Exaggerations in the Tomb Show Then George Bryson

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 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll -free across the

United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five three Three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white And afternoon welcome to the dividing line just a quick programming note for those of you who are

Cursed with having to play with time those of you who do not honor God's creation of time and think you can play with it

You will be playing with it this weekend or so. I have been told not that we know here, but The rest of you they're messing around with daylight savings time

Once again, you cannot save daylight as anyone ever saved a like no, no one can save daylight. It's completely reverberate

So it cannot be saved just woke rich up and Me is totally depraved.

It's totally braved daylight is totally braved and it cannot be saved. And so I Think it starts this weekend.

That's what I've been told. I think my wife confirmed that it's a mess for the airlines to have Change all that stuff around and black.

It's it's bad. You know, this could be like y2k You know what? There are actually people who did say that because it's been changed from where it was

It's been moved back by like two weeks on each end of it So that's most of the year at least eight I think what is about eight months of the year now is with this thing.

But anyway, that means that from your perspective

The time of the dividing line will change it will not change from our perspective because we live in a land where we recognize you cannot change time and That time time marches on whether you play with your alarm clock or not

And therefore we will be here at our regular time, but it's going to change depending on where you are if you play with your clocks, so just be aware of that and You know make the the necessary adjustments

Um last night I had the opportunity of doing something interesting

Obviously in working on the book and right now for me the biggest task

I'm facing on the book Is just simply time it's not material.

I've got the material I've got I've got probably about three or four more books coming haven't gotten that one that we ordered that I ordered

Yeah, that's that's not good. We you might want to check double check that check your orders on online, but I ordered one yesterday and The material isn't the issue in fact just a few moments ago

I was sitting here in the studio queuing up the sounds at the same time.

I was communicating through our chat channel with a student at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary in the library and He was scanning the

Greek text of the Acts of Philip from the version published by Francois Bovan of Harvard in I believe it was 1999 and with a

French commentary the English version comes out in 2008 and Then faxing me and not faxing but but sending me the

PDF scans Through email and so I was able to then rotate them and and while we're still chatting and channel check the check the verses check the terms

Etc. Etc. So it's it's amazing what you can do with with technology these days and Anyway The the real challenge here is going to be just getting all this information into a coherent understandable written form so that We can get it out on time that's going to be that's going to be the big thing now

Obviously, I you know, I've mentioned this numerous times on the program the Central argument of the film in the book is that Mary Omni is

Mary Magdalene without that Statistics fall apart the the the family falls apart

Everything it's gone. That is as I played for you the very first day after this all broke that first Tuesday I played the citations from Cameron and from Yakubovich where they both said that Simca put it all together when he found out the acts of Philip identified

Mary Omni is Mary Magdalene and the book just Makes that bald statement that it they just it they definitely do so Cameron made that statement that I I Really get the feeling these guys actually think that they probably have not even bothered

Looking at the original though the book itself at one point talks about photocopies of the

Greek of The acts of Philip so somebody went to a library got this stuff

Mary Omni is definitely in there what's missing is Mary Magdalene and the argument connecting the two so what

I happen to do is I Was doing some research last night chasing some articles

I want to thank all of you who have sent me URLs. They have been dutifully sent to me

I've followed up on them and it's frequently been following up from those and You know wandering about sort of how you do on the web that I have found some of the most important stuff that that I have and I was doing that last evening and I ran across the email address for Francois Bovong So I said hey nothing nothing to be lost in contacting the gentleman and asking him and so I wrote to him last evening and introduced myself and I quoted some some texts

From the book now of course. I'm at home, so I had to VPN in and And get these these files

From my from here, and then put them into Gmail that I was sending this from and again the the technology part is fascinating to me anyways

Especially when you started with a 8088 that didn't have a hard drive so anyway I quoted this section from page 69 of the book which says he handed me a folder containing copies of an ancient manuscript penned in Greek Along with professor

Bovong's translation the first page was headed by the words acts of Philip in this text Mary Magdalene In this text this is the book speaking in this text

Mary Magdalene was an apostle who preached and baptized and performed healing miracles This Mary was very very different from the

Magdalene of church doctrine and not a fallen woman at all Did you notice the Greek version of her name

Simca asked according the Apostle Philip who identifies himself as Mary's brother? She is not known as Magdalene the woman from Magdala rather She is known by her given name, but the same word inscribed on the side of I a a 8500 which is

Mary Amne then on page 96 we read in June 2000

Bavon and Bouvier published the first complete translation into French of the Mount Athos version of the acts of Philip with its identification of Mary with its identification of Mary Magdalene as Mary Amne the sister of the

Apostle Philip the acts of Philip provides us with a much more complete version of Mary Magdalene Than the

Gospels and quote that's page 96 the earliest was 69 Now I quoted those to professor

Bavon and then I asked these questions the book makes the statement that the acts of Philip specifically

Clearly identifies Mary Amne as Mary Magdalene. May I inquire number one? Does the term

Magdalene Magdala appear anywhere anywhere in the Greek of the acts of Philip?

Number two does the text the acts of Philip make the specific identification of Mary Amne as Mary Magdalene Number three if the answer number two is no is it your position that this identification is found upon certain is

Founded upon certain parallels to Thomas and other Gnostic literature along with the origin citation, which is contra

Selsom 5 .62 using Mary Ame Finally sir, do you feel your position in your words have has been accurately represented in both the documentary and the published book?

Thank you for your attention. Now. I did not know if I would get a response or not But this morning

I did get the following response from Francois Bavon Dear, dr.

White. I thank you for your message I am pleased to answer your questions first the name Magdala does not appear in the acts of Philip Second no, and let me go back and so, you know what he's saying

No to the question I ask is does the text of the acts of Philip make these specific?

Identification of Mary Amne as Mary Magdalene which the book directly without qualification or equivocation asserts

Which Cameron asserted on the today show which Simca asserted on the Larry King show?

Bavone's response that question is no since the woman called is

Since the woman Apostles called during the whole text Mary Amne Mary Amne is a possible

Greek for the Semitic name Miriam and the woman acts in the apocryphal book as Mary Magdalene in non canonical stories then when

I asked him, all right, is It's your identification of Mary Amne as Mary Magdalene.

Is that based upon? Parallels to Thomas the single reference in origin.

He says third, I believe yes, but But but but but but but but which is not repeated that many times.

I wasn't quoting. I just emphasizing for everyone I place myself on the level of literary traditions and not on the level of history,

I Believe that the acts of Philip carry old traditions concerning a strong woman disciple of Jesus Here is what

I sent to another colleague. It may interest you and here's a whole separate paragraph In these interviews, this is the these the interviews that are used in the film in the book in these interviews

I said that I was not convinced. Okay back up These the interviews he did after it came out in these interviews.

I said that I was not convinced by the program I thought that the filmmaker had two speeches on the one hand

He expresses his wish to open a scholarly discussion on the other. He realizes his personal agenda I said also that the final part with Jesus marriage and having a child is just science fiction

I added that the film should deal with a very old tradition of the Holy Sepulchre Which remains for me the best location for Jesus tomb since the

Emperor Constantine built this monument in the spot where the Emperor Hadrian? Erected a statue of himself and another for Jupiter in the 2nd century to humiliate the

Christians who venerated Jesus tomb at this place I said finally concerning Mary Omni that this name is a possible equivalent to the

Semitic name Miriam besides Mary Maria and Miriam I did not say that this was the real name of Mary of Magdala and That the traditions concerning Mary Omni and the acts of Philip Coincide with what we learned from this woman in the

New Testament and non -canonical texts I said that the acts of Philip sends her to the

Jordan Valley But the filmmaker concludes that this means Jerusalem. Did I not make the exact same point?

I certainly did I have published sufficiently in New Testament studies in 1984 in the book which

Mary edited by F. Stanley Jones Which is the one that I'm I ordered just a couple days ago and supposed to be here no later than Monday And the fast trip for Elizabeth Schussler Florenza as well as in the

Aussteig und Niedergang der Römischen Welt in 1988 plus the critical edition of the acts of Philip in the series

Apocryphal Forum of the Corpus Christianorum Which is what I was just having faxed not faxed to me.

Why do I keep saying faxed? That's PDF scam sent to me in order for my position to be known by Scholars and quote, so I wrote back to dr.

Bavon and I asked when When the English translation of the acts of Philip is due out

I had found that source you can buy that source We if we want to wait 25 days we could buy that source for a mere about $378 that's that's how much the book costs $378 is

Is how we would get that anyways the English translation he said will appear in 2008 so next year the

English translation of the acts of Philip will will be out and Available for all of you who are just chomping at the bit

Waiting for waiting for that to come out so there is your

Current and up -to -date information in regards to things we now have Direct contact with the cardi matheson the

DNA specialist now with Francois Bavon and honestly with what those two have said and Demonstrate by their own documentation the selective spin of their

Opinions their findings in the case of DNA their Conclusions in the case of Bavon and the acts of Philip the selective spin grabbing just a

Portion of what they said and then sending it out there with a certain spin on it should be more than enough for anybody to dismiss the

Jesus family tomb for what it is a very errant Attempt to create a story out of out of nothing, but anyway we will be obviously expanding upon that in the book and making the those those direct emails available and expanding even more so upon Well as much as we can expand upon in a period of time that we have that's that's the way to put it 877 -753 -3341 is the phone number that Johnny has called with a topic right on this subject.

Hi John. Hi, Johnny How are you doing good good good I was calling because I've actually paid

I paid attention to the To the press conference that I listened to from them when before the book well,

I think the book had just come out but um one of the things that Professor Tabor had done is that he had

Explained that he had a I don't know it was the other gentleman. I forget better green Oh, I believe it was yes who had said that he had spoken with a

Jehovah's Witness into a Roman Catholic and then mr. Tabor mentioned that he had spoken with the

John Dominic Ross and then they had said that the resurrection is a spiritual resurrection and that there was no need as it was said by the gentleman that for there to be

Jesus having the Spleen and all of this stuff and as as the there's a discussion went on at Professor Charlesworth Was echoing the same idea about a spiritual resurrection rather than a physical one and really the other side wasn't hurt and I heard some of the same idea repeated by mr.

Tabor on the show with Ted Koppel and Being that there was very limited time I remember a professor

Darrell Bach wasn't able to really interact with the holy idea of first ranking 15

Which I believe is taking real center stage at the bottom of the debate And I was wondering what your thoughts were on that and if you're going to include anything in your in your book on the on the subject of first ranking 15 well, yeah,

I mean I Actually am going to probably include either as an appendix or as the substance of the chapter

My opening comments from the debate that took place on on the mercury in 2005 where Jim Renahan and I debated

John Dominic Ross and Marcus Borg Some people may wonder why we haven't made that debate available yet.

We're we're going to be doing that unfortunately, what happened is The beginning of the debate the the audio was just all wrong.

I mean it it was worse than The audio that we had for the Barry Lynn debate

And so in essence what we're gonna have to do what I'm gonna have to do is since I still have the exact notes that I read

For my opening statement. I'm gonna have to somehow try to read those notes again and rerecord it and And Dub that over the the video now, obviously it's next to impossible to pace yourself in such a way

Maybe I can actually record the video and have it running in front of me And and you know, but you can imagine what that's that would be like trying to figure out, you know

Trying to read something and inflect it properly while at the same time watching a video of yourself Having done it before and trying to lip -sync it, you know, it's just It's almost a milly -vanilla thing, but that may be before your time

Johnny, so don't worry about but anyway So that's the reason we haven't put it out.

But the information is still there. And in fact just today I recorded the section from Jim Renahan and his opening statement and I sent that off to one of the folks

Well, I didn't send it off, but I actually youtubed it And if any of you have been watching my youtube stuff, you know how to get hold of anything

I've put up there so you can watch for yourself Jim Renahan's about six and a half minutes of Jim Renahan's opening statement where he likewise is focusing upon the book of Acts and and the

Apostolic proclamation of what resurrection meant and things along those lines So I would probably like to take the transcript of both of those and and use it because I Do want to address this subject the the very first chapter after the introduction is called why does it really matter and Obviously what

I have to address is this whole idea that well, you know spiritual resurrection physical resurrection, you know

You don't really need it doesn't really matter I don't have as much time as I would like what

I would normally do in a situation like this as I would pull together Various creedal statements from Roman Catholicism Eastern Orthodoxy The major Protestant creeds and you could make it very very plain

That no one held to a merely spiritual resurrection up until the last century or so and That's certainly on a creedal statement that that is not representative of of the historical

Christian position and that's to find Jesus bones in an ossuary is to deny the

Christian faith and Toto and You know, they just these folks just may be so politically correct

That they're they're trying to find a way around having to say that Christianity is false But in essence the conclusions of their quote -unquote research are that Christianity is false and and people need to Need to be aware of that fact and I will obviously be emphasizing that as best

I can in the time frame that I have Hello. Yes, sir. I can I'm trying to listen to what you were saying is just that you're really cutting out but One of the emphasis that I've seen in the discussion and is that they're misunderstanding and I think

I remember you playing a clip from NT right on the issue of because they like emphasizing the the physical and the spiritual first Corinthians 15 right on a misunderstanding of Sukkot now

I can hear you better and and I was hoping that Well, I was wondering if you you're going to expand on the the nature of the meaning of the word

Sukkot or soulish bodies who could cost in first Corinthians 15. I don't I don't know if I'm gonna have time to do that or not.

I There's so much stuff to put in here. And that's that's not the central aspect of the argument

There they don't get to that level at all in in the discussion in in the book they they all

I do is just quote a Roman Catholic prelate that says that wouldn't affect me and They're not getting into that level of stuff and so I probably will not have the opportunity of doing so in in only two weeks

No, but that did come up in the discussion with John Dominic Rawson in the debate

On on the ship and he he admitted when I brought that up. He said, you know what?

I've changed my viewpoints on that. I think NT right is is correct And so he changed his viewpoint at that point

Not the change at that point, but he had had changed his viewpoint since he had last published on the subject so But I I sort of doubt it's gonna get to that level

In in the time period that we have no, okay. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Thanks. All right guys. Bye. Bye. I believe we have fixed our

Volume issue there. I think it's just because we've been trying to go back and forth with doing iron sharpens iron and not blowing their 1957 vintage amplifiers up with We're sending out so That's probably why that was the case.

So if other folks call in you probably should be able to hear a little better All right, eight seven seven seven five three three three four one.

I had said on Tuesday that we would Look at some

George Bryson and Shabir Ali and all we ended up doing was listening to Shabir Ali and So I'm sure

George Bryson and all of his legions of fans Who are here, you know?

listening at all times to the program We're a little bit Unhappy about that and you know what we here we go

How's that oh good That's called plugging in the laptop to the soundboard so that you can hear that's our version of plug -and -play.

That's Except for us it's plug -and -play I just don't think there's something wrong with my output.

That's just all there is to it on this laptop There's there's something wrong with that output and we got a three -year warranty on it

We ought to just have them out and replace a dumb thing. What do you think? I Think they'll laugh at us.

I don't think they'll laugh at us. No, I don't we paid good money for that So and the guy who came out was pretty nice guy.

So I you know first time so anyway Those the greats all the fans of George Bryson My book.

Yes that guy right there he we did that we my book we read his book and Now we are not just reading his book my book yes, we are now listening to his lecture and We have gotten about six minutes into the second half of it here

So we'll do some of this first and then move on to George Bryson and your church Bryson should be early and your phone calls as well perish

I want to give you another translation of the exact same quote from Calvin the word hardened when applied to God in Scripture implies

Not only permission as some weak exegetes would interpret it But also the action of divine wrath all

External external circumstances which contribute to the building of the reprobate are the instruments of his wrath

Satan himself works inwardly with compelling power It's God's minister in such a way that he only acts by his command

Paul does not inform us that the ruin of the ungodly is foreseen by the Lord But that it is ordained by his counsel and will not only was the destruction of the ungodly foreknown

But the ungodly themselves have been created for the very specific purpose of perishing

Are you with that? Now of course for those of you who may not have been listening over the past couple of months

We've been playing for quite some time now in a slow and Fashion This this mp3 recording of a pastor's conference that took place back in I would estimate somewhere around October November 2003 where George Bryson is lecturing holding forth to a whole group of Calvary Chapel pastors on the subject of Calvinism because he is their

Calvinism expert and we know the date on this not because there's anything on the mp3

But because of the fact that so he's mentioning the fact that he was going to be debating me on the

Bible Answer Man broadcast which took place in the early December of 2003 so that's sort of why we figure we know where this was it had to have been before that and shortly before that so That's what we're listening to and what he's doing here is what he did in our debate

He honestly believes that merely citing John Calvin is enough to defeat Calvinism Of course what

Calvin's talking about first and foremost here is the sovereignty of God over all all his creatures and everything

He does in time and space and he doesn't seem to realize that Even during our debate and he should have recognized this.

I mean I could tell what was going on when he would quote Calvin He he would do this this pause and I know what he's expecting.

He's expecting the Calvary Chapel crowd to go Like that see but the

Calvary Chapel crowd didn't show up we were at the Anaheim Vineyard and the

Anaheim Vineyard folks didn't show up and and most of Calvary Chapel folks didn't show up and it was about three -quarters of reformed folks and When he would give this pregnant pause

To get the gasp effect. All the Calvinists are sitting to go on. Yep.

Uh -huh Just just didn't help his argument at all, you know to have these folks sitting there nodding up and down going, uh -huh yeah, okay, and your problem with that is you know, and He I don't know if he just didn't hear it.

See it didn't recognize what's going on I don't know, but he's still he's still going on with it and Still thinking that's that's the best way to handle these things.

How are we on our tape here? Oh We're doing well. I'll have a couple more quotes and we'll open it up the third point of Calvinism That's the first point third point.

All right, excuse me. That's the second point. This is the third point Whatever point the third point of Calvinism or limited atonement in mind the

Senate of Dort said this This was the Sovereign Council of most gracious will and purpose of God the Father That the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his son should extend to all the elect

For bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying to pay thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation

Godfrey who is a professor right over here at Westminster Theological Seminary said this Those that hold that the atonement is limited or definite in extent teach that Christ died to save only

Those whom the father had predestined to eternal life Therefore the atoning work of Christ is applied in due time to all for whom it was accomplished

Amen if the father has elected Some sinners to eternal life and the Holy Spirit applies the saving work of Christ only to the elect

Then Christ is in harmony with the purpose of the father in the spirit Amen, so Christ died on the cross for the elect alone.

Amen The question Sproul says is this for home was the atonement design some argue that all the limited atonement

Hey, give him give him credit. He said Sproul. He didn't say Sproul That's why he's at the elite level and certain other people who will not be mentioned

Are still well, wherever they are Is that the benefits of the atonement are limited to believers who meet the necessary condition of faith?

That is through Christ atonement was sufficient to cover the sins of all men and to satisfy God's justice against all sin

It only affects salvation for believers the formula you guys have all heard this the formula reads sufficient for all efficient for the elect only

This doctrine of limited atonement goes further than that It is concerned with the deeper question of the father's and the son's intention in the cross

It declares that the mission and death of Christ was restricted to a limited number

You know, I at least at this point. I'm awful glad that someone's just speaking this To go to the intention of God so often this conversation never mentions that now whether now obviously he's

Trying to disagree with this but you know I have to remember I have met people who became reformed as a result of my encounter with George Bryson on the

Bible Answer Man broadcast and When they first heard it they were angry By what I was saying and they were angry that I wasn't being refuted and they were angry that I was the only one using the

Bible and everybody else was running off to philosophy and things like that and you know, I Understand all that but they heard the truth they were challenged by it they understood it and over time came to see how it fit with with the proper biblical exegesis things like that, so I He's reading it so fast.

I'm not sure how anybody can actually follow along overly Well, but still it's being heard and and to at least get this out there where Sproul is

Accurately and properly talking about the what was the intention of God? What did God want to do their whole side of course is

God? Did not have either did not have a specific intention He's just sort of doing the the peanut butter atonement thing here you know where you just sort of spread it all over the place or it was

God's intention to save everybody or It was it was

Well, he's trying and his intention isn't actually going to be fulfilled see That's that's the issue.

We're gonna take a break today. We can take a break. All right, we're gonna take a break We've got one caller online. We'll continue on with George and Shabir and your calls here on the dividing line right after this

It's not an easy way it's a journey

To the Sun Following Jesus What is dr.

Norman Geisler warning the Christian community about in his book chosen, but free a new cult secularism false prophecy scenarios

No, dr. Geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called

Calvinism he insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent Philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant in his book the potter's freedom

James White replies to dr. Geisler, but the potter's freedom is much more than just a reply It is a defense of the very principles upon which the

Protestant Reformation was founded Indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate

James White masterfully counters the evidence against so -called extreme Calvinism Defines what the reformed faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the reformers is the very one taught in the pages of Scripture The potter's freedom a defense of the

Reformation and a rebuttal to Norman Geisler's chosen But free you'll find it in the reformed theology section of our bookstore at a omen org

Public crimes the criminal mishandling of God's Word may be James White's most provocative book yet White sets out to examine numerous crimes being committed in pulpits throughout our land every week as he seeks to leave no stone unturned

Based firmly upon the bedrock of Scripture one crime after another is laid bare for all to see The pulpit is to be a place where God speaks from his word.

What has happened to this sacred duty in our day? The charges are as follows prostitution using the gospel for financial gain pandering to pluralism cowardice under fire felonious eisegesis entertainment without a license and Cross -dressing ignoring

God's ordinance regarding the roles of men and women is a public crime occurring in your town Get pulpit crimes in the bookstore at a omen org

The history of the Christian Church pivots on the doctrine of justification by faith Once the core of the

Reformation the church today often ignores or misunderstands this foundational doctrine in his book

The God Who Justifies theologian James White calls believers to a fresh appreciation of understanding of and dedication to the great doctrine of justification and then provides an exegesis of the key scripture texts on this theme

Justification is the heart of the gospel in today's culture where tolerance is the new absolute

James White proclaims with passion the truth and centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith

Dr. J Adams says I lost sleep over this book. I simply couldn't put it down James White writes the way an exegetically and theologically oriented pastor appreciates.

This is no book for casual reading There is solid meat throughout an outstanding contribution in every sense of the words

The God Who Justifies by dr. James White get your copy today at a omen org

That's what I call sleepy time bumper music man That ain't good at 430 in the afternoon, man.

You're gonna you're good someday. You're gonna look up and I'm just gonna be Do do that's that's that's smooth.

Yeah, you know who that is. That's right. It's John Tesh. That's right Well, I doubt that's

John Tesh But it's it's John. Yeah, it's some some guy Oh See now here's

Where that appears to be to Greek text on opposite pages I'm I'm talking to my special secret agent at Gordon Conwell Seminary we don't all need to pray for him that he will not be struck by the same spirit that attacked

Jerry medetics and Scott Hahn and Oh, did you know that that that wacky guy on the the the

God who wasn't there? Also is a graduate of Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary Steve would

I mean the list of apostates is long I Don't it's sort of hard for me to keep up with what he was asking

But I was assuming that there was going to be another Scan that had 130 in it, but maybe that's on the the other page.

Maybe I just forgot to look at that I don't know. I will I will see if that's if that's where it is.

Cool. Great if it's already there No problem, and all is well Okay. Hey, you just got to hear some live inside research taking place right now on the upcoming book and I'm sure you're all very

Excited about that. Okay. We have a call from not just across the pond This is this is from the other side of the earth actually and from Australia.

This is a Peter. Hi Peter. How you doing? Great good to hear from you again.

Yes, sir. What's up? We were listening to George Bryson there and you know

We know he's tactics about give me the the faith Christians before they come in contact with Reformed teaching and I'll make sure they never come near it, right?

I Just want to discuss another tactic that they've used in our local area. Okay, it was similarly as bad and just as effective

Yes, sir What they did was they they started trying to argue with the pastor that was teaching in the church and the reformed doctrine well, there were two pastors there, which is a good thing and They couldn't win that way.

So what they did was they made threatening phone calls to his wife and family And eventually caused him to leave the situation because it was causing too much stress for them.

Well now I'm a little confused here Who what was this a? This must been

I mean People in the church didn't like the reformed teaching I see. Okay, so they they chose to attack the family

Yeah, well Allegations and things like that. Well, unfortunately When when politics crops up in local churches, whether it's theologically motivated

Or what its motivation is sometimes it's it's not theologically motivated it's always an ugly thing, unfortunately, and I have heard many a many a

Horror story about how pastors have been treated within the context of churches and they go back a long ways sadly

So I don't I would not want to lay that at the feet of our minions in general

Because I know many in our minion who would define that to be a reprehensible thing. Oh I think we all would

The problem is that now this happened five years ago and now this pastor has moved on to another church, of course and with friends of mine and Now he feels he has to step down as a pastor because he still bears a grudge against these people

That attacked his family in that way. Hmm Well, and I would hope that would be something you have to forgive them

Because they haven't repented of what they've done Well, if it's obviously if it is impacting him in such a way that that he cannot minister a message of grace and forgiveness

Then that's something that he needs to work out with with fellow pastors and and work through himself

I would imagine that's his his thinking in that context, but Hey, you know,

I I'm hoping I haven't gotten a final word on this, but I'm Hoping in early

July to be in Melbourne. Oh I didn't know if you knew that but we are

Hoping to try to arrange in early July a debate with a

Muslim apologist there in Australia in Melbourne so I'll obviously keep you guys

Aware of what's going on there? Okay. Yeah, you should come to Sydney Well, I can only go where where the folks invite me to go and right now the folks that are talking with Talking with me about arranging this are in Melbourne.

So I Don't know that's going to involve a flight through Sydney or a time in Sydney or what?

I don't know We have an Egyptian Mullah up in Sydney that teaches at the

Lakemba mosque Who has likened? The women in Australia who dress without the covering the what do they call it to?

Meet left out in the yes the street that you know cat can come and fine And yeah, why shouldn't they rape the women and that sort of thing?

He's been Told that he can't address the the media anymore because of his statements

Yeah, that sort of stuff. Yeah, we heard about that up here. I I saw the saw the discussion of it

He's he's world -famous. But all right, you should debate him. Well, I'd sort of like to debate a scholar actually

But hey, that might work out if if he wanted to do so, but well, I will let you get the media press

I bet you we would I bet you would well let you know what's going on with that. Thanks for your call, brother Okay. Thanks very much.

It's good to hear. I'm sure to say you even if you don't come to Sydney I'll make the trip down there. It's all right. Okay. Thank you very much, sir.

God bless Thank you, bye -bye yes, indeed, hopefully that is going to work out and We will let you all know as News develops on that.

Let's go back to one of our favorite people that man who we have

You know worked with for so long read my book. That's right, George Bryson. So again, remember what

I said when the Bible says That Christ came to save the lost

They say he meant the elect lost. He did come to save the lost but just the lost that are elect and Of course,

I would stop and say whenever someone says well You're saying he didn't come to save to seek and save those were lost only the elect

Well, all the elect are what before they experience regeneration. Let's say it together lost

There you go this doctrine Necessarily follows from the doctrine of election it from eternity

God has planned to save one portion of the human race and not another it seems to be a Contradiction to say that he sent his son to die for those who he had predetermined not to save That's good to know.

I'm glad that he understands that there is a there is a Logical necessity that flows and when you look at the perfection of the atonement the fact that it is it is not merely a hypothetical

Provision of a hypothetical salvation, but an actual atonement. It's substitutionary that if there is a connection there is a a

Consistency between the number of the elect and those for whom Christ dies Why would

God lay? the sins of those who are not going to be the recipients of his grace upon his son and Cause his son to suffer for those things to no avail

Not those who say well, I reject limit atonement because there is a reason for that.

Okay, we can discuss what those reasons are But Bryson at least is tuning in to the the consistency here.

Are you with me there? God wills all things says scroll that come to pass

God desired for man to fall into sin Now notice the difference notice the equivocation

He just equivocated on the term desire and will See, that's that's an equivocation.

That's utilizing one word and he's he's wanting to communicate one thing He's wanting to communicate something that is opposite of what

Calvinists actually believe Knowing and remember, I know it's been a few Actually months since we started this but remember at the beginning of this

Bryson talks about how folks at Calvary Chapel are not really Theologically oriented, you know, you just want to read the

Bible and reading the Bible isn't gonna make you a theologian Which I found an interesting interesting assertion, but And so if without any other context someone who hears him say

God desires The fall God desires sin

God desires rebellion It sounds like that that is an object of God's desire rather than God's will and his decree

Includes those things as part of the means by which he glorifies himself as if Oh God loves

Sin, you know, he just thinks that's wonderful That's the misapprehension. That's where the balance is lost in the presentation.

And there's a there's obviously a lack of Specificity in George's language at times.

Yeah, I know the Bible says God desires all men to be saved. You can never remember God desires A Man to fall into sin anywhere, but you've got to get into the hidden deeper truths to find that out

This is scroll God wills all things that come to pass God desired for men to fall into sin

He says now I am NOT accusing God of sinning. I am suggesting that God created sin Whoopee, you know if you're

God you're thinking. Oh, I'm sure glad he's not accusing me of sinning He desires I sin he creates sin, but I'm not going to accuse him of sin

Now you'll notice once again as we have pointed out over and over and over again George skates by Making his accusations primarily based upon equivocation ignoring distinctions that we make in our own self definitions

And he does so in such a way that he never has to answer the questions of how he would explain how

God can have exhaustive divine foreknowledge of all future events Without that this being the result of God's sovereign decree.

He doesn't tell us Anything more than that. He doesn't tell us how he can oppose Open theism remember when

I asked on the on the Bible answer man Hank Hanegraaff caught him angry with me for even asking him if he was an open theist

But once again, he has no rational ground for denying it He has cut out the ground from underneath him

That would be required to be able to respond to the accusations in a position of open theism

I mean, can you imagine George Bryson running into Greg Stafford on the subject of God's knowledge future events?

Would that would be ugly? No, no, no two ways about it. I May push

Adam into sinning, but don't blame me and call me the sinner Edward Palmer very popular

Calvinist says it's the moving of a finger the beating of a heart the laughter of a girl the mistake of a typist even sin that's all from the hand of God and This of course is the pregnant whoo pause where you're supposed to go now

Just bear with me one last quote. Are you guys still awake and alert out there? All right Calvin speaking to his detractors people.

I suspect just like you this is what he has to say So they denied that it is ever said in distinct terms

God decreed that Adam should perish by his own revolt They say that in accordance with free will he has

To be the architect of his own fortune that God had decreed nothing but to treat him according to his desert see what we believe

There are a lot of people say I believe that God is just I'm not worried about the lost that haven't heard

It's because God is just that I'm worried See man does deserve what he gets when he goes to hell if we got what we deserve we go to hell

I the justice of God is no comfort to me at all ultimately and finally That's why

I'm so glad that mercy and grace triumphant over Justice because justice is a scary thought but notice one more time

There are people who say that the lost who perish only get what they deserve only only

Receive justice Here's Calvin's response to that if this frigid fiction is received where would be the

Omnipotence of God by which according to a secret counsel on which everything depends he rules overall

Are you with me on that says if we say that the center only gets what he deserves? Well, you've taken it out of God's hands if you go to hell because it's your fault then

God doesn't have a say about you going to hell which is a silly thing for them to say But still the point is they're saying if you have any say in where you end up then

God isn't omnipotent because their version of omnipotence says if God has all power He has to he has to be the only one who has a say in anything

Are you there? Well, no, we're not there because obviously this is one of George's deepest misunderstandings of the the position that he is attempting to address and that specifically has to do with the

Relationship between the will of God and secondary means From his perspective if the will of God overrides all other things then it is the only means there are no secondary means

There can be no ground for for man's will there can be no ground for man's judgment based upon that nothing everything else has to go you have to have this this

Mono -vision of only one mechanism in in play rather than the richer deeper theology of the

New Testament and of the Bible as a whole as we have seen where you can have men active and They are they are culpable for their activities and yet they are not autonomous

So that God is reduced to merely learning What mankind is going to be doing in his in his great sovereign activity in in this world

So that's of course where the the difference between us lies now I said

I would get to actually two people today We will continue with George Brice in the future, but we are going to transition now in the last about Seven eight minutes nine minutes of the program and go back to Shabir Ali and his presentation on Did Christ die did

Jesus die for the sins of the world we were listening to his presentation in regards to the

Islamic Understanding of Atonement, that's something that's very important to understand But now he's transit transitioning into looking at the

New Testament and as I asked you last time are we going to get? Consistency from Shabir Ali we get the fact that when he was talking about the

Quran He would use the most conservative scholarship as to its origin as to its consistency and its authorship

Now are we going to get that in the New Testament well of course not that's the whole point of these presentations

So we pick up with Shabir Ali did Jesus die for the sins of the world Here we have two answers

I'd like to give you both answers one after another the first answer is no Jesus did not die for the sins of the world

And that answer comes from the Bible The second answer is that yes, he did die for the sins of the world and that answer comes also

From the Bible it just so happens that the Bible was written by many persons over the centuries and some of these persons had different Understandings of what

God teaches at one such person in particular as a man by the name of st.

Paul Who said that he was a disciple of Jesus? He said that Jesus appeared to him as a bright light and gave him a message to preach to the people

The answer in his right by the way Jesus did not appear as a bright light

There was a bright light associated with his appearance, but Jesus wasn't the bright light

That's a odd way of putting it. Maybe it was just a misstatement. I just thinks is that yes Jesus did die for the sins of the world but I'd like to Give you the other answer for the moment now

We'll come back to Paul's answer the answer from the majority of the texts in the

Bible Is that Jesus did not die for the sins of the world for now notice once again?

Shabir Ali would never approach and would not ever allow anyone to approach the text of the

Quran in this fashion presuppositionally Asserting that it is a a discontinuous text that there is contradiction in the text

He would say no you're assuming what you're trying to prove at the end you got to prove that first But for him of course coming and and this is because he's he's

Committed to the authority of the Quran since the Quran contradicts the Bible since the

Quran comes later and claims to be consistent with the Apostles and prophets and and that Muhammad was the fulfillment of this line of men sent from God That he then must turn around and attack the consistency and accuracy of the writings of those that came before Islam rather than recognizing that The the test of Muhammad is his consistency with what had already been

Given to the Jews and to the Christians in the Old and New Testament scriptures since he is committed to the infallible authority of Muhammad as a prophet when

Muhammad makes mistakes when he demonstrates his Ignorance of the Old and New Testaments and the Christian gospel and the and the

Jewish Old Testament and things like that his mistakes become infallible truth and So that which had been preserved by God all of a sudden must be denied and no longer

Do you have the concept of preservation? It's ironic that any Muslim who believes that God has perfectly preserved the

Quran would for any reason or or or Argument at all assume that God would not put forward the same effort to Control and to preserve and to pass down the writings of the previous prophets

That is the Old Testament and the New Testament. There is a great inconsistency at that point in time

First it is quite clear from the Bible that Human beings are going to be judged according to their own

Actions it is said for example in the gospel according to Matthew that when the angels come towards the last day

To take the people the angels will separate them Based on what they have done.

Those who have done good will go into everlasting Pleasures and those who have done evil will go into everlasting suffering and damnation

Now it doesn't say everlasting pleasures. By the way, it's the contrast between eternal punishment and eternal life it is the

Muslim that has a very carnal physical understanding and perspective on that particular subject in regards to everlasting pleasures these the 70 virgins and things like that, but That of course in Matthew 25 is not a teaching unto itself

Before Matthew gets to that particular point in time he has revealed the centrality of Christ to salvation and and everything else and Matthew continues on with the

Atonement of Christ and all of that's there But once again, once you start with the assumption that the

New Testament can be atomized It can be broken up into little bits and pieces. Well, then you can do with it. Well exactly what you want to do

It is quite clear then that the deeds of the individuals will be the criterion by which the individuals are going to be judged or Instead of viewing these things as prescriptive that is that these deeds are what determines where they go

We can recognize that this is descriptive That is those who have good deeds have them because God and his mercy and grace has changed them

And that's why they have good deeds because their nature has been changed into those who seek God's pleasure and God's Fulfillment in their lives and those who do not are those being described as continuing in the flesh and and Sowing seed to the corruption of their flesh and things like that same kind of misreading that you get from less nuanced

Catholic apologists as well the difference between the man -centered salvation of the religions of man

Islam being one of those religions of man and the God -centered salvation that you find within the

Christian faith and Within those within the Christian faith who allow the Word of God to be the Word of God rather than allowing their traditions

To override the teachings of the text we find furthermore in the Gospels themselves that Jesus on whom be peace taught people that they must

Do right and this implies that the deeds are going to be the things that will judge them according to Matthew chapter 5

For example, Jesus directed his followers that they should not take the wide open way

But they should follow the narrow way because he said The narrow way is the one that leads to paradise

But the wide open way is the way that leads to destruction In other words, he's teaching his followers to take that path which usually looks restrictive

Usually have a number of restrictions things you cannot do for example And that may make life appear narrow for some people they say we cannot have enough flexibility to move

We'd like much more freedom But Jesus and whom be peace according to Matthew's gospel taught his followers do not follow the path of freedom

Well do not follow the do not follow the path that leads to destruction Which is the popular way rather than you're to follow the narrow way that leads unto life

And that is found in obedience to God's will and all those things are completely true None of this has really anything to do at all

With the fact that yes, God can judge us by what we do and when God does judge us we are all found guilty and if we do not have the righteousness of an other that can avail to us then we are all going to be lost but Again, that's that's not the understanding that Shabir Ali has but follow the narrow path

So much so that according to that gospel He told his followers that they should live by every one of the commandments big or small

He said that whoever will practice any one of these commandments and teach others to do so He would be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

And again, the this is considered to be Contradictory only due to a lack of understanding upon Shabir Ali's point

Not due to any contradiction between what Christians believe and what the Bible is teaching at this point

So we thank you for joining us on the dividing line today We've covered a lot of ground on a lot of different subjects, but that's what we try to do around here and Lord willing

We'll be back next Tuesday morning again Remember probably at a different time for you unless you live in Arizona Or in a couple other little spots in the world because the times changing this weekend

But as it may we'll be here 11 o 'clock Mountain Standard Time as always. See you then.

God bless Oh The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 973 460 to or write us at P.

O box 3 7 1 0 6 Phoenix, Arizona 8 5 0 6 9 You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org

That's a o m i n dot o RG where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks