July 20, 2004

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

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

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

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

United States, it's 1 -877 -753 -3341. And now with today's topic, here is

James White. Well and good morning, welcome to The Dividing Line.

I hope I'm here. That sounded bad. We've got some sort of technical difficulty going on there, it's going whoop, whoop, whoop.

But hey, you know, that's how digital things work. We don't know why. But then again, we don't know why the website's not working right at the moment either.

And just a word of warning, we could simply disappear at any point in time from any number of things actually, given how we started here.

But we have been informed by the powers that be here in the Phoenix area that there is a very high probability of rolling blackouts today.

And some of you may recall a few weeks ago, last time we did The Dividing Line, we mentioned at that time that there had been a fire at one of the major substations on July 4th.

And a major, major, major power transformer there had burned and that they had found replacement, but it'd be like next year before it's installed or something.

Don't ask me how anything takes a year to do like that. I do not understand that particular concept.

But that's what they said. And so that was putting a tax on things.

Has nothing to do with sunspots. And then last night, early this morning, there was a smaller fire at another substation.

And that has only added to the difficulties. And one of the two major power companies here in Phoenix said that we were at the red zone by 8 a .m.

this morning. It is 11 a .m. here in Phoenix and it's 106 degrees with the dew point is at, oh, it's only 58 degrees.

So that's not too bad. Oh, but it's 107. So anyway, it's a little bit on the sticky side for us anyhow.

The monsoon is taking place and it's going to be 110, 111 degrees today.

And so they are expecting the possibility of rolling blackouts. And so at any point in time, all of a sudden, it could become very quiet.

And so if that happens, it happens. I actually think our battery backup would allow us to go, oh, there it went.

See you later, buddy. Something along those lines. But that's about the extent of what would take place. So, hey, if we get the whole hour in, that's fine.

If you were thinking of calling today at 877 -753 -3341, then you might want to do that earlier rather than later because the longer that you wait, the less, the greater the chance that we're all of a sudden going to go poof and disappear.

So this first summer it's ever happened, I think I remember once there was a talk about the possibility of brownouts when it was going to be like 117 or something.

This valley has just grown way, way, way too fast. That's just all there is to it.

I think they said that our total capacity right now is 9 ,800 megawatts at any one given time and that we're pushing 99 % of that in these summer afternoons here in Phoenix.

And of course, you know, the rest of the year, it's no big deal. The rest of the year, you know, especially during the winter when everybody else is, you know, sucking down fuel oil and stuff like that, you know, we're getting down into the upper 40s at night and the, you know, 72 during the day.

You know, it's no big deal. So anyhow, what is with this guy in the sunspots?

It has nothing to do with sunspots. Somebody slapped that person silly, you know, strange odd fellow there.

Anyhow, 877 -753 -3341, good to be back. I was gone last week teaching in San Francisco and it was very, very nice there.

Beautiful area, just absolutely filled with leftist liberal wackos. That's just all there is to it.

It's just the bumper stickers that I saw out there just frightening. I mean,

I think if Fidel Castro sailed into San Francisco Bay, he'd be greeted as a liberator.

It's just, man, that is just odd, very, very odd.

I think if World War II were to happen again, the Japanese wouldn't have to invade there. They would be welcomed with, you know, open arms.

It's just, oh, man, just very, very odd. But anyway, very pretty, just strange politics in that area.

And so we're done with that. And in fact, I think there might be one

Thursday in August that we might not be doing a program. But then it's not till September that I start doing any traveling again.

And up until the debate in early November and the cruise and stuff,

I don't think that I'll be gone more than just a couple days. I've got a lot of calling. I'd love calling, a lot of traveling to do.

Toronto, the Dallas area, Edmond, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh area,

Pennsylvania area next month, doing a lot of traveling, Chicago. But just for one or two days at a time, maybe three days at a time, not the big long stuff.

And so anyhow, 877 -753 -3341, if you were looking at the blog, you have found out, yes, we know that the website's having difficulties.

And that's because we're cheap and we split things up between two different servers.

And so half the website's working and half the website isn't. The graphics are not working. The text is.

And we do that quite simply to, in essence, even out the load.

And it's cheaper, basically, is what it is. And the cheap site ain't working quite right today.

So the graphics don't show up and that makes it look really goofy. But we like to make a dime scream before it leaves our fingers.

And so that's sometimes the result of that. But if you looked at the blog, and you can still read the blog.

It just is surrounded by odd looking things. And that's life. But if you read the blog, then you know that we now have...

You know, we should start this since somebody wants to... That's the

Sunspot guy. I know the Sunspot guy at Minnesota wants to talk about things. That's great. We can just wait until Sunspot warms my head or something like that.

And then we'll take a call. But we should start the index of prohibited books.

That's what we should do. Since some folks are saying we already have one. Then I think it would be a good idea to start the index of prohibited books.

That is the Index Prohibitorum. And I mean, if people are going to accuse you of having one, you might as well do that.

And I was... Let me see here. Oh, now we've got stuff on the real presence and stuff there.

Wow, there's been all sorts of stuff that was thrown up there since... Oh, there's even a response to me.

Oh, look at that. Hadn't even looked this morning. There it is.

I guess this means that all of C .S. Lewis's books go on the Alpha and Omega Ministries banned book list.

In Latin, that would be Index Prohibitorum. A list that from beginning to end is filled with heretical, turned to and fro wind of doctrine wishy -washiness.

Don't forget to include the relevant videos as well. I mean, after all, if we can't see some idea of sola gratia in Roman Catholic doctrine, even though Benjamin Warfield had no problem seeing it.

Well, you know, the problem is Benjamin Warfield didn't see it. And I've been glad to link to David King's fine demonstration from the writings of Warfield that some reformed

Catholics, as they call themselves, can only read certain sections of books and not entire sections of books so as to accurately represent people.

Warfield's statements concerning the Roman Catholic sacerdotalism are very, very clear.

But we should start one. The Alpha and Omega Ministries banned books list. I'd like to see what's on it currently.

I've never heard of it personally. Maybe we can put B .B. Warfield on there, even though I love

Warfield. And in fact, you know, Warfield, I was pretty amazed that any of these reformed

Catholic folks even touched him. I mean, it's sort of like the Jehovah's Witnesses trying to quote from Ignatius on the deity of Christ.

It's just not something you'd expect to have happen because Ignatius was so clear in teaching the deity of Christ.

And Warfield has taken some real hits. He was very much a non -sacerdotalist.

He has some quotes that I've seen some of these reformed Catholics take shots at because he, in essence, says that mere human actions do not convey grace, that grace is free, and so on and so forth.

And so these high church folks have some problems with Warfield. But hey, you know, he was talking about how

Roman Catholics and Protestants together are supernaturalists. And you can just take this one little section from him, ignore everything else he said about sacerdotalism and Rome's view of grace and things like that.

And now he's on their side. It's great. I'll have to go back and read this.

That's interesting. The gospel includes doctrine, but it is not only doctrine in the teaching of 2

John reference series. Quite clearly teaching about who Christ is, not something like forensic justification. Oh, yay.

Well, folks, there we've got it. I've just learned, thanks to Logos, Kevin Johnson has just informed us that the promise in 2

John that the truth will always be with us does not include what justification is.

It doesn't include whether we stand before God justified solely through the work of another that it is an imputed righteousness that is ours, a seamless robe of righteousness that hymn writers have written about for centuries now and has been the joy of our lives and the joy of our peace with God and things like that.

We've just learned news flash just now. We just learned that the truth that abides with us, the promise of the truth in the church only has to do with Christological and Trinitarian issues.

It does not have to do with the gospel. We do not have the promise any longer in the

Bible that we will know what the gospel is. Evidently, the truth of the gospel can be lost.

Well, there it is, folks. You heard it here first on The Divining Line. We've brought you this breaking news.

I just discovered this as I'm looking at this blog here. It's silly me to think that the truth would include the greatest work of the

Trinity. I mean, the greatest way in which God is in the triune fashion glorifying himself,

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in redeeming a people unto himself. How silly was it for me to think that the truth of the gospel would be a part of the truth that will abide in the church forever?

I should have realized, having read these Reformed Catholics, that it's only Trinitarian theology we can be absolutely certain about.

That's why you can get rid of the Mormons, even though they baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The gospel stuff has to be a lot.

We have to be able to have it so broad that you can have Rome's indulgences and purgatory and prayers for the dead, and we need to have

N .T. Wright's monochromatic righteousness of God view, and I guess we can still allow for a few of the solas.

But you see, the gospel has to be so unknowable, so fluffy, so vague and foggy, that we can have the big ecumenical tent of Trinitarians.

As long as they're Trinitarians, we don't want any non -Trinitarians need not apply.

But I'm so glad to have just discovered that. I just found this out as I was sitting here, and so I am very thankful to Kevin Johnson for informing us that only a part of God's truth, evidently the only important part,

I guess the gospel part is not important, it can be lost, and we won't know that.

So there it is, reading directly here, the gospel includes doctrine, but it is not only doctrine, and the teaching of 2

John referenced here is quite clear, the teaching about who Christ is, not something like forensic justification.

Well, there you go. You heard it here first. I don't remember saying that John was addressing forensic justification, but the very idea that that is not a part of the truth that will abide in the church.

Even when the apostle Paul himself two times uses the phrase, the truth of the gospel, so that the truth of the gospel would abide with you in Galatians chapter 2, evidently we just now discovered and have now brought to you, our dear listeners, the reality of the fact that whether we are justified and hence stand before God solely in the righteousness of Jesus Christ, or whether we have to do covenant works of faithfulness so as to only experience a future vindication, these things of just now, we've just now discovered, are unknown.

It's a matter of opinion. It's one opinion versus another opinion. That's why we need to be so ecumenically minded.

That's why we need to be so wide open in allowing all these different perspectives, is because that element of the truth, maybe it's not an important element of truth, definitive element of truth, can be lost.

There is the news for the day. I don't have words.

I just don't have words. It is truly amazing. I'm working on, it's turning into an article,

I suppose I should break it up, on Galatians chapter 5 and what

Paul said there. It is, I'm going to read a quote from here, John Owen, because this is in the article, but I'll read it right now.

John Owen, in his biblical theology, wrote these words,

Now it is no easy task to state just what the actual viewpoint of these men is on the value and perfection of the

Bible. Not only do they contradict each other, and all babble on most foolishly and spitefully and explain their own thoughts and opinions, but also they, to a man, play and toy with words and their meanings and definitions, and they invent totally new and unheard of expressions in order to impress or over -awe unlearned men.

The result is that there is little left as a residue of firm meaning, which a sound intellect might grapple with.

It is far easier to overthrow their opinions than to understand them in the first place. In fact, once the layers of tricks and deceit are peeled away, and the remainder is set forth in plain daylight and unornamented, then it will at once be seen to be so shameful, so disgraceful, as to be immediately self -destructive in the minds of any who are not equally incorrigibly wicked themselves.

This is because their teachings are deliberately stitched and patched together so as to deceive.

They can mean either anything at all or nothing at all at will, and their whole skill and art lies in speaking so laboriously and convolutedly as to prevent all possibility of the accident of being understood.

John Owen, Biblical Theology, that's from 1994, pages 821 through 822.

Now you might say, well, who is that? You know, who is he referring to?

Well, you know, it applies to the modern situation. That's why I was quoting it.

It applies to the modern situation. And the fact that there are so many today who simply won't allow language to have its normal meaning, and they play all sorts of philosophical games, and when you demonstrate that they're not allowing language to have its normal meaning, they will then accuse you of all sorts of things and generally say, well, you're just not smart enough to understand what

I'm saying. That's a real common one. There's a link on the website right now on the blog that will give you a good example of that in point of fact.

Seems like everybody on the phone today wants to talk about the same subject, and it's not a subject that I'm currently studying, so this could be brief.

So I guess we'll go ahead and take our phone calls, 877 -753 -3341 on this hot, hot day here in Phoenix, and just hoping that we make it through here before all the lights go out.

And then it's going to get hotter and hotter. You just sort of lay down, and I'm going to kick the next person out of the channel who says sunspots.

I'm just going to, in fact, I just did. I just kicked somebody out for saying sunspots. And so I'm going to put a script in, and when anyone types sunspots, they will be kicked from the channel.

Just make that a new rule there. Okay, let's go ahead and start with our phone calls, and let's go up to my home state and talk with Bob.

Hello, Bob. Hello, Bob. One time for Bob. Two time for Bob.

Three times for Bob. I guess Bob's no longer there. So let's move on to Josh in Casa Grande.

Is Josh around? Okay, we do not have any phone callers right now. I guess they're all hung up.

And so hello. Yeah, this is Bob. Oh, okay. Well, don't ask me.

I gave a plenty of plenty of warning that I was going to take the phone call, so I don't know what's going on.

Hey, we left for a week, and everything fell apart. Evidently. Yeah, so let me understand.

Operating such a complex piece of machinery is not like riding a bike. No, no, things somehow change on their own.

Oh, they feel like it. And oh, so the soundboard and stuff readjust itself just on its own.

No, I went to punch up Bob, and it wouldn't punch up. Oh, and I don't know why that is.

And it just kind of sat there and stayed green and green, and it's supposed to turn red, and it did turn red. Well, hey, you know, but we finally got

Bob on. Bob's there. Hey, Bob, how are you doing? Good, how are you? I'm doing great. I'll let you talk with Doc about it.

Why don't you talk? You know what? I think I'll sit back, and I'll let you do my part, and I'll just sort of sit here and chat with folks in the chat box.

Oh, no, that would be very not only short, but boring. Okay, all right, bye. Hi, Bob. Hi. How are you?

Oh, good. I guess the sunspots is kind of a hit. So lots of people talking about them.

All right, so that tells me that's you right there. And there you go.

I told you. I told you if you said sunspots that you're going to get kicked, and you just got kicked.

Yeah, but I didn't say it in the channel. Hey, you know what? It does not matter. I heard the words, and I knew that that was you.

And you don't have auto rejoin on. Nope. There you go. So folks, you've just heard.

I'm not sure if this is the first time I've actually kicked a caller. But we just kicked a caller who stayed on the air.

That's an amazing thing, actually, see? Because a lot of our callers are calling up dial -up anyways, and they can't do that anyways.

So anyways, Bob, what's up? Bob is sitting there trying to spell Prasapaligion while on the phone.

That's not easy to do. It's really not. P -R - Oh, you're a one -finger typer, too, huh?

That's not a good thing. Anyhow, let's get serious here for just half a second. And you wanted to talk about perseverance as well.

Yep. Yeah, I just had a question on the reformed position of perseverance. Is perseverance a part of being regenerated?

Or is that something that's after the fact?

Or is that kind of like a continually process of perseverance plus regeneration? Well, yeah, well, you know, when you think about it, perseverance is, it is both demanded by the nature of regeneration and the very fact that salvation is the work of God, and hence it's not going to fail.

I mean, fundamentally, perseverance is the result of the faithfulness of Christ to the will of the

Father. When you think in John 6, 38 -39, the will of the Father is that he lose none of those that are given to him.

He always does will the Father. All authority has been given to him in heaven and earth. And so perseverance is a function of the perfection of Christ's work as Savior.

And hence, it can never be something that we boast of. It can never be something that is a basis for our boasting.

That's the first thing to notice. And then, but it is also due to the nature of the faith that is given to us, the gift of faith that is given to us in regeneration, the work of the

Holy Spirit. That means it's the kind of faith described by the Lord Jesus when he says that he who endures to the end shall be saved.

That is not a prescription of how one gets saved.

It is a description of the nature of faith that it's going to persevere.

And so really, it's the result of the fact that salvation is a perfect work of God that is meant to glorify himself.

It's the result of the work of a perfect Savior. And it demonstrates that the work that takes place in the heart is accomplished by the

Holy Spirit of God and is not merely some human action. And so when you put all this together, we distinguish between perseverance and regeneration and forgiveness and adoption and what's called the ordo salutis, the order of salvation in that sense.

And perseverance wouldn't even be a part of the ordo salutis because it is a description of the fact that we see this in Romans 8.

Those whom he justified, he also glorified. And so that glorification indicates that those who are justified by faith will persevere in their faith and will receive glorification.

But in our experience, that is an ongoing thing. That's a daily thing. That's a big thing because the fact that we are time -bound creatures and as time -bound creatures, we're walking through this life and we experience many difficulties.

We experience many trials and we know the weakness of ourselves. And as we grow in grace, we learn of the persevering power of the

Holy Spirit, the preserving power of the Holy Spirit to bring us through trials and difficulties that we never, ever, ever thought we would be able, in fact, to survive.

And so all of that together goes into the concept of perseverance itself.

That help with your question at all? Yep, that helps. Okay, all righty.

Thank you, Bob, for calling. And I hope you get back in channel. It's PROS Apologiam.

And I won't kick you out unless you mention those things again. Yeah, I can tell you are currently being attempted to say that, but I'm glad that you're holding off.

So thanks a lot, Bob. God bless. Let's talk to Josh down in a place that's actually warmer.

If the term warm is irrelevant now, a place that is broiling even worse than it is where I am right now.

That's now you could tell a true Arizonian by how they pronounce this.

It's Casa Grande. But there are even people down there who go, I live in Casa Grande.

And so that's Josh. And so hi, Josh, how you doing? Good. Everyone down here says Casa Grande. Well, you know, that's because that's where they live.

You understand what that means? Yeah, I went through the public education here. There you go. There you go.

They have education in Casa Grande? We have one high school. Oh, wow. I'll bet you.

I'll bet you your last valedictorian went to, like, Stanford or something, huh? No, I think they went to GCU, maybe.

Oh, oh, ow. Oh, hey, watch it. I go to GCU, so.

Well, see, I went to GCU as well, and I was valedictorian in my high school. So that's why

I was figuring you were taking a shot there. Oh, no, I got some of the teachers you had. Really?

Yeah. Who did you have? And you're going to ask that. Yes. Mike Baird? Baird.

Oh, yes. Mike Baird had hair when he first started. Yeah, he has a big, long beard now. Yes, he does. Yes, he does.

He started that when I was there. Yeah, I took him for New Testament and Old Testament history. Oh, yes, yes.

I had him for Life and Letters of Paul, and that's where he said, well, of course, then I had him for Seven Years of Greek, and that's why he's bald now.

But I remember, and I've told him about this, and he swears he doesn't remember ever saying this, but we were taking a

Life and Letters of Paul class, and I remember him saying with great gravity.

And at this point, a lot of other folks in the class were sort of asleep, or they really weren't paying attention anymore and stuff like that.

But this was a point in time when I was just eating this up. We were reading Bruce's book on Paul and things like that.

And I remember Dr. Baird sitting up there in Fleming Classroom Building. I think it was like 105 or something like that.

And I remember him saying, now, in Paul, the word fear means fear.

And I remember writing that down as one of the most profound statements I had ever heard Dr. Baird make. And I've mentioned that to him a number of times since then.

And he goes, I said that? And I said, yes, you said that. I quoted you. He said, well,

I win the award for profundity. So anyways, what's your question there, Josh? Well, my question is,

I was listening to a debate, and I believe it was the topic was on Calvinism. And I believe the debate was between someone and Dave Hunt.

So it wasn't a great debate. But Dave Hunt said, I believe it was the one against Joseph Piper.

Oh, yes, yes, yes. That wasn't even a debate. That was Joseph Piper debated and Dave Hunt rambled.

Yeah, well, the problem with the overall debate was the topic was supposed to be the Atonement, and Dave debated all five points.

Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes. So that was just bad. But my question is, he in there talked about that Calvin taught.

Are you being beamed up to the Enterprise? That's actually my cell phone ringing. It sounded a little bit like the, you're just going up to the

Enterprise. But that's OK. Sorry, yeah, I'm actually from another planet. Yes, yes, you're an

Andorian. You have one of those cool little antenna. It snaps off because it's made of plastic.

It wasn't glued on well enough. But you're probably too young to remember the original Star Trek. So that probably didn't make any sense to you.

But no, I watched the first Star Trek with my father when I was a little boy. Oh, isn't that sweet?

On daddy's knee. OK, my question. Yes. Did Dave Hunt said that Calvin taught that God would give non -elect false assurance to better damn them.

And I was wondering, is Dave quoting Calvin right? I know he has a hard time quoting people in context.

So I was wondering, is that an accurate quote? Or what did Calvin teach that? And if he did, what are your thoughts on that?

My understanding is, and I would need to look at this specific, because I think he even made that point in our book.

And by that point, I was so tired of all the ad hominem silliness. I probably didn't even bother looking it up.

But there is a quote that I have seen where Calvin in talking about the judgment of God upon false teachers and upon those, like in 2

Thessalonians, refused to love the truth. That God can indeed send a deluding influence upon someone to increase their judgment in the sense of causing them to love a lie.

And of course, that's exactly what Paul said. Those who refuse to love the truth, God would send a deluding influence upon them and cause them to love a lie.

And so it would not be Calvin's position that that is normative, that God would send such a judgment upon someone in a normative situation.

But I can certainly see where Calvin would say, and I would agree that there are situations where God is certainly within God's purview, for example, with Pharaoh to harden a person's heart so as to bring judgment and glory to himself in the process of so doing.

With Pharaoh, you have that in the destruction of the gods of Egypt, the demonstration of God's power. I think we see that in our own land in a context of where people are today going far beyond where previous generations had gone in demonstrating what the total depravity of man is really all about and what certain beliefs really do entail.

And so it's one of those situations where when Calvin's talking about a particular situation or a particular thing that God does in a particular context, that he will take that, remove it from its context and say, ah, see, here is this terrible thing that God in Calvin's writings, this terrible, horrible, nasty person who delights to basically torture his creatures.

But in point of fact, what is being discussed is the fact that God has the right with condemned individuals to use them to his honor and his glory as he did with Pharaoh.

And so I would agree with that. But that doesn't mean that what Calvin said is that's what God does with all the reprobate, that he's just, you know, toying with them and giving them false assurance and things like that.

The irony is, and of course, Piper couldn't get into this because it wasn't what the debate was supposed to be about. The irony is that Hunt's entire position on that subject is just completely irrational.

I mean, I cannot understand. I can't figure it out. I tried to get into this a little bit in the book.

I don't know if you've seen Debating Calvinism or not. But I tried to touch on this and point out that in essence, from his perspective, there is no such thing as false faith.

As long as faith is faith, it's real faith. And that comes from the fact he's constantly quoting

Dr. Wilkin and the folks that are extremely anti -lordship.

And there is no such thing as a dead faith versus a living faith, a type of a contrast and that kind of stuff.

And so it just seems to me that his position is such that you cannot falsify faith.

Any person who says he has it, well, they must have it. And yet, isn't Dave Hunt known as the one who constantly is talking about the false faith of Roman Catholics or Mormons or others?

Isn't there a means of falsifying their faith? I guess as long as it's a professed faith in what he would consider an orthodox confession, which by the way, for Dave Hunt, does not just include

Trinitarian issues or even gospel issues, but includes eschatological issues.

I've heard him talk about a man going into apostasy because the man went from believing in the dispensational pre -tribulation rapture theory to not believing in the dispensational pre -tribulational rapture theory.

And so that's an act of apostasy, I guess. But other than that, as long as you are in the right group,

I guess as long as you say you have faith, you've got it. You can just go out and live like I don't know what and all will be well.

So I would assume that's what he's referring to. I'd have to look at the specific reference to get any further context in that.

But that's what I have read in Calvin and hope that helps answer the question. Well, could

I ask a clarifying question? Sure, go ahead. So could it be, would it be something to the effect of maybe a person saying,

I believe in Christ, but yet their life doesn't show it kind of thing? Or would it be someone like,

I can't give an example of a person, but a person that just is like having faith, living the Christian life, thinks they're a believer, has this assurance, and then on the day of judgment,

God's like, nope, that wasn't you. Well, in that context, I think what you'd be having, the only type of false assurance would be in the context of someone who holds, is holding to a false teaching or a false gospel.

And yet testifies that, well, you know, the Holy Spirit has spoken to me and the

Holy Spirit has revealed to me that I do in fact, you know, have eternal life and so on and so forth.

I don't think it would be a situation. You have someone who actually is holding to it.

And I'm talking about Calvin. I'm not talking about Dave Hunt. Is it actually believes the truth and yet, and has given this false sense of assurance so that they then are, you know,

God's just going, ah, sorry, gotcha. That wasn't the context in which I've ever heard

Calvin talking about such judgment. Judgment is never upon God's elect. It's never upon God's people in that form.

And I don't see him ever believing that God's truth is used in that way. Instead, you have those individuals and I've met,

I've met individuals who honestly, they, they, they hold to a completely false gospel.

They hold to things that are just, just directly contradicted by scripture. And yet they will talk about having assurance.

They will talk about having the assurance of faith and, and over a long period of time and the whole nine yards.

And so that is my assumption is what he would be referring to again. And, you know, unless we took the time here to, uh, you know, fire up, uh,

Calvin and track down the exact reference, uh, uh, which, you know, it's probably in the book someplace here, but it is,

I can, I can read the channel and do a little few things in there and a few other things while talking, but once you start trying to read and find stuff on a page, it's very, very difficult to, uh, uh, track down stuff in that, in that context.

So maybe if we had a specific context to look at, we could get a little bit more specific with the exact application he was, he was making.

Okay. Would an example of a group be like the LDS church? Um, well, they're always saying, you know,

I, I know the spirit, tell me, I testify to you that this is the true gospel.

Uh, you know, in, in Calvin's Europe, uh, there wasn't anything that was that far out.

I mean, I, uh, Calvin would, would just roll his eyes at, uh, something like that. Uh, just so far removed from biblical

Christianity and, and the very idea of even claiming to, to be biblical

Christianity. He, he would have, uh, mocked to an, an incredible degree, but, um, uh, really,

I think in his context, he was especially talking about individuals of false teachers, uh, who were opposing him in the sense of Roman Catholics who, uh, would speak much of a, a, um, a sense of confidence, which is ironic given tridentine

Roman Catholic teachings that, that would in essence say, you can't have that very kind of confidence.

That's the sin of presumption and things like that. Uh, but the idea being, uh, that there are, there are individuals who can consistently testify that they have this sense of confidence and yet biblically they are believing something is, is false and damning.

And, uh, hence he was saying that, uh, with some individuals, again, in the context of, uh, those who refuse to love the truth, they can be caused to love a lie.

And obviously those people who are loving the lie don't think it's a lie. They think it's the truth and they love it.

And hence they claim to love the truth. Uh, we see this in, in all sorts of religions and it is a, it is a judgment from God.

All right. Okay. Hey, stay cool down there. I'll try. Hopefully you guys don't get out of power because we're on a different power grid than you.

So, oh, well, that's, uh, I'll have AC if you're going, if yours goes out. Oh, well, thank you very much for that.

Uh, I'm sure that we will all drive down to Casa Grande at that point in time. And that'll probably cause you some problems.

You can come kick it at my house. That's okay. Okay, man. All right. Thanks a lot. All right. God bless. Bye. Bye -bye. 877 -753 -3341,

Arizonian, Arizona. I don't know what in the world that's about, but, uh, I guess the folks have been asking me some questions.

And in fact, I think I saw a personal message scroll by while I was talking and that's a, you said

Arizonian. Oh, it's Arizona. Oh, okay. That's what that was.

Uh, oh, okay. Here's a personal message. Um, somebody, uh, who's, who remained nameless, uh, from Florida, uh, wants me to note that, um, early savings rates, uh, for the cruise have been extended until August 8th, but payment must be made in full.

Uh, so there's still a opportunity of, uh, grabbing an incredible deal there.

And I've, you know, I've talked to so many folks keep going, man, I want to do that, man. I want to do that. And I'm like, we'll do it.

Here's, here's a chance. And, uh, we have a need of a, um, there's, there's someone, and let me, let me make sure that, uh, uh, is, is, uh, oh, he's not in channel right now.

Oh, so that means I can, I can absolutely, you know, mock him, um, to, to death. But, uh, one of the nice guys in channel, um,

I don't follow that either. Sorry. Um, one of the nice guys in channel needs a roommate for the cruise.

Okay. And he's a, he's a really fluffy guy. And, um, and we mean that sort of like as in puffy, uh, fluffy, puffy, nice, you know, just, just gets along with everybody type thing.

So, uh, we, we want to encourage everybody in case you've sort of forgotten about it. Uh, we, we are going to be, uh, escaping, uh, into the

Pacific ocean. Uh, Lord willing, I will, I really hope I'm feeling good this cruise.

And it was cause the boat thing, the boat was wonderful. Uh, I just, I just got sick, uh, the night of the debate with Greg Stafford.

And I really hope that doesn't happen this time. I really, really, really do. I, I, I hope that we've got a, we end up having an excellent debate with Doug Wilson, uh, on some of the issues that started this program.

Um, and in fact, I'll be quite honest with you. I think that the reason that we have people saying things like what

I talked about at the beginning of this program, informing us that when in second John verse two,

John says, the truth will be with us. How can you have someone who is a member of what's called a reformed church?

In fact, part of Wilson's own denomination, uh, come to the conclusion that the truth that will be with us, well, that's only about Christ.

That's only about, and that's not even about the work of Christ. It's about the person of Christ, uh, and that forensic justification, uh, you know, those, and in fact, uh, uh, the, including the solas, which had been mocked in an earlier post.

Um, I think that that is taking the fundamental foundational issues of this objective covenant stuff to a new level.

And that's why we're doing this debate. This is the kind of confusion that this kind of theology engenders.

We're seeing it. And some might say, well, that's not Doug Wilson's fault. Well, if we can address it on that level, maybe there are some others who can be warned.

Uh, that's, um, you know, sometimes you, you grab hold of a tradition. That's just simply, it's just simply wrong.

And you, you take it, you take it the wrong direction. Ah, gracious sakes.

That's, this is still, I sit there looking at that. Just, just go, Oh my goodness. Uh, eight, seven, seven, uh, seven, five, three, three, four.

And anyways, what I'm saying is in regards to the, um, Oh. Oh, it's been sent to me more than once.

Okay. I'm just scrolling through stuff here in the channel. Make sure I've gotten all of the, uh, all the stuff here that I need to need to get.

Did you do, do, do, do, do, do. Okay. Uh, see now, if I wanted sound effects, I'd get a piece of paper here and I would be shaking it and, uh, things like that.

And then I'd sound like a certain, very well -known person, but anyhow, um, I'm really looking forward to the cruise and I would really like to be feeling alive, uh, during the course of that.

So we can have some great discussions, uh, concerning the doctor justification and all the things that are related to it.

You know, the more, you know, maybe this is, I've got to learn. God has a purpose in all these things.

And yes, it is extremely, and you can tell the beginning of this program. It just, I don't understand how someone who can say they once believed these things could so easily end up slighting them like this in that way and lend to the, um, the enemies of the faith, all sorts of, of things like that, uh, all sorts of, um, you know, aid and comfort in essence.

Um, but despite all that, I honestly think that as we are forced to consider these things,

I cannot help but think that the heart that's been touched by the Holy Spirit of God, despite all of the, the stuff that's going on, eventually what happens is a person is going to go, you know what?

If there's anything that is dependent upon me and my works of righteousness and my perseverance and my covenant acts of faithfulness, if I don't stand clothed in the alien righteousness of Christ, I will not persevere.

I will not be able to stand the presence of God. And as a result, maybe the doctrine of justification, which has been taken for granted for so long will be counted precious once again, even if by a smaller group of people than took it for granted before.

And if that's what happens, great, wonderful. If our understanding is increased, if, if God's people are blessed and benefited, then that's, that's great.

That's wonderful. Uh, 877 -753 -3341. Let's talk with Jamin in, uh,

South Dakota. Hi, Jamin. Hey, how you doing? Doing good. I just want to thank you for your ministry. You're pretty popular up, up here in South Dakota.

Really? There you go. There you go. See, you know, I go to New York and I'll have,

I'll have 20 people show up in New York for a talk, but hey dude, you're, you're, you rock

South Dakota, man. Doesn't South Dakota only have one congressman?

I don't even know. There's like five people there. Wyoming only has one.

That's, I heard the vice president saying that. The Wyoming only has one. So hey, you know what? I'm glad to be loved in South Dakota.

Maybe I'll end up needing to move there or something like that. That'd be a good thing. Actually, yeah. A guy from Phoenix, Arizona moved up here, a friend of mine.

He said he hated Phoenix, but. Well, this time of year, it's, it's fairly easy to say things like that.

Yeah. I'm sorry about the power outages and all that. Well, you know, so far we've survived. So that's the important part. What's up?

Um, couple of questions. Uh, well, I'm writing a refutal to a book written by a local author by a pastor.

Now, is a refutal a mix of a rebuttal and a refutation? That's, I don't, I don't even know.

It's a fair question. Rebuttal, whatever. So we'll get ahold of this in an attempt to prove his case against, it's an anti -Calvinism book, basically.

Oh, okay. Okay. And it's 2 Thessalonians 2, 13. Oh, yeah. His argument is, um, that it's, it's talking about salvation from the tribulation period.

I've already talked to guys in the channel about this, and they said it's entirely eisegetical. And I agree with that. It's just that, what, what does this mean though?

I mean, this, in this context. Well, uh, amazingly that, uh, you know, for this reason,

God will send upon them a deluding influence. They will believe what is false. And we were just talking about that. They all may be judged.

You would not believe the truth, took pleasure in wickedness. Now the problem here is certain eschatological systems, uh, throw this totally into the future so that his idea is, well, 13 following that therefore is within this eschatological concept of the future antichrist, things like that.

But the problem is that, uh, we ought always to give thanks to God concerning you brethren is present tense, not future tense.

And that might give an indication that second Thessalonians two 13, it says, but we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren be loved by the

Lord. Not some future tense group, but Paul is addressing the Thessalonians. And this is the passage you're talking about, right?

Uh, when it says brethren be loved by the Lord, that's right now because God has chosen you.

So he's talking about his direct audience at that particular point in time, the Thessalonians of the first century, probably this would be the seventh decade of the first, well, sixth decade of the first century.

Uh, God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation to sanctification of the spirit and faith in the truth that has nothing to do with any kind of futuristic application that can be limited to some tribulation period.

And so you can demonstrate that by the fact that, that he specifically addresses the people to whom he's speaking.

He uses the very same language he uses in any other of his epistles. When he says we are under obligation or debt, uh, to give thanks concerning you.

This is a common phraseology he uses. But then when he says that he says, because not because of what they've done, but because God has chosen you.

And then there's a, there's a textual variant here. It can either be read as, as first fruits under salvation or from the beginning for salvation.

I addressed that, um, wow. Is that in the, in the books coming out in October?

I think, I think it is. I think, uh, I have a footnote on that particular issue and I'm not sure why I would have been addressing it in this context.

Oh yes, that's right. Cause I'm talking about second is two 15, uh, in the book about tradition and stuff like that.

I knew I'd read it someplace. Anyhow, uh, there's a textual variant there. And some of your translations will say as first fruits, uh, for salvation, something from the beginning for salvation.

There's the total, the difference is exactly one letter, uh, our cane versus our par case. So anyways, but, uh, the reason that Paul's giving thanks for them right then is because of what

God has done in bringing about their salvation, his sanctification by the spirit and faith in the truth. So to try to remove this, well, it wasn't really trying to remove it.

It's just talking about that, that sanctification and that, that salvation was during the tribulation.

But there's absolutely no base. It's coming from a particular understanding of the preceding four or five verses.

But the problem is, uh, if that was to be put off into the future, you would not have, but we should always give thanks to God for you.

And it's present tense. We are currently, we ought to present indicative active.

We ought to give thanks for you. So to, to remove that is to, uh, to completely dismiss it from its, its real context.

Okay. Uh, another one. How much time do I got a couple of minutes? Yeah, you got a couple. Yeah. Uh, first Peter three,

I think, uh, 16. Okay. Or wait.

Yeah. Three, six. Well, yeah, the one, uh, yeah, yeah, that's right.

I think. And keep a good conscience. So then the thing which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior. It was the one talking about the spirits in prison.

Oh, oh, oh, oh. Uh, yeah. Okay. Uh, well, I've been, I just done a lot of research on that, on the, uh, the whole different views of Hades and shield and, and all that's

Tartarus there. Tartaru. Yeah. And, uh, evidently there's three of them, the

Ghana, uh, Tartaru and Hades. But what, what is, what does that mean?

I mean, in that passage, what, what spirits in prison? I mean, what does that mean? Yeah, there is, uh, there is a tremendous amount of, uh, of discussion about what that's about.

And, and, uh, uh, it's, it's interesting that there are those who, um, have presented the concept of a, uh, a, a holding place for particular spirits.

Um, and there's, there's actually some, some decent, uh, uh,

I don't know if you've read, uh, Kenneth Wiest on that, uh, John MacArthur holds that viewpoint, uh, so on and so forth.

Um, there's, there's a number of parallels between second Peter and Jude, uh, at that particular point, for example, second

Peter two, four, if God not spare angels when they sin, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness reserved for judgment.

And then that's contrast that's, uh, paralleled with, um, uh, Jude's discussion of those, um, those creatures not keep their first estate, but lusted after strange flesh, um, so on and so forth.

And so there, there, there are those who have, uh, felt that this was, um, uh, angelic spirits that were involved in some sort of rebellious activity prior to the destruction of the world by the flood.

And that when Christ, uh, uh, makes proclamation, he doesn't preach the gospel, but he makes proclamation of his victory, uh, to them.

He is in essence, just proclaiming to them his victory over their attempt to have, um, uh, scuttled

God's plan in essence. And, uh, like I said, that's what you have both in Wiest and, um, and John MacArthur.

Now, again, this was a, a sermon that I listened to from MacArthur from about 20 years ago. So I, I, I don't want to speak for him now.

Um, now of course there are those who say, well, uh, that can't possibly be, be the case at all.

And it can't be the case at all because, um, if angels can take on any form of human flesh, then that would destroy the, um, uh, ability we have to know that Jesus Christ truly rose from the dead.

Um, I, I, I don't necessarily buy that idea at all.

Um, I, I think we do need to try to at least explain, uh, who these spirits were. And, uh, it doesn't seem that they are human spirits.

And, uh, there does seem to be the parallel that we have to deal with between Jude and Peter at that point. So there is a lot to it.

And, you know, I, I don't consider it a real big major issue. Testament doesn't either. But, um,

I do tend actually to, to lean that direction more than I, than I do some of the other viewpoints, uh, that have been expressed out there.

Okay. All right. One more, um, what I'm doing some studies on the heart and I've been reading some books on things.

You ever heard of, heard of a John Eldridge? Name doesn't ring a bell. Well, he wrote some books.

He's not much of a theologian, actually kind of a lame theologian. But, um, he, he's making his point in this book that the heart of man is good.

The regenerate heart. Uh, then I would agree with you. He's not much. Oh, the regenerate heart. Okay. And I, I'm just,

I'm thinking in my head, okay, well, how good and how long is it good? I mean, I can't, his argument was kind of like that, you know, in the old

Testament in the Holy of Holies was the dwelling place of God, right? Uh huh.

In the, in our tabernacle. Well, what is our body is the temple of the Lord and where is the

Holy of Holies in us? Well, it's our heart. Well, so since the spirit of God dwells in the heart, it, where God dwells, there must not be any evil.

So the regenerate heart is, is good. You mean sinlessly good? See, that's what

I don't, I don't know. I mean, what is the connection between the, uh, the heart and the soul and the spirit?

I mean, you know, like in the greatest commandment, we're given those four things or three.

But using parallelism for the strength in the mind, right. But, um, well,

I certainly am one who, who believes that the, the biblical presentation of man is, is not one that, uh, we

Westerners try to divide man up into constituent parts. Yes, there is a recognition of the, the intellect or the will, the heart, um, in, in man.

There's no question of that. But I, I think we are, when we start dividing man up into all sorts of constituent parts so that the, uh, well, the, the heart is pure, but the mind may not be or something like that.

No man is man. And yes, there is a, there is the, the fact that we have been made righteous, uh, in Christ.

And that's why the Holy Spirit can dwell in us. But there is also the discussion of remaining sin.

And, uh, I don't, you know, one, one of the various falsehoods and heresies out there that I honestly don't have a lot of experience in dealing with is perfectionism.

I don't know if he's actually talking about perfectionism. Um, ironically, B .B. Warfield has an entire book on perspectivism.

Had, obviously he's, uh, long gone, but, um, uh, I don't run into many per, uh, perfectionists these days.

They, I know there are a few out there, uh, and to be honest with you, I really have a hard time dealing with anyone, uh, who thinks they're sinlessly perfect.

Uh, I feel like just sort of popping them in the nose and if they get angry about it, I just proved that they're wrong anyway. So, uh, it's, it's just really hard for me to, you know, to deal with that, you know?

Oh, so, uh, you're telling me that, uh, you know, That isn't really his position, but I know what you're saying.

Um, it's, it's just, I don't, I don't know where it's leading. And I don't really understand how that imputed righteousness works.

I mean, how he can keep on sinning. Well, you see, that's, yeah, that's the basis.

The righteousness remains. Yeah, well, and that's because it's not a righteousness based upon our actions and our fulfillment, but it is

Christ's actions and Christ's fulfillment. And the work of sanctification is what then brings about our own hatred and detestation of sin and our desire to fulfill the commandments of God.

That is, that's sanctification. That does not add to our justification, uh, an area that unfortunately a lot of people are missing the boat on today.

Hey, Jamin, thank you very much for your phone call. We are out of time. Uh, enjoy things up there in South Dakota where it's a lot nicer than here.

We will see you Thursday evening here on The Dividing Line, seven o 'clock Eastern Daylight Time. God bless.