Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Comments are turned off for this media
Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.
Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.
If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.
Here is James white.
And good afternoon, welcome to the dividing line on a little early program today. I'm sure we'll have lots and lots lots folks pop in about an hour from now. I have the delay line because I didn't read the blog where we announced earlier today That we were going to be an hour early for a proper reasons and that's another good reason why we aren't on any networks and all that stuff that other people do because then your life becomes utterly and completely wrapped around that time frame and Adam this not in the slightest bit interested in that at all.
Eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. We have for the past three programs have been doing a radio free Geneva and I did get a note by the way. And I hadn't even thought about this. Don't ask me why.
I've experienced the mega church Southern Baptist routine before and I remember very clearly when a Very large Southern Baptist Church here in Phoenix went through the change. It always takes place when one big mega pastor leaves and the person who comes in after him Just doesn't isn't the same thing as him doesn't go the same direction and I remember at that time The new pastor mentioning in a sermon very shortly after he arrived that they couldn't find about eighty seven percent of The people they had baptized over the past three years.
They just had no idea where in the world they were and you would think okay. The back door is almost as big as front door and we mentioned in the last program the idea of how many people you have to Baptize just to get one person sitting in the pews on a regular basis.
Just just one and of course Obviously in my experience sitting in the pew is not the same thing as actually growing. Participating becoming involved in the life of the church stuff like that. So if you tried to figure that part out goodness I don't have the foggiest idea how how many you'd have to quote-unquote baptize get saved.
To get to that point makes you truly wonder when you read first John chapter 5 exactly how all this fits together. But anyway You got a note that pointed out where some of those numbers might come from.
Pastor was talking about a certain church while the one of the radio free Geneva's we've done. One of the people who have recently preached nasty anti-calvinism sermons we reviewed his sermon and found it wanting of course and documented that and in that particular church this this pastor is telling me that he there were seven people from that church in his church and Those seven people who had been in that church represented 17 baptisms.
In other words, they had been baptized an average of what two point something times a piece. So you get them when they're really real young, you know when they're just knee-high to a grasshopper it's real easy and in fact I one of the things I started laughing about on the last program was I was scrolling down the founders blog and there was this picture of.
And I've heard these stories from a number of different sources, but there was this picture of a guy doing the baptism thing for kids and I've heard of churches they do this they will they will build sets and they will have special services where the young kids come in and they'll have they'll have themes and lights and and and all sorts of cartoon characters around a baptistry and They'll make it look like a lot of fun.
It's a theme park it's a water park and every kid wants to go to the water park, right and. And so they're going home saying to mommy and daddy. They're gonna do it again next week and I want to get I want to get baptized mommy and daddy and how many mommies and Daddies are gonna go.
Oh, we don't want you to get baptized little kid and and how many are even prepared to discuss what baptism means or anything along those lines at all and so they'll actually use this kind of of methodology and Every single one of them counts.
Okay, every single one of them counts and so. Then you know they get baptized at seven and Then they go through an emotional crisis at 14 and they get baptized again, well do they Count that you better believe they count that they're not going to go back and amend the the records from seven years earlier.
But you better believe they're gonna count that that's that's and that's another one to go and So of these seven people 17 baptisms represented in those seven people and So I was going. Wow, you start figuring out what that adds up to and a fairly significant portion of some of those big numbers really represent Nothing they they represent absolutely positively nothing.
Which of course is why? You have the kind of attendance and worship that you have and then if you actually make that more serious and start talking about attendance and Bible study and Participation life the church and things like that that the numbers just get downright infinitesimal.
But that's that's where we got to go. That's what we've got to do. And oh goodness. Amazing stuff, but if I share that with you, I've got some other stuff here. In case the phones don't go completely crazy, but we actually have a call right off the bat here so we'll go with that and then See what happens don't have any Any clips to play today?
No radio free Geneva or anything like that. I'm sure that there's plenty of stuff out there. Oh, by the way, it's on the blog. But two things two things just real quick for a go-to our call. Hey, I know straight gates down rich knows straight gates down.
We don't control state straight gate. We don't have any control over at all. We don't know why it's down. We haven't been told why it's down as far as I know. It's down. We can't put it back up. So, please please please please please please.
Do not drive rich and sane by constantly hitting our website with complaints about straight gate being down. There's no James. Guess what? I just heard the straight gates down straight. That's that's what I heard, too Yeah, okay, how many times how many times you heard that today is really the I could couldn't count can't can't can't.
Obviously we need to do something about getting we yep, we're supposed to we're supposed to do it. Yep, so but we do have you know, it should be back up this weekend or so. We have our mp3 shopping cart.
We do have everything that would be on straight gate from our ministry would be in our mp3 shopping cart. I think that's why people say that. That's why they're calling up and saying we're straight gate.
It says this weekend or so, we'll see I I know that there's movement of servers and you know things like that happens so We but we can't answer those questions. So anyway, that's a and B I Know about the gift of scripture.
I Have received a minimum of a dozen URLs. They're all the same URL to the times article About the release on the part of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church in England Scotland Wales, etc of the 60 page book called the gift of scripture, which basically It's not like this is it's actually not a big deal everybody's known what Rome believes about scripture and what Rome scholars believe about scriptures and and All the rest of stuff.
This isn't anything new or exciting along those lines, but they've put it in print That you really can't trust all sorts of sections of the Bible, you know, you've got the Roman Catholics doing this. You've got almost all the mainline denominations doing this.
I've got to sit here Looking at John Shelby Spong doing this. I'm watching debates with Shabbir Ali debating William Lane Craig and All Ali does is quote over and over again from the Jesus seminar guys and Raymond Brown just boom boom boom over and over and over and over again and William Lane Craig isn't in a very good position to argue against him because he's already based so much of his arguments upon the Same kind of scholarship anyways, and so there there you go.
So You look at all this stuff and People say do you ever get frustrated? Well, yeah. But to me it's just it's just a sign of judgment. I mean, there are just so many people from so many perspectives that just they have no concern About the Word of God.
They they they are so quick to grab hold of any criticism of the Word of God and Buy into anything that's less than the highest Belief in the Word of God it and they'll still sit there and talk about how they believe in Jesus and stuff.
But what Jesus believed about Scripture? Well, they can get around that by saying well actually what's in the Gospels doesn't represent what you just believe about Scripture. So we don't know what you just believe.
Well, if we don't know what you just believe about Scriptures. We don't know what you just believe about anything. Okay, quit quit playing games and saying you have some idea of what Jesus is about saying you believe in him.
But you don't know anything about him. If You can't if everything Scripture is just simply what later generations want to project on Jesus. Just be honest and say we shouldn't believe this stuff anymore.
You know, it's one thing to deal with the the Muslims. Okay, fine. You know, your ultimate authority is the Quran your ultimate authority is what the the the hadith tell you to believe. Fine, we can deal with that.
It's these people who call themselves Christians who are anything but Christians. That are the most difficult to deal with and and it's no wonder as I was listening to some of the stuff. It's no wonder that there is no apologetic left Amongst anything that's that's liberal ism in Western cultures.
No, it's no wonder that that that Christianity is is defenseless. Because if you don't have anything to defend you're gonna be defenseless. It's you that's just all there is to it. Well, anyways, that's that's another issue but we will we will press on with some of that stuff as time goes by let's Talk with Jim.
Hi, Jim. How you doing? I'm great James. How are you doing? Pretty good.
Actually, you touched on a couple of interesting things there before I called really to talk a little bit about the cross and debate. Mm-hmm, but the gift of Scripture I thought was an amazing thing because there's an internal inconsistency to it.
Where they're saying that science Needs to be embraced where the Genesis creation account is concerned. And yet among the things that they are saying are scripturally true valid to be believed. They included the virgin birth, right?
Seems internally inconsistent, doesn't it? Yeah, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of consistency there. But I think if you were to push and prod a little bit farther I think you would find some pretty interesting views as to what they think the virgin birth might be in other words what it might Allegorically represent etc. Etc.
I I don't know these specific authors well enough to comment on it, but something tells me that If you pushed hard enough, you'd you'd find some pretty Unorthodox Interpretations of the original intention at least of Rome and defining the virgin birth the Immaculate Conception so on so forth.
And even at that Let's let's face it original intent is pretty much lost on everybody today. Anyway, so in the legal field as well as the religious field, so it it is interesting how a Portion of an allegedly universal church can put out a document like this and it doesn't come from Rome.
I'm sort of wondering personally what Roman Catholic apologists are going to be saying about this. I haven't seen anything yet in Carl Keating's e-letter or anything It it will be interesting. I haven't checked Jimmy Akin's blog, but I would very much like to see what they have to say about this document because Roman Catholic apologists by nature tend to be more conservative, right?
You know some of the discussion boards have already lit up with with a bit of talk about it.
Really, which are the Catholic answers or well and the calm board and some of those?
Discussions have already erupted. Primarily because you know, it's very difficult for your Catholic on the street The the average everyday pew sitting Catholic who then has to defend these sort of decrees that come down out of the Catholic hierarchy and When you're just a Catholic guy on the street with Protestant friends and you're trying to defend your church and Then the Catholic hierarchy sends down something that says well the Bible Portions of the Bible are valid and portions aren't and some are defensible and some aren't it's very difficult for your average Guy on the street to say, okay I gotta continue to defend my church here, even though they're making statements, but I can't really Defend to my Protestant brethren.
Yeah, that's true Protestant friends. I guess I have to pick my words.
Well, I have to yes, you have to be very very careful there. Well, I listen to the cross and debate.
Yes and It was very very interesting. There's just one aspect of it that I want to bring up with you and see if you could comment on it. One of the guys in the question answer period tried to bring it up and if I understand what crossman was saying He was saying that the differences between the different Gospel narratives and gospel accounts had to do with a defensible kind of rewriting and reshaping of the gospel story to make it more palatable to the audience that was being written to.
But then he said that it was okay to do that because it was after all the Holy Spirit that was guiding these Individuals to do that right that each of the gospel writers under the inspiration of the Spirit was making New editorial changes and comments to the gospel to fit their audience.
And it just seemed to me that if we're going to buy into that argument Then certainly the Mormons ought to jump on that and say that it's the same Spirit of God that caused them to write their new Testament of Jesus Christ and it certainly seems that every charismatic who's having a Unbiblical revelation these days ought to be able to say yes, but hey, that's the way the original Bible was written.
It was written by people who by the inspiration of the Spirit gave a slightly different version or twist of the gospel to fit their audience. And in this contemporary world we live in that same spirit is now giving me a new version of the gospel and What's to say that the? 21st century charismatic doesn't have the same Valid argument that crossman is trying to give to the original gospel writers.
Where does it stop if you buy into that argument? Well, it's it stops in the fact that the argument itself Utterly destroys any possibility of having any certainty. Whatsoever in regards to divine revelation it destroys the reality of divine revelation it turns it completely into subjectivism and and it it feeds directly into what you see in for example a a Marcus Borg and that's direction of things this pluralism this panentheism this.
Your experience is God type of a type of a situation and you can't say anything with any kind of certainty. You can't say anything with any kind of authority, which is exactly what they want regarding.
Anything in regards to the Christian faith at all it all becomes just whatever you want to be and that is the goal that is. That's the desire. That's that kind of religion doesn't call anyone to deal with the holiness of God.
It doesn't call anyone to look at their sin and deal with the wrath of God against their sin or anything else and so that is exactly what they want and that's exactly the direction that they are that they want to go and so.
The end of it is the end of all apologetic the end of all truth everything becomes subjective and You know, you're left with basically. Someone saying well, you know, I just don't see it that way. I'm not gonna say you're wrong and I'm not gonna appreciate if you say I'm wrong and I'm not gonna accept if you say I'm Wrong anyways, because you really don't have any basis for so doing and so you just sit around and you write scholarly papers.
And you have symposiums and that's all there is that's left. There is no divine revelation. You might as well just you know systematic theology in the history of the church becomes just that it's just a history.
Just people once believed this we now know they were silly. We can sit around and talk about what would have been better if we just hadn't believed like that. But we really can't get into that and let's just let's just go on from there.
And that's that's all you have left and that's what you have in liberalism today there's if you look around that's that's the best they've got to offer and I don't find that to be an overly compelling.
Type of my question is then knowing cross and as you do and the time you've spent with him in the amount of reading you've Done on him. Do you think that he understands that everything you've just described is the end result of his Approach in his philosophy.
Or I mean, do you really think that he is purposefully trying to throw that door wide open? So that all absolutes disappear and do you think that he understands the damage that does. And do you think that's purposeful?
Or do you think he just hasn't thought all the way through?
The necessary consequences of the theories he's out there throwing around. Well, I think it's purposeful on a large portion of the Jesus seminar John Dominic Crossan came to this from a monastery. I really think he thinks That what he's Doing really for him.
This is all just academics the eye. From his perspective as far as his worldview goes there only certain things there are only certain parameters that you can actually lay out and Say you have to include this and for him.
It would be his radical egalitarianism and Shared meal that's those are the only two things he would say those need to be there because they're part of the most primitive Level of that everybody has to agree that that was there and that's it.
That's the only way you can define it beyond that. However, you apply that however, it works Becomes a matter of personal opinion. Does he does he see that? Well, I Don't know how he couldn't I don't know how he could not see that he certainly toward the end of the debate when during the audience questions I was talking to him and He had at the well at the end of the debate in his closing statement and then in answer to an audience question He had made a statement somewhere along the lines of you know Can we realize that Christianity has a right wing and a left wing and it was sort of can't we always get along?
Can't we cooperate and what's important? Etc. Etc. And I at one point took the opportunity to say to him. Well, dr. Cross and that's where we part company is we can't quote-unquote just get along because the only way that we believe you can change the world is to change people's hearts and that is to the gospel and You're you don't have a gospel.
You're you don't have any basis for defining a gospel or proclaiming a gospel or anything authoritative or anything else for that matter. And so He listened so he couldn't possibly Not realize that but I think from his perspective He realizes it, but he thinks that's all that's the best.
We've got that's that's just all there is there there really isn't any divine revelation the way that we think there is and so he's doing the best he can with what he thinks is actually there and You know, I don't know, you know, maybe I'm just completely Taken by the fact that he's a he's a very nice fellow and maybe he has the exact same Purposes that Robert Funk had and that other people in GS seminar have or that that Spong has that they clearly hate Funk hated the Christian faith Spong hates the Christian faith.
They want to completely redefine it and Maybe he has the same motivations and I'm just silly but I didn't see any evidence of that to me When he would speak this is just the conclusions He's come to in examining these ancient texts and that's what they are.
They're ancient texts. This isn't the honest us isn't this isn't God-breathed people may have believed that once that's not really what it is and It's it's just It's scholarship dummy It's to use his terminology is is the feeling that I get from him?
So and it's all parables it's it's and you know You can interpret a parable any way you want to interpret a parable and that's how he interprets it. Yeah. Yeah, very much. So So now you listen to the mp3 or because I we only started shipping the the DVDs yesterday.
I think yeah, I downloaded and listen to the mp3. Two weeks ago. Okay, I was going to call in before but I was enjoying your Your radio free Geneva program.
Waiting in line or could I ask you one more thing? Oh, oh, no, you got I Think I see. Oh, there is one other person and we got plenty of time. So what's up?
Well on a completely different going from scholarship to complete lack of it I want to ask you about Dave Hunt for a moment. Oh good grief. You on your blog mentioned the September 2005 Question and answer section right on the Berean call.
Well, actually it was in his is his newsletter. And I had the electronic version of it, but it's on his website as well. Yeah, I downloaded it as well as a PDF which by the way, there's more than one version of that is there?
Yes, there is a change. My understanding is there is a change between the original PDF and maybe what I received. Because I if people remember the blog I saw this for the first time when I was on the ship I found out that they had a Wi-Fi hotspot and You could pay the same amount of money for that that you did the other computers.
And so I brought my my laptop down and I started getting my regular mail to my regular account and that's when I got it and someone I need to go back and look at it, but someone pointed out that there was a interesting change in that very segment where there's the controversy right now as to whether Dave Hunt's actually saying that Calvinists are saved or not saved but So there's there's two different versions of it.
I quoted the one from the The original that I received from him and I think that's what's on the website the PDF version of it now as well. And that is the conclusion of him saying look if you hold to the Calvinist gospel the big thing They're saying right now is well what we meant by that was if you believe in baptismal regeneration, which?
I've asked a Presbyterian friend of mine to respond to the misrepresentations of reformed theology at that point. It just seems that Dave cannot avoid going after that particular issue even when we were doing our book I'm sure he was somewhat upset that he was debating someone who he couldn't go after him after on that particular issue even though he'd still sort of snuck a little bit of it in but I've asked somebody to respond to that, but I mentioned on the blog I Pointed that particular issue out mentioned.
I'd like to do more about this a whole article and now what they're saying is well He's you have to have that infant baptism for regeneration concept in mind or all that concluding paragraph Doesn't count that's what they're now sending out a guy named.
I think Ed Poor Ed has to take off the has to take all the heat for for Dave's odd statements like the Hebrew original of Acts and stuff like that and so now they're saying well you've misunderstood him The the Calvinist gospel he's talking about even though the previous paragraph is about God picking and choosing an election things like that.
It's all about infant baptism for for regeneration now. So I see some backpedaling going on at that particular there is but I read it sort of the opposite way.
I read it have it here in front of me now is That because the question came up about whether someone who believed in a Calvinistic Soteriology could be saved and the the question is even asked Can you extend a statement of being a fellow believer?
To TF and other Calvinist the same way that apparently this TF did. In extending that hand to them and saying that he thought they were safe. He launches right from the first paragraph into infant baptism.
Which seemed like such a strange place to launch? That it's only when you get to the conclusion that you realize that he did that on purpose. So that he could get to the end and say that Calvinist. Those who only know the false gospel of Calvinism are not saved.
Right while those who are saved and ought to know better, but teach these heresies will be judged for doing so.
Let's make sure I mean this is a long answer and Yes, he does go into that but but right after you got him from baptism. Then you've got Ephesians 2 8 to 9. You've got the whosoever will stuff first all that stuff the John all the father gives me but the father gives everybody regeneration before faith.
Two paragraphs on that dead in sin. He's the guy's a Pelagian at that point, right? Calvin. Allegedly mocking the Word of God then the first 72 for first Timothy 4 to John 1 13 and world John 3 16 and after all of that.
Then finally you get to that last paragraph where where his? Wilkinism comes out his Zane Hodges as a zism comes out and Says well, you know if you believe the right. The right particular perspective at least once.
Then you're you're in it. You're you're cool but If that's not what you believed then you're lost. I mean, I can't read it any other way. That's a sentence those who only know the false gospel of Calvinism are not saved know what what is included in that, right?
What is what is included in the false gospel of Calvinism? Is it every single point? What if you differ with quote-unquote his view of Calvinism on one point does that mean you can then be say I don't know.
Well, that's why I'm saying I read it that I felt that he put that baptism thing in there. Almost like a fail-safe like a red herring that he could put right there at the top. To give him the excuse to launch into everything else.
Yeah so that later when somebody said is this really what you mean he could point back at the Baptism thing and say oh, I meant that to be honest with you like the body of the answer.
Completely undermines much wider much wider. Yeah much much wider. Yeah, and to be honest with you, I just don't know that we can give Dave that much. I'm sorry he seems to be honest with you as I've looked at this what love is this saga and His backing off of this point and backing off of that point and backing being being refuted here refuted there backing backing backing backing he always does it in such a way as to put his face out there he gets smacked in the nose and.
Only then does he move and say that no one ever hit him anyways, and that's that's his mo. And so this rambling rather illogical Disconnected response is classical hunt and I just don't think it's a matter of well I'm gonna put this up here so I can fall back on it now.
I think it's first thing across his mind. I've listened ever listen to him speak. Mm-hmm. I tell you He's all over the place and this response is exactly what you'd hear. Yeah, if it's almost it in fact given the grammar and stuff I almost have to wonder if we didn't go to their mp3 page and listen to a recent radio program if this isn't a transcription of Dave's doing that just just wandering around and well.
They say this and they say that and and and things coming to his mind. And I just have to sort of wonder if that's not behind it. I don't know but anyways. That's what he's doing now is he's trying to use that failsafe.
But I think it's pretty clear exactly what he was saying and exactly what his purposes were.
Well, and he's clearly said it. It's not what he's trying to say. He has said those who only know the false gospel of Calvinism are not saved. I mean, there's no ambiguity about that particular statement regardless of how much window dressing he put on it before he got there.
Yeah, and the funny thing is.
Right before we came on on the air. I got an email From and I'm not exactly sure how this got to me and who sent it to me and stuff but There's an article they've someone has posted and It says it pulls back the curtain a little bit and begins to show how many quote Calvinists end quote are really our minions.
In disguise. James White believes that our minions who hold the false gospel that Christ died for everybody are saved. I once asked him you hold that people who believe in universal atonement are saved too.
Here was his reply. Yes, Louie, and I sort of remember this. I was gonna start doing a search for what day when this particularly took place in our chat channel because I can tell where. Well, this was from our chat channel.
I was saved before I came to understand that wonderful truth and quote so here's a whole article about how I'm actually not a Crypt, I'm not actually a Calvinist. I'm a dead Calvinist. I'm an unsaved Calvinist because I don't make a full understanding of particular redemption required for Regeneration so you work very hard to say what it is.
You believe and then people hear whatever it is.
They want to hear it and I get shot from both sides.
So I guess it's a pretty good thing to be somewhere in the middle and according to the question and answers here on hunt. It's okay. If you if you teach a false gospel and a false doctrine apparently a damnable heresy, but don't do yoga.
Ah. Reading Dave is always something that'll that'll keep you awake. Hey, anyway, thanks your call brother. You take care. All right. God bless. Eight seven seven seven five three three three four one.
We're gonna take our break. We've got two other callers online and room for you as well. We'll be right back.
Today Many stars strong and true.
What is dr. Norman Geisler warning the Christian community about in his book. Chosen, but free a new cult. Secularism. False prophecy scenarios. No, dr. Geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called Calvinism.
He insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent. Philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant. In his book the potter's freedom James White replies to dr. Geisler. But the potter's freedom is much more than just a reply.
It is a defense of the very principles upon which the Protestant Reformation was founded. Indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate.
James White masterfully counters the evidence against so-called Extreme Calvinism defines what the Reformed faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the Reformers is the very one taught in the pages of Scripture.
The potter's freedom a defense of the Reformation and a rebuttal to Norman Geisler's Chosen but free you'll find it in the Reformed theology section of our bookstore at a omen Org, this portion of the dividing line has been made possible by the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.
The Apostle Paul spoke of the importance of solemnly testifying of the gospel of the grace of God. The proclamation of God's truth is the most important element of his worship in his church. The elders and people of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church invite you to worship with them this coming Lord's Day.
The morning Bible study begins at 9 30 a .m. And the worship service is at 10 45. Evening services are at 6 30 p .m. On Sunday and the Wednesday night prayer meeting is at 7. The Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church is located at 3805 North 12th Street in Phoenix.
You can call for further information at 602 26 grace. If you're unable to attend you can still participate with your computer and real audio at prbc .org. Where the ministry extends around the world through the archives of sermons and Bible study lessons available 24 hours a day.
Under the guise of tolerance modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality. Even more disturbing some within the church attempt to revise and distort Christian teaching on this behavior.
In their book the same-sex Controversy. James White and Jeff Neal write for all who want to better understand the Bible's teaching on the subject. Explaining and defending the foundational Bible passages that deal with homosexuality including Genesis Leviticus and Romans.
Expanding on these scriptures they refute the revisionist arguments including the claim that Christians today need not adhere to the law in a straightforward and loving manner. They appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to God's plan for his people.
The same-sex controversy defending and clarifying the Bible's message about Homosexuality. Get your copy in the bookstore at a omen or how the pilgrims progress.
It's not an easy way. It's a journey.
And welcome back to the dividing line taking your phone calls today at eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. Let's go ahead and talk with Rick. How you doing Rick? Not too bad. How you doing doing?
All right good.
Oh, I first I want to say um I enjoyed The radio free Geneva. I thought it was. I thought it was great. I mean, you know, I was I was to say I guess to say the least incensed by. By just you know.
You don't even get a fair shake. Don't get a fair shake. No, when tradition becomes the ultimate authority in anyone's situation doesn't matter who it might be. But when tradition becomes the ultimate authority scripture is always going to suffer and you're always going to have something lesser than scripture taking the place of scripture and.
That's what you have in that situation. And I imagine Jack Graham would be shocked if you told him that he was a. That he was bound to tradition. But that's one of the problems with having an unbiblical form of church government.
And I'm biblical ecclesiology is there isn't anyone who can tell him that? Okay, maybe maybe another pastor halfway across the United States or something. Okay, those would be the only quote-unquote peers these super pastors of these super churches have and You know, I've said many times. There are only a couple churches where these people who gain super large Access and and notoriety and stuff.
There's only a few churches I can think of where those individuals actually have a biblical form of church government where they can. They can have peers who keep them on the straight and narrow it's a dangerous thing.
Yeah, it really is to experience that kind of success. Shall we say so. Anyhow, but that wasn't what your question was about. Oh, no.
Actually, I also really enjoyed the the message you did on the emergent.
Church, it was about McLaren. Which one was where was where was that from? You were in a you read some other church grace something I think hmm. I've spoken on a couple times In various and sundry places and just and even at those I I I don't claim to be an expert.
I'm just simply trying to give people an idea of they're hearing about it. They're seeing it. What are we? What are we talking about? I haven't interacted with these individuals on the level that you would need to do so to actually claim some level of expertise but once again, it seems to be one of those situations where you have a Number of Problems coming together and giving rise to this and it's not like those those problems are not issues We've we've dealt with many many times in the past as far as biblical authority the form of the church purpose of the church, etc Etc.
So, yeah, what's your?
Go ahead. My question I guess would be related to that. I guess like I'd seem to be growing I guess in conservative ranks too, and I just Um wonder about the idea that you know scripture is not just proposition it's it's poetry and narrative and like it just seems to be like sort of like a whole new way to look at the Bible and it Didn't seem to sit well with me.
Like I was like it just seemed to be more open You know to You know, okay, we maybe disagree with this guy McLaren or whatever on these huge issues, but we can still learn from them and you know, and I I don't know it seemed to rub me wrong because like, you know, McLaren is is Seems to be off on and the major issues and you know, it doesn't it doesn't do well In sort of promoting them.
Yeah, yeah, well a couple things. First of all when you criticize any movement There is a a proper way of recognizing Truth in what is being said and then there is an improper way. It seems today that whenever you criticize anything.
I mean You criticize Mormonism people will start off by saying well, you know There's a lot of good things that we can learn from the Mormons. They love their families and They're very mission-oriented and blah blah blah blah blah.
Yeah. Well The those are all interesting. But they sort of pale and insignificance next to the fact that that this is a polytheistic religion that that lacks the gospel. So. And it brings you directly into idolatry.
So I don't know that you need to be spending too much time on on that particular aspect but when you're talking about people who will Confess orthodoxy on the doctrine of the Trinity even on the gospel and then they go off and do other things.
They will at one point say yes, and then it sounds like they're saying no. That's when we have to listen very carefully. What's being said this morning? I was writing and I was listening the whole time.
I was I was writing for an hour. I listened to NT, right? I was listening to NT right lecturing on the church in Modern day and this is a fairly recent lecture since he was Bishop of Durham when he did this and he hasn't been Bishop of Durham all that long so fairly fairly recent and With so many other times so many other times and I've listened to NT right he he takes he gives with one hand and he takes with the other and As I was listening, I was thinking about a lecture that I listened to by John Robbins just a few weeks ago.
Where he was just ripping and shredding on NT right and I was thinking about what Robbins was saying, okay. The the quotes that he read most definitely indicate problems. He had a wide variety of quotes from NT right on a wide variety of issues.
No, no question that those are quotes that need to be dealt with but he never ever ever recognized that for example within the context of Anglicanism he often is is way to the right of where the Anglican Church as a whole is and So I think that does have to be recognized you have to recognize that for example.
And I think every criticism I've heard of the emergent church movement has has pointed this out. There are reasons why this this Movement take is taking place. There are there are reasons why? These people are embracing these kinds of things and if you're going to respond to them meaningfully you need to understand what those reasons are.
And if those reasons are valid reasons if they're let's face it. There's a lot of dead formalism in fundamentalist conservative churches. There are churches that people just go through the motions and there's there's no.
There's just a lot of dead formalism there. Okay, if that gives rise to this you don't defend dead formalism. You recognize that you say, you know what? We've been Speaking about that for a long long time.
Here's here's how you actually handle dead formalism. You don't go running out and do this stuff if we're not dealing with what are really issues. Then how can we say we're really responding to even what these people are saying?
So same thing is with with McLaren, you know, just because just because the Mormon prophet Says that you should spend time with your kids and your family doesn't mean that you shouldn't spend time with your kids and your family.
So you've got it. You've got to admit when a person says something's true, but you don't spend all your time Focusing upon you well, but you know, we believe 5 of the same thing. No, you don't do that you you focus upon what's what's really important and what's really definitional and Try to find out what's really definitional.
That's what people tend that they tend to go either either direction. The imbalance on the one side is let's just all talk about the things That are that we have in common and let's dialogue blah blah blah blah blah.
And on the other side sadly to people even to the right of me. If you don't agree with someone Then not only will you never let them speak? Not only will you never dialogue with them? But you've somehow feel that you have the right now to completely twist their words out of The context in which they are originally spoken and I you know I think one of the reasons that maybe I Try to be a little bit more fair along those lines, though.
Most people are shocked that I would even try to do so is I've been I've been the target of that I've you know when people will come after me and They are to the right of me. I've I know what it feels like to have what I've said just completely ripped out of its context and and applied in a way that I would never ever apply it and So if I'm gonna sort of demand that I be treated, right?
I need to I need to do that the other direction and so that may be behind what you what you heard there. Is that okay? Here's what the emergent church movement is responding against these are issues. These are problems.
We can't stick our heads in the sand forget about it, but this isn't how you respond to it. You don't you don't deal with post-modernism by then embracing post-modern categories. You don't you need to see why post-modernism is anti-biblical and you need to train your people on how to respond to post-modernism and detect it in their own thinking and how to help other people see that it's really a An image of God destroying way of thought and and how the biblical way is a better way and etc, etc, etc.
So that's probably what was what was behind. Even taking the time to say, you know, they're they're saying true things here here and here, but here's where they've missed it here. Here's they've missed it there and you're trying you're just just just trying to be fair and accurate and what you're saying about somebody.
Yeah.
Yeah, I thought I mean I Was you know, I thought that was good like this.
Scripture is not just proposition. Right, right, right, right. I'm sorry. I that is and that's all around us. I mean That is. That's everywhere. That's sadly these days that's that's John Armstrong. You know his stuff it attacks upon quote-unquote foundationalism and this whole that that has Almost by default taken over the vast majority of theological seminaries you've got.
Peter ends writing its Westminster seminary now and and Coming up with all these alternative ways of understanding inerrancy and. Yeah, it's it is absolutely positively everywhere and fundamentally in the final analysis I think it is it is evidence of the judgment of God upon Western culture.
A Discerning church and a clarion voice of the church is a blessing upon a culture. This culture is eating itself from the inside. It is it is eating itself up. We are engaging in self-destructive behaviors.
We we if it has something to do with the image of God, we're gonna find a way to try to kill it. I mean I saw someone in channel put a URL up About the fact that there's a Danish man who has filed a lawsuit Demanding money from the government to be able to pay for a same-sex prostitute to come to his home.
And I sit there looking at that going. What? But see that's that's where that part of Europe has gone. I mean it is it has become. If it's if it's godly get rid of it. There there are many young couples in those countries in the Netherlands and places like that that get married Secretly now because marriage is considered such a bad thing.
Such a backwards thing such an immoral thing to be married. You're supposed to have sex with lots of people that's what it means to be moral. I mean we're talking is this not calling white black and black white.
What is good evil and evil good? Yeah, is that you know I? These these are nations. We all live in nations right now if you can understand my voice basically we live in nations that have had Tremendous testimonies of the gospel right and when you spit on that and stomp on that and and say I don't want that um.
There's going to be a reaction. There's gonna be a response, and I don't know why so many evangelicals are afraid To point that out, but that's the reality and that's we're dealing with so anyways all righty, sir.
Sure, thanks for your time. Thank you. God bless. I'm gone. Bye. Bye Alrighty, let's continue on with our bank of phone calls here. And Let's I I had to ask about this because Steve wants to ask a question about Eschatology so this could be real short.
I don't know hi Steve. How you doing? James you know that you're sort of pushing things here a little bit.
You don't remember me. Do you of course not well? I called you. I was in Iraq. How you doing? Oh?
Well, you said you don't have quite the delay from Virginia that you do from Iraq though exactly.
Hey, I've basically uh. For lack of better terms. I've never really delved too deep into eschatology. I.
One for you now. I'm with you brother. I don't delve too deeply into at least okay. Let's define eschatology because. There may be folks listening. You don't know we're talking about eschatology is the study of last things eschatos last.
The problem is eschatology has a what I would call a dogmatic segment. And then it has what we might call the the warfare segment. The dogmatic segment is Christ is returning the concepts of resurrection.
Judgment heaven and hell those are all the dogmatic elements of eschatology, but what most people know about eschatology? Has to do with stuff that Makes certain people millionaires because they write series of books that sell millions and millions and millions and millions of copies.
Fiction it well in and not only that but it's uh, but you sell them in grocery stores, too, and they do real well, so. You've got the pre millers and the odd millers and the post millers and and even amongst the pre millers.
You've got some incredible battles between Pre-tribbers mid-tribbers and post-tribbers. I mean I honestly in in my in my life I have known people who would not even say hello To a pastor in a almost identical church right across town.
Because one person was a pre-tribber and the other was a mid-tribber. I mean the difference between a pre-tribulation rapture and a mid-tribulation rapture three and a half years for those of you Who know what I'm talking about they would not even have fellowship with one another.
So strong was their conflict over something like that, so maybe I'm overreacting to that. But that's the kind of attitude that I've reacted against and said man. I don't want any of that. We have members in our church of all the three major eschatologies as far as that issues concerned.
We have pre millers on millers and post millers in our church. And we all managed to come to the Lord's table together and and not each other's faces and things like that, so it's a good thing.
Okay, so my question is I guess basically it's just What is your view. I'm Really indifferent just to kind of get an idea of where to start steering down this path, and why?
But you mean my view on that issue. Yeah, well, I sort of announced it I think it was when was that I have to go back and look at my blog was that this year last year I was at April this year. Okay. We had a We had a big thing where you could you could write in and well actually it was just people in the chat channel.
But you could guess what my eschatology was going to be and and I sort of took a position and said okay. This is sort of why but I'm never gonna argue about this with anybody you want to call in argue.
You can you can believe me. There's plenty of places you can argue, but I by default by Simplicity am an amillennialist that is I believe that two things first of all keep it simple stupid and Amillennialism is by far the simplest way of looking at April 2004 last year, okay.
Looking at the issue of eschatology secondly the issue of ages that is the you the biblical term age and The fact that we live in this present evil age, and then there is an age to come. There is no Period between them in Jesus eschatology if you examine his use the term age.
He talks about how during this age. You've got the the sons of the kingdom, and you've got the the wheat in the tares and and so on so forth. But in the next age it will not be that way. And you've got the resurrection and and there seems to be just this age and the age to come.
Not this age then seven years and it's divided in here and blah blah blah blah blah blah and all this very complicated stuff. That goes into that now many of my reformed forebears Were were postmillennialists, and they you know you you read a book like the Puritan promise and and Puritan hope I'm sorry and things like that and they argue very strongly for postmillennialism and of course I could I Could very much like I put it this way I was raised pre mill and.
And Certainly Matthew chapter 24 gives almost anybody fits to make it fit perfectly. I don't care what your position is. I was raised pre mill. I've adopted on mill, and I could hope that it was post mill.
I used to take the old Position of panmillennialism it'll all pan out in the end. That's that's I think that's the safest one to take until you know you do far more reading than actually I've ended up doing in This whole thing.
So you know, but that's that's sort of a default issue for me. I personally think There's a number of areas where there's a lot more work needs to be done than has been done. I think it's more important for example that we would be spending time Discussing for example the issue of punishment and hell there's all sorts of huge books out there attacking that and almost nothing responding to it and Yet the fact the matter is most people can run around and quote the left-behind series left and right and give you everything there is to know about Premillennial dispensationalism and yet they know nothing about those particular aspects.
And they think this is all there is and in fact I was telling somebody once that About what my eschatology was because they had asked me and they were shocked that there was any other view other than what was in the left-behind series, they didn't know there was anything else and So, you know.
Oh Absolutely, and if you question it if you if you show any other different understanding you're automatically looked on as possibly being a member of a cult and and So, you know, I understand that mindset.
I have vivid memories as a junior or senior in high school. During a high school lock-in at the church I was at using my tritium lit watch to read from Matthew 24 and Explaining to the other guys in my group at this lock-in where you stay overnight with the youth group at this lock-in.
The meaning of the the budding of the vine of the olive tree in Matthew 24. And we know that's always a picture of the Nation of Israel. So once Nate the Nation of Israel has become a nation again, then you have one generation until the end and that was 1948 and so 40 years from 1948 to 1988 and This was like 1978 or 79 or 80 around in there and so we're getting right near the end, you know, and and I saw how many times I saw thief in the night and Which is I I've been told thief in the night is still the number one Rented Christian video out there and if you've never seen it, you've at least got to see it for historical reasons.
But it presents the pre-mill position very very vividly and and in a very 1969 ish way, so it's sort of fun to watch but so I know I've been there done that got the t-shirt. I got the books. I sat in my senior Tests as a senior in high school when I get done.
I'd pull out a Hal Lindsey book. I was there. I know so.
Anyways, I've done that. Cut the t-shirt. You got it. You got a quick question. Any books that you'd recommend on that debating or how to debate or points of debate? Oh goodness.
Huh. You know, I've the irony there is I have various academic books in the sense of debate rules and things like that. But actually the process of debate. I never took any classes on it. You listen to a bunch of debates, well, you know, ironically, no I really didn't.
I had heard some debates before I did my first debate against Jerry Madetik's, but no. This has always been something that was just something that I was capable of doing. It was just just an ability a capacity to listen and respond on the fly detect Errors and argumentation.
I'm sure there are such books. I've found most of them that I've picked up because I have picked up a few books on debate from Amazon or something like that. But I've found most of them to be rather dry and uninteresting.
To be honest with you listening to two good debates helps out a lot. Listening to to Greg Bonson and Gordon Stein is always a lot of a lot of fun and Listening to folks who are able to clearly express themselves and to do so succinctly Really helps out a lot.
Greg Bonson stuff on logic is very useful along those lines. His book always ready would be from a Christian perspective would be very useful along those lines as well. I know we carry that one at a omen org.
So those would be some of the things but you know There might be some excellent works out there and I'm just I've just not encountered them or not read them or or I've forgotten.
There I'd like to get into. I listen to Your debate with Stafford a lot and right. Yeah, it's just it's an area that I'd like to definitely get into be honest with you part part of it is just simply experience.
I mean, I can tell you and we're the the music's about to start. But the biggest thing for me is like in the debate with crossin I knew exactly what he was gonna say before he said it and when you know that about your opponent.
You're ready to engage in a good debate. You're you're gonna you're gonna do well that type of a situation. All righty. Okay, James. Hey, welcome. Welcome home. Thanks a lot. God bless. Alrighty. Well, thank you so much for the callers.
I didn't even I didn't even have to read John Shelby spong today, which probably is a good thing. Make the whole day go better and thanks for listening in an hour early today. We will be back on Tuesday Lord willing at 2 p .m. Eastern Daylight Time.
See you then. God bless.
The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries. If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or write us at p .o Box 3 7 1 0 6 Phoenix, Arizona 8 5 0 6 9. You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org That's a o m i n dot o RG where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks.
Join us again next Tuesday morning at 11 a .m. For the dividing line.