by Adam and if you're gonna object to that like I said you got to object to the idea of being placed in Christ so that his righteousness his righteous act ends up representing us as well and that then absolutely destroys the entire the entire gospel itself and so really that's why you know people ask why why are you so focused upon exegesis why are you so much one that wants to discuss it from the biblical text because there is no end to the the confusion that man can create when we do not have a firm foundation upon which to stand

God has given us his word when I read the hundred nineteen psalm I hear in there how

God has exalted his word above his name and above the heavens

I mean that's that that's an incredible thing I want to stand on that firm foundation now if that foundation ends at a certain point that I'm gonna stop there if I step off that foundation

I don't know what else is down there there's there's no solid foundation to stand on beyond that point and people may want to go that direction and they made absolutely delight themselves in all sorts of speculation but you can't call it

God's truth once you've stepped off of that foundation that's one thing I've noticed just in studying this there's so many books from Calvinist that deal with the scriptures and exegesis that I really don't see too many people really seriously digging into the tech that is exactly correct that is that is a tremendously astute observation and that to me really is fundamentally you know

I express this a few weeks ago I look at Dave Hunt's book I look at Norm Geisler's book I I look at you know some of these other books have been put out like the huge book against perseverance the

Saints are once saved always saved is what this guy attacks what's the guy's name it's it's escaping me at the moment but he we have a section on our website about about this particular fellow in his 800 page book and all the rest of stuff when you look at these books fundamentally they are saying look here is a philosophical foundation that we absolutely positively have to embrace and therefore here's what flows from that and I say look if if philosophy is the love of wisdom where does knowledge and wisdom come from it comes from a fear of the

Lord well how do we gain a fear of the Lord well very clearly by listening to what he has revealed to us how is a how is a man to keep his way pure well by by walking in the light of God's Word yeah

Dan corner thank you silly Brit Dan corners 800 page book is what I was referring to before I'm a biblicist and I think

I have a really solid foundation for saying look God created us as communicating beings he created us with the ability to understand

Revelation the Lord Jesus very clearly held people accountable to what was found in the

Bible in the Scriptures therefore you know those who try to short -circuit being a biblicist by saying well you have to have the loss of the philosophy of communication and the philosophy of language wait a minute

I don't remember a discussion of the philosophy of language when Jesus approaches

Adam after the fall of Jesus well God approaches Adam after the fall in the garden

I don't remember Adam going well I didn't understand what you said or you didn't discuss with me the epistemology of language all the rest of them now

God had made his revelation clear enough and he held Adam accountable for it I mean that's just all there is to it and so I think that the word has been given to us with clarity it's been given to us as a guide and that's where we need to start and when we start with the word it will prove to be consistent it will be proved to be consistent in what it teaches about the gospel justification and all these issues and I I worry sometimes about folks who just refuse to find satisfaction in the fullness of Scripture I've said it many times to those who work in in the eldership of the church

Scripture functions like the walls of a building and there is so much within it that no man could ever begin to plum its depths in this life but the elder of a church knows what

I'm talking about when I talk about those people who stand at the windows and they're always looking outside and they don't know almost anything about what's inside but oh they so long for what's outside let me tell you something they're gonna find a way to get out and those folks end up being real difficulties within the church itself hey

Paul I waxed real long thank you very much for your call I really appreciate it thank you thank you for calling in today God bless thanks all the rest of you for listening in today excellent question

I appreciate we spent 40 minutes on that didn't we yeah we did and what is the fundamental lesson all that go back to the scriptures exegete the scriptures that's what we do here that's what we do on the dividing line we'll do it again next week

God bless the dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries if you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -0318 or write us at P .O.

Box 37106 Phoenix Arizona 85069 you can also find us on the worldwide web at AOMIN .org

that's A -O -M -I -N .O -R -G where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks join us again next