Predestination & Election

And welcome to The Dividing Line this Saturday afternoon. My name is James White, along with me Mike Beliveau, the president of Alpha Omega Ministries.

And this afternoon we are addressing a subject that a lot of people have a lot of questions about, and that is the subjects of predestination and election.

What does the Bible say about those subjects? How can we understand this difficult topic? That's what we'll be talking about this afternoon.

We invite you to take your Bible and a piece of paper and come along with us as we examine the subject of predestination and election.

Almost every church group that I know of has some doctrine of predestination and election. Now what it says is always a good question, but every church group has to address the subject because the terms predestination and election occur rather frequently in the

New Testament. Hence, we obviously cannot skip over them. We cannot fly by them hoping that no one will notice that they're there.

We cannot delete them out of the Bible because to do so would mean to remove a great deal of Jesus' teaching in the

Gospel of John and other passages, like in Matthew 11. It would be to wipe out

Paul, the first chapter of Ephesians, the eighth and ninth chapters of Romans, and to do a great injustice to the entire teaching of the

Scripture concerning the sovereignty of God and his role in salvation. Unfortunately, I can't think of any other topic that has been made more of a football by people than the subject of predestination and election.

There are a number of reasons for this. I think one of the main reasons is the fact that we as human beings do not like the idea that God has any control in this world other than that little bit that we'd like to allow him to have.

A sovereign God is extremely far removed from the vast majority of humanity. They don't mind, as C .H.

Spurgeon put it, if God is in his almonery giving out gifts and alms and things like that, or if God is in his workshop creating stars and planets and things like that.

But once God gets on his throne and starts acting like a sovereign ruler of the universe, which the Bible clearly says that he is, and once we as Christians start proclaiming the sovereignty of God and the fact that he has a perfect right to do with his creation what he sees fit, well, then everything breaks loose and everyone starts crying, treason, treason, treason, and everything falls apart from there.

I think that's the starting point in discussing the subject of predestination and election this afternoon, and that is the subject of the sovereignty of God.

I feel sorry for those who do not have a sovereign God, because I believe it is a natural tenet of theism to believe that God is sovereign.

If you have a God, then he must be sovereign, or he is not a God. I think you need to listen to what

I just said there, because it's extremely important. God in his very nature must be sovereign.

He must be in control of all things, or he is not God. It is impossible to have a

God who is only in control of a small portion of his universe. That is not a true deity, that's just simply, like us, a man who only has limited control of God as God, and God is sovereign.

In the 135th Psalm, for example, we read, I know that the Lord is great, that our

Lord is greater than all gods. The Lord does whatever pleases him in the heavens and on the earth and in the seas, and all their depths.

It is very clear from the scriptures that God is in charge. For example, in the book of Proverbs, we read many

Proverbs that would clearly show this. For example, in the 16th chapter of the

Proverbs, you have a number of these, such as, for example, verse 9 of Proverbs chapter 16, in his heart, a man plans his course, but the

Lord determines his steps. Here we see the sovereignty of God involved even in a man's life, that God is the one who knows the beginning and the end, the beginning from the end.

He is the one who has sovereignly decided what will and what will not take place, and he is in charge.

Now this, of course, begins our thinking about a lot of subjects, such as the subjects of evil and things like that, which we will attempt to address as we go along.

But I don't think that we can get into the subject of predestination and election without first letting our listeners know that the very presupposition from which we are working is that God is sovereign,

God can do what God wills to do, he can work in the way that he wishes to work, and that we believe that the scriptures abundantly point out that God will work out his purpose, whether man likes it or not.

And when we look at some of the passages, for example, in the ninth chapter of Romans, the Bible will directly and clearly state just that fact, that God will do what

God will do, and it is not up to us to argue about it one way or another. Arthur W.

Pink in Groomings and the Godhead said, God does as he pleases, only as he pleases, always as he pleases, none can thwart him, none can hinder him.

That's true. And if you don't have a God who does what he pleases, I feel sorry for those who have an idea of deity as a grandfather sitting up there who is just sitting there attempting, just trying to keep up with mankind, reacting to sovereign man's desires for a servant

God. And even at the same time, if we allow his sovereign rule, thereby we automatically think he's going to, you know, he sits up, ah, boy, am

I going to get him and just be able to unrighteously do anything he wants.

Yet if you look at the 97th Psalm, verse two, it says, righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne.

And so his love is pure and his motives are pure. He's not up there as a wicked man thinking, what can

I do to them next? We're not that kind of an attitude at all. Certainly not. And the

God of the God of this universe, the God of the Bible is a merciful and just God. You cannot have one or the other.

You can't just simply be love and mercy. He must also be just and righteous and true.

And we need to remember that in looking at the nature of God and how he exists.

Now, part of the reason that mankind decries the sovereignty of God is the fact that we believe in the sovereignty of man.

That is, we like the idea that man is in control of his own life, that man is unhindered, unaffected by anything outside of himself, and that we are completely sovereign over what we do.

That, of course, is not true. Man is not sovereign. We are controlled by many things.

Even in a free nation like the United States of America, neither one of us is a sovereign individual who can make any rules, go as fast as he wants down the highway, go any direction he wants on the highway, do anything he wants legally or any other way.

We are not sovereign. We are under rule, under the rule of government, under the rule of morality, ethics, many things such as this.

As R .C. Sproul says in his book Chosen by God, which is an excellent book that I would suggest and probably will suggest more than once during the program today for people to pick up, he says in there that God is free,

I am free, God is more free than I am. When my freedom runs into God's freedom,

I lose. And that is a very logical and very biblical statement that, yes,

God has made man in his own image. When Adam was created, he had a free will, not an absolutely free will, for Adam could not will to fly, could not will to be outside the realm of time, could not will to create.

There are many things that were beyond his will, but he had the freedom of choice, any which direction.

When man fell, man fell into sin. He died spiritually. And the Bible says he came under the dominion of Satan and the power of sin, that sin and death rule as Lord over man.

And it cannot be said biblically that an unregenerate man has a truly free will.

But the Bible says an unregenerate man is under condemnation of sin, is under the power of sin and is spiritually dead.

This we see, for example, very clearly in the second chapter of Ephesians, verses one through four, and I'm reading from the

New International Version, says, As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is not work and those who are disobedient.

All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts.

Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. So Paul says that before Christ, before regeneration, we were dead in sin.

We were dead in our trespasses. Now, I think that this is probably one of the key elements of the sovereignty of God in understanding predestination election.

One must answer the question, is one dead in sin or is one wounded by sin?

This is a big difference. The early church believed that man was dead in sin. It was not until Pope Gregory came along and decided that man, that sin was a disease that afflicted man, but did not kill man, that we had

Pelagius and the semi Pelagian heresy and things like this. And so one must ask oneself the question, do

I believe that sin kills? If you don't believe that sin kills, then you're obviously not going to believe in predestination election because man is then spiritually alive and man can make spiritual decisions.

But if you believe, as Ephesians chapter two says, that man is dead in his sins, that is going to affect what you believe concerning the role of God in salvation and the role of man in salvation.

For if you know anything about dead people, dead people rarely do many things. I've talked about it before, but I'm glad I had the experience.

A couple of years ago at Grand Canyon College, I gave a lot of demonstrations on the cadavers there.

Grand Canyon is one of the few places that has cadavers, dead bodies laying around, you might say.

And I would frequently give demonstrations of body parts and functions, anatomy and physiology on these cadavers to high school students as they came through as I was a senior biology student.

And so I could do anything I wanted to, to those two cadavers. We had a male and a female. I could pull off the chest and I could stick my fingers through the heart and I could pull out the intestines and split open the kidneys and do all sorts of wonderful and crazy things to this body.

And you know what? It never reacted. Why? Because it was dead. Dead bodies don't react to anything.

They must be made alive before they can react. And this is something that we must think about when we start talking about the subject of salvation.

Are we attempting to treat unregenerate, spiritually dead people like they are actually spiritually alive?

Are we placing the responsibility for choosing salvation in the hands of a spiritually dead person?

I could have given that cadaver all the choices in the world about whether he wanted to come alive again, but he couldn't choose to come alive again.

He was dead. He would have to be made alive before he could choose to be made alive. And this is a very clear illustration that Paul uses of the spiritual condition of the man before Christ.

John MacArthur, I think, really summed it up quite well in his commentary on Ephesians. He says, quote, Man does not become spiritually dead because he sins.

He is spiritually dead because by nature he is sinful. His condition has nothing to do with the way he lives.

It has to do with the fact that he is dead while he is alive. He is spiritually dead while being physically alive.

Because he is dead to God, he is dead to spiritual life, truth, righteousness, inner peace and happiness, and ultimately to every other good thing.

That's true. Now, if a person accepts this idea that man is dead in sin, as the

Bible clearly presents it, then the rest of the points that follow along relevant to the doctrine of salvation and predestination and election will make themselves very clear.

For example, what we're going to do, and it's about 16 minutes after 3, what we're going to do is begin looking at some, not certainly all because it would take us the rest of the afternoon to do so, but some of the clearest passages in the scriptures that teach the doctrine of election and predestination.

And then we will deal with the many problems and questions that automatically come up in people's minds when these things are presented.

So let's start with one of the clearest passages, and that is the first chapter of the book of Ephesians, which must be deleted from someone's

Bible for them to reject the idea that election and predestination is present within the scriptures.

But the first chapter of Ephesians, verses 3 through 12, listen to what it has to say.

It says, praise be to the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ, for he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

In love, he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ in accordance with his pleasure and will to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the one he loves.

In him, we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins in accordance with the riches of God's grace he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.

And he made known to us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment, to bring all things in heaven and earth together under one head, even

Christ. In him, we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will in order that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be for the praise of his glory.

Now, if you listen closely, you heard a number of words in there such as chose, predestined.

These things are important words that we will be looking at and seeing in many other passages.

But notice that when he starts off this whole passage in the book of Ephesians about the subject of salvation, he begins with the sovereignty of God and salvation.

He begins with where we always much start when we talk about salvation, and that is the fact that God is the author of salvation.

God is the active mover in salvation. And any salvation plan that does not have God as its source and as its sole foundation is not a salvation system that comes from the

Bible. We're going to take a break and come back and look at, for example, Second Thessalonians chapter two.

If you want to be turning there during the break, we'll be looking at that and we'll be back on the dividing line right after this.

Good afternoon. My name is James White, along with me, Mike Beliveau. We're looking at the subject of predestination and election from the basis of the scriptures.

We had just looked at the first chapter of Ephesians. We're now looking at the second chapter, the 13th verse of Second Thessalonians, where Paul says,

But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning,

God chose you to be saved through the sanctification, sanctifying work of the spirit and through belief in the truth.

Notice that God chose them to be saved from the beginning through the sanctifying work of the spirit and through belief in the truth.

And then in verse 14 says, He called you to this through our gospel. The proclamation of the gospel is the instrument by which this calling was was made alive to the hearts of these individuals who had been chosen from the beginning by God to receive salvation.

One of the things, too, you must note, in fact, is that it is not for sanctification, but it is through sanctification of the spirit.

It's just so many people think it's the other way around, through the sanctifying work of the spirit.

So it's not it's not just simply being called to be sanctified. Right. It's through the sanctifying work of the spirit.

Right. So the spirit is the one who is involved in the actual salvation process and is sovereign in that.

In fact, you had just mentioned a passage in. The book of Acts, it's all through the book of Acts, I couldn't believe the number of places that the book of Acts presented.

In fact, it's interesting. Acts two thirty eight is a passage that many who believe in baptismal regeneration like to like to throw out.

But the very next verse says the promises for you and your children, for all who are far off, for all whom the

Lord our God will call. Now, it's interesting that someone could believe that baptism causes regeneration because desiring to be baptized is a spiritual thing.

And what they're saying is a natural person could desire a spiritual thing, which absolutely makes no sense at all. It's the same thing with repentance.

And this just struck me just recently. And I like filling these things out and letting

Christians think about them. That's the way I like to do things and let them come to their own conclusions. But the word repentance is the

Greek term metanoia, which means a changing of the mind. Now, we like to say that if you'll repent, if you'll somehow put

God in your debt by doing this nice spiritual thing of repenting, then God will do this, this and this. But of course, they presuppose that you have to do this before God will do something.

The question that struck my mind was metanoia means a change of the mind. Now, according to the eighth chapter of Romans, the mind that is according to the flesh, the unregenerate mind, the natural mind is an enemy of God.

And cannot do anything that is pleasing to God. Now, repentance would obviously be pleasing to God.

But Romans 8 says the natural mind cannot please God and is an enemy to God. So obviously, before the natural mind can metanoia, can change, can repent, it must be changed from a natural mind into what kind of a mind?

A spiritual mind. Regeneration must take place. And that is the sanctifying work of the Spirit spoken of over in 2

Thessalonians 2 13, as well as here in Acts chapter 2, where he talks about the Lord, our

God will call them again. Notice the order of the work God is doing it. Your involvement comes in after only afterwards that God has done something first.

It's not the other way around. Exactly. Because it is the eternal choice of God. In the 48th verse of the 13th chapter of Acts, we read when the

Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

Now, listen, let's say all who were appointed for eternal life believe. Now, when we go out and evangelize and, you know, a lot of people say, well, if it's predestination election, then why should we evangelize?

I think you've got a really wild and crazy idea. If you think evangelization, you're supposed to go out there and save people.

Right. God saves people. Don't you dare try to save somebody. You'll mess it up, man. That is bad news.

I evangelize because I want to glorify my Lord Jesus Christ, want to be obedient to him.

And he's given me the glorious opportunity of being involved with it. If that's not your reason, you've got the wrong reason biblically.

But the point, again, is when we go out and evangelize on the basis of Acts 13, 48 and numerous other passages we haven't even gotten to yet, it is very clear that when we proclaim the message, we proclaim it to all because we do not know who the elect are and who they are not.

We proclaim it to all and all will be held responsible for that decision that they make.

But we also know that the only ones who are going to respond to the call of God are those whom

God has chosen. Now, why is that? This is another vital point. You're saying, this is the vital point.

Well, there's 12 different vital points. Why is it? Why is it that when we talk about predestination election, we say that only the elect will respond?

See, this is where you get into the real nitty gritty. People like to say, well, I just think it's up to man to respond.

I think God just simply makes salvation available to everybody and it's up to you to respond one way or the other. That's the most popular viewpoint in America right now.

It is not. It is not representative of where Christianity has been since the Reformation.

Okay. A lot of Christians, they think that's true, but they would be surprised to find out that Luther and Calvin and Zwingli and Edwards and Spurgeon and Warfield and all the others would say, what are you talking about?

You've forgotten God in this whole, uh, kind of a vital part of the very, very vital part.

I say this based on Romans chapter three, verses 10 to 11, a very, very important passage that few of those who put salvation in the hands of man can deal with.

It says in Romans chapter three, verses 10 to 11, as it is written, there is no one righteous, not even one.

There is none who understands, no one who seeks God. There is none who seeks after God.

I think it's NAS or, and close to James version. Now, that's the important point. There is none who seeks after God.

Now, I hold, I stand by that. If there are none who seeks after God, then obviously salvation must be

God's work. Because as you know, in R .C. Sproul's book, Chosen by God, he goes through four listings of the four possibilities that are present, uh, relevant to the idea of the offering of salvation to man.

Four possibilities. And it goes like this. Number one is God could decide to,

God could decide to provide no opportunity for anyone to be saved. I mean, he's sovereign. He could do that.

I mean, he'd be perfectly fine to do that because we're the ones who walked away from him. He could decide not to save anybody. And we need to remember that was a possibility at one time.

Yes. You know, anything beyond that is pure mercy and grace. Number two, God could provide an opportunity for all to be saved.

And this, of course, is the most popular viewpoint of people today. Third, God could intervene directly and ensure the salvation of all people.

This is known as universalism. There are people who believe that God's going to save everybody. But of course, it's not extremely biblical because you talk about things like hell and punishment and things like that.

And the fourth is God could intervene directly and ensure the salvation of some people. And that's what I'm saying.

Now, most of our audience, and I'm sure that there are some who would go both directions on number one and number three, but most of our audience will either take two or four.

Probably most will take two. So the question has to be asked, which is either biblical and which is more loving?

One says God offers it to everybody. But the problem is if that's all

God does, he offers it to everybody and says, here it is, it's up to you, how many are going to accept it?

Right. There's none that's going to choose a massive goose egg. Why? Because the natural mind is at enmity with God, cannot please

God. Man is unreconcilable to God outside of God's sovereign work. He's dead in his sin.

A dead man cannot respond to a spiritual offer. And Romans chapter three, verse eleven says, there is none who seeks after God.

How many times we hear, but what about all the people that are out there seeking after God? I mean, my normal response to that is

I think they're seeking after the benefits of God without God, because I don't think that an unregenerate man truly seeks after a holy, righteous

God, because man knows in his innermost being that he is a sinner. And the last thing on earth that a sinful man is going to going to seek after is a holy

God, like Isaiah saw in his temple vision in the sixth chapter of Isaiah. And so obviously

I reject that idea. So this is important. It is important that man is unable to choose without God first working in him, because most of the people who reject the sovereignty of God in salvation reject on the basis of well, that means man has no freedom.

You're right. Man doesn't have any freedom when he's dead in sin and is in slavery to sin. When we talk about the idea of free will,

OK, we need to define what we're talking about there. No one believes that man is completely free to make his own choices of anything he wants.

Obviously there are restrictions. Adam had a free will as to good and evil. When he fell, he lost that because he fell into the power of sin.

Jesus Christ had a free will because he was the second Adam and he was not under the sin nature.

Christians have a free will in that we are now again spiritually alive, but the unregenerate person does not.

Show me biblically where it says that. Now, then the question comes up, well, that means God's forcing people to do something they don't want to do.

That's not true. That's not true. Now, I can't go through everything Jonathan Edwards said in the freedom of the will or what

Luther said in the bondage of the will. And these are great Christian classics that we should all at least be somewhat familiar with.

But the point is this. The unregenerate man does not want heaven. That's right. He only chooses what is within his realm, his desires, and his desires in his sin are not to come under the conviction and the power of an omnipotent and holy

God. Exactly. That's the point. The will of man, our decisions are determined by our choices, our desires, our decisions are determined by our desires.

Whatever we desire more strongly at one time is what we are going to choose. Now, a man who is in sin is going to choose what his desires drive him to choose, and that is the darkness.

It is never the light. Men free from the light because it exposes their sin. Now, when

God in his sovereignty moves in regeneration and creates spiritual life in individual, then the desires of the spiritualized individual, the regenerated individual, are different than the desires of the sinful man.

And hence, the choices, the will of that individual is different than the will of a dead person, spiritually speaking.

And this is how this is how the Bible presents this idea of the sovereignty of God. You see, people like to think the idea of predestination election is unloving and nasty and horrible and ungracious.

But the point is, if God did not elect, if God did not work in predestination, if God did not choose and God did not sovereignly move in people's lives, there would be no salvation because we would not choose it.

So the most loving thing in the world is the fact that in God's grace, he reaches down and he saves.

Now you say, why doesn't he save all? I don't know why he doesn't save all. And he has a purpose.

Right. And the thing is, the Bible doesn't say why he doesn't save all. And it's none of our business. That's the thing.

And people go, well, that's not fair. But again, again, Sproul points out that we all receive one of two things.

We either receive justice, man in his sin receives justice, is due reward, or we receive mercy.

Nobody receives injustice, unfairness. OK, if we wanted everything to be just, then we would all receive the just desserts of our sin.

But nobody wants it to be just. Oh, no. No, we want mercy. But where do we get off then demanding of God that he show mercy to everyone?

I mean, he does show a level of mercy to all. I mean, as the Bible says, the wages of sin is death.

And the first time that every one of us sinned, we didn't die. Right. So obviously God is withholding that immediate physical death.

He's showing mercy to us. In the book of Luke, Jesus even said God shows mercy to the unrighteous and the ungrateful.

All mankind receives some level of mercy. So even then, that mercy does not deserve anything else.

But in the end, in the final analysis, a person either receives justice or receives mercy.

And we cannot complain because of how many or how few God decides to show his mercy to.

That would be like the governor pardoning someone and we getting all mad at him because he didn't pardon everybody on death row.

That's ridiculous. I mean, he didn't have to pardon anybody. They were found guilty. They were condemned. They were going to die.

It was their just deserts. And he and his mercy decides to pardon a certain individual. And can you imagine riots breaking out because he doesn't pardon everybody on death row?

I mean, that's silly, but that's exactly what the objections to the sovereignty of God and salvation eventually amounts to.

You hit it right on the head when you said he doesn't have to pardon or he doesn't have to forgive anyone. He could just let them go on and get what they deserve.

That's what we don't want to give what we deserve. The end, you know, the end of that is to hell.

And we think, oh, that's awful. That's kind of rough. That's a little too much. The other side of just yet.

What is grace? Grace is a free gift of God. And if we start demanding it, it goes out the window.

That's no longer grace. It's based on works. I stopped. I had just started a couple of verses on predestination election, jumped into all those objections.

Let's look at a number of other passages because we keep we keep speaking of the sovereignty of God and election as a as a foregone conclusion.

But we need to look at some of these more passages so you can see it. For example, in the 11th chapter of Matthew, verse 27, Jesus says.

Now, this is Jesus speaking. This is not Paul. You know, people like to jump, you know, throw Paul out the window. What about Jesus?

Jesus said in Matthew 11, 27, all things have been committed to be by my father. No one knows the son except the father and no one knows the father except the son and those to whom the son chooses to reveal him.

Now, the base of this passage, I think I'm very, very safe in saying that no man can have a knowledge of God outside of the will of Jesus Christ to reveal him.

We cannot demand a knowledge of God. We cannot say, I know God, but I don't know Jesus Christ.

That is a biblical impossibility. Jesus Christ wills to reveal the father.

And it's only to those whom he wills to reveal the father that the father is revealed. Now, this teaching of of election and the sovereignty of God and salvation is not foreign to Jesus in any way, shape or form.

In the sixth chapter of John, we have some excellent references to this because Jesus very clearly presents to us exactly what we're talking about in the sixth chapter of John.

John 6, 44, Jesus says, no one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up at the last day.

Now, it's interesting because the Greek language is no one is able. No one has the ability to come to him.

Why? Because the whole Bible says man is dead in sin. You call a dead man. What's he going to do?

Is he going to get up and walk over to you? Really? Most likely not. Every time that I had to demonstrate to cadavers,

I had to go into the room where they were and cart him out. I couldn't go, yo, come over here. You know, Willie and Clara, come on over here and lay down here on the thing and we'll demonstrate to you.

Hold yourself together there so you don't fall apart. They wouldn't get up and do it. I had to go get them. Why? Because they were not able to.

They were dead. Jesus says no one is able. No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him.

Now, that that word to draw is used normally of, for example, casting a net into the water and then drawing the net in, dragging and dragging it in.

Now, them fishies don't want to come out of the water because they're going to be turned into filet of fish. They don't want that. OK, but the net goes out.

They are they are taken and they are drawn in by the father. And so this is what Jesus says in John six, forty four.

Then in John six, sixty five, he says he went on to say, this is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the father has enabled him, has made him able.

We must be enabled by God. So the question then comes up and there are some other passages to look at.

In fact, that's where we're going now. Many people who I've talked to about this have said, well, I just believe that God calls everybody.

God enables everybody and then he leaves it up to you. Now, the enabling, I think very clearly in Scripture is spiritual life.

So what they're saying is that God regenerates all people and then leaves it up to them and obviously regenerate individual, according to the

Bible, will accept Christ. So that doesn't make any sense. But we're going to go to the eighth chapter of Romans. We're coming up on a break here.

We're going to go ahead and take the break and then we're going to be looking at Romans chapter eight, beginning of verse twenty eight.

And we're going to ask the question, is everyone called in the same way as being spoken of here in the chapter of Romans?

And welcome back on this Saturday afternoon, we're discussing the subjects of predestination and election dividing line this afternoon.

And we just went over to the eighth chapter of Romans. Some have called it the very pinnacle of Christian revelation of the

Book of Romans is the height and the eighth chapter would be the pinnacle of the height. And there definitely are things in the eighth chapter of Romans that are a joy to any

Christian who studies them. So I'm looking forward to a little plug here, teaching that Christian training class coming up, starting in July at North Phoenix for six months on the

Book of Romans. I'm looking forward to that because it is a fantastic book. The gospel according to Paul is what

I like to call it. But in Romans eight, twenty eight and following, we read and we know that in all things,

God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

I don't believe that a natural man will love God. I think the Bible very clearly says those who love

God are those who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew and we'll have to talk about foreknowledge in a second.

He also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and those he predestined.

He also called and those he called. He also justified and those he justified.

He also glorified. What then shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us?

He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all. How will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things who will bring any charge against those whom

God has chosen, that is, the elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns?

Christ Jesus, who died, more than that, who was raised to life, is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? And he goes on through them and talks about the eternality of salvation, the fact that God's love can never be separated from us.

But the point is, we ask the question, as many people like to say, well, I believe

God just calls everybody the same and it leaves it up to them. Well, aside from the fact that that means that, you know, no one would ever accept him unless God somehow regenerates all people, gives them a spiritual mind and then leaves it up to them.

But then again, if he did that, they'd all choose him. The point is this. Most of the people that I talk to who say, well,

I believe he's called all people do believe in punishment, believe in the fact that not all people are saved, but that they're going to be those who are going to be punished.

They believe in a hell and things like that. So on the basis of Romans chapter eight, verse 30, it says those he predestined, he also called.

Now, here's what they'd say. Well, we believe all are called. That would mean all are predestined. Those who he called, he also justified.

If they mean that all are called in the same way, then all are justified. And you've got a chain here.

Those we predestined, we also called. Now, we don't believe all are predestined. We don't believe that all are called in the sense we use in Romans chapter eight.

It's used differently other places. We do not believe that all are justified because some are not right with God and we don't believe that all will be glorified because Jesus said there could be some who go into eternal punishment and some are going to eternal life.

So Jesus himself said that. So chapter Romans presents this to us, the idea of predestination.

However, it bases it upon the foreknowledge of God. For those God foreknew, he also predestined.

And this, of course, is the main way around the idea that God predestines unto salvation.

And that is this, that God foreknew us. And this is normally taken to mean that God looked into the future.

He saw that we would accept him. And on that basis, chose us. Only problem with that,

Jim, is it doesn't say that God chose us on what our decisions would be. Each of the five times that it's used in the

New Testament, it always speaks of whom God foreknew, speaking of a personal relationship, not what he knew about us.

He doesn't, he knows the future. He knows that who will choose and who will not. But that's not how it's used each of the five times.

If you look at them closely, it is always whom or who God foreknew, these he called.

It is never a relationship of the end result of the works that they will do of believing him or something along that line.

Exactly. There's always the personal relationship of the person themselves. Exactly. The the word for for knowledge is always used of a personal knowledge, not an idea of looking in the future and looking at actions.

Now, it's interesting that I have here in my hand some sermons by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, the great

Baptist preacher of the last century. And in one of his sermons on this subject, and of course, he believed in predestination election.

He was what would be called a five point Calvinist, which is, you know, today it's just a five point

Calvinist. But that's, you know, that's where, you know, where the where C .H. Spurgeon was coming from. And it has been the last century where people have gotten away from that.

But in a in a choice in a sermon, he did an election. And this is extremely small print.

It's great to try to read this. He says, you cannot find a motive for a fact in itself.

There must be some motive lying higher than anything which can be found in the mere act of God. If God chose a man to make that man wholly righteous and good, he cannot have chosen him because he was to be good and righteous.

It were it were absurd to reason thus. It were drawing a cause for an effect and making an effect a cause.

If I were to plead that the rosebud were the author of the root, well, I might indeed be laughed at. But were

I to urge that any goodness in man is the ground of God's choice, when I called a recollection that that goodness is the effect of God's choice,

I should be foolish indeed. That which is the effect cannot be the cause. But what original good is there in any man?

If God chose us for anything good in ourselves, we must all be left unchosen. Have we not all an evil heart of unbelief?

Have we not all departed from his ways? Are we not all by nature corrupt enemies to God by wicked works?

If he chooses us, it cannot be because of any original goodness in us. But, saith one, perhaps it may be because of goodness foreseen.

God has chosen his people because he foresees that they will believe and be saved. A singular idea indeed.

Here are a certain number of poor persons, and a prince comes into the place. To some ninety of the hundred, he distributes gold.

Someone asks the question, why did the prince give this gold to those ninety? A madman in a corner, whose face ought never to be seen, replies, he gave it to them because he foresaw they would have it.

But how could he foresee that? That they would have it apart from the fact that he gave it to them. Now you say that God gives faith, repentance, and salvation because he foresaw that men would have it.

He did not foresee it apart from the fact that he intended to give it to them. He foresaw that he would give them grace.

But what was the reason that he gave it to them? Certainly not his foresight. That were absurd indeed, and none but a madman would reason thus.

So C .H. Spurgeon long ago definitely didn't take the idea that God's election is based upon looking into the future and based upon our response to him because that isn't election.

That places salvation right back into the hands of man himself because then God's choices depend again upon man.

Right. Arthur W. Pink has an excellent book called Gleanings of the Godhead and he says in there, false theology makes

God's foreknowledge of our believing the cause of his election to salvation. However, God's election is the cause and our believing in Christ is the effect.

That's exactly what Spurgeon just said. Believing in Jesus Christ is the result of God's election.

Not the other way around. That's exactly right. And so that's a very, very true statement by Arthur W.

Pink as well as by C .H. Spurgeon. And now, of course, people might say, well, who cares about Arthur W. Pink and C .H. Spurgeon? Okay, let's look at what

Paul says about it. In undoubtedly one of the most difficult chapters in the

Bible, especially for a person who doesn't believe in the sovereignty of God, I think they might as well just cut this one out.

The ninth chapter of the book of Romans is an amazing chapter indeed. I begin, for example, with the sixth verse.

It is not as though God's word had failed, for not all who are descendants from Israel are Israel, nor because they are his descendants are they all

Abraham's children. On the contrary, it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. In other words, it is not the natural children who are

God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. For this was how the promise was stated, at the appointed time

I will return and Sarah will have a son. Not only that, but Rebecca's children had one the same father, our father

Isaac. Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad in order that God's purpose in election might stand, not by works, but by him who calls, she was told the older will serve the younger, just as it is written,

Jacob I love, but Esau I hate. Now there is Paul's answer to the idea of election based on foreknowledge, the idea that if God looks in the future and sees it, we will choose him.

Because the passage says before the twins did anything good or bad. And that's the whole point of what he's saying. In order that God's purpose in election might stand, this choice was made that Esau would serve

Jacob. This was God's choice. It was his choice in election. And it did not depend upon what

Jacob or Esau did. The choice was made before they ever existed. So he goes on to say in the 14th verse, what then shall we say?

Is God unjust? And many people would say yes. The Bible's answer is not at all. For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom

I have mercy. And I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. God's mercy and compassion cannot be things that are demanded by men.

God's mercy and compassion are part and parcel of his grace. Grace is undeserved. If God gives mercy and God gives compassion, then it must be out of his own sovereign desire to do so.

Nothing can force him to give mercy and compassion. Okay. Verse 16. It does not therefore depend on man's desire or effort, or I might add in their choice, but on God's mercy.

Then he gives an illustration. Verse 17. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.

Therefore, God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy. And he hardens whom he wants to harden.

Strong words, but they're there. They must be dealt with. Verse 19 says, one of you will say to me, then why does

God still blame us? For who resists his will? But who are you, old man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, why did you make me like this?

Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay, some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath prepared for destruction?

What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory, even us, whom he also called?

Very clear teaching that is very difficult to deal with if one does not acknowledge the sovereignty of God and the lostness of man in sin.

Those are the two pillars that make this understandable and do not just turn God into a into a terrible despot, but instead show him to be the loving heavenly father that he is, that he would have this kind of mercy on anyone at all and that he would make this this great salvation available to us.

But I don't like being at the common lump. And of course, that's the natural reaction.

We just recoil when we read Paul saying, comparing us to a lump of clay in the potter's hand.

We don't like that. The modern man just goes, I don't want that. And unfortunately, unfortunately, a large measure of the

Christian church does not want that either. They do not like the idea that God is sovereign in this matter.

And yet it is presented there. Now, this does not take away from the fact, people listen to this and they say, well, man, if we don't have a choice, then it's not fair and we shouldn't be we shouldn't be held responsible.

Wait a minute. I didn't say we didn't have any choice. Why does why is the doctrine of election required?

Because man is dead in sin. What is sin? Did God did God force man to be a sinner?

Well, of course he didn't force him to be a sinner. That's that's completely ridiculous. And so the whole council of Scripture must be looked at.

And the passages we've looked at, of course, they're the passages that talk about predestination election, mainly because these are the passages that most people normally ignore.

That's right. You just don't hear a lot about these things. It's not the fact that, you know, we choose God. We cannot choose

God if God chooses us first. We're in a realm that we can't make any spiritual choices whatsoever.

Unless he chooses us first. Right. He must do the the initiation. He must do the regeneration, bring us to a position where we can make a choice.

And then from that time, we can say, yes, we chose Christ, but not first. Exactly right.

We chose. We do. Yes, you do need to choose Christ, right? You do need to repent. But we need to realize in every time that we proclaim that that the only ones who will choose him, the only ones who repent are those whom

God elected beforehand, who he imparts his grace to. Effectual grace that brings about spiritual life and that spiritual being can then respond to the gospel call and accept

Christ as Lord and Savior. But it is all based upon the sovereign act of God first. All right.

I've had some people in different Bible studies mentioned to me. Well, if I'm regenerated, that means

I don't need to choose Christ anymore. But wait a minute. He has made it very clear that you must accept

Christ as your Lord and Savior and that there is no forgiveness of sins without that step. But you cannot choose

Christ without God regenerating you first. And the regenerated individual is not going to reject the gospel.

I mean, now that the person has spiritual life, they're going to very clearly see the work of the

Holy Spirit in their life, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the whole nine yards. And so it again is the sovereign act of God in salvation.

God is sovereign. Man is dead in his sin. Those two facts alone would demand election.

Right. Even if we didn't have all these passages, Romans 8 and 9 and Ephesians 1 and 2

Thessalonians chapter 2 that clearly teach it, John 6, Matthew 11, all these things that clearly teach it, even if we didn't have them, we'd have to have the doctrine anyways.

Right. Because you cannot have salvation when you've got a sovereign God, but dead men.

Right. I mean, that automatically demands that God be sovereign in the subject of salvation.

So we come back to our choices. We've eliminated numbers one and three and we're left with,

God could choose to make it possible to save all or could intervene directly. We see that the second, the first one, number two, which of the four that we listed for God could provide an opportunity for all to be saved.

Would result in no salvation. Right. And which is more loving to provide a way that none could ever attain to or to make sure that a small group or whatever size group it is, the elect will, whoever they are.

Right. Of all nations and kindreds in time. Well, when I go out and witness this guy, how do I know if this guy's of the elect or not?

He doesn't wear signs. You know, God doesn't drop signs on people's necks. This is the elect to witness to him.

That's why we take the gospel to every creature and we invite people to accept Jesus Christ, their Lord and Savior, knowing all the time that the only ones who will, will be those who

God has, has called whom God has chosen from eternity. And this of course then reflects on our understanding of the, of the eternality of salvation.

The idea of eternal security is very clearly addressed by the fact that if God is sovereign salvation,

God saves you, you've been elect from all eternity in Christ Jesus. Jesus says those whom the father gives to me,

I will lose none of them. Then very clearly eternal security is, is the obvious doctrine of scripture in the light of all these passages.

So we see how this subject is an important subject. We do need to think about it. We do need to wrestle with it because there are a lot of questions.

We invite your participation during the next hour and talking about predestination election at two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five.

We'd like to have your comments. What do you think about it? As you've ever heard of these passages before, have you ever thought about it? How do you handle the idea of predestination election?

All right, Mike, go ahead. You were talking about how or the possibility of if Grand Canyon's been predestined to win or not.

Yes. Yeah. Um, and I, of course, they're, they're a Baptist college. Yeah, of course they must be. Um, we were talking before earlier about the person who has been regenerated.

Well, they've been regenerated. They don't need to accept Christ. I don't think the coach of Grand Canyon would appreciate a lot.

If the guys said, Hey, we've been predestined to win. We're not going to go show up to play today. Sure. You know, I just sit on the sidelines.

Yeah, they lost one to nothing. You know, who, why can you imagine the practice next week? Yes. Um, it just doesn't work that way.

You must go through with the process that God has called you to. Obviously there's, uh, one of the realms that one must discuss predestination election is, uh, election is the eternal thing.

It's outside the realm of time. And yet we live within time. And so, uh, there's, there's some of the difficulties that we have in understanding it are based upon the fact that, uh, we see an eternal decree being worked out within the realm of time.

And that's a long subject to get into and discuss. But, uh, that is a, that is an important aspect, uh, that, uh, that does come up.

One thing we, we, you know, we, we read it as we went through, but we really haven't commented on too much as the fact that we were chosen before the foundations of the world.

Exactly. In fact, uh, that is, is, is presented, for example, in second Timothy, uh, chapter one, uh, where he says, um, uh, in verse nine who has saved us and called us to a holy life, not because of anything we have done, but because of his own purpose and grace, this grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed to the appearing of our savior,

Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and brought life and immortality to the light of the gospel. And so, yes, uh, before the foundation of the earth is how he said it in Ephesians and here before the very beginning of time, uh, we have been chosen in him and what a glorious grace that is that God has given to us.

Two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five is the phone number. We go to our first caller in Mesa and this is

Brent. Hello Brent. Hello. How you doing? Pretty good. How about yourself? Oh, just fine. Well, I'm glad that you're talking about this doctrine because I've been studying it myself.

Um, recently I've been reading what Burkhoff says and what the song says and some other people.

And one of the things that, um, gets me about this doctrine is they really don't deal with some of the passages in the

Bible, such as first Timothy chapter two, where it says, um, that God, our savior desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

And then also in a second Peter three, nine, it says that, um,

God wishes all men to, uh, yes, a second Peter three, nine.

Right. Yeah. He's, um, not wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance.

Okay. Let's, let's look at that because that's one of the most common passages that is urged against this idea, which obviously

I don't believe the Bible is contradictory. So obviously there is a, looking at the context, these passages might help us.

Uh, first of all, for example, in second Peter three, nine, which is, uh, again, the normal passage is brought up as the first one in the people's mind.

Second Peter three, nine says the Lord is not slow in keeping his promises. Some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Now, one must ask the question since it says that God wants everyone to come to repentance, can't

God bring everybody to repentance? Everybody would say, well, of course he, he can bring everyone to repentance. And in fact, if God doesn't bring you repentance, you're not going to come to repentance.

The Bible clearly says that. So the question is when he says, uh, he is patient with you, who is the you, who is the anyone, uh, what, who is the everyone, but everyone to come to repentance?

Is this all of mankind? Because if God's will is for all of mankind to do that, then all of mankind is going to do it because God's will is sovereign.

He can do what he wants to do. So the question that I'd have to ask relevant to second Peter three, nine is who is

Peter talking to? Is Peter talking to the world at large? Or is Peter talking to individual people?

In other words, the elect. And I think if you'll look at second Peter chapter one, verse one, where Peter tells us who he's talking to, listen to what he says,

Simon, Peter, a servant apostle of Jesus Christ to those who through the righteousness of our God and savior,

Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours. Grace and peace be yours in abundance to the knowledge of God and of Jesus Christ, excuse me,

Jesus, our Lord. So who is it that he is speaking to? Who does he open his letter in talking to?

He's talking to the elect themselves, two Christians. And he's explains in second

Peter chapter three, that part of the reason for the delay of the piracy, the coming of Christ is that God wishes to work out his plan of salvation for all those who are elect.

And God is not willing that any of the elect should perish, but that all should come to the knowledge of repentance. And I believe that in the context of second

Peter, which is addressed to the elect, that that's what he's talking about. If not, we're left with a very absurd contradiction, because, you know, or universalism, which, which again, doesn't work at all unless, unless a person is a universalist.

And then you have to go and talk about the whole, the whole idea of hell and punishment and things like this.

Right. Well, I could see in the second Peter verse where the context, yeah, that, that makes good sense.

But in the one in first Timothy, um, even though that, that also was a letter directed to believers and well to the pastor,

Timothy, um, he's, he's talking and talking about the prayers and the petitions and things giving to be made on behalf of all men.

And that he's saying that he says people should lead a tranquil and quiet life.

And then it says that this is good and acceptable in the sight of God, our savior, who desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

And it just seems like, well, go on, go on that. And then also like other passages, like Acts 1730, for example, it says, wait, wait, wait, before you go over to access the

Spanish first Timothy, it's, it's easy to go from one passage to another very quickly. But in first Timothy chapter two, notice the very next verse says for there is one

God and one meteor between God and men, the man, Christ Jesus. Now, who does Jesus act as mediator for?

Does he act as mediator for all men? What does the book of Hebrews say?

He is mediator for those who are purchased by him. He is mediator for Christians. Okay. For the elect.

So he said, he then says that there is one media between God and men. Now here men is used in a specific situation.

If it's specific in verse five, why can't it be specific in verse four? See, I'm just,

I'm just, you know, I know where you're coming from and I'm, I'm, I'm not, you know, I understand exactly what you're saying. The point is, uh, we have to be consistent with what we're saying.

Christians, Christians will say that Jesus is the mediator for Christians.

Jesus is not pleading in behalf of a non -Christian who's, who is unsafe. So the word men in verse five, and I have my

Greek text around here someplace. I can grab it and check it. The same word. I imagine it is. In verse five is specific.

That is, it is limited to Christians themselves. So why can't it be also in verse four since that's already specific in the context that he's already talking about?

You see what I'm saying? Now you, you were mentioning. That makes sense. Um, except that just normally in, in just reading it, it just seems more general than the problem with the

English language. Well, let me, let me, let me point out something else to tell you. It's helped me a lot. We are, we are sort of eavesdropping on other people's correspondence.

Okay. That's what these letters are. Okay. When you think about it, we are, we are reading somebody else's letters.

So we need to realize that, for example, when Paul sat down to write to Timothy, he did not write out everything he had ever spoken to Timothy.

He already knew that he had spoken with Timothy, had preached to him. Timothy had heard him preach. Timothy would have an understanding of the basic doctrines.

So when we read a passage, we need to take the whole Bible as a whole and say, how do we understand this?

How would Timothy have understood Paul's use of the word men here? Would he have used it?

Would, would Timothy have said, Hey, I understand what he's talking about. He's talking about Christians or, or what? So sometimes we say the easiest reading of this would be, you know,

I just understand it this way, but we need to have the full understanding of what Paul has already preached and interpret these passages in the light of the very, very clear passages that he's already, that he's already brought forth.

And so when he says in Ephesians chapter one, where his subject is this, see this, this passage right here, it's the subject in first Timothy chapter two is not salvation predominantly.

It's talking about prayers and how a Christian should live. So Ephesians chapter one, it's subject is salvation.

So we need to look at what Ephesians chapter one says, and that should be determinative for how we understand second

Timothy, first Timothy chapter two. If we're trying to understand what first Timothy chapter two says relevant to salvation, you know,

Ephesians chapter one says that God works all things according to the counsel of his will. And if we're going to take these passages, like over in second

Peter here in first Timothy and say, his will is to save everybody, that means he works with all things according to the counsel of his will, everybody's going to be saved.

That most people would not agree with. I certainly don't. I think that makes the Bible even, even more contradictory at that point.

And so, uh, uh, I understand what you're saying. The natural reading would be, but what I disagree with you at is the idea that that is the natural reading for Timothy, the original recipient of the letter,

I don't think would have said that that's the natural reading. I think he would have understood it differently because of the context in which it was spoken.

So now you've then said something about it over in Acts chapter 17, Paul's sermon on Mars Hill. Right. And, uh, 17 verse 30, where he says that, um, says all men to come to repentance.

Well, and Noah says in the past, God overlooks such idiots, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.

Right. Okay. Now this, this came up just a couple of weeks ago and we talked about this, this thing.

When we see, uh, John the Baptist, he goes out and he indiscriminately tells all to repent and we do too.

We proclaim the message to all people, repent. Now it would be silly for me to say to someone, be spiritually reborn by God in a sovereign act and then repent because he cannot reborn himself.

That's God's work. The first work that a man must do is repentance. That's not even, I hate to use the term work at that point.

You obviously understand what I'm saying. The first action of the regenerated mind is that of repentance.

Okay. Now the only ones who will repent are those who are elected, those who

God gives the gift of repentance to. And we could look at, uh, oh, I believe it's second Timothy chapter two verses 23 and 24.

Talk about God giving the gift of repentance. Romans chapter two verse four talks about God leading people to repentance.

Repentance is a gift of God, but we must look at who is being told to repent. We are told to tell everybody to repent.

And then only those who have been elect will, but everyone is given that, that command.

Everyone is given that command. And, uh, so I don't think that Paul's Paul speaking in Acts chapter 17, uh, overrides what he himself was saying about the subject of election in many other places.

Yes, we command all men everywhere to repent. We know that natural man will not repent.

He simply stubbornly will refuse to repent. But when God regenerates, then that, uh, that individual will repent.

Okay. Okay. Um, can I suggest a book to you since you've, you're studying some good stuff there, Burkoff and Augustus Strong and some others.

Um, may I suggest R .C. Sproul's Chosen by God? Yes. I just looked at that today and I was wondering if it was a decent book.

Oh, very, very, that's mandatory. Very, very, very good. Uh, C .H. Spurgeon, uh, the great

Baptist preacher, uh, has a great deal. I mean, what you're going to discover is that everybody before this century, uh, everybody before this century is going to be coming from this position.

Right. I mean, Luther, Calvin's, wingly butcher, Jonathan Edwards, uh, his, his material on the freedom of the will is just, uh, also mandatory reading.

John Gerstner, B .B. Warfield, uh, all of, uh, all of them are gonna be coming from this direction. Okay. Okay.

Um, so when I've been looking at these passages, you know, I'm kind of like almost persuaded to adopt the view except that I never heard people deal with the, um, these other passages that seem to suggest that was

God's will for everyone to be saved. Sure. I understand. That's where the wrestling comes in. I really appreciate you clearing those passages up for me.

Okay. Super. Okay. Well, thanks for listening, Brent. Okay. Bye bye. Two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five, two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five.

The phone number is 15 minutes after four o 'clock. We got about five minutes before we take the next break and we've got a line open for you at two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five.

We invite you to join, uh, with, uh, with us this afternoon with your questions and comments.

It's interesting that Jesus comes out and flatly states it, you know, none will, you know, those that are in my hand will not perish.

And yet there are so many verses that taken out of context can, can be placed higher than the black and white truth teachings of Christ.

This again, gets to the point where people might listen to this conversation. See, you can, you can interpret the Bible any way you want. Again, the, the illustration that I've used numerous times before about my car.

And I just think it really fits here. And that is if you want to know about the lights in my car, you get the owner's manual out and you look up lights.

Now you may hear something about lights. When you talk about the battery, you may hear something about the lights. When you talk about the tires, cause they're close to that.

Uh, maybe about maintenance when you clear, when you clean the car, something like that. But you're not going to get your main information about the lights by looking at other things that just mention it.

The same thing. I can't believe that people, you know, people see that. That's very logical. If you want to learn about the lights, you look up lights. Well, they don't do that with the

Bible. They go to passages that are talking about prayers for Kings or talking about the history of Israel.

And they draw from these analogies that they apply to salvation. Well, that means it might be just fine to do that, but you first got to get your knowledge of salvation.

The passages of scripture that directly deal with the topic of salvation. So look at the passages in Romans are to take preeminence

Jesus's discourses in the gospel of John about salvation. It could take preeminence over oblique references, uh, found scattered here, there, and everywhere through scripture.

And you need to deal with the scriptures on the basis of what the scriptures themselves say, not on what other people would like to say what they say.

And welcome back from the last 19 minutes on the dividing line. We have one line open for your questions and comments at two, four, five, zero, three, seven, five.

We go to Peoria with Greg. Hello, Greg. How are you? How you doing? Pretty good. I was listening to you and that other brother go at it.

And, uh, I think I agree pretty much with both of you. And I think the problem is that's hard to do.

You realize that I think the problem is is your definitions of salvation are different because now that brother can point to scriptures like, uh, if any man of you, if there'd be any month of you, no, my brethren, if any one of you doth err from the truth in such a one, convert him, but him know that he that converted the sinner from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death and hide a multitude of sins.

And you can point to scripture that's where Jesus said they're mine and no man can pluck them out of my hand.

Yeah. I know you're trying to say the James passage is about someone who fell away and then was reconverted.

Well, no, I think your concepts of, uh, of what salvation are, are just a little bit askew.

Now that brother thinks anybody that says Jesus Christ is Lord somehow is saved and is baptized.

And well, yeah. Baptism is necessary. And for his, from his viewpoint. Yeah. And I think from, from your point of view, or at least

Calvin, someone who had made that final commitment that, that after you finally faced that last thing in your life where you, you decide to burn everything, you go after Christ.

Well, yeah. Calvin would say that that salvation is a, is a complete and total commitment, but he would also say that it was completely and totally based upon the sovereign work of God.

Yeah. Um, the only contention I have with, uh, Master Calvin is the fact that he believed that sovereignty was

God's primary attribute. And I think, I'm not sure if it's his primary attribute as such, but it is definitely, uh, something that undergirds all other attributes as well as his holiness undergirds all attributes.

And, I think that the sovereignty of God cannot be compromised in any way, shape, or form.

And the sovereignty of God primarily was compromised by the birth of Jesus Christ and his life and ministry.

Yes, I'm well aware of that. No, but my point being that we have this, this eternal being

God himself who so compromised his sovereignty. No, no, that's not a compromise of sovereignty.

He was born in the most humble circumstances amongst the most humble people in the most humble place.

See, that's, that's the thing. That's where God's love always comes from. Put the breaks on there, my friend.

we need to talk about what you just said. Uh, uh, I'm looking for a specific passage here and it's going to take me a second.

It's in Acts chapter, um, I believe it's Acts chapter four, as I recall. Um, in Philippians chapter two, we're told that Jesus, who is our ultimate example of humility, uh, made himself of no repute.

He made himself nothing to become man and to die as the sacrifice for our sins.

Right now. Okay. Oh, exactly. Now, when you say it, that compromised his sovereignty, that's where I have to disagree with you.

When, when you say that compromised his sovereignty, because I believe that the entire, uh, plan of salvation, including

Jesus Christ coming to earth, uh, was planned by the sovereignty of God.

Okay. And that is actually the example of the sovereignty of God, uh, that this, this took place.

Because when, uh, when Peter talked to the Sanhedrin, I wish I could find this crazy thing. I'm looking all over the place for it.

Uh, he said that what happened there, God had purposefully foreordained that Jesus Christ's sacrifice and their part in the sacrifice of Christ, uh, was foreordained by God.

Now that would be the sovereignty of God being involved right then and there. Oh sure. I'm not, I'm not saying that God surrendered sovereignty.

And what I'm saying is that, uh, he, he put it aside himself or beside himself.

Well, the Lord Jesus particular attributes, he's done that. Uh, where's the love of God and the judgment of God or the judgment of God and the love of God.

God does these things one at a time. There's, there's some attributes of God that are mutually and exclusive.

He can't do both things at once. Well, uh, let me, let me give you that reference.

I was looking for it. And it's fine. I found acts four 28 where Jesus says to them, uh, they did, uh, this is in the prayer after the, uh, the persecution.

Speaking of Pontius Pilate, here's what they did, what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen. So the, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was, was, was decided beforehand by of course the council of God.

But what you just said about the, the, the mercy and justice of God cannot be at the same time.

I, I'm a little uncomfortable with that because I think that sometimes God's judgment is merciful.

Well, certainly. But what I had in mind was, do you think the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were thinking, my, what a, what a merciful

God we have here as they were watching the fire fall? Well, let me put it this way.

Uh, the fact that Sodom and Gomorrah existed at all, first of all, demonstrate that God had mercy because the first time they did something wrong, you could have had fire falling from heaven.

So there was mercy there. And remember what Jesus said to Tyre and Sidon, Chorazin and Bethsaida.

Uh, when he talked about those cities, he said it will be more tolerable for Sodom in the day of judgment than for the cities in which

Jesus worked his miracles. And so even in judgment, God is merciful and just in his judgment for these cities in which

Jesus did his miracles will receive a stricter punishment than Sodom in which there were no miracles worked at all.

And so there is where I'd say, I don't think you can completely compartmentalize the ideas of God's mercy and the ideas of God's justice.

Well, no, don't get me wrong. I agree with you. What you said, I really do. I think you're right there.

I just would say it differently because I think one after one attribute is filled up just the same way that God to his mercy, but the

Amorites, when you talk to Abraham, he said, no, your, your children will be in bondage.

And so the iniquity of the Amorites, exactly. Then comes judgment, right?

See his mercy went up to a certain point and then something else kicked in. That's, but I, but that's his sovereign, that's his sovereign choice.

I mean, I mean, you cannot exhaust God's mercy or his grace. He makes the choice which at which time he will, he will withdraw that.

That is his sovereign choice. So I do agree with you. I just, I, I would just phrase it differently.

Okay. But I would say this too, that I appreciate somebody getting on the air. I'm so sick of Armenianism.

Amen to that. I might see predestination a little bit and different or election just a little bit different, but I think it's so refreshing to hear somebody get down there and say, well,

God's going to do what God's going to do. And not worry about this gooky

Catherine Coleman type. In other words, what you're talking about is the the normal viewpoint today that God is running around heaven, trying to meet all the requests, excuse me, demands of sovereign men on earth.

And you don't like the idea of a God who is our servant. You want a God who is holy and the sovereign.

And I agree with you a thousand percent on that. Yeah. People don't realize that Lord means master. That's right.

That's right. Okay. Okay, Greg. Thanks a lot. Bye bye. Two four five zero three seven five.

I like that. Preach it. But that is so true, though. I don't mind it when

God's out there doing certain things, but boy, let him step up to his throne and have dominion over my life. Oh yeah.

My free will has got to go out the window and realize it doesn't. Two four five zero three seven five. We have 11 minutes left.

We did have a caller and the passages that are brought up are too wide and varied to attempt to deal with in the short period of time we have left.

But basically, for example, John 12 32, the two passages in Ezekiel were given.

They talk about the fact that God has no pleasure in the death of wicked ones.

And I'm certainly not saying that God does have pleasure in the death of wicked ones. I don't think that that thereby means that God must save all people because of the fact of sin.

But the other passages in the New Testament were like John 12 32, where it says, but I, when

I am lifted up from the earth will draw all men to myself. And then in John one 29 talks about the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.

And I, I can only assume since the person did not come on the air and actually explain what the, what the person was attempting to say that the question concerning these passages are, okay,

John 12 32 says that he will draw all men to myself. And of course it's lifting up here is not in praise or worship or anything like that, which we often use this passage.

You know, if GSB lifted up, he'll draw them into himself. It has nothing to do with this. John chapter 12 is talking about his crucifixion.

I mean, he talked about being lifted up and the only way to understand being lifted up is in the crucifixion, but it says, I will draw all men to myself.

Again, the question that has to be asked when the phrase all is utilized in scripture is, does it mean all?

Does it mean all? Uh, that's, it's, I mean, that's a very simple question.

When the Bible says he'll draw all men to himself, are we to mean that that means that all men will be drawn to Jesus Christ and thereby saved?

Not the Bible does not say it. That is the case. The same thing happens when

I asked the question about atonement. We believe as Christians that Jesus Christ died in our place.

Do you believe that? You see, we like to say, well, yeah, Jesus died for you, but you know, it's all up to you whether you accept it or not.

I've got a problem with that because you see, if we really believe in the substitutional atonement, if we really believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins in our place, then that means that if he died for all, then all are saved because he took all their place.

All their sins are forgiven. No grounds for condemnation of those people at all punishment or anything else.

So we have to ask the question, what do we mean when the term all is utilized?

When it says he takes the sins of the world, what is that talking about? Whose sins and see whether a person accepts the idea of limited atonement, specific atonement or not.

Most people agree that the only sins that in the eternal scheme of things were really taken on the cross of Calvary were those who accept

Jesus Christ. Now, if the only ones who are who accept Jesus Christ to the elect, then obviously then he bore the sins of the elect.

You know, either way you go at it, if you don't like saying limited atonement or specific atonement, that's fine. Think it through your direction.

You're going to get there anyways because those who say, he died for all, but it's only effective for those who accept him by faith.

Who are those who accept him by faith? The elect. So in the long run, who sins the bear on the cross of Calvary?

The elect. Okay. So you get, you get there the same way I did. You just took the long way around because well, then they say, well, it's only applied to those who have faith.

Well, that's fine too, but the only ones who have faith are the elect. You know, we keep going around in circles on semantics and things like that.

The point is that the idea that all are saved in that is countermanded by many other scriptures.

And it just simply doesn't make any sense at that point to present it in that way. The gospel call does go out to all mankind as part of the condemnation of those who have the gospel call and reject it.

The Bible says they're going to reject it, but God still gives it to him anyways. Oh my.

Okay. I'm just handed a note. It says double predestination, reprobation and foreknowledge.

We already talked about foreknowledge and the person just may not have caught that earlier in the hour.

We talked about foreknowledge and we talked about how foreknowledge is always in reference to persons, not their acts, and that God does not seem to look in the future.

See if we're going to do something and then respond to that. Reprobation and double predestination refer to concepts of the idea that God eternally chooses who is going to be saved and who is not going to be saved.

In other words, it is an active choice saying these people are not going to be saved. That's double predestination.

Reprobation would be the idea that those who are not saved are reprobate and God keeps them in that position.

At six minutes until the hour, it's next to impossible to attempt to even commence to begin talking about those things.

Again, I think one of the best things we can do right now is instead of attempting to address that, is to suggest some books for people to look at.

We've already mentioned earlier R .C. Sproul. I'd start off with his book, The Holiness of God.

It's an excellent book available now in paperback, almost not available in hardback anymore. And then the book that directly addresses these questions is a book by R .C.

Sproul called Chosen by God. I know Berean Christian Bookstore at 35th and Carrollback has it. I just saw it there today when

I was in or can order it from you. They're available at other Christian bookstores. Chosen by God by R .C.

Sproul is excellent. There's a little paperback that I got from Berean that they can order called

Election by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Six Sermons on the Subject of Election by the great

Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon. Of course, if you want to really dive into this stuff, there's like the

Reformed Doctrine of Predestination by Boatner. John Gerstner has works on predestination and election.

And then if you really just want to go back about to 1560 or so, you can pick up the

Institutes and the Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin and just read it from the horse's mouth. In actuality,

Luther said more about it than Calvin did. And that's interesting that Calvin's name ended up being connected with it.

But I think it's because Calvin dealt much more with the idea of the sovereignty of God and eventually it became connected with his name.

So there are some of the issues you can think about in yourself. If you'd like to contact us, you can do so by writing to Alpha and Omega Ministries.