May 2, 2006

desert metropolis of phoenix arizona 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 doctor james white director of alpha and 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 doctor white call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll -free across the united states it's 1 -877 -753 -3341 and now with today's topic here is james white welcome to the dividing line it is a uh...

tuesday morning eleven o 'clock out here in phoenix might be the first day of many here in the phoenix area where we are going to see triple digits that's possible i think it's only get to ninety nine i'm being very very optimistic today but you never know it might uh...

might get a little bit higher than that we uh... we hope not anyways 877 -753 -3341 i uh...

received a note this morning uh... i tell ya anyone who can uh...

make some of stuff that we've played recently on uh... the dividing line look good like they have been doing their homework uh...

is is not doing too well i was sent a link to an article at the fair lds site fair lds uh...

let's just put it this way fair lds has never been fair to me let's put it that way but uh... john tibetanus is uh...

well to look at brigham young university's website john a. tibetanus m .a. in linguistics and m .a.

in middle east studies hebrew university of utah is a senior resident scholar with the neil a.

maxwell institute for religious scholarship at brigham young university he has taught the university of utah at the brigham young university jerusalem center for near eastern studies has lectured in israel in the united states that sounds pretty pretty impressive uh...

and then i start looking at his uh... article entitled agency versus predestination i honestly don't recall if i had seen this before i i think i would have remembered this if i did there's a lot of stuff at the fair lds website but uh...

i started scrolling through this and and he i'll just read a few sections here though luther and other reformers taught predestination john calvin was his foremost proponent during the time of the protestant reformation many adherents of today's protestant evangelical movement many adherents of today's protestant evangelical movement lean heavily on calvin though not all evangelical christians believe in predestination calvinistic belief is expressed in the acronym tulip reach our stands for one principle told apparently unconditional election limited atonement irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints and then he looks at these points and uh...

i was just scrolling down going on uh... okay well doesn't having major discussions from the book of mormon on these issues is really major waste of time over those of you who are new to the program haven't heard our discussions of mormonism in the past i would simply mention in passing uh...

that i have made the comment numerous times that that mormonism even though it is trying to mainstream it is trying to uh...

find a place in uh... not so much in protestant christianity quote -unquote but be accepted as a as a christian denomination of sorts in essence in its uh...

attempt to uh... proselytize and it still does of course it proselytize much possible uh...

is in a really difficult situation because uh... you you just can't come up with any meaningful defense of lds belief in the plurality of gods in the book of mormon uh...

the more and more you look into joseph smith the more you're tempted to have to go the direction of of myth and allegory and liberalism that's exactly what they are lds church ended up doing in fact uh...

i think it's the community of christ is what they're called now uh... and so they they've never produced meaningful biblical scholarship you can't find i keep looking but you cannot find a meaningful exegetical commentary on romans for example written by a mormon because they can't do it it's just it's not that their people are not intelligent enough to they can all learn languages and everything else but you simply can't produce that kind of of of commentary when you're a polytheist when you are so far removed from the world view of the person who wrote this you just can't make head or tails out of stuff and so that's never that was never their emphasis i'm sure they're trying to go that direction but uh...

it this can't succeed i mean outside of you know some liberals going well it's an interesting insight but of course the liberals will say anything is an interesting insight i mean it's sort of like uh...

brian mcclaren uh... writing endorsement for a a book by uh... uh... john dominic ross and marcus borg on jesus you know i mean uh...

once you get out past certain point everybody can endorse everybody else because there's no more objective truth to be worried about one way or the other but uh...

i scroll down this thing and uh... here like i said if you can make uh...

eric and canners uh... sermons sound uh... scholarly and insightful on calvinism you've uh...

you've accomplished something here is here's the beginning of the section unconditional election by john tibetans calvin believe the god elect some people for salvation and chooses others for damnation not based on any inequality is the individual but does so out of his own divine will taken to the extreme it means that one whom god chooses to save will be saved regardless whether he is a good or evil person while one destined for damnation will be damned even if he is righteous the concept is expressed in the saying if you will or if you won't you'll be damned if you do you'll be damned if you don't and quote uh...

continue on uh... this is where latter -day saints indeed most christians part company with calvin as if calvin ever said anything even close to that the concept of predestination suggests that god is capricious saving or damning people at will without regard their righteous or sinful state it makes peter a liar when he declared of the truth i perceive that god is no respecter of persons but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is except with him acts ten thirty four thirty four thirty five et cetera uh...

i imagine someone's gonna uh... points uh... uh... john to that list of this this program you know one things that struck me as i thought about this was uh...

you know farms loves to go after bad representations of mormonism and demonstrate when people and there are there are people out there who've made bad representations of mormonism and uh...

yet to turn around and to soak completely uh... mess what unconditional actions about is is uh...

it's it's completely difficult to understand i recognize there aren't a lot of calvinist in utah you got jason wallace in and the orthodox presbyterian church up there and uh...

and uh... my quiet kowski and and uh... and that the folks there but uh... they do know of them but evidently they're not too interested in knowing what they believe because uh...

if you can completely massacre a presentation like that i uh...

i don't know it's uh... just in case you're wondering uh... mister that enough uh... it means that one whom god chooses to say we say repeat regardless of whether he is a good or evil person well one destined for damnation be damned even if he's righteous i'm sorry there is no righteous and who not once it is there's where we sort of start off with our major differences between mormonism is aside the fact that we have regards we have a different view of man as well as i want to tracks we used to pass out to up in the salt lake is called uh...

no man is able and it was all on the inabilities of man john chapter six john chapter eight you know that the whole testimony there is an unrighteous uh...

all deserve damnation all deserve god's wrath god's wrath abides upon every man who works on godliness that is the state of all and so uh...

there is not only does this make predestination again makes the same error we talked about this how many times of the past few weeks uh...

just flip side either uh... the predestination life presentation of that they're equal things they're not predestination is used positively of predestination to life election and is salvation those terms are not used in the same way of god's allowing a person to experience is just wrath there is no requirement of the extension of positive grace and mercy to cause a person to be reprobated under judgment that's they're not equal things and yet that's how people presented and as soon as you hear something present like that you just know you're talking to somebody who's going on secondary information they've never listed addition so they're not trying to be fair and that just uh...

dismissed about ninety eight percent of everybody who addresses the subject uh... right at that uh...

to complain time so anyway um... uh... as i scroll down farther there was almost no attempt at all or well -kept let me back up i have to either choose that that uh...

john devet knows knows nothing about reform theology has done almost zero reading and therefore the fact that he doesn't present the classic passages are provided response to them is based on ignorance or he does know and he's dishonest wanted to uh...

i'm gonna go with the first one i'm gonna assume that uh... you know he doesn't know when you scrolled help with this stuff uh...

the not only are the the primary passages that are used by reform people to present these concepts completely ignored uh...

you know i mean it that that the key to the the two texts presented for irresistible grace of john six twenty eight to twenty nine uh...

then so then to him what shall we do in my work the works of god jesus answers in this work what you believe in him he has sent and flippin's two thirteen for his god work in the book will do is of his good pleasure neither one of them would make the top ten of tax on irresistible grace uh...

in any way shape or form uh... calvin held that when god causes like salvation they are unable to resist is free gift the external call goes on and kind of the new internal caldwell spirit isn't had all of those chosen the saving cannot be resisted will of course dead people have a hard time resisting anything personally but that's not really addressed but uh...

the the main text are not even addressed and so the response text that are offered frequently from book of mormon uh...

almost nothing to do with the uh... with with the text where with the issues that are that are presented and so it was it was just amazing to read this and and again like i said what what caught my attention was the fact that there is actually someone who can make some of the really bad stuff we've been looking at uh...

look good uh... is his that goes so uh... that was also at the same time by the way just along the mormon route there uh...

there was an article in the uh... utah desert news and uh...

it was about uh... a new book and uh... i've ordered it in so i can take a look at it uh...

just read your little section here uh... larry saints evangelical christians tried to trade in traditional bible bashing for understanding friday night discussing how to bridge the gap between the two religious beliefs discussion came in the hills a newly published book by theologian david l wrote titled i love mormons a new way to share christ with our day saints road the dean of spiritual life at the salt lake theological seminary said his book is an effort tell members of different christian faiths how to replace confrontational evangelism for active listening and respect for lds culture quote the intended spirit of my book is a beggar showing another beggar where the bread is and that bread is heaven rose said to the gathering of both lds residents and members of other christian dominations of the grace baptist church and bountiful elder alexander b morrison's funny listen to this above that that's gonna happen in utah elder alexander b morrison america's member of the quorum the seventy of the church is christ let it say said he appreciated rose efforts effort to move from ritual bashing to a more loving approach morrison added however that rose book was quote replete with air affected interpretation and quote that only hindered good communication between the christian phase morrison said he knows that at least thirty six errors about more than that is the men rose book adding that one of the most egregious was a passage insinuating lds members believe the martyrdom of joseph smith is equal in importance to the crucifixion of jesus christ quote this is frankly ridiculous larry saints love and revere the prophet joseph smith but we most emphatically do not worship him and quote morrison said i'm sorry but i found that in the midst of trying to be more loving when i appreciate his efforts but the man is clueless specifically what he was saying i i just found that to be sort of uh...

sort of interesting and uh... nina sent me a link yesterday woman sees vision of mary in tree trunk yeah you know we could we could i'd bet you anything if we tried we could get a mary vision a week a mary citing a week what is today's mary saying when you can tell us that i came to fort collins last week with a heavy heart she planned to return to her home in north platt nebraska today with renewed faith after seeing apparition of the blessed virgin mary on the trunk of a small tree in her nieces yard the image resembling our lady of guadalupe had brought hope and joy to gonzales and the residents of coach light plaza apartments at fifteen fifty blue spruce drive residents and their friends flocked to the spot in front of unit forty five throughout the day saturday to place flowers and candles at the foot of the tree and marvel the small likeness the virgin that suddenly appeared friday morning suddenly appeared friday morning it hadn't been there before huh uh...

gonzales forty eight satin by the death of her husband six months ago in visiting her children at the apartment said she had stepped outside to have a cigarette early friday and discovered the image when she looked at the tree i knew it was her the minute i looked at all said saturday afternoon our culture has a lot of faith in miracles and it felt really good to see her i believe uh...

gonzales called her niece camelia gomez who lives in at unit forty five to show her the tree we gathered everyone around and started taking pictures gonzales said i cried because it is a miracle people came and brought candles and flowers and and and and and turned into prey well what happens when uh...

when the tree bark keeps growing and it turns into it turns into jimmy carter uh...

what are we going to get in uh...

home i'll my oh my uh... team i'm sorry but i i people using you should you should be nicer about things like this i'm sorry

But that's idolatry folks Being nice about idolatry is not honoring to God Okay, not telling these folks excuse me

But looking for Mary in tree bark or in what was it down in South Phoenix some stucco they had some some water

Was it? Dripping out of a I think there's water stains on stucco or something and and so you know

They've got people at 11 o 'clock at night sitting around with candles You know praying to Mary outside of a stucco wall

Then we had remember we had the yucca plant remember the yucca plant on 16th Street that this is a number of years ago

This is back in the 90s There was a yucca down 16th Street shot a shootout and it and it curved in such a way people thought that saw the

Virgin Mary And so about three days, you know I mean traffic was snarled everything on 16th Street Then like three o 'clock in the morning somebody came by with a machete and and de -marionized the yucca to John So it wasn't me either by the way, but you know and then last year what was it the the the water stain on the underpass up in Chicago and Of course, we all remember the the eBay

Mary apparition was that Jesus was that Jesus on the cheese sandwich or was that Mary? I forget which one it was.

I don't know. It's all idolatry folks. It's it's all absolutely worthless. It is it is

Unbelievable just just horrible terrible stuff going on there. But anyway, I do have some some

Quotes to play for you because I looked at remember last week the last one last calls we had was a made a reference to a conversion letter this is from Bentonville, Arkansas Bethel Baptist Church, and this is from one of the pastors there

Brandon Cox and It's called free to decide confessions of a former Calvinist And this is linked off the

Baptist fire website for those of you who didn't look at the blog. I mentioned the strange

Baptist fire website that has just come up that will be providing responses to Baptist fire and I Even even wrote my own little article that you know

If I had been asked they could have put on strange Baptist fire, but nobody ever asked me to do things like that Anyways, but then again, actually they do ask me all the time and I say nope don't have that so it doesn't really matter but Strange Baptist fire dot -com

I think is is the response website Well, this is the article was linked off of that. And as I was looking at what

Brandon Cox had to say One of the things he said toward the end

It says the final straw came from me in the summer of 2005 when I purchased and listened to the well -known sermon by dr

Aiden Rogers entitled Predestined for a hell absolutely not one of my strongest arguments for Calvinism was my

I so Jesus e is o g es is that's spelled Romans chapter 9.

I listened dumbfounded as dr. Rogers decimated every supporting argument I had given an asserting that God had created people who are foreordained to damnation simply to show forth his justice.

Dr Rogers masterful exegesis of this off -studied passage convinced me to do a thorough reevaluation of my own theology

Very few Calvinists today would claim to be hyper Calvinist In fact any Calvinist I've ever met would always label those a little more extreme than themselves the hypers

Suddenly I was faced the evidence that which proved my own leaning toward a hyper Calvinist theology and So I had responded.

In fact, I had to change my blog this morning. I responded twice to Adrian Rogers once in August in September of 2002 and Then what

I had up there I think was March of 2004. So there were two different sermons sermon series that I responded to in regards to Adrian Rogers and I the

Romans nine sermons were the earlier ones So I changed the links this morning so you can actually find the right ones

And I've got a few quotes to play from that Depending on what kind of time we have so on and so forth during the course of the program today

But we do have a few callers online And so we're going to start with Adam.

Hi Adam. Hi, dr. White. How are you, sir? I'm doing okay If you're interested in these quote -unquote

Calvinist conversion stories, you might want to look at Catholic answers in January they had a guy who was a

Calvinist and was actually exposed to like RC Sproul and things like that and Ended up converting to Catholicism And I've seen a number of those

Painful to listen to yeah. Well, in fact, I was listening to One of those particular conversion stories and I was actually going to try

To use it on the program to try to you know, make something meaningful out There was so little substance to the conversion tape the

Catholic answers webcast they did Radio program that I really couldn't come up with anything.

I mean there was so little substance so little scripture So little meaningful just oh, you know, I discovered the beauties of Mother Church and blah blah blah

I couldn't come up with anything I had to you know I wasted 20 minutes listening to this thing and skipping around in it and there wasn't anything there

So I moved on from there. But anyway, anyway, my question is on the Trinity. I heard your debate with Greg Stafford Mm -hmm, and I want

I just want to know man you were patient in that debate I mean that guy was just being so dense

Nothing was getting through his head. It was just like I can't the only times I was listening and I just hear what he said

I just put my head down and go. Oh good grief. Well, I'm not sure that it's dense as it is

Greg has a an established position and I think one of the issues that Greg's facing aside from the fact that he always has to be

Concerned about what the leadership of the society is going to think of what he's saying is he has

He has followers not I don't think he'd use that term he certainly wouldn't use term disciples or anything like that, but he has people who look up to him as as holding a position of leadership in essence and and so he has a position to defend and and you know that was you got to give

Greg Stafford his Kudos, that was only his second debate that he had ever done

Ah, and so it was like my 50 some odd if the 50th or something like that And so, you know on that level, you know, give him give him his credit

But I was a little every time everybody asked me what surprised you most about the Stafford debate. I Had read his books.

Of course. It was primarily his his book in defense the watchtower and answer to scholars and critics and and I Read it as I was writing my own book on the

Trinity and there were a couple sections I have openly mentioned this many times There are a couple sections in my book that are much better today because I read

Stafford's book For example primarily the the sections on the identification of Jesus as Jehovah and I had read his responses

To for example Hebrews chapter 1 verses 10 through 12 and and John chapter 12 verses 39 to 41 so I knew exactly how he'd respond and I Took the time to interact with what he was saying and it greatly enhanced.

I mean, I think it really made my arguments Significantly better and tighter.

Oh, yeah. He's not your normal Jehovah's witness No, he's not your normal Joe's witness. But what surprised me was even though he had my book he had had

Oh my goodness, at least for maybe five years. My book had been out. I saw no evidence

Whatsoever that he had actually interacted with my responses to his own position And again, that's that is what surprised me.

I expected Much more on that level instead Basically, he he you know he gave his regular presentation and then all he could do in cross -examination was he wanted to argue mass and count nouns and and lose the audience as if the audience would have any idea what in the world we were talking about there and I did everything

I could to Leave this brilliant job there. I mean instead of jumping into that. I mean, I am biblical languages

So I think that was interesting but you did a brilliant job there because one of the weaknesses that I saw in his position is he doesn't understand that linguistic philosophy has

Changed in his view of language as this just straightforward grammatical structures always have this meaning They always have this meaning was just blown away by Wittgenstein last century

You can't have language in this, you know Basic where all these words have the same meaning all those same grammatical structures are always going to have the same meaning well, what he was really trying to argue there was to go back to a

Very very lengthy exchange that he had had first with Rob Bowman then then dr

Hartley on that particular subject and and The problem was while that is worthwhile going into in a cross -examination period you could not even begin to define

The terms of the discussion let alone summarize the discussion in that period of time

I mean you couldn't do it and that's not what cross -examination is supposed to be in the first place You're supposed to you're not supposed to be necessarily introducing entire new subjects during the course of cross -examination

You're supposed to be asking about Presentations that are even made so people who sit back and listen to that and they actually look at the text of Scripture as we're going

Through them. They'll look at Romans chapter revelation chapter 5 for example, and they'll a revelation before and they'll go

What do you mean? There's no worship here. What are you talking about? Yeah, that that that's where most people have gone

Got a little problem there Greg, but anyways, yes. Yes, sir You had a question about that or was that this?

Well, I actually wanted to ask you we were translating through Matthew in class and and we were doing the Great Commission and I noticed that in 2819 there is one name

If the name is singular, but there's three things listed there and I asked my teacher and he said and I and he said well

There might be some relation there and I said that sounds Trinitarian But he cautioned me said we don't want to be reading our theology into the text

Here at this point, so we need to be taking it out. We need to be careful not to do that Yeah, well, you know, there's there's a there's a fine line between reading your theology in and reading theology out

And I quote BB Warfield's comments on the singular use of Anima at Matthew 28 19 followed by the string of Father son and Holy Spirit and Certainly BB Warfield did not have any problem in in seeing the fact that you have to be able to explain the singular name at Matthew 28 19 being defined as father son

Holy Spirit and he also makes a fairly strong argument that you can connect this idea of baptism and the name of God with Old Testament Passages where the name of Jehovah was spoken over the people in a covenantal sense

And so if I didn't quote that I'm trying to remember now This has been a number of years ago if I didn't quote the whole section

I certainly gave you the references in Warfield's work on the Trinity Which I think you'd find extremely useful if you haven't tracked it down already

I called the Lord of Glory Lord of Glory is on the deity of Christ. That's an excellent work we make that available through the ministry, but there is a

Section of Trinitarian essays in his collected works a 10 volume set that I think you'd find really really useful

I wonder if it's on the CD -ROM. I Don't have the CD -ROM myself, so I wouldn't know I would assume it would be yeah, all right.

Well. Thanks. Okay. All right Thanks for calling All right, let's talk with Earl.

Hi, Earl. How you doing? Hey? How you doing doing? All right? What I'm calling about is I've uh

I've listened to most of your talks with like van Hale yes What is up with that guy?

I mean, I don't know if you've ever heard like his debate with dr. Walter Martin have you I did many years ago.

It was a train wreck and the same thing with yours He constantly says things it's like trying to nail jello to a tree actually the the the actual terminology that I used back in Early 1980s the first time that I encountered him and by the way

You'll you'll find this to be amazing the first time I ever quote -unquote debated, and I don't use the term debate

I don't like to use term debate in a very formal sense the first time he and I argued on a radio program Let's put it that way

Was on a radio program here in Phoenix with a fellow who's now nationally known as a shock jock by the name of Tom like us

We were on the Tom like a show together And we did we did the like a show one day and the next day

We're on KFL are in in Phoenix and We we had quite the interesting

Encounters there, and I don't know how many times I've been on his radio program. I've I think at least around a dozen

Times now up there in in Utah and one of the last things that van ever said to me

Rich was there with me. This is a number of years ago. We had just finished a lengthy

Program with him, and he actually gave us a compliment at least he gave I considered it to be a compliment

We were standing in the rather darkened office offices because it was already late at night after the program was over his live call -in program and He he made the comment to me said you know after all these years

You're still saying the same things that you were saying when we first when we first debated when we first Met each other and what he meant by that is we had stayed focused on the central issues

What does Mormonism teach concerning who God is who Christ is what salvation is etc, etc? And I took that as a wonderful compliment

I don't know if he meant it that way, but I took that as a wonderful compliment that we hadn't And I think he did mean as a comment because now that I think about the context was all these passing fads in LDS Apologetics you know the the white salamander letter when it came out and all these these things that people have jumped on You can see for example in Godmakers 2 and stuff like that, and we didn't jump on those things

We've stayed focused upon. What's really central about Mormonism, and that's just the way we've been for the beginning

So I I think he did recognize that on that level. We aren't the sensationalist that you see amongst amongst other folks, but I'll never forget, and I don't know if you've heard of it.

Did you hear the program he and I did on Calvinism? I think I have I've listened to like said most of what you have on your website

Okay, and a few little snippets around other website the reason I ask is is I'll never forget

This was in an odd little studio. I don't remember even why they were there. I've only been in the studio once it was in a building right off of The freeway, and it was actually up near the airport motel six is behind the

Denny's weedy debt up there I'm telling rich this but and near Redwood right off Redwood Road up there and It was just he and I was almost

I don't think there's anybody else there. I don't remember. There was a board up I think I think a Bailey van even had to do the Board hopping that day, but he and I did a program on it, and I'll never forget him saying

It was one of the calmest programs. We had done. There was very little Rank or anything like that, and I remember him saying at one point as we were going through Romans 9

He said well He said now obviously if I started with your presuppositions like the inerrancy of the text of Scripture Then your position would make perfect sense

I just don't start there And it was such a to me such a confession of exactly what this whole thing is all about if you start

With the assumption that the Bible actually presents God's truth, then yeah your position makes perfect sense

He's a very funny character Like that he tries to almost paint

Mormonism in a sense to be sort of just another Denomination really just another really because like when you listen to him.

He constantly quotes church fathers Yes out of context yes, and you know at the same time

You want to ask him were any of those church fathers remotely Mormon, right? And I don't know

I just it was really interesting another have you ever heard of a doctor or not. I'm sorry Steve Gregg Steve Gregg yes, he's debated gene cook, and he's a

I think oh, yeah, yeah, is he up in like Nebraska area

Oregon yeah, I've heard the name people have referred me a number of times to some online

You know mp3 files or something Yeah, the names the names familiar, but we get a lot of folks who say hey

You know you should you should debate this guy you should debate that guy you know I mean We just got a call right before the program about a guy with Calvary Chapel that needs to debate

James White You know and and I'm and I'm just like Okay, you know

Whatever, but you need to realize you know people all the time I get emails from folks saying hey, you know our church would love to have you in we were wondering if you're available next month

That's like and it's like excuse me folks. We're I'm booking in the summer of 2007 right now, right?

You know I mean nope not available next month You know so yeah, there's lots and lots of folks in my normal response is okay

Could you send me some of their books and some of their? Their their teaching some of their you know their experience teaching their lectures things like that that normally ends it right there

There's my opinion his debate with a gene cook. He really he really did a better job to me

I Don't know gene didn't have a way of putting he day debated on Calvinism and gene just didn't have a way of putting it in word

Not that necessarily Steve's position was correct or true, but he presented a better argument

Well, you know I'll have to you know like I said There there may be better folks out there

We certainly hope there are because they've got to be better than some of the folks who've been reviewing lately, but You know

I'll listen to you know someone can link me to that particular debate I'd you know that's that's the kind of thing that if I can get hold the mp3

I can stick it in my mp3 player when I'm out riding like I've got a 57 mile ride tomorrow

I can listen to pretty much the entirety of a debate I think I can do that through your website right yeah sure yeah, okay now

I bought it from Jean so I probably have to like email him up or call him or something make sure I can give Something tells me

Jean would not have too much of a difficulty if you if you hooked me up to his mp3 to Last thing before I go yes, this is regarding the

Cult excuse me. I'm sorry Church of Christ I'm sorry, which which which one international churches or the old style the old style, okay?

I've been debating a lot of those guys, and and I can't help but think that they're so far off no x238

You know I had a guy come up to me at the Sedalia debate the first guy who came up to me after the day

I walked down off the stage haven't even put all my stuff up I haven't even packed my stuff up yet the first guy after me is a

Church of Christ guy And he wants to challenge me to Debate on baptism, and he said would you be interested in debating baptism, and I said let me let me take a wild guess

He said he represented some church crisis. Let me take a wild guess you'd like to do like three nights and We're gonna spend three nights

Debating x238 and he just sort of looked at me like oh you've heard of this before I said you know

I said you know what don't have the slightest interest. I said that has been we had a

Reformed Baptist pastor in Tennessee Nashville over the past couple years did a number of debates the

Church Christ passed down there if Somebody wants to hear what a Reformed Baptist has to say about baptism. I'll refer you to those mp3s personally

I see absolutely positively no positive benefit any longer from anything like that. It's been gone over a thousand times

There's only so many times that we can address the issue of x238 and 239

The fact that in reality you've got within that context God's freedom and calling whosoever unto himself and all the rest that stuff you're not going to you're not going to change because you've got a completely messed up soteriology and view of man and You know that's that's just all there is to it, and he looked disappointed

But you know you know and probably would you know sadly I shouldn't assume this But this has been my experience whenever I tell somebody nope not understand going that direction the next thing

I hear someplace on the web is that I'm I'm afraid I've been refuted blah blah blah and as it is right now

You know Preparing for the Shabir Ali debate this weekend. They're listening to this

Muslim Mormon stuff. I have to be really careful about that I don't want to call Shabir Ali a Mormon. That would be really a bad thing to do

I Recognize how long it's been since I've been able to do almost anything in that area or even talking about Jehovah's Witnesses We're just you know

There's only a couple of us involved in this ministry And there's only so many hours in the day And I have to be careful that I don't get you know there's a priest some some or Eastern Orthodox priest who wants to do

A debate on soul scripture is in place. You know and I said no not not really interested Not not something

I'm overly excited about right now and and Everybody's always saying why I think you should debate this or I think you should debate eschatology.

I was laugh Hysterically at that that one when that one comes along yeah, right sure, but anyway, so I think about those things

I don't want to really that's good So I'm gonna have you read my little article on this subject on the website the one on Titus 35

No, that's that's actually Mike Porter. There is a there is on the website under I believe general apologetics a brief rebuttal of baptismal regeneration, okay, isn't that that isn't one dealing with Titus 3 5 well

Not not my recollection I was dealing with x238 and acts 22 and a few of those others so the one by Mike Porter on at Titus 3 5 is a more recent one you have to scroll down toward the bottom of the page

I think oh track that one down. Yeah Listen to a guy named Stephen a reformed guy.

He debated. I think it was in Tennessee Yeah, that's Steven. Yeah, that was a it was a very very good debate

And it really showed the the darkness I should say within Church of Christ Yeah, that's who I was referring to he that that Pat I had talked with that pastor

At being a fellow reformed Baptist elder before those debates, and we had been praying for them and stuff

And so you know somebody wants to wants to hear that debate you refer him to that And you know that's all there is to it

I don't I don't see any reason to be redoing it over and over again myself, so I appreciate your time brother Okay, thanks a lot brother.

I got less by my alrighty Oh my goodness. We only have 20 minutes left.

Hey. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, let's let's get to let's get to Adrian Rogers here real quick I appreciate those phone calls always good phone calls.

We have the we have the best audience out there. There's no two ways about it I've always said that we attract a very interesting group of folks, and I very much appreciate that and I've really enjoyed the the range of topics we get to address.

This is from September 14th 2002 I'm just gonna play a section here in light of the claims

Brandon Cox made about the the the masterful exegesis of Romans chapter 9 that Adrian Rogers presented now of course this time

Adrian Rogers was still alive and We were these were sermons that were currently being played on on Christian radio stations all across the

United States And I remember when I first responded in 2002 to Adrian Rogers We got lots of contacts from people thanking us for doing so because in essence people were afraid to do so They were afraid to address someone like Adrian Rogers because you know he was so well -known so on so forth but when you present material in regards to Exegesis and the meaning of the text of Scripture you need to be able to stand behind it and so let's let's just play a section here of the the material from Adrian Rogers and my response from September of 2002

Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated there were two sons they were twins but God made a sovereign choice and God said

I choose Jacob Now this is God's plan don't argue with it

You may not like it you may might say as one man said how odd of God to choose the Jews But he did he he chose

Abraham out of all the people and then Abraham's son Isaac, and then he shows Isaac's son

Jacob so what God is showing here is just simply his Sovereign his sovereign promise now right now.

We start to kick in some deep water Okay, don't check out on me now. This is important Yeah, the deep water is where he has to abandon the consistency of what he's set up at this point

Because up at this point if you were simply to follow what has been said Then obviously we are talking about salvific context.

We're talking about the sovereignty of God We're talking about his ability to make choices not to respond to choices that we make remember

That's what he already did wrote back in Romans chapter 8 He's already said that what God has done There is in response to what men did in time though He then turned around when talking about eternal security and says that what men do in time can't have impact that we've noted the the tremendous

Inconsistencies last time but if he were to remain consistent Then the next verses would lead him to hold to a reformed soteriology

But he doesn't hold to that he has his traditions and therefore in this next section

In this next one -minute clip you will hear where the switch takes place

See if there's any basis in the text for it verse where God says look at it in verse 13

Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated how could God ever hate a little baby?

Well actually says that even before the children were born look in verse 11 for the children being not yet born

Neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God According to election might stand a lot of works

But of him that called it Why did God call Jacob? And not

Esau was it anything that Jacob had done. Oh, yeah, and even born it is

God's sovereign Joy be very careful

God here is not talking about two little babies one born for heaven and one born for hell

That's not what he's talking about at all This is national and not

Personal let me give you a verse that will help clear this up. Well. There's where the switch takes place

Up till now we're explaining. How it is that not all who are of Israel are

Israel That is there are Jews who do not believe there are Jews who reject

This is clearly what Paul has been talking about up to this particular point in time

But now all of a sudden. It's not what he's talking about anymore

And it's hard to know exactly why he's not talking about that anymore But the main reason

I would suggest is not because of a verse that he's going to look at It's because if you hold to that then you have to hold to Reformed soteriology he was talking about individuals

He will continue talking about individuals later on the context before and after is very consistent And you'll notice that if you if you look at Romans 9

And I hope you will take time to look at this in your own text notice one other thing that needs to be brought up when we talk about the subjects of Romans 9 the various verses and all the rest of stuff

Notice the words that Paul uses look back at Romans 9 11 where he worked where he were where he was

For though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad

So that God's purpose according to his choice would stand and then look at the next phrase

Not because of works, but because of him who calls now stop just for a moment

Theorize with me for a moment if dr. Adrian Rogers We're looking at any other passage of the

Bible If dr. Adrian Rogers were looking at any other section in Romans 3 or 4 or 5 or in other of Paul's epistles, and he saw the words works and him who calls

What would he say? What would be the context? Notice not according to works

That's the exact same Greek term. That's used in Romans 2 and 3 and 4

And when he sees those that word in Romans 2 and 3 and 4 He knows what it's talking about he doesn't have any problem understanding works there

But Here in Romans 9 he can see works and he won't even mention it are these

National works. I don't know. We're not told I listen to the sermon. He didn't explain it

It's like it's not even there and what about the calling didn't he just get done in Romans chapter 8

Talking about a universal calling now We saw last week that he didn't deal with this properly that is he was very inconsistent in his use the term calling

Didn't see the golden chain of redemption so on so forth, but he recognized that calling is

What? National or salvific. Well, it was in Romans 8. He doesn't give us any reason to believe

That here in Romans chapter 9. It's not he doesn't even deal with it It's like it just simply vanishes from the text and it does most of the time

When you're dealing with our minions who are trying to find a way around Romans chapter 9 the words don't mean anything yet There is a template that is put over the text and what we need to do is we need to get it off of personal things on to national things and Therefore words that otherwise would ring a bell and cause red lights to come on and tell us what kind of context we're in are simply ignored

Now some of you missed the fact that I was playing the dividing line from September of September 14 2002 which is why you heard that in the background which was my air conditioner and Rich is noticing this too.

I'm going out of the right ear into the left ear back and forth here. It's really odd I don't know how that can happen since there's only one microphone sitting in front of me

But who knows maybe after all the abuse this microphone has had over these years It is finally finally losing its its ability to do things anyway

You won't find of course on the Baptist fire website any defense of Adrian Rogers sermon you'll just find the presentation of Adrian Rogers sermon and that's what really drives me nuts about Baptist fire is these individuals the poof it just came back up again.

We got a short someplace poof these It comes back. I like that sound that poof we have to make that a a sound that that's not it's not your headsets

It's happening in mine. So Fixing your headset is going to do Absolutely nothing This sounds better over here doesn't help me any anyways

Baptist fire these folks are anonymous We don't know who they are They won't stand behind what they say and so you can't interact with them

You can't if you have multiple people writing for that website and they say in Article 1

X about a word for example, I was just saying about Adrian Rogers. He had recognized the proper

Meaning of the word call when he went through the golden chain of redemption He hadn't done a real good job on that, but he had recognized what the calling was in Romans 8 now

We get into Romans 9. Also, we have a completely different meaning You can hold him accountable because you know who it is.

You know, who's doing the sermon, you know, he's doing the same sermons You can say wait a minute now. Why are you making this change? Why are you shifting meanings?

but I'm Baptist fire comm if You have Article 1 that says one thing and then article 2 says something else.

Is that the same person? Is that a different person? Who do you write to to say? Wait a minute. You've contradicted yourself.

They won't respond they don't they won't interact and that's why I wrote what I did in regards to anonymity and Christian theology and the fact that in this case the anonymity is what allows them to Present only one side of any issue

It's not that they have you know, they've obviously made up their minds and they're not gonna be confused by the facts But they will not even acknowledge

The rebuttal of the materials they offer. I mean, what are there if you look at their resources about Calvinism?

What what do you have there? You have what love is this and you have chosen but free and You have

Adrian Rogers sermon on Romans 9 and you have the Vance book in other words stuff that's been out and has been ravaged and properly so Repeatedly shown to be filled with error and eisegesis and and and every kind of lexical faux pas known to mankind

Can be found in these books and yet that is what they're offering and has there been a rebuttal of these books?

We don't know. You don't even know who we are. We're just simply going to present this material to you and Obviously their intention is not to and this is what concerns me their intention is not to convince us

Their intention is not to and not to address us in any way shape or form When I write on almost anything, you know, there have been a couple times.

I suppose that I've actually said in an article you know what I'm just writing to believers and just writing to Christians and You know,

I'm not concerned about anybody else's particular point in time, I suppose I said that but it is far more challenging to write a book to write a chapter to write an article where you not only communicate clearly to Your audience that believes like you believe but also

To write it in such a way that if someone Who disagrees with you reads it they're going to not only understand but they might actually even be challenged to think through what they're saying

You can't do that. If all you're concerned about is I want my little group

To continue to believe what I'm saying. My little group will continue to believe what

I'm saying. That's all I want them to do and And I'm I'm only going to give them enough information that as long as they don't run into opposition

As long as they don't get challenged by somebody else by those big mean nasty

Calvinists Then they're gonna be alright now if they do get challenged They're also going to discover that we've only been given a half the story

And in fact, we've been giving them flawed information. In fact, we knew it all along But we're gonna take our chances

That they're not going to run into those folks that they're just going to close their eyes Then close their ears close their minds and all will be well.

We can just feed them this little bit of Pablum That's what Baptist fire is all about and the sad thing is

Baptist fire addresses some good issues Baptist fire I would agree with various things that Baptist fire says

Concerning the inspiration of Scripture and things like that But as we've said many times what good is it to have an inspired

Bible if you're not going to read all of it and Believe all of it You can you can get yourself all excited about we believe in inerrancy now

Yeah, well, do you believe in the inerrancy of Romans 9 enough to actually respect the text enough to exegete it properly?

Romans 8 John 6 any of those things What good is it to confess inerrancy if you don't practice

Inerrancy there's a there's a big difference between confession of inerrancy and the practice of it

I've mentioned this many times before That to me is one of the biggest problems in Christian scholarship today or at least in conservative

Christian scholarship since in the vast majority of Theological seminaries nobody believes in inerrancy anymore.

Anyways those that say they do in a large portion of those you have a huge gap between the confession of inerrancy and the practice

That must necessarily come from believing in inerrancy If you don't engage in rigorous believing exegesis of the text

If you sit back and go well We don't need to worry about all that Greek stuff and we don't need to worry about all that context stuff

You're just confusing things and you're complicating things that is not showing respect for the

Word of God And that is not showing that you really actually believe in inerrancy. Why why bother with inerrancy if You're true if your surface level tradition is enough who cares about anything else?

Just just take your four spiritual laws stick them in the microwave Sunday morning warm them up again and reserve them

That seems to be what's what's enough for most folks. That's how you grow yourself a big church

Well, that's how you grow yourself a big graveyard is what you actually get, you know lots of religious folks running around but not much in the way of Actual challenge to live what you what you believe and that's not showing respect for the

Word of God That does not show that you actually believe this is truly God speaking And so I want to know what

God is speaking if you want to do that, then it's going to take Respect for the word and exegesis thereof.

So when I look at baptist fire I Mentioned the article yesterday,

I would really hope that someday somebody associated with that would get themselves

Convicted that what they're doing is wrong that what they're doing is is not respectful

For the Word of God and they would disassociate themselves and then also Let everybody else know who actually is behind this because something tells me that we might know some of these folks that we might have a have an idea of You know where these folks coming from and and where they're you know, and actually be able to hold them

Accountable for what they're talking about what they're saying. That would be that would be important to me I'm gonna just for the last minute or so here.

Let's go ahead and continue listening a little bit to that That dividing line is still available.

I gave the link on the blog To those programs actually I linked to other programs

But there's two programs in 2004 two programs in 2002. I respond to Adrian Rogers on these issues and massive $1

Fee for those those particular downloads In fact ones 2002 are so old that we broke them up into three sections for people who are still, you know running along it 24k download speeds and things like that there.

I know there's still a few of you left out there, but We make it a little bit larger these days and just no longer there

Okay, well what was this verse that he wants us to listen to well here it is Speaking to the mother of these two little twins and the

Lord said unto her two Nations are in thy womb.

She might have said it feels like two Nations are in thy womb and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels

And the one people shall be stronger than the other people and the elder shall serve the younger

He's not talking about one particular baby and another particular baby one born for blessing and one born for Bane He's talking now about two nations

God and his providence said I'm going to use the Jews My choice is for the

Jewish nation Well, he said actually Genesis 25 33 but it's actually 23 if you look back at Genesis chapter 25 beginning in verse 22

But the children struggled together within her and she said if it is so then Why then am

I in this way? So she went to inquire of the Lord So she inquired of the Lord the response to her was the

Lord said to her two nations are in your womb and two peoples will be separated from your body and One people will be stronger than the other and the older shall serve the younger and then it says when her days

Then very next verse when her days to be delivered were fulfilled behold there were twins in her womb

All right, so God tells her beforehand You are going to have twins and yes

God tells her beforehand that they will rep they will lead to two nations There's no question about any of this

There is no question about the fact that Jacob is the one through whom the

Jewish people come There is no question about the fact that through Esau come the Edomites There is no question about the fact that God chooses

Israel He does not choose Edom the Edom is is under his his wrath and his curse throughout the

Old Testament No question about any of those things But where do we find the basis in the text for thinking that Paul himself has?

abandoned his own purpose in explaining How it is that not all of those who are of Israel are

Israel We haven't been given that we're simply shown well You know that Jacob led to a nation and Esau led to a nation therefore this has nothing to do with individuals

Wait a minute. Where does the context say that because we'll note that in the very next section of Romans chapter 9 after Paul cites from this particular passage

He is then going to Quote from the minor prophets after he says the older will serve the younger he quotes the minor prophets

Jacob I love but Esau I hate it and yes if you go to the minor prophets That is in reference to the difference between Israel and Edom.

There's no question about any of those things The question is how does the Apostle Paul?

Intend that to be understood and that from the dividing line in 2002

It's linked on the blog if you want to listen to the rest of that response to Adrian Rogers. That's where it's available

Thanks for listening. We back Thursday afternoon God bless been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or write us at PO 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