Steve Gregg vs. James White Debate: Part 3

Our God of bulwark never failing. I don't like Calvinists because they've chosen to follow John Calvin instead of Jesus Christ. I have a problem with them. They're following men instead of the Word of God.

Our helper he amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing On top of my feet, standing on a stump and crying out, He died for all those who elected, were selected. For still our ancient foe does seek to work us woe.

His craft and power are great and armed with cruel hate.

Well, first of all, James, I'm very ignorant of the Reformers.

On earth is not his equal.

I think I probably know more about Calvinism than most of the people who call themselves Calvinists.

Did we in our own strength confide. Our striving would be losing.

But God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.

We're not the right man on our side. The man of God's own choosing.

Doomed before the womb?

You ask who. That may be Christ Jesus. It is he Lord saw both his name. Read my book From age to age the same. And he must win the battle.

And now from our underground bunker Hidden deep beneath Liberty University. Where no one would think to look. Safe from those moderate Calvinists Dave Hunt fans. And those who have read and re-read George Bryson's book We are Radio Free Geneva.

Broadcasting the truth about God's freedom to say To his own eternal glory.

Debate Introduction and the Plan for the Final Segments

And welcome to a Monday edition of Radio Free Geneva. We, of course, are continuing the debate begun last Thursday. We've done the first two parts, have three parts to go. Between myself and Steve Gregg.

Steve Gregg has a radio program that will be beginning here. In about 45 seconds. And that's why we have the longer intro. And also because it's lots of fun. And that allows me to stretch and film. And today it looks like we're going back to the 12-minute statements.

And so that will be taking up our time today. And we will be continuing tomorrow. And, Lord willing, on Wednesday. And then probably on Thursday. On the dividing line. We will be taking open phones. And questions, comments, so on and so forth at that time.

So today again on the dividing line. Radio Free Geneva. The continuation of the live debate. Between myself and Steve Gregg. On the subject of God's freedom in salvation. Good to be with you.

Thanks for joining us again. I'm going to turn this over to Paul With Youth with a Matter of Freedom Another book relevant. And Omega Ministry To do yet. Or at least haven't taken the opportunity prior to this.

And the others that I should interact more.

A short.

Try to do both of those things in this program. In my first segment I will try to give A view that I'm espousing. And in my second 12 minutes I would like to interact more with Dr. White. Just conversationally.

The Default Position, Human Freedom, and the Witness of the Early Church

For a non-Calvinist view. Well by definition Non-Calvinist is a negative. Basically By saying I'm not a Calvinist. What I'm saying is that A person's default position. If they read the Bible And are not taught Calvinism I believe that it will.

That the Calvinist view is convincing. Early church We know that the view. I don't even think Calvinists Need to know that this is true. The church fathers did believe That men had the choice Freely to choose to Serve God or not.

Which is a non-Calvinist position. And they did not believe that. Now because the church fathers said that Doesn't mean it's true 400 years for any Christians To come over to call this a default view.

In my opinion The Bible without any Instruction from outside They will get several impressions. They'll get the impression that God Creates a reason to expect. Old commands to man. This is his will and his commands.

And man's responsibility Implies that man has a responsibility For things that are not in your power to do. Since God is angry And disappointed by man's choices God must not have ordained them. Or else God will happen.

And then get angry when it does. Condemning man and gracious And forgiving man. Now those are the impressions I believe. People I think would get When they read the Bible. They see commands of God. They see judgments from God.

They see God holding men responsible. We see God get angry. You read enough of that. And this is not just a few. This is hundreds of texts. There's hundreds of commands.

In the Bible.

There's hundreds of times For God to denounce the sinners And so I'm not saying That that proves Arminianism. What I'm saying is That it gives a default In creating everything And that man is making Some choices of his own.

Default position. Now obviously many Calvinists Might argue that That is not the default position And that they read the Bible And just got a Calvinist worldview And the doctrines of grace According to Reformed theology Just the first time They read through the Bible.

And I won't call them liars.

But I haven't known Very many people Who got that impression Reading the Bible. The Calvinists I have met Have become Calvinists As a result of being trained To be Calvinists. And so the question then is If there is a default position That people generally get And which the whole church Got for 400 years Before anyone else Came up with an alternative.

It seems to me that Calvinism is the novel view That has to prove itself. For Calvinism Has got to be stronger Of individual tech And does exegete.

Of what I would call.

Upon how God Exercises his freedom. And what is he free to do. The Calvinist Believes he's also free To not do that. If he doesn't want to Make any decision He wants to make A choice in it. That was uncontrolled by him.

That's one of his prerogatives. Because as the sovereign God The fact that God Is compared with other Sovereign entities.

That we know. For example.

God is a king.

This is a quote from James White In his book The Potter's Freedom On page 41.

He says.

I believe one of the reasons Modern men struggle With some of the plain Biblical truths Of all of us. Any longer have a.

Commandment.

When the scriptures.

Were written.

And often the power of God To properly rule.

Over his creation.

Is likened To the power of a king To rule over his realm. We see little reason Why we should Bow to God. I agree. One of the biggest problems About what it means To have a king Is they do see Little reason why They should bow to God.

We're not debating Whether there's a God. And what Dr. White points out Is that in the Bible. This is Dr. White's words The power of God To properly rule.

Over creation.

Is likened To the power of a king To rule over his realm And that's exactly What the non-Calvinist Agrees with That the power Of an earthly king Is the image The Bible uses To describe God's.

Power to.

Micromanage.

Every thought.

Person in their realm They make laws Their plans.

Are carried out.

When there's something Important enough For them to carry out But they do allow Their subjects to Marry who they want to marry. Get up in the morning When they want to get up.

In the morning.

Eat what they want to eat.

In other words.

A king does not have To control every decision Of his subjects In order to be sovereign. Kings don't do that generally. And the Bible Does not indicate To my mind That God does that either. He is a king however And he is sovereign And he can do Whatever he wants.

And when he has a purpose He fulfills that purpose. Dr. White spent His first presentation Last Thursday Quoting a lot of verses About God Fulfilling his purposes And no one can stop him. There's not a Christian Who disagrees with that.

There's not a non-Calvinist Who disagrees with that. What we're discussing Is not whether God Has the freedom Or the power To do what he wants. What we're asking Is what does the Bible.

Tell us.

About how God Exercises his freedom And his sovereignty And that's a different question And that is not Really told though That in addition to God Being like a king This is what Jesus taught us Particularly a father Who can be disappointed By his children.

The fatherhood of God Is like the father And he left sovereign Over his household. Sovereignty does not suggest. In Deuteronomy 30 verse 19. I call heaven to earth To witness against you today That I have said So choose life In order that you may have life And that you may be your descendants.

Of course everyone knows Joshua 24 15. If it's disagreeable In your sight To serve the Lord Choose for yourselves this day Whom you will serve To serve beyond the river Or the gods of the Amorites In whose land you are living.

But as for me.

In my house.

We will serve the Lord. Joshua tells people To choose who they will serve In Isaiah 66 Verses 3 and 4 In their abomination. So I will choose Their punishments And will bring them On them what they dread Because I called And no one answered I spoke And they did not listen And they did evil In my sight And chose that In which I did not delight.

Now in this passage We see that he chooses What will happen to them. And there's this distinction Made he says As they have I will choose The results I will choose.

The outcome.

I will choose their delusions. In other words The Pharisees and the lawyers Rejected the purpose Of God for themselves God does.

You know.

He has left some choices He does not ordain Everything that happens. He does ordain What he wants to ordain. And he controls everything That he wants to control. The question we have here Is does the Bible Anywhere say Including every human choice Upon the person who claims That.

It's not at all obvious. When you read the scripture God seems to be disappointed With man's choices. And by the way I have a much longer list.

Of here.

But I see my time.

Is up.

So I'm going to yield.

To the floor.

Thank you very much. I would begin Just briefly responding By saying I do not Of course Accept the assertion That somehow A synergistic position Is a default position. For whatever reasons We're listed I would say That synergism Is more default Because of the fact That people Generally will assert The free will of man Over the free will of God.

And that certainly is A common element Of human religion If we want to call that The default position. But I would say A default position Is that which is defined By the word of God. I would dispute The assertion That Augustine Was the first person In church history To believe in these things.

Clement's epistle To the Corinthians Has a number of references To the elect Diognetius likewise. So that was not The issue of the early church. Certainly people like Justin Martyr Who were far more Influenced by Greek philosophy Than they were By the Pauline Corpus Would definitely emphasize The free will of man.

But that's a Greek Philosophical position Not a biblical one. Last year When I listened To Steve Gregg's Thirteen and a half hours Of MP3s And did a number Of programs Responding to them Because we kept Having people write to us And say this is the person You need to be Responding to.

I raised a number Of issues And there were Two particular issues That I want to try To get to today. Or at least start Trying to get to today. That should I think Lead to some of the interaction. And that is two issues Where I made a very Clear assertion That Mr. Gregg Was guilty of engaging In eisegesis Reading into the text And meaning that Is not substantiated By the form Of the text itself.

And those two Were on Romans Chapter 9 And Acts Chapter 13 Verse 48. There is a Almost fifty minutes Presentation I did On Romans 9 On the main page Of our website. Anybody can go And listen to Steve's MP3s And listen to the response If they want an even Fuller discussion.

But I don't think Any quote unquote Debate would be A real debate If we did not Get to these Particular texts And bring them Into the discussion. I also want to get To 1 Timothy 2 4 2 Peter 3 9 and Matthew 23 37 As the time Will allow Over the course Of today and tomorrow.

But first and foremost I want to go to Romans Chapter 9 And maybe we can Take a look at Some of the specifics Of that text And hopefully that Will be useful to us today. I have to do so Very quickly Not nearly as in depth As I would like.

But that's the nature Of debates. I begin by asserting This is the continuation Of the preceding material From Romans Chapter 8. The golden chain of redemption. The fact that no one Can bring a charge Against God's elect.

Having made this great Announcement of the victory In Jesus Christ Paul then turns To the primary Apologetic issue That he had to deal with. And that was People were saying Paul if what you're saying.

Is true.

If Jesus is the Jewish Messiah Then why aren't the Jewish people as a whole Embracing him. Why in fact Are your primary enemies The Jews themselves. And so he Enumerates beginning In Chapter 9 His desire for the Salvation of his Fellow Jews.

He enumerates the Great blessings That were theirs Even including the Deity of Christ In Romans 9 5. And then I believe We have the section Of Romans 9 That all those Who tried to turn This into just Merely a discussion Of national honor And blessing And so on And so forth Tried to turn this Into a discussion Of nations.

They cannot explain This text And they cannot allow It to continue on Through the context. And that is these words. But it is not as though The word of God Has failed. Verse 6 of Chapter 9. For they are not All Israel Who are descended From Israel.

Now that statement Cannot be made About nations. You cannot talk About nations Not being Israel Who are descended From Israel. We're not talking About different Israels Or things like this. We are talking About individuals.

We are talking About people. We are explaining Why it is That there are Descendants of Israel Who do not Embrace the faith Of Abraham Even to that day. And now we are not Embracing Jesus Christ As their Lord And Savior.

He continues on. Nor are they all children Because they are Abraham's descendants. But through Isaac Your descendants Will be named. So what Paul is doing. Here is he is explaining That the fact That the Jewish people Continue to reject As a whole.

Certainly he was One of the exceptions To this But continue to reject As a whole. The Messiahship of Jesus Is not inconsistent With Jewish history itself. He is going to draw Numerous examples From the history That the Jewish people Would have to agree to Of people Jewish and non-Jewish Who were hardened Or received mercy And it was all due To the freedom of God.

And I would submit To anyone. If you are going to say Well you know Some of these quotes Are from the minor prophets. They are about nations. They are not about individuals. Tell me where That change takes place.

If you are going to say Well this is all about nations. By the time you get Verse 20 or so You are clearly talking About individuals. Where did the change take place? Why can't we walk Through this entire text And see it as a whole?

Let's try to walk through it And emphasize what it says That is It is not the children Of the flesh Or the children of God. But the children of the promise Are regarded as descendants. What is that promise by the way?

Does that promise Not include the new covenant And salvation itself? This is not merely National blessing For this is the word of promise. This time will come And Sarah shall have a son. And not only this But there was Rebecca also When she conceived twins By one man Our father Isaac.

For though the twins Were not yet born And had not done Anything good or bad. Please notice They Individuals Had not done anything Good or bad. Yes they both become Fathers of nations. But this is not talking about They are becoming Fathers of nations.

It says for though They had not done Anything good or bad. So that God's purpose According to His choice Would stand Not because of works Not works of nations But works of individuals. But because of him Who calls Notice His choice His calling Versus Doing good or bad.

And because of works Though it's a contrast It was said to her. The older will serve the younger Just as it is written. Jacob I love But Esau I hated. Now here's A very very quick point To throw out. If your interpretation Of this text Turns Paul's argument On its head Then you need To take your argument up With the apostle Not with me.

If you're arguing The way that the people Opposing the apostle Paul argued That is indication That you've got The wrong position. If you're at least Seeking to follow After the apostolic example What then Shall we say.

There is no injustice With God. Is there Notice again The apostle Brings up objections To his own position. May it never be. For he says To Moses. And here I point out once again The Greek language Has verbs We don't have in English.

I will mercy Whom I mercy. And I will compassion Whom I compassion. These are active verbs. These are things That God does. And he revealed this In Exodus 33 To Moses. And the apostolic Interpretation Of this text That is given By the apostle Paul.

Verse 16 says. So then It does not depend On the man Not the nation. The man Who wills Men have wills Or the man.

Who runs.

That is active Does things Again. These are Easily understood words But on God Who mercies So I don't know How much clearer It can be. So it does not Depend on The willing of man Or the actions Of man But on the mercy Of God That is his Interpretation Of the words Of God To Moses In verse 15.

Then in verse 17 For the scripture Says to Pharaoh For this very purpose I raised you up That was written To an individual To demonstrate My power in you And that my name Might be proclaimed Throughout the whole Earth.

God had a purpose At a particular Point in time And he wanted To accomplish That purpose.

At a particular.

Point in time. He did not wait Until someone Evil enough Or someone Rebellious enough Comes along. He did not Want to do it In one century He had to do it Three centuries later Because he kept Waiting until Somebody would Fit into his plan.

No he raised Pharaoh up For a particular Purpose That my name Might be proclaimed Throughout the whole.

Earth.

That was God's Purpose And that's what He accomplished. The apostolic Interpretation of Those words in Verse 18 of Chapter 9 is. So then He mercies Whom he desires And he hardens Whom he desires. And they are Placed in direct Parallel to one Another They are both Active verbs.

He mercies And he hardens And the determination Is whom he Desires. That are Those are the Words of.

Scripture.

Themselves Then please Notice in Verse 19 you will Say to me then Why does he Still find fault For who Resists his will. Now Mr. Gregg has a very Unusual reading of This but I think If we just look at The text of all The line of Argumentation here It is very easy To understand.

We've already Seen up in Verse 14 That the apostle Introduces an Objection. What was the Objection being Raised. What Would the natural Objection to Verse 18 be. Well it's the Very one that's Raised by most People who don't Like Calvinism.

It's the very ones Who raise this Objection. They say Well why is he Still find fault For who resists.

His will.

If the very word Will is in the Preceding that he Desires to do this Whom he desires He hardens Whom he desires He mercies How then can God judge. Because if it's God's will is Being accomplished He'd have no Basis upon which To judge.

Which of course Is the very Common Arminian Objection But it's the Objection that the Apostle raises To his own Position and I Would submit that If you find Yourself in the Position of the Objector to the Apostle you might Realize that that Means you're on The wrong end of This particular Discussion.

The Response from Paul Is on the contrary.

Who are you.

Oh man who Answers back to God in fact it's Oh man is the Very first in the Greek oh man.

Who are you.

Who answers Back to God. The Thing molded will Not say the Molder why did you Make me like this. Will it. And I Would love to be able To expand upon the Fact that is a very Full answer. It takes Us back to a Recognition of our Creatureliness the Fact that we are the Pot we are the Clay and God is the One who fashions us.

And we have no right To put him in the Dock so to speak And demand of him An answer. And the Answer then is you Are a man and you Cannot answer back to God who is the Creator. You cannot Say to him why did You make me like This.

And why. Verse 21. Does not the potter Have the right over The clay to make from The same lump one Vessel for honorable Use and another for Common use. The potter Has that right over the Clay. The clay cannot Say.

You must make me To be an honorable A beautiful china Vessel or something Like that. The clay has No right to do this. The God has the Right as the potter To use the clay as He wishes. Please. Notice then that the Apostolic Paul's own Interpretation of his Own interpretation of.

Interpretation of.

Words here though He's clearly drawing From Old Testament Parallels is what if God although willing To demonstrate his Wrath and to make His power known Endured with much Patience vessels of Wrath prepared for Destruction and he did So to make known the Riches of his glory Upon vessels of mercy Which he prepared Prepared beforehand For glory.

And there Some will say oh Well you know they Prepared themselves on. So what is the direct Parallel here. The direct Parallel is between Those vessels for Honorable use and Those vessels for Common use coming from The one lump and the Hand of the potter to Those who are being They experience God's Wrath he makes his Power known he brings Judgment upon them he Endures them with much Patience but they are Vessels of wrath and the Contrast to them is what Vessels of mercy which He prepared beforehand For glory.

And so here. What are these words. Mercy and wrath Judgment all of these Are salvation words. They're Not just. Well we're Talking about the God deals with one Nation one way and Another nation another Way.

He's talking about Individuals he's talking About salvation. This has Been God's freedom all Along. We'll continue with That in the next section.

Thank you Dr. White and Dr. White's website it's Easy to locate. Malachi 1 Is clearly talking about The nation of Jacob and The nation of Esau. These Men were long dead before And so forth had judged Edom.

That's not the Individual salvation of Two men. Here we're Simply talking about how God has historically Throughout the history of Israel divided Israel into.

A community of people.

Chosen for privilege and One not chosen for Privilege that privilege Included eternal life the Israel of God and some That were not have in Addition of the privilege Of personal eternal life Themselves which is of Course something that's a Privilege of his disciples.

There is not anything Really here to suggest That Jacob I love these I've hated is talking About God hating an Individual and the woman Decided to send him to Hell. I would challenge Dr. White since he doesn't Like eisegesis and would Like to read from the Text what's there to show Me where in the text it Says anything about Jacob Having any particular Eternal destiny this Passage I find nothing Stated about it.

I believe Paul's talking about what He says. He's talking about Malachi and he's talking About the same thing that They're talking about. Why Why would he quote them to Make his point if he if he Was not making the same Point so I don't agree with Dr. White's argument to See his argument doesn't Really touch my argument Very much because he or Dr. Sproul who have also Read try to end the same Because they keep Misrepresenting it the Truth is I do believe that Not making a flaw in logic.

You know if God if if Can't find fault no one Resist God's will that's a Bad premise. People resist God's will all the time and Therefore God can't find Fault says well who are You a man you're resisting God doesn't use that word.

He says you're replying Against God it seems like. If you're replying against God even people resist God All the time. Dr. White's Answer to that of course People resist God they just Don't. I'd like to see Established in scripture Before I could accept that I'd like to actually find A scripture that says that God has sovereign decrees Such as the cat.

I whole Time with Roman Catholic. I really wanted to interact With Dr. White about Something else. But boy the Time does go by fast and Dr. White has another 12 Minutes segment. I want to Say that he is going to Bring up Acts 13 48.

He's Told us that I will not Have an answer for it on This show because this is My last segment before we're.

Done with the show so I.

Will answer his.

Well thank you very much. I would like to immediately Go back to the text when it Is still hopefully fresh in People's hearing and I Guess one of my problems With saying well you just Don't understand what Arminians are saying.

There's all sorts of Different Arminian Perspectives and of course I have debated a number of Different Arminians on this Subject including in writing. And so many of them do Seek specifically to make This nothing but a Discussion of national Blessing in Romans chapter 9.

I would just simply say If it is the statement is Being made none of this Has to do with heaven or Hell and if the term hell.

Has to do with heaven or.

In any reference that has To do with salvation then There are almost no References to salvation. All of scripture notice What Paul says that he Has great sorrow and Unceasing grief in his Heart for I could wish That I myself were a Cursed separated from Christ for the sake of my Brethren my kinsmen.

According to the flesh What's he talking about. Here is he only talking About the continuation of A national line or is he Talking about the very Reason why he evangelizes The Jews and calls them To faith in Christ.

Of Course this is about Salvation. Of course this Is about God's freedom in The subject of salvation. It is what follows through All the way through the Entire text so to say That well this is you Know this is just simply Who's going to continue On the name or something Like that.

Obviously it Does not take into Consideration terminology Such as not doing anything Good or bad because of Him who calls not because Of works. What are these Words in Pauline theology. If they do not in fact Have to do with the very Issue of salvation itself.

And so I would just say.

And so when we get to The key text and he's Talking about Moses I Will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. Compassion he has Compassion. How does this Have to do with the Continuation of a national Line of blessing.

Why does Paul then say. It does not depend on The man who wills the Man who runs but on God who has mercy. Is this mercy only in Regards to the continuation Of the line of one Israel Versus another Israel.

And what does pharaoh Have to do with any of This. Why bring pharaoh In. At this point it Would make no sense If that was the if That was the thrust but The thrust is not that. The thrust of course Is explaining they are Not all descendants of Israel who call Themselves Israel.

This Issue of God's freedom Has been the case all Along. God has had the Freedom to go to the Gentiles which is going To be what's going to Continue on as we go Through Romans chapter Nine he's had that Freedom all along and Then we get the verse Twenty.

I really think This is a good example Of the the is a Jetticle characteristic Of this kind of freedom. Because you will say to Them why does he still Find fault for who Resists as well. Not I Believe that Steve just Said we'll see that's You know that's where He the objector goes.

Wrong people resist as. Well all the time this Comes right after verse Eighteen that says so. Then he mercies whom he Wishes he hardens whom He wishes. This is the Very essence of the Argumentation and these The words that come Beforehand and so the Question then becomes What is this all about.

What what is going on Here this is this is the The Greek term fellow Whom he wishes he Mercies whom he wishes He hardens you will say To me then why does he Still find fault for who Resists as well. And all Of a sudden we insert Into this text someplace.

Oh well oh man don't You get it people resist As well all the time is That what follows through Beginning of verse twenty. Do we do we go to these Other texts where people Resisted God's intention. For them we go to a Discussion of the of the Wills of God and secret Revealed and and the law Revealing the perfect Will of God and then the Decrees of God and we Don't go back to Genesis Fifteen Genesis forty five And and acts four and all The places we already Been to point out these Purposes and decrees of God.

Is that what Paul does. No he says well what is Molded say to its molder. Why have you made me like This. So the the Interpretation that says Well you know the objector Just got it wrong does not Even answer to what Paul's Response thereafter actually Is and so I I think again If you know we say if we Just read the text you know I some Calvinist didn't come Along and cram Calvinism Into my mind.

I remember Very clearly having a debate With a an atheist many many Years ago and here is an Atheist never been a Christian says it's so Obvious when you read the Bible it clearly says God's In charge of all things he's Sovereign over all things and Everything happens according To his will and it's very Obvious very clear here is an Atheist had no problem Recognizing the default Position is as if you just Read the Bible what it says Very clear and he found it Very odd.

In fact it was sad He found it very odd that I Would actually defend that he Had encountered so many Christians as I just can't Believe all these Christians. They try to read all this Free will stuff into the Bible and I and and why Don't I seem to believe the Bible more than they do and So he found it very strange That I then came from a Reform perspective and Defended those very things He's but didn't think Anybody these days would Defend.

So again what I what I Said was I think that it's Very clear that both sides Believe the other side has an Overriding agenda or Hermeneutic or tradition Whatever else it might be. Obviously from my perspective It is the Armenian who is Inserting into his theology a Concept of libertarian free Will that is simply unbiblical.

It is contradicted by Scripture. The fact that God Calls for us to be obedient That he uses means to Accomplish his will is not an Argument against those Biblical texts which we saw That teach that man is the Slave of sin.

As Jesus said he Who commits sin is the slave Of sin. The son must set you Free. You cannot just simply Choose to be free. The son Must set you free. And so it Is in that context then that I turn to acts 1348 because This is not a text that is Trying to didactically teach Anything about the sovereignty Of God and salvation.