August 7, 2003

This is The Dividing Line, with 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. We'll be listening this afternoon, as we have a number of things to discuss today.

Don't forget, coming up on the 19th, we will be joined by Eric Svensson.

We're going to be analyzing various statements made by Roman Catholic apologist

Jerry Matytix in their debate on Mary, sort of in preparation, a little bit of a preview of what

I can expect in the debate coming up in October between myself and Mr.

Matytix on the exact same subject. I don't know that I've ever done a debate where I was able to listen, well,

I'll take that back. I had heard Mr. Matytix debate on Sola Scriptura, but not against anyone who was particularly compelling prior to my first debate with him.

So I couldn't say that I've necessarily really had that opportunity before. It is an interesting way of preparing for a debate, is hearing exactly how it's been debated before.

So one thing that will be different is I think we'll have a few more Protestants at this one than there was at the one that Mr.

Svensson was talking about. Dr. Svensson was talking about he was one of two Protestants in the room, or at least

Evangelicals in the room anyway, so that'll be a lot of fun. But first, before we get started with the program today,

I would like to welcome to the program, back from where I bet it's a lot more humid than it is here, but probably not quite as hot as it is here,

Florida, Michael Fallon is on the phone. How are you doing, Mike? Good, how are you, sir? Do you like having air conditioning in your car now?

Yeah, actually I've had it. I've been under the luxury of air conditioning for a good two years, God providentially gave me that.

You don't drive down the road with your hands out the window with the air rushing through the shirt type thing?

Only for just good fond memories of spending time with you, Jay. Oh, I tell you, you just adapt, you know?

You do what you have to do, and that was... What's the humidity like out there this time of year? Believe it or not, you really want to know, it's between 95 to 100 percent.

95 to 100 percent? Do you even bother with towels after showers, or do you even bother with showers?

Well, you would know that. Probably shouldn't share that with everyone, but... Okay, alright, well we'll move on from there.

I just thought I'd let you know it's 108 degrees here right now, and 109 degrees.

Oh, man. Dew point of 62 degrees, so the heat... Boy, just stick an apple in your dog's mouth and...

Yeah, yeah, the heat index is 112, so it's pretty nice out here right now.

It truly is. Anyway, we're getting out of all this stuff come December, on a little old cruise that you have arranged, and there's breaking news in regards to the cruise, because how long ago was it that basically we sort of said, well, we've sort of sold all our cabins?

How long has that been now? Not long at all, actually. We sold out of all of our cabins in mid -June.

Okay. We have been without the ability to book into any more cabins since that time.

We've sold, if your folks can believe it, 86 cabins. Wow. And the amount of persons that we had attending our cruise is up to right now at about 180.

Cool. Including folks that are three in a room and four in a room and so forth. Right, right. So we have a tremendous amount of people that, for some reason, want to come and listen to you,

James. No, I reject that. That's not why they're coming. But, now, is Warren, is he still going to be in the dinghy behind the boat that we're just going to tie to the back?

Is that still how Warren's going? No, actually, we filled out the work papers for him, and he's going to be our dining room steward.

I've got to play that for him. That's great. So it's sort of a work study program type thing.

Is that how it works? I was going to say, it's a good thing he didn't hear that. Well. We love

Warren. We really do. He's a wonderful guy. Why do we pick on him like this? It's a terrible thing.

Anyway, you have some news for us, though. Yes, we do. And the great news is that, as of right now, we have a wonderful, just,

I mean, first of all, I want to give just a word to a young lady who's been helping us immensely.

And you and I are both aware of this. And she is in the inside there at Holland America Line and has helped us on numbers of things.

And her name is Rebecca Laurie. And she has helped us out with all sorts of tight situations and things and gone to bat for us and helped out our group.

And one thing that she's been instrumental in is helping us set up a wait list group, which is unlike the wait list group that you would be on if you were trying to book into this ship any other way.

And we have wait list prices that are a loan for Alpha and Omega. Now, I want to make sure everyone understands that this is a wait list group, not a wait list group, because I wasn't really able to tell exactly what it is.

W -A -I -T. There you go. All right. Just wanted to make sure everyone understood that if you're like Mike and I and you're not wait list, you can still take advantage of this.

Right? Basically what's happened is that we have rates that are considerably lower than what the general booking rate is.

They're not quite where we were with our original contract before we completely ran out of cabins.

But what they are is they're only about 10 % higher. So instead of having an 84 % discount, you have about a 74 % discount.

Still incredible rates. Awesome rates. 74 % off the regular rate. And you can start in with these cabins, with an inside cabin, at just about $390.

Wow. Which is still a fantastic rate. That added with your port taxes and so forth is still lower than any of our previous four cruises that we've done.

Right. With Alpha and Omega and Proclaiming the Gospel. So there's really, golly, if there's an opportunity that you could jump on with us on the wait list, and that's where they start for the inside, they go up to I think about $900 for a suite.

But if you have the opportunity to book on with us, I can guarantee you this, if you take a look at the cruises and their rates and so forth going into next year, the 2004, as right now

I'm trying to book somebody a honeymoon on a cruise line, there's no way you can touch these rates.

It's just impossible. And you're never going to see rates even like this again. It's just not going to happen. People, we have gotten over all sorts of war fears and other things, and we've moved on.

So unless you are planning on betting on some sort of nuclear catastrophe happening in the Middle East the next time that you plan to go cruising, this would be the time to go.

And I couldn't think of a better way to spend the week with fantastic apologetics.

This is exactly the way that we've wanted to do things over the past four years, and we have the opportunity to do it now.

Well, that sounds really exciting. Now, you said you also needed to talk to the folks who have already signed up?

Yes. For the folks that have already signed up, let me just give you a little bit of information here.

First of all, we will be staying at the Tampa downtown Hyatt, and that is the night before we cruise.

We are cruising on the 6th of December. On the 5th of December, you need to make sure that your flight gets in sometime before 5 p .m.

because our debate between James White and Greg Stafford is going to be starting at 7 o 'clock sharp, possibly 7 .30,

so it's 7 o 'clock dull. So if you are in the cruise with us, there is no admission charge to the debate.

So you will just book your room with us, and you can go ahead and give me a call to do that, but those fees will be due with your final payment.

The final payment is due on September 12th. So if you've already signed up for the cruise, that's what you need to know.

The second thing is, on the 13th, when we return from the cruise, you need to get your flight out of Tampa and have it booked no earlier than 2 p .m.

That's pretty much it. Now, Dr. White, I think you're going to be testing out the waters with Holland America, so you can let us know in a few weeks what to expect.

Well, not exactly the same boat and the same cruise, but, yes,

I'll definitely let you know about what it's like, you bet. In fact, I was just noticing in Carl Keating's e -letter that – in fact,

I almost forwarded it to you, and I think I forgot to do so – that they just got back from Alaska, and it was – and I still wonder what it would be like to end up on the same ship at the same time.

Can you imagine if you were on the ball with those guys? Or, you know, sun -drenched to the cruise with five guys or something?

And being that I'm – yeah, I'd end up at the same table or something. That would be really – Yeah, the Gale River, I apologize.

You get to Glacier Bay and dump out all the NIBs into the water. Anyway, folks, you don't want to miss this great time, and I don't want to take up any more of your valuable time on this show.

And I'll sign off. If anybody has any questions, they can give me a call at 727 -452 -6453.

Now, that's a number that's still a number on the website. We'll need to update those. You're going to be sending us the new prices, right?

I've already sent Rich and you, I think, the new prices about a week and a half ago. Oh, okay. Just check your sent items and so forth, or your inbox, and you should be able to find them.

I will send them again, though. Oh, well, you know, once I start seeing details, my eyes just sort of glaze over, if it's not in Greek or something like that.

Well, you're not busy or anything. No, no, not in the slightest in any way, shape, or form.

So, okay, great. Thank you, Mike, and thank you for all you do. And I hope you'll keep listening because maybe something interesting will happen on the program today.

You never know. Okay, sir, thank you. All right, man, thanks a lot. God bless. Bye -bye. If you want to see that information, obviously,

I don't think we've updated the prices yet, so just add, like, 10 % to them for the moment, but we'll get that done.

That link is still on the main page at aomin .org, at least I hope it is.

So, 877 -753 -3341 is the phone number.

If you want to jump online and have questions, we've been having just a tremendous amount of audience participation the past few weeks, and I'm looking forward to that continuing because that really does help a lot in making sure that we're talking about the things that interest you folks.

I did want to play, just again to remind you all, and we'll need to turn the computer up here,

I wanted to play another little section, just a brief one, not as long as I did the last time, from the

Eric Spenson and Jerry Matik's debate. We're not going to be able to get to all this stuff anyways when Eric is on, so it's not like we're going to, oh, there's nothing left to say with Eric because we covered it all.

This is in the cross -examination period, and it was, again, cross -exam is always where you really start discovering if someone has substance to their position or if their position collapses upon examination.

The house of cards and the wind blows and it all comes apart, and I think that's pretty much what happened to Mr.

Matik's presentation. I could certainly tell that in listening to what he was saying.

It was very obvious to me that he was playing games in light of the clear presentation that Professor Spenson had given, and then a question was asked by Eric Spenson, and I just loved how this illustrated the real issue.

Let's go ahead and listen to this question. Can I listen to it? Okay. Okay. Mr. Matik, do you believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter?

Do I believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? Do you believe Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? I have to be honest and admit

I've never given it any thought, but can we infer it safely from the text? Hold on a second. There's such a pause there that I'm not sure.

I don't think this can actually work. Let's listen to this again.

Okay. Okay. Mr. Matik, do you believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter?

Do I believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? Do you believe Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? I have to be honest and admit

I've never given it any thought, but can we infer it safely from the text? That Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter.

Right. This is what this makes me think of when I hear this.

Why isn't it working? Oh, I know why it's not working. It would help if I did it right. That's what

I think about when I hear that. Did Peter's mother -in -law have a daughter? Now, think about it.

You can tell this had never been thought of before, but you see what he's trying to get at, and I'll let it play all the way through.

I'll quit playing, but it's obvious to me Jerry knows exactly where this is going.

Okay. Okay. Mr. Matik, do you believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter?

Do I believe that Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? Correct. Do you believe Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter? I have to be honest and admit

I've never given it any thought. But can we infer it safely from the text? That Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter.

Right. How do we... Help me infer it from the text.

It's a pretty easy question, Mr. Matik. Did Peter's mother -in -law have a daughter?

Well, obviously a wife. Peter had a mother -in -law. Did that mother -in -law have a daughter? Yeah, that's not an inference.

I'm saying that's... I don't understand your question. Okay. You asked... Peter married somebody. You asked earlier...

And he married a woman. You asked earlier whether there was a passage that specifically names... Or specifically says

Mary had other children. But we do have passages where Jesus is said to have brothers.

We have passages where Jesus is said to have a mother. We actually infer from that that the mother of Jesus and the brother of Jesus have the same son -daughter...

Or son -mother relationship. Only the same way... In the same way that Peter... We infer from Peter having a mother -in -law and having a wife.

We don't need the New Testament, in other words, to tell us specifically every conceivable way that a relationship might be in existence.

We don't need it to say Peter's mother -in -law had other children. And one of those children was a daughter.

And that daughter married Peter. We don't need it to say that because we can infer from a common relationship with Peter, can't we? But there's no analogy.

This doesn't help your position at all. It does help my position because you're saying that we require a passage that says specifically

Mary had other children. But that would be like requiring a passage that says

Peter's mother -in -law had other children... Before we could believe that there was a daughter -mother relationship with Peter's wife and Peter's mother -in -law.

The reason the analogy doesn't hold is because Peter has to marry a woman. So of course his mother -in -law would have to have a daughter.

But the word of Delphos, both sides agree, even though you don't think it's relevant in these instances, can be used, has been used, both in a broader and narrower sense.

So we're not necessarily driven to the conclusion in what age. If we're told that Jesus had brothers, therefore we don't need a statement that Mary had children, then it can only be interpreted in that one way.

Can you cite one instance where Adolphos or Adolphe is used that way in the New Testament era? The very instances that we're debating.

Did you hear that? Did you hear that? Did you hear that? The very passages that we're talking about.

Talk about circular argumentation. Having to assume the very texts that are under debate to answer the question.

And Eric just nails them. That way in the New Testament era. The very instances that we're debating, yes.

Yeah, no. Presenting from the disputed passages, can you cite one instance, so that we can establish the usage.

You can't establish the usage from the disputed text, you are aware of this. You need to have, there are thousands upon thousands of instances of Adolphos in that literature,

Mr. Mantis. You can't produce even one? Actually, let me take back what I just conceded. You can establish usage from a text when you look at how that text is understood.

Yes, and is there something in the context that leads you to believe that these were cousins or close relatives rather than siblings?

It just goes on. It was, I just, I loved the question.

It was so well put. And I can guarantee you, I'm going to raise the very same issue, but I'll probably do it in my presentation as an illustration.

Of the fact that consistently, Mr. Mantis is going to have to take passages in their absolutely most unusual form.

To be able to come up with his position. It's just, I just thought that was wonderful.

It was great. Did Peter's mother -in -law have a daughter? Oh, that's classic.

877 -753 -3341 is the phone number.

And let's go ahead and start with our phone calls. We only have one of them at the moment, but that means lines are open if you'd like to join us.

877 -753 -3341. Let's talk with Scott in Edmonds, Washington.

Hello, Scott. Hello, James. How are you, sir? I'm doing splendidly. How are you doing? I'm doing all right.

All right. I had a question for you. I have a roommate who is very solidly a four -square church attender.

And so he takes the typical, you know, Armenian line. I don't think he's really thought about it too much.

He just kind of, that's what's always been fed to him. And we were discussing perseverance of the saints the other day, and I was showing him some of the text, and we were going through it.

And he seemed to not really want to discuss the text anymore, and he kind of turned to, so what?

You know, what does it matter if I believe in perseverance or not? It's not essential to my salvation that I believe it. And I wasn't really exactly sure what

I should respond to that with, because it just kind of struck me as an odd question. So what would your response to that be?

Well, if someone were to ask me why is that so important, I would say, well, really it's important because it speaks to the very foundation of how we view salvation itself.

In other words, fundamentally, you will determine your belief on the eternality of salvation, the security of salvation, the continuance of salvation, based upon whether you view salvation as something that is anthropocentric or theocentric.

It's either centered upon man and man's fulfillment of requirements, man's efforts, man's cooperation, or it is something that is solely to the glory of God and none to the glory of man whatsoever.

So really, the whole issue is very pastoral. When you deal with individuals, for example, who are excessively introspective, they refuse to, for various and sundry reasons, really embrace the promises of Christ and trust in the finished nature of His work, that can have tremendous pastoral ramifications.

It really speaks to the nature of faith and to their understanding of the Gospel as well. And so if someone were to ask me, well, what does it really matter?

It's not going to impact my salvation. In many ways it does, because in essence, it's speaking to whether you believe that salvation is the result of a cooperative effort between you and Christ, that Christ really has no final and fundamental control over, and hence cannot finally be the one glorified for its completion, or whether you believe

John 6 .39, the fact that Jesus will always do the will of the Father, He will always please the

Father, He will always be successful in what He does. And so it really goes back to answering that question, whether you believe salvation is all of God, or it's partly of God and partly of man.

And so that's how I would at least approach it, so as to get to the fundamental issues, the foundational issues, right off the bat.

Okay, yeah, I think you're right. And I think fundamentally I need to go back to is salvation a monergistic or synergistic process?

Because I think that's our fundamental disagreement. And that's why he doesn't understand the whole rest of what I say and why it's important.

Because he doesn't understand the fundamental assertion, or the truth, that salvation is wholly of God.

Well, it's ironic that you would call it that question, because the fact that I've been recently getting some emails from a fellow,

I'm not really exactly certain how he ended up with my email address, but Dan Corner, ever heard of Dan Corner?

Sounds familiar. He's got... Yeah, okay, yeah, I've seen him on the internet. Yeah. He bashes you on the internet.

Right. And he's got this big, huge, humongous book against what he calls OSAS, Once Saved, Always Saved.

He's a fellow who has put out some real audio stuff about me, stuff like that.

In fact, there's an article on our website, and there's a link to the dividing line

I did in 2001, where I exposed him and how he had edited stuff and things like that.

But anyway, this fellow's been... I guess Dan Corner knows him or something, he's been calling him on the phone and trying to convince him he's not truly saved, and telling him that he sins even once after accepting

Christ, that demonstrates he's never truly been saved and he's going to hell, and all the rest is wonderful, fun stuff. And it really speaks to the reality of the fact that from Dan Corner's perspective, and people like him,

I don't know why anyone would call what they proclaim good news. It's not good news.

It's bad news. It is as much a system of slavery as any work salvation system could ever be.

And it really does go back to... He is saying, well, debate me on the topic of my book.

And I would say, well, I'd be glad to debate you, but we're going to start with the foundations. We're going to start with the sovereignty of God, the deadness of man and sin, man's inabilities, the sufficiency of the work of Christ.

We will debate the whole issue. And he tried at one point when I was on a radio program back in St.

Louis. In fact, the same radio program I'm going to be on a week from this coming

Monday to debate David Bernard on Trinitarian issues. He tried to fax in a fax and get me to sign something that would say...

I think we lost our call. Bye, Scott. I was still talking to Scott. That's okay.

He tried to get me to sign a contract that during the program

I would not wander off into the other points of Calvinism. In other words, I can't defend what I actually believe.

I can only defend what he wishes that I believe.

And I said, I'm not going to do that. I don't believe in once saved, always saved. I believe in the

Reformed doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. The reason I believe that salvation is eternal is because it is perfect because of what

Christ has done. And by the way, if you haven't listened to that, if you go to aomin .org,

I believe it's slash O -S -A -S in capitals, not HTML, I think. If you'll go to that, right at the top, there's an update and there's a link to the

Dividing Line archive at straightgate .com. And if you'll listen to it, that was one of the more interesting programs.

Actually, that's a program that Rich did. I wasn't there. And I had recorded a response to Dan Corner, and I played the tape of the

KJSL program I was on. And it's fascinating. I think it's one of the more interesting calls

I've ever gotten was when this woman called in who has a program on KJSL at midnight.

I mean, folks, if you have a talk program at midnight, let's just say you're never going to be

Rush Limbaugh, okay? And this lady calls in, and she's just ripping and shredding on me, and her entire system just collapsed, everything she said.

That was completely unintentional. I turned my sounds off, but that is the sound

I have that announces the arrival of a certain person that many people in the channel know.

Thinker is now online. Isn't that great? Anyway, that's funny.

You should listen just to the phone calls worth it, and then listening to their radio program later that evening when they were inviting me to come on at midnight.

I'm completely asleep at that point in time. It was something that was interesting. Anyhow, let's go ahead and take

Jonathan, and then if we need to hold him over the break, we can do so. 877 -753 -3341 is the phone number.

Why don't you join us? In fact, I'm going to put my computer on mute. That way it won't do anything. We lost

Jonathan. Well, Jonathan was... Everybody in the channel is now hearing the sound that was played when

Lin Thinker joined. Jonathan, give us a call back at 877 -753 -3341 because you had a question on a topic that truly gets people thinking and gets people talking on the subject of cessationism.

We always get a phone call every once in a while on that. Anyone else who would like to join us on the program this afternoon, obviously one of the big things while we're waiting for Jonathan to call back in, if he can,

I mean obviously if he was driving down the road on a cell phone or something and left a cell site or...

That doesn't happen a whole lot. That's because wrong spelling.

www .aomin .org slash osas .html I even said all capitals.

Didn't I say all capitals? Is on what? In on? In on... I don't understand that.

Is... Oh! Well, why don't we take our break first and then we'll take that call.

That sounds like a good idea, doesn't it? Alright, we're going to take our first break, our only break in fact, and be right back with your phone calls right after this.

Answering those who claim that only the King James Version is the Word of God, James White in his book,

The King James Only Controversy, examines allegations that modern translators conspired to corrupt

Scripture and lead believers away from true Christian faith. In a readable and responsible style, author

James White traces the development of Bible translations, old and new, and investigates the differences between new versions and the authorized version of 1611.

You can order your copy of James White's book, The King James Only Controversy, by going to our website at www .aomin

.org. 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 www .aomin

.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 .00. 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 www .prbc

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

Millions of petitioners from around the world are imploring Pope John Paul II to recognize the Virgin Mary as co -redeemer with Christ, elevating the topic of Roman Catholic views of Mary to national headlines and widespread discussion.

In his book, Mary, Another Redeemer, James White sidesteps hostile rhetoric and cites directly from Roman Catholic sources to explore this volatile topic.

He traces how Mary of the Bible, esteemed mother of the Lord, obedient servant and chosen vessel of God, has become the immaculately conceived, bodily assumed queen of heaven, viewed as co -mediator with Christ and now recognized as co -redeemer by many in the

Roman Catholic Church. Mary, Another Redeemer is fresh insight into the woman the

Bible calls blessed among women and an invitation to single -minded devotion to God's truth.

You can order your copy of James White's book, Mary, Another Redeemer, at aomen .org.

Here I stand On the one straw Delivered me

On the Word It's also above His holy name

Here I stand And welcome back to The Dividing Line. My name is James White and we are talking with various and sundry folks.

I'm not sure if this is a conspiracy or what, but we have a John and a

Jonathan online at the same time. And so Jonathan is back, but John called in while Jonathan wasn't there.

So I'm not sure who we're supposed to take first, but let's go ahead and...

Do you have any personal preferences? Which one sounds more desperate? Let's...Jonathan?

Alright, Jonathan sounds more desperate, so we'll talk to Jonathan first. Hi, Jonathan!

Hi there! How are you? I heard that part there. Yes, I'm a rather desperate person,

I've got to admit that. Oh, and it sounds like you've got a bit of an accent, too! Yes, I do.

Oh, where are you... What kind of an accent is it? I'm from the northeast of England, but I'm currently living in Florida, believe it or not.

Oh, this is wonderful, because, you know, John, who's going to be on after you, is a naturalized citizen from England.

Really? So he's going to sound a little bit like you, except he's starting to sound a little bit like a yonk. Yonk? You like to play with the accents, don't you?

Oh, I love... I love... Well, you know... I watch the people in the channel start yelling,

Don't do that! Don't do that! Stop it! And I think it's just great. You know who

I am, I guess, then. No. Oh, no, you don't! All right.

Okay, anyway. But I do like doing the accent stuff. So you had a question.

Yes, I do. And I'm just going to say it as quickly as possible. I have a question in regards to cessationism and charismaticism, if that's okay.

Charismaticism? Yeah, is that a word? I don't know. You mean the charismatic movement? Charismatic movement.

If you put an "-ism on the end, you sound more educated, I guess. Oh, well... But you're already British, so you sound very educated just by talking the way you do.

Oh, very good. Very good. Yeah, very broad question. Okay. What is your opinion, of course?

Well, you know, it's interesting. When people ask about cessationism, and for those few people who live under a rock someplace, we're talking about the...

Generally, when people hear that term, they limit it to the discussion of the issue of tongues.

And in reality, you can't do that, because the issue really has to do with the ministry of the

Holy Spirit. Now, initially, for certainly all of my seminary training, and of course the seminary

I went to didn't really address this issue very much anyway, I understood cessationism in the context of the ceasing of miraculous sign gifts.

Now, that would be things like raising the dead, the kinds of extraordinary, miraculous activities associated with the apostles prior to the writing of the

New Testament. And so tongues was associated with that, but there were other elements in the sense of a prophetic ministry of looking into the future, or special healings and things like that.

I understood cessationism in that terminology. I have since learned that there are people who would not consider me a cessationist, because I do believe that especially, for example, the concept of speaking in tongues, as I understand 1

Corinthians 14, has a particular purpose as enunciated by the Apostle Paul, and that that purpose no longer exists.

And the Holy Spirit being a spirit of order and truth, that a gift that had a particular purpose at a particular time, when that is fulfilled, that I do not believe that gift would continue.

But I've discovered that there are people who would view me as almost a charismatic. And the reason, yes, the reason they would do so is not because I speak in tongues like this is an accent, but there are actually some individuals, not just individuals, but I guess people who take an entire perspective, that there are no miraculous gifts of the

Spirit at all in the sense of, for example, I firmly believe that God gifts certain men with discernment, with the ability to handle the

Scriptures, to explain the Scriptures. I believe that He gifts elders to be able to communicate

God's truth to the people. I believe that the Spirit is involved in that way.

And there are people who reject that. They reject that the Holy... I'm not sure what the Holy Spirit is doing from that perspective at all.

Is he on holiday or something? I don't know, but there are those who take an extremely strict cessationist viewpoint, and hence would view me as not doing, not holding a cessationist viewpoint.

But for most folks, cessationism is primarily limited to the discussion of miraculous sign gifts, and I would hold to that, because I believe there is a purpose that was fulfilled.

Obviously, if you believe that, for example, like Gordon Fee does, that Romans chapter 8, 26 and 27, is referring to a ministry of the

Holy Spirit, interceding and connecting this with the concept of tongues and so on and so forth, you would disagree.

But I would hold that viewpoint. But I don't hold the extreme viewpoint, because I believe that the Holy Spirit does give men gifts to minister within the

Church. Oh, that's very interesting. So you wouldn't be of persuasion that you need to stand in a dark room saying,

I'll have a shandy, I'll have a shandy, I'll have a shandy, and then you kind of burst into something which is...

You know, that obviously happens all the time within certain denominations and certain perspectives.

And obviously, as I look at the Scriptures, that was not what the gift of tongues was about at the time when it was being practiced in the early

Church. And hence, if you have to, in essence, train someone or, in essence, put them into a state of mind where they no longer have control over their tongue, that's not the ministry of the

Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit gives us discipline and gives us a sound mind.

And I'll be perfectly honest with you. When I watch out here in Phoenix, Arizona, it's the channel between 20 and 22, and I never mention the specific channel because I don't want anyone to consider me a mean, terrible, bad, horrible person.

And on there, you have a television network featuring strangely colored hair piled high in the wind and individuals who consider the

Trinity a secondary issue and yet somehow tie that word to the name of their network.

Much of what I watch on there, I look at it, and I have to honestly say, that is not the same religion that I believe in.

I don't understand this. I do not see that the

Spirit of God that I know that gives a desire for the

Word of God, a desire for His truth, and a desire to be consistent in what I believe and to honor and glorify

God, I don't see that in the vast majority of what

I see represented there. And if that is representational of the broad charismatic movement, then we're on really different pages.

Very much so. But, you know, there are many people who would join me in my criticisms of that particular channel between 1 and 22.

In fact, I would agree with you. Yes, indeed. Especially when you made reference to that channel there. Yes, indeed. All right.

Well, thank you, sir. Okay, well, thank you very much. Thank you for calling. God bless. God bless. Bye -bye. All right.

So, we go from Jonathan in the northeast of England. And now we go to John.

And, John, were you in the northeast of England? Northwest of England. Northwest of England.

Now, which is better, the northeast or the northwest? Anywhere in England is better.

Better than what? Somewhere else. Well... I think cessationists should stop it right now.

Oh, and is that why you were calling in? Yeah, I'm here to bring a little culture to the colonies.

Just had an idea as I was hearing the program in progress, or progress, depending on which country you're from, that we should get some t -shirts made,

Peter's mother -in -law had a daughter. And we should have it at all of your debates with the

Catholics. And it would drive everyone nuts. It would be great. And the question is sort of a double -edged sword when you think about it.

Because it also points out that Peter was not exactly a celibate priest -pope.

Now, was he? No, he was married and probably had munchkins and all those things that Roman Catholic priests aren't supposed to have.

And I know, I know, I know everybody admits that. It's a discipline, not a dogma.

I've heard all that stuff before. But, yeah, we could probably sell a lot of those t -shirts.

But the problem is we'd have to pay Eric Svensson a royalty on it. Yeah, there's always a drawback.

There always is a drawback, yeah. So, now, you know, I did tell everybody that you're from the old country, but that you have now done the proper thing.

And that you fly the flag and that you're now a tax -paying

American. Tax -paying? That's going a bit far, isn't it? Yeah, you're absolutely right.

Didn't they explain that part when you went through the thing? No, that was omitted. Ah, okay.

All right, all right. Yeah, it's right. We came over here about ten years ago now and been pastoring the church here in Phoenix with my wife.

It's the church that used to exist before you went there about a month ago. What's this?

No, I wanted to give you some feedback. We're all just so thrilled you were able to come and be with us that day.

Now, you really, you can't get on the program and tell folks that I came and I spoke at your church and your church now does not exist.

It does exist. I was joking. No, in fact, my email box is now full of recensions, of invitations of everyone

I was supposed to be speaking at for the next four months. They're going, We heard what you do.

Well, it was my fault I asked you to be subtle and speak on John 6 in the morning and Romans 9 in the evening.

Yeah, I don't know what you were thinking, but I've told, everyone I've told that.

I said, yeah, John asked me to do John 6, 37, through whatever in the morning and do

Romans 9 that night. They looked at me like, so, did he realize what that meant?

And I said, yes, I think so. I think so, yeah. Absolutely. Yeah, we loved it. And I had a question on that that someone raised after your visit.

I just thought it would be good to go to the horse's mouth. Oh, sure. I used a Gillette Mach 3. That was...

And it was in Romans 9 and their question was about verse 18, about, therefore he has mercy on whom he wills and whom he wills he hardens.

And their question was, is this the verse that the interpretation of it, how you do interpret it, would mean the difference between what we know as Calvinism and Hyper -Calvinism in the sense that Calvinists would say that for the non -elect,

God passes over them, whereas the Hyper -Calvinists would use the word harden and see in that an impartation of evil.

Would that be the thing that would differentiate the, what I would see as the Biblical Calvinist with that which is not even

Calvinist, the Hyper? Well, actually, Scleruni, from Scleruno, to make stubborn, this is a present active verb.

And so it is parallel directly with... Opposite of mercy.

Yeah, it is. And so, the question, though, you see, to harden does not mean to impart upon them some desire or evil, as you said, that they do not already possess.

This is a judgmental hardening of them already in their sin.

It is not an issue of these are kind, loving individuals who desire to do what's right before God, and God prevents them from doing the right thing.

That would obviously be the wrong perspective. And really, the issue with Hyper -Calvinism has to do with our responsibility in evangelism.

I remember the first Hyper -Calvinist I ever met. I wasn't even a Calvinist at the time. In fact, I probably would have been one earlier if I hadn't run into this guy.

And it's interesting, he has since left the faith, which I find very intriguing. But I was explaining to him, this was in college, about we were going out to the

Mesa and we were witnessing to Mormons and things like that, and he just, in a scoffing way, said, well, if they're elect, they'll get saved.

And that is the attitude of the Hyper -Calvinists, and that is that, in essence, to me anyways, and there are people who give a wider definition, but for me, the essence, what most clearly identifies the

Hyper -Calvinists, is a denial of the fact that when

God ordains the ends, He also ordains the means. Which is prayer and preaching and all of that.

Exactly. Which is all the things, all the glorious benefits that we get to have, the ministries that we get to have, and that God uses to conform us to the image of Christ, those tremendous opportunities we get to be, to be the

King's heralds, to be the ambassadors for Christ. Absolutely. That stuff is left off, and there is no preaching, there is no proclamation of the

Gospel, there is instead this cold self -centeredness, in essence.

A passivity too. Yes, a passivity in regards to evangelism, passivity in regards to all of the means that God uses to bring about His purposes.

And so, for me, that's really the heart and soul of Hyper -Calvinism. Most people get into the issue of the free offer, and someone was asking me just recently, where do you weigh in on that?

And I said, look, here's how I understand it. I am to give the free offer to all people.

I do not have the ability to see into the hearts of men, and God calls me to proclaim the

Gospel to everyone, and that's a glorious freedom because when you stand outside the

Temple of Salt Lake, or alongside a pilgrimage route that Roman Catholics are taking to go see the

Pope, or something like that, you really don't want to have to try to figure out who the elect are anyways because you are not given the means to do so.

So, it gives you freedom to proclaim the Gospel to everyone. And that when you say anyone who believes may have eternal life, that is absolutely true.

There is no reason why a Calvinist cannot say that because that's not addressing the issue of where faith comes from, the nature of faith, or anything else.

Anyone who believes in Jesus Christ will be saved. Now, we recognize outside the work of the Holy Spirit no one's going to truly do that, but that's not the point in the proclamation.

But other people will say, and you need to add to that the idea that in essence, as I understand it, there are people who will say, and you need to basically believe that God is disappointed, that He has a desire that He does not fulfill, and it's not

His purpose to fulfill. And at that point, I just go, why exactly is that?

And that's the part where I go, okay, well, if you want to believe that, but I don't see where that connects up with everything else.

So, that's where I start to draw the line and go, okay, well, if what you mean by free offer is

God must be disappointed, or if you have to go into all these complex discussions of multiple wills and how this will intersect with that will, let's keep it simple,

Stu, because I'm not all that bright. So, let's stick with the basic stuff here and go out and preach the gospel and watch as the

Lord blesses that. That's the neatest thing. Absolutely, and I think the other side of that, some folks just say, well, what you're saying is that some folks just don't have a chance.

Well, yeah, and again, when someone says that, I immediately, remember what

I said when I emphasized in Romans 9, specifically verse 13.

I said, when you see the phrase, Jacob I loved, Esau I hated, if your mind is in the right place, if you have a biblical perspective, what should amaze you about that phrase is not

Esau I hated, it's Jacob I loved. And such a person, if they're talking about chances, probably the main thing to deal with there is the issue of the justice and the wrath of God against sin because most of those folks, when you really start pushing them on that particular issue, they are not clear on that issue.

If they think that God somehow owes to us some type of a quote -unquote chance, then they probably aren't really clear on the issue of the righteousness of God's judgment to begin with.

Right, and I've found too that if people struggle with the U in the tulip, the unconditional election, then it's a misunderstanding somewhere of the

T, of the total depravity and the power of, and the nature of sin and how it is cosmic treason and God is just to, and would be just to obliterate everybody.

Oh yeah, you're exactly right. I have found the vast majority of objections to particular redemption are not actually aimed at particular redemption.

They are aimed either at a misunderstanding of unconditional election or more fundamentally to the issue of man's deadness and sin and the propriety of God's judgment itself, most definitely.

All right, Iman. Thank you, sir. Thank you for calling in and adding some culture along with Jonathan to the program today.

I very much appreciate your ministry, as you know, and I've been pastoring for, I don't know how many years now, 16 years in the ministry and it's your ministry and probably

Dr. R .C. Sproul who's taken me from being Armenian to understanding what the

Scripture is saying in so many different ways and you've really been a blessing, sir.

Well, I very much appreciate that and that despite my bad accent and the fact that I speak as a Yankee, that just warms my heart.

It truly does. Thank you, John. Bless you, sir. God bless. Bye -bye. All right, let's get one last call squeezed in here and let's go back to the

Garden State and talk with Mike in New Jersey. How are you doing, Mike? Hi, James. Yeah, I figured after hearing from two

Brits, it would be good to hear from a guy in Trenton. Yep, there went all the culture just right on out of there.

But didn't I see some comments from you about my accent? I'm scrolling back here.

Did you say anything about my accent? I might have. You might have? I might have. I don't know.

Not really relevant right now. Oh, okay. All right, you have a question. We've got about three minutes.

All right. One of the things that never really got ironed out for me as a new believer was there's this proliferation of Bible in a year kind of products.

I mean, there's Bibles for that. There's plans. I mean, there's like the machine reading plan to reform people,

I guess. But the thing is, these often have like three or four or sometimes like five or six chapters a day.

And if somebody really wants to just take one and sit down with like a notepad and a commentary or what have you, it can take well over an hour per chapter.

And for just daily reading, which is going to be more recommended or more profitable for your average lay believer?

Well, you know, there's a place for each. I did the Bible in a year thing. I'm not sure if I've told you this story before, but I remember as a teenager,

I read a Jack Chick track. And in it, he talked about what it would be like if you were a

Christian and you died and went to heaven and you ran into Habakkuk.

And he said, so what did you think of my book? And there's this cartoon of you staying there with this look of shock and horror on your face going, ah, ah, ah, you know.

And even though it was a comic book, it really hit me. And so I did the

Bible in a year thing. And it was hard. I mean, you're a teenager, you're in high school,

I had to get up earlier because I had early classes, the accelerated classes and all the rest of that stuff.

But I did it. And so I think there's a good discipline there, but you're right. Obviously, you can't just do that over and over and over again because you're reading such large chunks that you cannot do exegesis.

So I think it's good to have the overview. I think it's good to go ahead and read entire stories at once and move through large passages and get that broad overview because sometimes you get so focused upon a small section that you start, in essence, missing the forest for the trees.

And so it needs to be a balanced type situation where you have that as well as the closer study of a book, the closer study of a text.

And, you know, so I think it has its place, but a person who just does that over and over and over again is going to get bored eventually.

And you want to be able to get, you know, a little bit more focused in your studies. So I think it's good.

I think that I would not suggest that a person be an expert on the

Book of Romans and yet has never read the Minor Prophets, has no idea what the Minor Prophets say.

I'm not sure how you could become an expert in the Book of Romans without reading the Minor Prophets, but you see the point that I'm making. So, you know,

I don't have anything against them and some of them that are organized in different ways. It doesn't have to be chronological or canonical or things like that.

Some are done in different ways that can introduce some interesting concepts to it. I think that's neat.

And for people who studied the original languages, doing some reading like that on a daily basis helps keep your language skills up and things like that.

So, you know, as long as you're studying, that's the important part. And then doing a mixture, maybe getting the whole

Bible down and then doing a New Testament study or doing a Paul study, things like that.

You know, that's the important part, I think. All right. Okay? All righty, man.

Well, thank you for calling. And soon, when you call, you won't be calling from that side of the continent, will you?

Yeah, that's very true. This Sunday, Lord willing. Oh, back to foreign missions work, huh?

Well, Lord bless you as you go back to your foreign mission field.

Well, thank you. Thank you, sir. Bye -bye. Take care. All righty. Ah, yes. The foreign mission field of Salt Lake City, Utah.

Indeed. Well, thank you all very much for listening. I love when we get calls and we get to go all over the board.

I didn't even get into discussing the election of quote -unquote Bishop Robinson.

Talk about an example of pseudo -Adelphoi, false brethren. I'm not surprised about it at all, folks.

If you're surprised about the Episcopalians, you didn't know what the Anglican community was up to all along anyway, did you?

When a denomination goes apostate generations ago, this isn't surprising at all.

Well, maybe we'll talk about that Tuesday morning here on The Dividing Line at 11 a .m. Mountain Standard Time. We'll see you then.

God bless. o -m -i -n dot o -r -g where you'll find a complete listing of James White's book,

States, Debates, and Tracts. Join us again next Tuesday morning at 11 a .m. for The Dividing Line.