The Doctrines of Grace

What is up guys, my name is KJ, and again

I have Jeremiah with me, and wait for yourself. Hey everybody, my name is Jeremiah Nortier, I'm a reoccurring guest slash host with KJ here on Why Theology Matters.

Thank you so much, KJ, for doing this with me. No problem, man. It feels good. It's been a while to do a podcast, man.

We're in a new year, 14 days in, so it's almost February, man. What's going on? It's 2022, but not 2020 all over again, hopefully.

So hopefully this is the start of a new era. Yeah, I've been seeing, man, COVID, it seems like it's getting worse around the world, so I don't know if everything's going to shut down again, but my prayer is that it won't.

You know what, though? If it does, we'll just do more podcasts. Have more free time. Another plus thing,

I just recently just graduated in December from college, so now I have more free time to do podcasts. So thank y 'all for you guys' patience.

Some of you guys may have been waiting for these episodes. I graduated, so I have more free time. Hey, KJ, you are basically a scholar now, so I am submitting myself to you.

You are a genius. I wish, I wish. No, but I think Jeremiah, he's a couple things coming up.

He's thinking about doing a YouTube channel as well. Was it Apologetic? How's it go? Yes.

So this is kind of just a teaser, but the Apologetic Dog, it'll be launching hopefully before too long.

And the primary verse that I want to anchor my apologetics in comes from 1

Timothy 6, 20. And there, I didn't want to do 1

Peter 3, 15, KJ, the very overused apologetics verse. And so as I was praying about it,

I kept coming back to this verse where Paul says, Oh, Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you.

Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge. And what

I love so much about that, KJ, is as Christians, we're called to guard the truth, the deposit, the gospel, the deposit of the gospel that's been handed down to us.

And so that's my mentality is I want to guard truth. I want to guard the gospel. And I want to get into those contexts where we're contending for what is truly called knowledge and demonstrate things that are falsely called knowledge.

Demonstrate how something that's contradictory to itself could not possibly reflect the truth. Yeah, that's amazing, man.

Now you also have a debate coming up next month about baptism. And I think you're on the side that says baptism is required to get to heaven, right?

But yeah, what's the debate about, man?

And when will it be? The details? Yes. So February 11th, it'll be a Friday and it's going to roughly start at 6 p .m.

Jonesboro, Arkansas, at Arkansas State University Centennial Hall. We have a graphic, more information if any of our listeners want more information, we can definitely send that to them.

But February 11th, we have kind of loosely titled it the Great Baptism Debate.

Now there is a lengthy proposition that I did not come up with, but I am negating. So I'll let people look more into that of what it is.

But I think at the core of it, I'm going to make a big deal that baptism is the thing that fundamentally separates the

Church of Christ from Baptist doctrine. Now there are definitely other things, but the

Church of Christ, how they view baptism, I think adds works to the gospel of grace.

So that's really going to be the core of it. I think this is an important conversation that should be had. But I want to lovingly talk about the truth and contend for these things.

So KJ, just be praying for me that I would represent Christ even in the midst of controversy.

Definitely, man, definitely. Now the word you use, controversy, is definitely kind of the topic we're going to deal with.

It's been a lot of controversy since this kind of theology has come out. But today I want to talk about,

I guess, maybe some misrepresentations of Calvinism, what Calvinism is, what it's not.

And so I guess we can just title this, today's episode, Calvinism Misrepresented. Is Calvinism really biblical?

And then I guess in the overall picture, why does it matter? And then especially in a lot of people think, Calvinists, are they really evangelistic?

So we'll talk about all those things today. So you guys just keep hanging with us. So the first thing, when we think about Calvinism, I guess on a broad level, what is that before we kind of dive into the main topic we're going to talk about?

What is Calvinism to you, man? Yeah. So I actually, I like the title

Calvinism. It's really getting back to John Calvin. But as you study church history, you realize what

John Calvin held to, it was not original with him. We see things of St. Augustine.

And really what it boils down to, these five points really point to the sovereignty of God.

And so Calvinism is definitely misrepresented because it's not seen as the doctrines of grace or the doctrines of love.

And so it's definitely biblical. I think a lot of people understand a misrepresentation of Calvinism, one that makes

God mean and totally does not leave the creator as he ought to be as the creator over his creation.

So I just had a fundamental level. We're really saying let's consistently hold to the sovereignty of God the way that the scriptures teach us.

Definitely, definitely. Now, before we jump in this, once again, I think it's always good to start off with something that's primary, which is the gospel.

So people who are listening, who are Christians may be like, well, I don't agree with that, but at least we can all agree on the gospel, which is the personal work of Jesus is who he is and what he's accomplished.

We know that the Old Testament promised a Messiah and this Messiah will come to deliver us from sin. Well, all the

Old Testament saints were wondering, you know, is it David? Is it Moses? Is it Noah? Like who is this Messiah going to be? And finally we get to the book of Matthew and Matthew tells us that it's

Jesus. John tells us it's Jesus. Mark tells us it's Jesus. All the apostles tell us it's Jesus. We find out this

Jesus is that God. And the reason why God came in Jesus, obviously, is that it took

God down on a cross for us to be made right with the father. So that's kind of a short version of it.

There's a sin nature that we've all inherited by Adam where he sinned in the garden. And because of that sin nature, all of us were born with the wrath of God upon us.

But Jesus, when he came, he was a perfect vessel. He never sinned. He was not born in sin like we were.

And so he lived a perfect life. And by dying on a cross, it appeased the wrath of God. And so by trusting in Jesus, he gives you his good works.

He takes your sin and died on a cross. And then you add to that, Jermiah, man, that's actually primary again, something we can't disagree with as a

Christian. Right. And what's also fundamental to the gospel, KJ, is that death, burial and resurrection.

Because since Jesus died, you know, in our stead as our substitute for the punishment of sin, he resurrected, which we're so inextricably linked to him that we too have been given resurrected life.

Jesus proved that he truly is Lord and God by his resurrection. But he gave us a new life in that resurrection.

And one of the blessed hopes that Christians have is that we will also receive resurrected bodies at his second coming.

And yeah, I mean, that's all of our hope is totally focused on the perfect work of Jesus Christ.

Resurrected bodies in a new kingdom, huh? That's right. I just played.

I don't know yet. I'm going to leave that topic alone. I used to be so into eschatology, but I just I just found out the more

I learned to study it, the more I just don't know. So, but hey, the primary thing I do know the gospel and that's what saved me and you.

And I mean, you guys, we're able to be united right now and do this podcast. So now with the primary thing taken care of, let's kind of deal with this controversial issue as in Calvinism.

And I like what your mind said. He said he doesn't like the term, but just to kind of familiarize with this again, like it didn't originate with John Calvin, his doctrine,

I guess it was just God's sovereignty has been preached since the early church history with Augustine and Augustine actually got it from the

Apostle Paul. So we'll talk about a little bit later. Now, one of the major things, I guess, about Calvinism that gets kind of misrepresented is limited atonement.

I know certain other people define it as definite atonement or effectual atonement. How would you define it,

Jeremiah? And what is limited atonement? Yeah, I liked how you use the phrase definite atonement, or we we've even done on a past episode, particular redemption.

We're talking about the scope of God's focus is on a particular group of people.

He is powerful to save to the uttermost, but in what way? And so I think

Arminian theology, they, and we would count them as brothers in Christ. We would just see them as being inconsistent or just misunderstanding certain verses.

And that's how they view Calvinist. So it's all good in the sense that we should be sharpening each other and we should lovingly be having these conversations.

So if we're talking about what's hard to grasp for people and what limited atonement is, is the atonement, the blood of Christ was specifically shed for God's elect.

And I think that's hard for people to really grasp because they're like, well, why couldn't

God die for everybody on the cross? And what the scriptures teach us very clearly is if Jesus's blood was shed for you, then your sin is totally covered.

And we don't want to understand, we don't want to end up in universalism.

So there is at some point where we have to at least agree that Jesus's blood is not effectually shed for, for every single person, because then why are some people in hell?

They'd be paying the punishment for their sin all over again. So there's something dissatisfying about that for people that are really trying to look at the scripture as a whole and harmonize it, understanding its consistency.

But totally to throw a bone to the Arminian side of things is you do have verses that talk about the whole world and all people.

And I get that those are hard things to reconcile, right? Because Calvinists are going to look at those verses and say, yeah, the whole world and all people talks about all kinds.

God has people scattered throughout the whole globe. And that's really what that's getting at. But KJ, I want to tell you one of the most specific verses that to me supports only particular redemption.

And it comes from Romans chapter 8, where the apostle Paul says, who shall bring any charge against God's elect?

It is God who justifies us. And I just want to pause right here because the context is talking about God's elect.

The apostle Paul is talking about us, those that no longer are under condemnation, but are in Christ.

There's therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. That's the whole context that Paul is laying out.

And we are justified, right? This flows from that golden chain of redemption from verse 30, which we'll get into later.

And then Paul goes on to say, who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died. So think about this atonement, right?

His bloodshed that appeases the wrath of God. Christ Jesus is the one who died.

More than that, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.

So we understand that Jesus' death, his bloody death was for us. And more than that, arguing from the lesser to the greater, his resurrection is for us as well.

So one misconception that I hear from a lot of people that I respect and look up to is they say that Jesus' blood could have been effectually applied to everybody, but it's only those who receive it.

On one hand, I say yes and amen. We look to the sacrificial lamb of the

Old Testament. Whoever it's applied to gets to receive the benefit. I say yes to that, but we can go one step further.

It was specifically shed for those people, not just whoever would freely come and get it, which is true, but it's only those who freely come is who is also it was intended for as well.

And I think that verse I read to you, KJ, is probably one of the most direct verses that support particular redemption limited atonement.

Yeah, I like 2 Corinthians 5 .21. I actually have a tattering of my favorite verses.

But to read it, it says, for he made him a new no sin to be sin for us, that we may become the righteous of God.

So it's two terms. You've used one of them already, which is justification. Another term that many Reformers use and also throughout church history is substitutionary atonement.

It's the fact that Jesus is atoned for our sin of the cross. And you mentioned earlier a word universalism.

It basically means that when you die, like all people go to heaven. And basically we're justified by our death.

So when you die, you go to heaven, no matter what you believe in. But that just doesn't add up to scripture.

So I like to single out, we're not single out, but to make it simple. And the fact that either we're going to lean on the side of universalism or no definite, as in the fact that Christ actually did die for a particular group of people, because either it's everyone or it's a select group of people.

And 2 Corinthians 5 .21 helps me best understand it. Because like you said, Christ, when he dies for you, he justifies you.

And that means he makes you right before God, the father, according to the law. And so again, some of the sins that we know as one of them is unbelief.

And so you guys look, I think it's Mark nine, that the guy prayed to Jesus, you know, Jesus, I believe it helped me my unbelief.

And well, if unbelief is a sin, then that can, that means that if Christ died for you, he also died for your unbelief. Well, all the people are in hell.

You would think they have unbelief. So what's the deal with that? You know, is there something else to this thing? But yeah,

I think you have something to say too Jermiah. Yeah. Well, I love the verse recorded in 2

Corinthians 5 .21, because Paul's talking about us. He's not talking about us as humanity, but he's talking about those who are in Christ.

Right. Also, John six is an important passage to understand in the conversation of limited atonement.

Jesus says, all that the father has given me will come to me and I'll raise them up on the last day.

And there's more there, but the point is Jesus is the perfect savior for all that the father has given him.

He is particularly this effectual personal savior for them, savior of the world.

There's no other savior, but, you know but for those in him specifically, he saves them to the uttermost.

So Romans eight, John six, I think is huge, not only for limited atonement, but we're going to see also for the other doctrines of grace as well.

Yeah. I think R .C. Sproul says the best, you know, you know, God rest his soul. But he said like on the lines of like, you know,

God's atonement is not limited that like God is limited in his power, but that's why he kind of over time people have defined it as no definite or effectual atonement.

Because again, it's just saying that God died for particular people, as you said, the elect. Now one good question, man, if what we're saying is true, then that kind of begs the question for other things if you believe in this doctrine.

So if limited atonement isn't in fact true, does that mean that like all the people who are elected by God, were they on their way to hell?

I know some people may kind of question that or have questions about that. So we can't talk about that. Oh yeah. I think it's a great question.

We'd almost say from whose perspective, because from the triune God's perspective, father, son, the

Holy Spirit, from their perspective, no, they were never there. The elect's destiny was actually never headed towards eternal destruction, because God determined that.

And so, but we've talked about this before, KJ, but even those who are in Christ, we were once following the prince power of the air.

We were once children of wrath, children of the devil. And we say, okay, in what sense could the elect have been children of wrath?

When we were born into this world, we were born with the original sin. Our disposition was set on evil, not good, not seeking

God, but rebelling against God. And so we were children of wrath in terms of our nature designing evil and the wrath of God abiding on us in this temporal world.

But we were not going to eternally reap that consequence, because God determined not only who the elect are, but the moment in time in which he was going to call them, justify them, and sanctify them into glorification one day.

So it's from whose perspective. We were children of wrath in the sense that we had a, we were born with the nature that was rebellious against God and deserve in light of that sin and that rebellion, eternal destruction.

So for humanly, that was the path that we were set on. But from God's perspective, God is going to save, he's going to regenerate his elect.

Yes. Now another misrepresentation of this, I've seen many of our reform like Baptist brothers do things like this, but people who disagree with limited atonement, they may say, well, you're a believer in another gospel.

So I don't think I would take it to that extreme, but I do feel it's like, you know, the God give you holds limited atonement.

It kind of shows you like, you know, we did nothing to earn our salvation. It's simply God. That's kind of how

I would kind of look at it. What would you look at it as? Yeah. I know people that would disagree with this, cause

I'm with you. I don't think it's a different gospel. I think, I think what's crucial to the gospel is that you must believe in the

Trinity and from the Trinity, you understand that Jesus is God. So it's not that you understand the depths and the mystery of the

Trinity, but you understand that Jesus is an eternal divine person that took on flesh and blood among us being truly

God and truly man. So you must put your faith alone, apart from your works in that Jesus, the only

Jesus that can save. And if you don't, Jesus said, unless you believe that ego on me, I, the eternal,

I am creator of all things, then you will die in your sin. So you gotta believe in the right Jesus and you have to receive him the way that he prescribed, which is by repentance and faith.

And so I think it's Acts chapter 16, the Philippian jailer said, what must I do to be saved?

And Paul and Silas said, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved. That's, that's the essence of the gospel and how a person can be made right with God.

Now we're talking about the theology that consistently upholds this gospel of grace.

I think people can misunderstand that theology that undergirds the gospel, right?

So this falls into a second tier category, very important issues, but second tier. Who was the atonement for?

Was it for every single person without exception or was it for every single person without all different kinds of people without distinction?

I think that's deeper. I think that's for Christians to study the scriptures and understand these things along with the elect.

You know, I think Armenians are saved believing in the right gospel, but I think their doctrine that upholds the gospel is wrong.

So that's, that's how I look at it, KJ, is we got to get the gospel right. And then from there, we can talk about these deeper matters of doctrine.

Definitely, definitely. And just to make sure I explained this part earlier with, I guess, justification, again, it means to be right before the law, according to God.

And again, Jesus is the one that makes us right according to the law. And what would you, what was your thoughts about that, that Mark 9 text?

I think the man in that story was actually a believer, but he tells Jesus, you know, Jesus, I believe it helped me in my unbelief.

How do you think that, that statement alone can kind of tie in to people who are in hell, I guess, consider having unbelief.

That's why they're in hell. What's your thoughts on that? Yeah. The fact that he would even cry out,

Lord helped my unbelief gives evidence of his regeneration, that the spirit has worked upon him because the unregenerate man doesn't say things like that, right?

They're not going to say, God, convert me, all these things. I have a love for you, but I just can't seem to get there.

No, that's not how it works. Those people that recognize their depravity, their sinfulness before God, cry out to the

Savior for help. So I think that's exactly what we see with that person in Mark 9. And I'm with you in terms of how does limited atonement versus unlimited atonement work?

Well, belief is a command. I think in John chapter 14, opening verses,

Jesus says, believe in me, that's a command. And to fall short of that command is sin.

So unbelief isn't just this idea that you can kind of take it or leave it, but it's actually a command.

That's why I think it's earlier in John chapter three, those who do not believe in Jesus stand condemned already because they're in unbelief.

They're in categorically opposition or opposition to God, their creator. So this is interesting because if the unlimited atonement view says all sin are paid for, then what about the sin of unbelief, right?

And if that's accounted for, then I think it just kind of breaks apart from there, really does.

Yeah. Like you said, if all sins are paid for, that means unbelief. So there should be no one in hell, even because Jesus died for unbelief.

So a lot of people are in hell, but we know again that he only died for a typical group of people. And even for us, it is encouraging the fact that, man, even in the times

I have my unbelief, Christ did die for this sin. At least in my opinion,

I'm very wicked at times, really all the time, but it's the Holy Spirit in me that makes me strong and courageous. And in my times of doubt and unbelief,

I pray that same prayer. So I'm glad that Jesus did in fact die for unbelief because if I have to earn my salvation,

I'll lose it every day. I think Charles Burgess said something similar to that. But yeah, man, I guess with limited atonement, another one,

I think it's probably bigger than limited atonement is the idea of irresistible grace. Now I just,

I guess now, and I know I first got saved, I used to love saying that term, but like, you know, in hearing that now

I already know what someone's thinking, like God's grace is not irresistible because I resisted it. So why, why would you even use a term such as irresistible grace?

So biblically, how can we define that term now? What would you say? Yeah, effectual calling might really get to the core of what the eye and tulip is getting at, because like you rightly said, we, in our unregenerate state and even in our disobedience, in our walk with Christ, we do resist

God. We do quench the spirit, things like that. And I believe it's in Acts 7.

He explicitly said, rebuking the Pharisees that they resist the

Holy Spirit. So it's kind of misleading when we say irresistible grace, but like anything, what does a term mean and what does the

Bible teach? So effectual calling is really a better term.

I think we could probably rename each of the five major points of Calvinism. And so effectual calling, once again,

Romans 8 and John 6 are probably a few of my favorite places to go. There's definitely more, but when we read

Romans 8 verse 30, I think we see the effectual call. So Paul says, and those whom

God predestined, he also called and those whom he called, he also justified and those whom he justified, he also glorified.

What's really interesting is all this is in the past tense. So from God's perspective, it's a done deal. But for those whom he predestined, he also called.

And I think that's really the core of what we're getting at with irresistible grace or effectual calling. There's a point in time marked out from the foundation of the world where God, the father is sending along with the son, the

Holy Spirit to regenerate a heart, a heart of a person that now sees their sinfulness before God and their need of a savior.

And it's that point in time that's irresistible because the Holy Spirit moves in such a way to change a person's heart.

That's what Jesus was talking about in John chapter 3. I've had someone say, well, what can I do to be regenerated?

That's a work of God. You don't contribute anything to that, just like you did not contribute to your own physical birth.

It just happened to you. The person that was regenerated by the Holy Spirit and born again, that happened to them in spite of who they are.

So John chapter or Romans chapter 8, verse 30, I think is a good place to understand that.

And then also in John chapter 6, I think verse 44, there's obviously a context.

I think it starts to capture what we mean by irresistible grace. No one can come to me, Jesus said, unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day.

That word draws does not mean kicking and screaming against our will, but God transforms our will, right?

By showing us the truth, by showing us our sin and our need for Jesus Christ as our personal savior.

So there's so many other places. Ephesians 2 talks about that radical transformation that we were dead in our sins and trespasses, but we were raised in newness of life by the

Spirit. And in the moment when all that takes place and happens, that's what the eye is getting.

That's the irresistible grace of when the Holy Spirit worked in our heart in such a way that he took out that heart of stone that loved sin, loved being in rebellion against the creator that we know, and then gave us a new living heart, a heart of flesh that now desires to please

God and to follow the Savior. Awesome, awesome. I have to add too, I think about it, it really is rooted in the first letter of the

TULA, which is total depravity. The moment you realize that we in and of ourselves cannot do anything to earn our salvation and we're dead in sin, as Paul says in Ephesians 2,

I like you said Romans 8, I believe nothing we do in the flesh is pleasing to the father. And then

I think it's Romans 13, anything done not in faith is also a sin. So there's nothing we can do in the flesh to please the father.

Isaiah says our good deeds are like 50 rags. So what can I do to please God? The Bible says nothing.

That's what separates Christianity from other religions. But if we can just go a little bit deeper than that, that means that nobody born in this world is really born loving

God because of what Adam did. We know which is called total depravity, original sin.

So sin spread the moment Adam sinned, all the children that were born after that, even babies are born with a curse, which is sin.

And so because of that, we're born with a nature that's opposite of the things that God says to do. So for example,

God says love, we're born hating. God says do this, we're born doing the other things that the opposite of what scripture causes and commands us to do.

And one of those things is again, which is to follow him. God has followed me. We said, no, I don't want to follow you. I want to go the other way.

And that's the kind of central we're getting at. So unless God overrides our resistance in a sense,

I know some of my, I like that term, but he has to override our resistance order for us to follow him. But you also can think of it from another angle too, is that in the garden, let me go back,

I guess define this term real quick. So free will is the ability to make decisions in the garden.

Adam and Eve had the ability to make decisions, but they also had the ability to choose God and not choose God. We as sinners born in this world did not have that ability to choose

God out the womb like Adam and Eve did. But what happens is the moment you hear the gospel, if you're one of God's elect, he changes your heart and gives you that decision back to follow him.

And now you want to follow him because you realize that Jesus only can satisfy you. So not like God is forcing you to the cross, but it's more so you want to run to the cross because for the first time,

God has taken off your eyes of stone and now you can see who it is Jesus is.

That's the kind of way I think of it too, man. I think about it. Absolutely. That's good.

Now let's think about this a little bit too, kind of why it's probably like, you know, turning red over here, but if God has to override our resistance in order for us to come to faith, does it mean for those who are destined for hell or destruction, does he also cause them to sin for them to go to hell?

Because some people might say, well, Calvinist teaches that, you know, God picked people in heaven, picked some for hell, but does that mean that God calls people that are going to hell to sin?

How do you tackle that? Right. So we'd say no, but it's very complicated because the scripture teaches the absolute sovereignty of God.

And we read that man is responsible for his sins. So we're talking about multiple things.

How did those come together? I think there is a paradox, paradoxical nature to some degree, but I think the scripture also allows us to go really deep to understand these truths to give

God glory. So no, we would say, we would not say God causes the non -elect to sin because to cause someone to sin,

KJ, would be like me to get a gun in my hand, walk up to somebody pointing their back and say, do

X, Y, and Z, or I'm going to pull the trigger. And now I'm coercing, forcing them to do that.

Well, no, the creator and sustainer of all things does not operate in that human category.

He is able to determine a world that he wants to create time, space, and everything, every historical event to take place.

Even every maverick molecule that exists is being sustained and determined by the creator.

So no, God does not cause people to sin in the human category of coercion.

Rather, I would say in a very mysterious yet clear way that he has ordained whatsoever comes to pass.

And people are like, oh, I disagree with your confession. There's no verse that says that. And I would say, well, Ephesians 1 .11

talks about how all things work together after the council or according to the council of his will.

Now that's in a context of Ephesians 1, before the foundation of the world, you had this Trinitarian council, right?

God, the father, son, and Holy spirit are determining what's going to take place in this world for it to work out according to their will, their desire, right?

So God uses means to bring about his determination. So God can leave man in his sinful state rather than intervene and regenerate their heart, right?

So God uses secondary means to accomplish his end goal. Now I see the primary cause of all things in terms of purpose, absolutely.

But God uses sin sinlessly. He is able to work out his will through the secondary means of sinful man without him coercing an individual's will.

So that can get really deep, really fast KJ, but I'd say rest assured God is absolutely sovereign, but he does not cause people to sin the way that we see other people simply causing other people to sin.

Yeah. Do you have an example off the top of your head, how maybe God could use a secondary causes to like bring about his ultimate means?

Absolutely. The probably the best way is when we look at Satan in the story of Job, Satan wanted to do all these things and yet he had to have permission by the sovereign

God. And so, and I think it's James 5 11 that tells us you've seen the end purpose of the

Lord to display mercy and compassion in the life of Job. So yeah, God knew

Satan was going to approach him in that way. And I would even argue that was ordained to happen.

And so you see the secondary means of how that took place. And so God had to permit it.

It was ordained to happen that way. And so God used Satan to afflict

Job and to bring about his ultimate end. I believe it was

Martin Luther that says the devil is God's devil, right? God's sovereign in that way. And real quick, KJ, for anybody curious, go to Ephesians chapter 10, where you see that he uses the sinful

Assyrians as an ax in his hand. And he wields this ax,

Assyria, to judge the people of Israel for their sin.

How can God do that? Well, he's sovereign. He can, he wields time and space in his hand and he can use whatever secondary means and tools to accomplish his purposes.

I think another example I used to have on top of my head, I think the story of Bimelech, I think a Bimelech was a unbeliever, right?

And God used a Bimelech for a certain sin. I forgot what it was that he used them and how I think he used them to some degree to kind of show or teach something.

And listen, Genesis, I can't remember off the top of my head, but that was always a good example. I love the example of Satan. Like you said, everything that, like you said, the devil is

God's devil. So everything the devil does, even today, he has to get permission from God. There's a passage in Isaiah, I think 46, off the top of my head, but it says that God created light and darkness, calamity and wealth.

He brings these things. And so that's the best example. Like God's the primary first cause of everything that happens in the world.

So everything is rooted in God, but he does use secondary means, the decision of man to bring about his purposes, like Jeremiah kind of said earlier.

And so even, for example, if you were to, you were in college or whatever, maybe a seminary, if you fell a test, that was like, it sounds crazy, but that failing of that test happened and it turned to panic.

That decision was already ordained to happen. So even though you fell that test, which is secondary means, like the primary means God already knew you were going to do that and he planned it out to happen in that way.

But also on the flip side, to bring about some encouragement, you can rest in that, that God is sovereign for the

Christian day. So when bad things happen, you can rest in God, that man, my God has everything in his hand.

So you alluded to an interesting passage in Isaiah about God says, I create darkness and light.

I create good and calamity. Some translations say evil, and we understand the point that the prophets get in because God is sovereign.

And I think there is a context from Isaiah 40, even through 48, Dr. James White has talked about, this is the trial of the false gods.

All false gods you can see are contrasted with Yahweh, the one true

God creator of all things, because idols, false gods are made by human hands. And we even understand that there's demonic activity there, but all that's reaching to a tipping point in Isaiah chapter 46, for the speaking, you know, as a mouthpiece of God says, for I am

God and there is no other, I am God, and there is none like me declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times, things yet not done saying, my counsel shall stand and I will accomplish all of my purpose.

And what that is telling us is that of course, God is omniscient. He knows everything because he has purposed all things, the end from the beginning.

I've heard some people say, well, he knows the beginning and he knows the end, but he doesn't know the middle. Well, you would have to forego

God's omniscience. He sees the picture as a whole because he created this world to take place.

And yeah, initially we can ask questions like, man, there's a lot of evil in this world. Satan's coming about.

Yeah. God has a purpose in all that to redeem his creation. You know who stands at the very forefront of that?

His elect, those that have experienced grace and mercy and his everlasting love.

And so I think you're about to transition to there's, we have hard questions about God's absolute sovereignty, but there's so much benefit for those who have experienced the grace of God, right?

KJ. Amen. Now everything, the reason why I kind of went that direction because this next topic, which is like double predestination, it's probably another one of those things that kind of gets misrepresented.

Even the name, I guess the title, it already runs somebody the wrong way. Double predestination is a double positive in a sense, but I'll let you kind of tackle that and I kind of come right behind you.

How would you define double predestination and why do you think that term gets misrepresented? Yeah, I think that the phrase itself is a little misleading, but if it's properly understood,

I'm off for it because we're not saying that God predestines the elect and non -elect in the same way.

Now is God sovereign and has he marked out purpose in everything in this world? Absolutely, for his glory, according to the praise of his glorious grace,

Ephesians 1 talks about. But this predestination, even though it's determined in the mind of God, in terms of his knowledge, there is a means in which how

God saves the elect that's different than how he allows the non -elect to stay in their sin and receive judgment.

And so we want to be careful in describing double predestination not being symmetrical, right?

If we look at a circle and cut it right down the middle, it's symmetrical. Where predestination actually looks like, we'd say it looks way different.

God especially, talking about irresistible grace, extends his loving, gracious, and merciful hand to regenerate the hearts of the elect, right?

But God takes more of a passive approach in leaving those in their sin.

They don't deserve salvation, but he leaves them in their sin. And I've heard some people say, well, it was all predestined to happen.

Yes, but in time and space, God passively leaves them in their sin.

And that's crucial because if he leaves them in their sin, then they are going to receive justice according to what their heart desires.

And like you pointed out earlier, their heart desires sin and evil, and they desire to rebel against their creator.

So God justly puts not only his justice on display, but his holiness and his wrath on display too, because ultimately that's how

God is receiving glory from them. And we don't have to tackle it necessarily here, but that's really what Romans 9 is getting into.

But that's the key, KJ, is we don't want to say that they're symmetrical, the way that God extends his hand for the elect and non -elect, because that would commit the heresy called equal ultimacy.

It's not symmetrical, it's asymmetrical. Definitely. You quoted that Romans 9 passage talks about how

God has prepared vessels of grace and vessels of instruction. And I think about that word prepared,

I don't know what it is in Greek off the top of my head, but it reminds me of, I think it's in Proverbs, talks about how the hand of the

Lord has destined everything, even the wicked for destruction. I think Timothy mentions how they're elect angels.

Obviously, the New Testament tells us how they're elect, which is the saints of all time. And you have this election going on all through our scriptures.

Now the question, some people made that word double predestination to define what this election looks like.

But we know from scripture that, like Jeremiah said, that God is sovereign. And you've got to argue self -determinism to a certain degree.

But the way I look at it, we're all born into this world in original sin. So all of us, our hearts are born with a nature that's against the scriptures and everything

God says to do. And the wrath of God is abiding on all of us. If all of us were to die, God's wrath would abide on all of us born into this world.

And what Jeremiah mentioned earlier is that it takes an act, the hand of God to override our resistance for us to come to God.

But if God's hand does not move, all of us will be heading to hell to a certain degree, or has wrath will kind of abide on us.

And so what it does is like the people that God elects from eternity past, he also, the people that he did not elect, it's kind of like he's choosing on both sides.

How would you kind of think about that? You're right. God's knowledge is binary in a sense.

He chooses this for this person and he chooses this destiny for another person. So there's definitely a dual choice going on, but how he carries out their life to their end destiny is not symmetrical.

It's not equally, ultimately the same. We're saying he extends his hand of mercy, grace, and love to the elect, and he withholds that from the non -elect and they receive justice,

God's holiness, and his wrath. And I'll tell you this, KJ, you and I have talked about this over time.

I used to really try to stay away from double predestination because I would try to say the scripture primarily uses the word predestination in a single sense for the elect.

And I think the word predestination in its few various forms is only six times in the

New Testament. However, there's one time in Acts chapter 4 that it's specifically talking about the non -elect, those who hate

God in their rebellion. This is what changed my mind on how double predestination, as long as it's explained biblically and correctly, is a proper phrase.

And so for anybody that cares about this verse, it's Acts chapter 4, kind of starting around verse 27 where we read,

And that's important to this point. You got Herod, Pontius Pilate, Gentiles, and the people of Israel.

It's all those people that were rallying together to crucify Jesus, to beat him, to make him suffer and die on the cross.

That's the context. And then verse 28 says, all these people to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.

This reminds me a lot of Isaiah chapter 53. It was Yahweh, in that context,

God the Father, it pleased Him to crush the Messiah, the suffering servant. So what means did the triune

God use to bring that about? Sinful man's decisions. All that was predestined and planned to take place.

Now God wasn't putting a gun in their side, making them do that like humans do, but God in His creator category is sovereignly upholding

His plan of redemption, letting it unfold the exact way that He wrote it to come about.

Hey, Jay, I think this is a good illustration. I've thought about this for years and I really like it. If we say,

J .R. Tolkien, who wrote Lord of the Rings, there's a lot of murder, there's a lot of mass killing, there's a lot of sinful things that happen in that story.

No character in that story can look at Tolkien and say, this story is your fault and you some, it is your responsibility, but you're not at fault for writing the story to take place how you determined it to come about.

And I like that because even the person complaining in the story would be dependent on the author writing that out.

So it's very similar. God is able to amplify that in a way that humans can't mimic that.

That's just a very rudimentary example to show that I am not at fault for writing a story.

It's the way that I want it to come about. God is free to bring about a world that he determined and to carry out his redemptive purposes.

He's omniscient and then chose to create this world. He determined it.

So from God's perspective, every jot, every tittle, not only of scripture, but the entire world is determined and upheld by its creator.

So I just encourage people to be biblical. That doesn't mean that things are going to be hard and confusing and that we have to talk, have these conversations,

KJ, to help people along. That's a part of the process of sharpening each other. That's what God predestined to take place is our sanctification.

Definitely, definitely. Now we would think about this is that if God has determined, in fact, that the people who go to hell, people that go to heaven, you know, what's the purpose for somebody to hold on to Calvinism to even share the gospel?

Well, number one, Matthew 28, the great commission, what did Jesus tell us? Go out and share the gospel, proclaim, baptize in my name and do these things right.

Teach and share the gospel. I think it's a mark to the great commission. So already the sharing of gospel, the command from the

Lord. So even if I were to hold to Calvinism, the command from God is to go out and proclaim the gospel. So it shouldn't contradict script, like scripture doesn't contradict.

I think what is it? Corinthians got, I mean, Paul tells us that God is not an author of confusion. So even if these things that we're saying is true, it would not contradict the idea of evangelism.

In fact, I think it would heighten our evangelism because we know that there's something I can do.

It's kind of like if I believe I can save people, all the pressures on me. But if I know that I can do nothing to save myself and I can't save others, the pressure's on God in a certain degree.

I can just rely on God's sovereignty and go out and share the gospel and know every time I share the gospel, it'd be perfect in this sense that God, I've done what

God told me to do and I'll let God do the work. So it's kind of like there's not a filled gospel offering, like a gospel sharing in a sense, if you're doing a biblical course, but what's your kind of take on that?

Yeah, because what do we hear often, KJ? Well, if God's predestined at all, then

I'm just going to sit and do nothing and it doesn't matter what I do. So God's going to do his will.

What I love about that, for one, it's a misrepresentation of we actually believe. But you know what that tells me?

Even in my disobedience, God is sovereign. Job learned that, right? He was starting to question things with God.

That didn't work out too well for him. And in Job 42, he learned that nothing can thwart the purposes of God.

So what we tell people is exactly what you did. Number one, we're commanded to be obedient to sharing the gospel, making disciples of all men of all nations, right?

So when they say, why should a Calvinist share the gospel? Because we would say, because we're called to be obedient, number one.

And number two, just going back to what you said, we preach the gospel knowing that that is the mechanism that God is using to draw the elect to himself.

It's in tandem with the work of the Holy Spirit regenerating their heart, bringing them to new life so that they can see their sinfulness and conviction and see their need for a savior.

So when we preach the gospel, it's saving the elect. And it's also going out to judgment for the non -elect that hate the gospel, that aren't seeking

God, suppressing the truth and unrighteousness. And we know that God's word truly never returns void.

We've talked about the prophet Jeremiah of the Old Testament preached God's truth for 50 years and did not see anybody repent.

It might've been Jeremiah or Isaiah. And that was God's primarily of using that person's obedience for judgment.

We have to be prepared as Christians to, like you said, we can't save anybody. God does the saving. He is the one that gives the increase.

So we can preach the gospel with boldness, knowing that its effect is out of our hands.

We are just called to be obedient. And it's wonderful for me as I'm going out, KJA, sharing the gospel, people either on my job as a bereavement coordinator or going out with a specific intention of evangelism, knowing that my steps are ordained, right?

Knowing that everything that I say, especially as it's pertaining to giving God glory and preaching the gospel, it's in his hands.

It actually allows me to go to bed at night knowing that I didn't do something that possibly threw

God's plan off kilter. If I was disobedient or if I failed to do something, God is still using that towards his end.

And real quick, Romans 8, 28, this is a verse that I read differently in light of God's sovereignty, that we know that all things are working together for good for those that love

God, right? So for those of us that are in Christ, even our mistakes, even our disobedience, all of our trials in our life is actually sanctifying us to be more like Christ in verse 29, the image of his son.

But that verse goes on to say who are called according to his purpose. God's running this show.

And so if you've experienced his grace and his mercy, then let your whole life, like understand your whole life is categorically different now than how you used to look at it.

So it pertains heavily in evangelism and prayer, knowing that God is ultimately working out all things together at the council at his will.

Yeah, I think the best evangelism starts with prayer, like you said, because it's the idea that I can do any of the fact that I'm going out to share the gospel.

My words won't save them, but God's word will and his power can save somebody. It's also encouraging too, because it also lets us know that there's nobody too far from God's grace that he can't save.

So it may be somebody listening right now, even trying to gospel somebody for 15 years, he's kind of getting discouraged. I would say, keep going.

Also your lifestyle is also example of the gospel, but just continue to keep pursuing in prayer, continue to keep spreading the gospel and knowing that you're not, you're doing a good job.

It's not your words that again, will save them. It's that God has to change their heart. So you can continue to keep proclaiming the gospel and knowing that you're doing a good job because you're doing what

God has called you to do. And that's the most important thing. You're doing what God calls you to do. Yeah.

So the same objection is as a Calvinist, right? Someone who believes in God's absolute sovereignty, why pray?

Because it doesn't matter. It does matter from a personal relationship, God's command is to pray.

So we want to be obedient and give God glory in that life. And the thing is, we don't know

God's sovereign will. We don't know God's eternal decree. We don't know who is going to respond in dependence of faith to the gospel.

So we share the gospel with everyone that God puts in our lives. We pray for people's salvation, for people that God's put in our life.

And we understand that prayer doesn't change God's mind. I was talking to somebody one time and they said, man,

I really think God answers prayer more when we can get more people to pray. That is not true.

Prayer changes us. Prayer does not change God. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells us that the father knows everything that we need, even before we ask.

Yet he wants us to pray. Why? Because that's relationship. That's us talking to God. God talks to us back through his living and breathing and powerful word.

And so when we pray, we understand that God ordains the means to bring about the end.

So he's ordained our prayers. That's how I can look at James 5. And that says the effervent, effectual prayer of a righteous man avails much?

Absolutely, because the righteous man has ordained prayers that God is using to bring about his end.

So it's just usually misrepresentations that people sent and them not understanding why pray, why evangelize.

God's commanded us. God's chosen those means to bring about his end goals. Yeah. And even with the idea of why pray, it's not because we pray to kind of get things answered.

But I think it's the relational aspect, as you said, like, man, I'm talking to the God of creation, the triune God. And all it is like, you know,

Jesus died from the cross. The Holy Spirit is still active in my life. You know, allow me to be righteous and a father from eternity past.

He chose me and adopted me in his family. Why not pray right? And I get to talk to this guy that loves me so much that he died from the cross.

It's the relational aspect. And also, like you said, realigning and shifting our focus to what

God's plan is and our own plan. So when we pray, we kind of get the idea that, okay, God, I'm going to be more aligned in your will, not my own will.

And so that's kind of what I think about for prayer as well. So it's kind of cool, man. So the true, like the true

Calvinist, again, even we don't use the word Calvinist, the true person, the host of God's sovereignty,

I would say is in a sense the best evangelist to this degree is that he has the full counsel of God in his back pocket.

He doesn't have to try to like do anything to persuade anyone to come to faith. He just simply trusts in the

Lord that the Lord will work. Now, again, I might say, you know, there's different ways of evangelism, you know, relational evangelism, just the cold, dry turkey evangelism.

Somebody say, what way works best? I think whatever way you're doing and you're being obedient to the God, that's what matters most.

And so whether or not you're being relational, you're in a relationship and sharing the gospel, and if an opportunity God may give you,

I think that's still good because the gospel is still getting shared. Whether or not you do that, just go to somebody randomly, share the gospel.

That's my favorite method, but it's just the fact that the gospel is still being proclaimed and God's still going to work. And so that's kind of what

I would say with that. You got any last thoughts, man, on this topic? Yes.

For those of us that have been saved by God's grace, use that testimony as kind of a bookmark in your mind to share other people how you were saved, how you were not seeking

God, how the gospel was presented to the good news that God the Son took on flesh, was perfectly obedient, died, the punishment for sin was buried, resurrected and ascended to the right hand of the

Father, and how that radically transformed your life, how you see the truth now and you embrace the truth.

It's easy to, if you've been changed, explain to somebody else how they can be changed as well if they receive this good news of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin with repentance and faith.

And KJ, what that simply means is in your heart, turn from loving your sin and the things of this world and turn and put all of your faith in Jesus Christ.

Love Him far more than anything else in this world. And you know what's amazing is the elect will respond to that gospel proclamation to repent and believe in Jesus.

Definitely. I think it's John 10. I think Jesus says, I know my sheep, my sheep know me.

It's something a lot of paraphrasing, but he says, like when I call them, they will come. I forgot exactly how it goes, but I know

Steve Lawson preached on that sermon. And he says that whenever God says something, the response is yes.

And so Jesus says, when I call my sheep, they will answer. I think it's encouraging for us today is like, man, like you think about that, like Isaiah, he preached for,

I don't know how many years it was, but like he didn't see a single person come to faith. But what was driving him to keep preaching the gospel is that I believe he knew

God was sovereign. So even though he wasn't seeing people getting converted, he knew that God's message was still getting proclaimed.

And so for us that like, we never know who it is when they come to faith. And yesterday I was at the gas station and obviously

I live in Palmdale, Arkansas. So it's kind of like, you know, bad neighborhoods and wherever. So he's got to be careful in different places. And so as I was pumping gas, this guy, you know, got the car right next to me.

I didn't know what was going on. He just said, Hey man. And I kind of just kind of ignored him. I just want to make sure he was talking to me. So I let him kind of say it again.

He said, Hey man, I'm talking to you. Okay. I said, okay. And so anyway, he was like, Hey man, you know, I just got out of prison and I have no money to my name.

And like, my wife's getting on my nerves. I was wondering if you could buy me some alcohol. And I was like, man, I don't have no money for alcohol because I'm broke.

I just got a car. But I don't have the money for alcohol, but I have to do better. And so I ended up starting to share the gospel.

Now, in that moment, I could have easily been like, Hey man, you know, I'll just see you later. You know, God's going to save me regardless. I don't have to preach the gospel, but I know that I get to play a role in God's, you know, mission by proclaiming the gospel.

I get to be like Jesus, Jesus heard the gospel, all people. So why not do the same? I don't know that guy came to faith to, you know, yesterday night, today, 10 years from now, you know,

I don't know where his eternal destination is, but I know God can still save. And so. Yeah.

So you were basically like, I have some food that you don't even know about. Exactly. That was kind of funny.

I basically tried to tell him that, you know, drinking won't satisfy him, but Jesus Christ can. And so he left smiling. So it was kind of funny because he started the conversation.

Now he said, I don't know if you're a Christian man, but I need some help. And I was kind of being a Christian man. And so I showed the gospel and that was all right.

Maybe you may be thirsty for alcohol, but I can give you water that you'll never thirst again.

This is the very, that's fine. But yeah, hopefully this is encouraging for some people and not kind of, you know, rubbing you the wrong way, but it's more so like trying to dismantle some of the misrepresentations.

So we can kind of see what does the Bible really say about these ideas? And so thank you guys so much for listening.

Do you have any last thoughts? Yeah. Our goal is to just provoke critical thinking when it comes to the

Bible, the truth. And so I want to encourage people to think about if God is omniscient and then he chose to create then everything that we're saying falls from that line of thinking.

And what's wonderful is the Bible does talk about God knowing the end from the beginning, declaring it to be so having purpose of all things, all to the praise of his glorious grace.

So it's okay to be like, I don't understand that. That's okay. That's what KJ and I are doing.

And for more years to come, we're going to continue to sharpen each other in these things, but trusting God that he is working out all things together after counsel of his will.

Definitely, definitely. Be on the lookout for more podcast episodes. If you guys are interested in the idea of, you know, everything we talked about,

I think, you know, some pretty good books. Number one, the Bible, obviously, you know, without the Bible, like there will be no other, you know, secondary sources to kind of explain the

Bible. So the Bible is number one area to grow an idea of God's sovereignty, the book of Romans.

I think Isaiah, really the whole entire Bible, you see God's sovereignty. I think about that, but I know

Romans is a good book. Ephesians, if you want something kind of shorter that kind of explains his sovereignty, I would say start with Ephesians.

All the other books in the Bible kind of talks about kind of hiding that sovereignty. Well, you probably listed the best ones.

The thing to remember is you have two perspectives, right? You have God's perspective, and then you have man's created perspective.

I'd even put the angels in that because angelic beings and people, they are timeless in the sense that they do not age over time, but they don't see

God's perspective. And so when you understand the creator -creation distinction, the way that Romans 1 lays out, let the creator be the creator of all things, sustainer of all things, who's omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.

Let him be that, and then understand we're part of the creation. Our wills, our desires are not identical with God's.

We are made in God's image. So everything that we do reflects the creator, but it's not one -to -one the same.

So I think having those perspectives, those different perspectives in mind, you got God's perspective and man's perspective really kind of helps resolve this paradox in many ways.

Definitely. And now some secondary resources outside the Bible you can look at, I like Marluth's book, The Bondage of the

Will. I know Jonathan Edwards has a book on free will. Augustine has a book on predestination, obviously a person of John Calvin, his works.

Those are just a couple of books that kind of get you an idea. I think the easiest book, like we don't like, you know, the systematic theologies and the real hard reads, you can read

R .C. Sproul's book on reformed theology. He actually talks about, you know, tulip in that book and defines the terms differently.

I think it's like 50 pages, 60 pages, a really short read. So you can knock it out in like a day if you wanted to. So that's a couple of recommendations.

Any for you, man? Yes. R .C. Sproul's book, Chosen by God, I would say is a must read and it's pretty condensed.

I mean, it's probably in the ballpark of a hundred pages, but it deals with the five points of Calvinism, breaks them down.

I would also recommend Dr. James White's The Potter's Freedom. It's very polemical. Like it's writing against,

I think it's Norman Geisler's book. I can't remember the title, but it's really good because it gets into a lot of these deeper issues and deals with certain verses, helps give context.

And I would recommend John MacArthur's sermon series on the doctrines of grace.

He's a very good, clear speaker. But yeah, there's so many books. And I think to just kind of whet someone's appetite is

Grace to You, MacArthur's sermon series on some of these things, along with other people, I'm sure you have in mind, just really helped get the ball rolling.

A lot of these ancient works, you know, we're talking about the bondage of will, those, I would almost say, put those on your shelf for when you start to understand these things, because I'm even still like, man, these are some great minds.

Luther, he was the first one that I can look in history to say, look, there's only two principles that you need for God's exhaustive determinism.

And that is his omniscience and his omnipotence. From that, it's a done deal.

And I think it's good, KJ, to be logical and even philosophical, right, attached to that. But what we're saying also is biblical, highly biblical.

And that's what informs our philosophy. That's how we can double check our logic. But just to know, just to encourage people, the

Bible is very consistent with God's sovereignty in salvation and with all the evil that comes about in this world.

It's not a purposeless, random evil. God is, God has a purpose in those things as well.

So yeah, those are just some recommendations and books and stuff. Definitely, man. Thank you so much for coming to help me.

It's always a pleasure to have you on, man. So a couple more episodes to look out for. I have an episode coming out about the

Sabbath day. I have an episode coming out about, you know, my next episode coming up will be a reformed theology that's represented.

So that's a really big one. And then also I may do like a class on evangelism.

It's kind of weird, but I might do it in a podcast style, like, you know, how did Jesus evangelize? You know, what are some good ways to do evangelism today?

Things of that nature. Something in the future, KJ, you and I can maybe talk through a little bit is presuppositional apologetics.

And I'd like to even talk about other forms of apologetics that I love and appreciate like classical apologetics, evidential apologetics, reformed epistemology.

No, yeah, reformed apologetics. There's a lot of things that are nuanced in their distinction, but I would love to talk about apologetics as a whole.

Definitely. I know we kind of went to appetite on one of those episodes about apologetics. So yeah, we definitely got to get a roll on that, man.

It's always a pleasure to have you, man. Thank you, KJ. It's always a pleasure and honor to be able to talk with you about these things.

And we pray that God would bless it, that it would encourage God's people, that it would draw the elect and that we can continue these types of conversations that are sharpening.

People don't know that you and I are still talking about the Sabbath, right? And we're still chipping away at it, but it's been really good.

Yeah. On a funny note, maybe the next time I drop a podcast will be February and my team would have won the

Super Bowl. So that's my you guys are listening out there. Maybe you can pray a prayer. I'm just playing, but yeah, go pack go.