Islam, and Roman Catholicism

Alpha & Omega Ministries

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

Comments are disabled.

00:13

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line

00:19

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

00:27

Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed

00:33

Baptist Church This is a live program and we invite your participation. If you'd like to talk with dr.

00:38

White call now It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll -free across the

00:44

United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five three three three four one And now with today's topic here is

00:51

James white And good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line. Hope you saw the blog that I announced that our discussion of Zainab bint

01:00

Josh will be on Tuesday of next week And I had mentioned at the end of last program

01:08

I was hoping to do that today But we're going to be doing it next week. And so I hope you're not too disappointed with that We will be having some

01:15

Islamic discussion today and so hopefully this will be of use to you

01:22

I was listening to a Debate as I was writing earlier this week

01:28

Well, it was sort of a debate It wasn't much of a debate It was an encounter between Nabil Qureshi, dr.

01:37

Nabil Qureshi MD Of acts 17 ministries Nabil and David Wood who have been running around out there

01:45

Getting themselves in all sorts of problems. They they were roughed up at the Arabic festival in Dearborn and then they were at ISNA It must be it must be nice to be these guys.

01:58

They they evidently don't Do it out there in England. I just saw

02:03

Nabil was on Unbelievable radio program and they're they're they're bopping all over the place.

02:11

They're doing their thing and that's that's great. We we love these guys they're they're out there doing doing what needs to be done, but Anyway Before all that happened.

02:21

I think this debate took place right after they got roughed up may have been the same day Now I think about it

02:29

And so We They had this debate that evening with Osama Abdullah now.

02:37

I would you remember that I Engaged Osama, I think in March of last year in Southern California somewhere because I'm in California sometime last year

02:46

I don't remember all the details, but anyway, and and it was Well, it's interesting

02:52

Osama stands there and he reads stuff off of his website and throws everything but the kitchen sink out there

02:58

There's there's no standards. There's no, you know knowledge the background of any of the quotations he's using or any of the things like that and It doesn't matter how many times you correct him

03:09

He does not hear correction at all. It doesn't it just doesn't matter how clear it is

03:15

He's just gonna keep repeating the same things and after a while it Gets very frustrating. And so I invited

03:21

Osama to call the program today and to Present to us what he says in this debates

03:31

I'm gonna play a section here and then we're already getting phone calls on other issues But I'm gonna play at least this one section I want to get back to some others because I told

03:37

Osama that I would address these issues today So I want to try to get to them But he was thrown out a bunch of stuff that's supposed to be on the resurrection of Jesus Nabil gave a very standard clear focused

03:52

Tight presentation on the historical evidence of the of the Resurrection well crucifixion resurrection things like that Osama didn't touch any of that.

04:02

He can't touch any of that. He's not as it's not his thing. He just throws stuff out there and So This this was toward the end of his his opening presentation and basically he had run out of things to say

04:19

About the subject and so what Osama does is if he still has five minutes left. He'll start talking about anything else it's just he's just got his website up and he'll start scrolling through stuff and start reading stuff and It's very frustrating because it's very brief.

04:33

It's very surface level It doesn't have much meaning to it, but it's it's out there So this is what he said about the what

04:40

I wanted to do is I want to have him on say, okay Look, you've met you made this claim before let's listen to the claim that he makes

04:46

And I wanted to give him five minutes to just explain this himself and and then we could talk about it.

04:51

But here's here's what? Osama said in the debate with Nabil Qureshi just a couple weeks ago

05:07

First what's in chapter 3 verse 16 and second Second book of Samuel chapter point 2 verse 31 and so on chapter 12 verse 6 and so on chapter 18 verse 3 30 rather and book of Proverbs chapter 30 verse 5.

05:20

They say God Almighty's words are flawless. They're Errorless, they're perfect.

05:26

Okay. Yeah, we see here in the Bible What about in John chapter 18 verse 48 says he was a robber in Luke chapter point 3 verse 19

05:34

He was a murderer and now mark chapter 15 verse 7. He was entered us Insertionist insurrection

05:50

Now he just throws those things out as If they're somehow contradictory Most people were all of those things.

05:58

So the idea in Osama's mind is in the Gospels Matthew should be a mirror image of Mark which should be a mirror image of Luke which should be a mirror image of John They should they should say the exact same things if they use different words if they describe things differently

06:13

If they use different descriptions a different order of presentation anything like that. It proves the

06:18

Bible's wrong So what you should just have is it's the same gospel repeated four times evidently. I mean, that's the only way this makes any sense

06:27

And it's insurrectionist is it's the term I think he was searching for there But the insurrectionists would rob and they would murder and those would all be subcategories the same thing

06:38

So, you know most people reading that would go. Well, that doesn't really make much sense But again when you're just looking for stuff to throw out and hope something sticks

06:45

That's what that's what you do. But keep in mind this idea. The Gospels have to be identical or the

06:50

Bible is is untrue So here's here's the section. I really want to get to and that is the inscriptions on the cross

07:02

It says Jesus of Nazareth the king of the Jews the inscription that was

07:09

John Okay Okay How can you trust anything in the

07:47

Bible? So there you go. If we cannot get this account straight, then how can you trust anything in the

07:54

Bible? So since the renditions of what's on the cross, according to Osama, are not identical with one another, then that means you can't trust anything in the entire

08:06

Bible. Now, the fact that one gives a longer version than another, and the fact that if he was here,

08:17

I would say, Osama, why do you believe that each of the Gospels has to give an exhaustive account of everything it says?

08:27

I mean, why can't one have a shorter version and another one have a longer version, and one mention that there's multiple languages used and one doesn't?

08:36

Why is that a problem? Because that's... Well, for example, throughout the

08:42

Hadith, when different people narrate the same events in Muhammad's life, they don't all do it in the exact same words.

08:49

Does that mean it never happened? When you read the newspapers today, you will find different reports on the same issues, but they're not using the exact same words.

09:05

Does that mean the event didn't happen? I mean, I can show you four different accounts of the inauguration of Barack Obama, and since they don't use the exact same words, does that mean that Barack Obama was not inaugurated?

09:18

I mean, the logic is completely missing, but you don't generally get a chance to challenge these type of things, and that's what

09:25

I would be doing, is I'd be asking, upon what basis do you assume that this is a requirement, that it has to be the exact same words?

09:35

Are you thinking that historical writing back then, they had an MP3 recorder, maybe a digicam, you know, and so you've got...

09:43

Is that what you're actually assuming? And of course, the question then becomes, does Osama apply this?

09:49

And this is what I wanted to ask him. I wanted to take him to a number of texts in the

09:55

Quran, where you have parallels, just like you have in the synoptic

10:01

Gospels, and in fact, there's an excellent little website that's been put up, www .qurantext

10:07

.org, and if you go to qurantext .org, and click on the parallels link, you'll find this information, and if you scroll about 75 % of the way down, you will see a comparison of Surah 7,

10:24

Surah 15, and Surah 38. This is a comparison of the discussions between Allah and Iblis, Satan.

10:39

And now, there is a difference in looking at the Quran and looking at the New Testament. When I talk about the

10:45

New Testament writers, we have four different writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They're writing to different audiences at different times, and so it makes perfect sense that different people would use different language, they would use a different dialect, they would use different vocabulary, because we believe that men spoke from God as they were carried along by the

11:06

Holy Spirit. It's the men who spoke. What they spoke was from God, but they used their own language. God's big enough to use men in that way, because He knows us better than we know ourselves.

11:14

So, we would have an answer as to why there would be understandable, stylistic differences between the synoptic

11:26

Gospels, but the Muslim believes that the Quran is not

11:32

Muhammad's thinking about these things. The Quran is the very words of Allah written in eternity in Arabic, so when the

11:43

Quran tells the same story, shouldn't it say it in the same way?

11:50

Now, I'm not saying that that would necessarily be the case, I'm just using Osama's own reasoning.

11:56

His reasoning is, you can't trust the Bible because of differences in how much of the inscription is recorded by each of the

12:06

Gospel writers. Since they are not absolutely identical to one another, not contradictory to one another, but since they're not absolutely identical, then you can't trust the

12:12

Bible. It would follow by logical necessity that every time the

12:17

Quran tells the same story, it should tell it how? In the exact same words.

12:24

Well, I just invite you to compare Surah 712 with Surah 3876, for example.

12:33

And here you have Iblis speaking, and in Surah 712, he said,

12:39

I am better than him, you created me of fire, while him you did create of mud.

12:45

But in Surah 38, it says, he said, I am better than him, you create me of fire, whilst him you did create of clay.

12:52

And then we have another example, Surah 1533, he said,

12:57

I am not one to prostrate myself unto a mortal, whom you have created out of potter's clay, of black mud altered.

13:03

And so the Surah 15 is somewhat of a compilation and summary of elements of 7 and 38.

13:13

And then if you look carefully as well at the discussion in Surah 7,

13:20

I took the time to get my Quran out here. Let me let me read a section here that I think is quite fascinating, actually.

13:28

And we have to take just a few moments here to put the old reading glasses on so we can see what in the world we're doing these days.

13:35

And in Surah 7, here's the story, Surah 712, what

13:40

God said, what prevented thee from bowing down when I commanded thee? He said, I am better than he, thou didst create me from fire and him from clay.

13:48

Allah said, get thee down from this. It is not for thee to be arrogant here. Get out, for thou art the meanest of creatures, art of the meanest of creatures.

13:57

He said, give me respite till the day they are raised up. God said, be thou among those who have respite.

14:04

He said, because thou hast thrown me out of the way, lo, I will lie and wait for them on thy straight way.

14:10

Then I will assault them from before them and behind them, from their right and their left, nor wilt thou find in most of them gratitude for thy mercies.

14:19

It reminds me a little bit of the story of Job, just a little bit. God said, get out from this, disgraced and expelled.

14:26

If any of them follow thee, hell will I fill with you all. And so here,

14:32

Iblis says, I'm going to attack your servants and God says, get out from this, disgraced and expelled.

14:39

By the way, just in passing, that's the exact same word, disgraced, that is used of how

14:45

Christians are supposed to feel as the result of Muslims engaging in jihad and subjecting

14:50

Christians that they feel disgraced. In Surah 9, just so you might know, it's used of Satan and how he's supposed to feel.

14:57

It's not normally brought up in all the literature you read. Now compare that then with what we have in Surah 38.

15:08

So the angels prostrated themselves, all of them together. This is to Adam, by the way. Not so Iblis, he was haughty and became one of those who reject faith.

15:17

God said, O Iblis, what prevents thee from prostrating thyself to one whom I have created with my hands? Art thou haughty or art thou one of the high and mighty ones?

15:25

Iblis said, I am better than he. Thou createst me from fire and him thou createst from clay. God said, then get thee out from here for thou art rejected, accursed, and my curse shall be on thee till the day of judgment.

15:37

That wasn't in the preceding one. Iblis said, O my Lord, then give me then respite till the day the dead are raised.

15:44

God said, respite then is granted thee till the day of the time appointed. Iblis said, then by thy power I will put them all in the wrong, except thy servants amongst them, sincere and purified by thy grace.

15:54

God said, then it is just and fitting, and I say what is just and fitting, that I will certainly fill hell with thee and those that follow thee, every one.

16:04

Now the story is the same in basic outline, but the story is not identical at all.

16:13

You can demonstrate numerous variations between the two. Additions and deletions of words, phrases, facts that are found in one and not found in the other by Osama's own argument, by his own argument.

16:29

The Quran cannot be the word of God. Now I invited Osama to call. I said

16:34

I would give him time. We would discuss it just like we did with Matthew Bellisario last week. Not in Islam, obviously.

16:41

But he chose not to do that. He said he'd rather do debates. Well, the problem is I have yet to hear, and it didn't happen when

16:48

I had the debate with him, I've yet to hear him actually admit or allow meaningful cross -examination.

16:56

And I'm not sure that he could do meaningful cross -examination because I would be asking these direct questions. And you have to answer direct questions directly.

17:04

And you'd have to have a real moderator who could put his foot down to force him to answer these direct questions.

17:11

But that's something I wanted to ask him. And there were some others here I'd like to get to.

17:17

I'd like to try to keep things consistent. We have a caller here. It looks like a completely different subject that we'll get to as we can here.

17:24

So please try to be patient. But I think it'd be better to stick with these in the order that they came up in the debate.

17:35

Stick with the Islamic subject. Then if we need to change topics, we can change topics. But let's listen to a couple other things that Osama said during the course of this particular debate that I think is useful to look at and to respond to.

17:49

This is a really common one. This is one that you'll hear the bigwigs using.

17:55

And Osama repeats it as well. You just don't say things like that, we are told by Osama.

18:44

Well, if Osama would read what Paul was saying, then maybe he would understand why he said what he said.

18:52

Normally, they focus upon 1 Corinthians 7 .25, where Paul says,

18:57

Now concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy.

19:03

They say, see, he has no command of the Lord. This isn't scripture. But what Paul is actually saying is if you read the context of preceding context, when he had answered certain of the questions that were coming up in Corinth, when there was a part of the gospels in the traditions of Jesus that address these things, words of Jesus, then he referred to them.

19:25

But there are things that Jesus did not talk about and that are not a part of the gospel narratives.

19:32

And so when he says, I have no command from the Lord, what he means is there's nothing recorded in the stories and teachings of Jesus that specifically address this subject.

19:42

And of course, that's obvious. That's like saying that all

19:47

Muslims, there are some Quran only Muslims, but they can't answer a lot of these questions.

19:54

There's all sorts of things addressed in the Hadith that are not addressed in the Quran. And that would be like saying, well, but you can't look at any of that.

20:01

The fact of matter is the gospels are not meant to be everything we have. We have a New Testament.

20:07

The Holy Spirit didn't just give us Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. We also have the rest of the New Testament. There's a reason for that. As the gospel goes out into the world, it encounters these issues, these issues come up, and therefore they are addressed in the pages of Scripture.

20:19

And so Paul is simply saying, I am unaware of anything that Jesus taught in this subject. But as an apostle, one who is trustworthy, here's what

20:26

I have to say. And when he concludes that, he repeats that by saying, and I think that I have the

20:33

Spirit of God. That is the apostolic commandment that I've given to you comes from the

20:39

Spirit of God. I have the Spirit of God. This is how I've answered the question that you've asked concerning the subject of marriage and virgins and so on and so forth.

20:47

And that's what's being said. It has nothing to do with Paul being uncertain as to whether he's entwelt by the

20:54

Holy Spirit. This is manhandling the text. This is ignoring its context, demonstrating a gross and abject ignorance of what's actually going on in any of these particular texts.

21:06

The same thing came up a little bit later on. And this time it has something to do with yours truly and my debate with Bart Ehrman.

21:14

Listen to this. And he said this was Jesus. Go to right here. Right there.

21:20

There you go. Most interesting. I don't want to sound rude, but there's a manuscript called

21:25

Pete 73. I saw this in Bart Ehrman and James White debate on the purchase.

21:33

You know, people were writing manuscripts and these manuscripts have names.

21:38

Pete 73, which is one of your manuscripts. Ironically, it's called Piper's 73.

21:44

It's a manuscript that is half canonized. Half of it is part of your Bible today.

21:50

And half of it is thrown out as erratic, as infidels, as false writings. One author, one manuscript.

21:59

Half of it is in the Bible. Half of it is outside the Bible, thrown out as a lie.

22:05

For God's sake. And then a little bit later on, it came up again in these words.

22:13

I brought you an example of Pete 73, which is the most interesting one to me.

22:18

I don't want to sound rude, but come on, let's be real here. One guy writes a manuscript and half of it makes it to the

22:25

Bible. Half of it is thrown away. It's one author, not multiple people writing one book.

22:30

No, this is one guy writing a manuscript. Half of it is in the Bible, the other half is thrown out.

22:36

Come on. Was he inspired by God? Was he inspired only by the first half and the other half?

22:41

He was drunk or something? I mean, come on, be serious here. Yeah, okay.

22:47

I imagine most folks in the audience were just sort of staring at him at this point going, what are you talking about?

22:53

First of all, he's got the number wrong. It's P72, not P73. I showed a picture of a particular page from P72, the end of 1

23:04

Peter, the beginning of 2 Peter in my presentation. Rich remembers seeing that.

23:11

Rich had to keep dragging me away from P72 up in Denver in 1993 because the security guards were getting a little bit nervous about the amount of time that I was spending with that particular manuscript in the exhibition there.

23:25

But as it may, P72, what he's talking about is that since I mentioned this,

23:32

Bart Ehrman brought up the fact that P72 contains non -canonical works within it.

23:38

And of course, I responded by pointing out that there's Codex Sinaiticus for that matter.

23:45

Upon what basis do you assume that everything that is found in a manuscript is supposed to be canonical in the first place?

23:52

When people would copy books, they would copy a wide range of things. And it's a long leap from the presence of the books together to the assumption of canonicity.

24:02

But obviously, those are things that are far beyond Osama's study. This gentleman has no concern about actually seriously studying what we believe, being consistent in the use of scholarship and anything like that.

24:17

He's just looking for stuff, for mud to throw up on the wall and hope something sticks. And so as I heard this, notice the terms ludicrous and ridiculous and come on people, because he seems to be assuming, did you catch that statement toward the end?

24:34

Was this guy inspired? Does he think this is one of the originals or something?

24:40

This is a manuscript from the end of the second century, 175 to 200, around that time frame.

24:47

It's just a Christian probably visiting another church. Maybe he's traveling or something like that.

24:54

He visits another church and he hears someone reading from a book. He's not heard from. He finds out these are the epistles of Peter.

25:02

And so he asked to make a copy. And he asked if they have anything else he can copy while he's doing this to bring back to his church.

25:09

It's someone writing at the end of the second century. And what does that have to do with inspiration?

25:17

Half of it's thrown out as a lie. No, it's not thrown out as a lie. I mean, that's like in our fellowship, if people didn't know better, they would think that Pilgrim's Progress is the 28th book of the

25:29

New Testament for us because we quote it so often. No, we make a clear distinction between Pilgrim's Progress and the rest of the

25:37

New Testament. But I certainly don't have any problem with someone quoting from it or reading from it and things like this.

25:46

And so I just don't even begin to understand what he's trying to say by half of it's thrown out as a lie.

25:52

What you mean, not a lie, but as something that's non -canonical. Yes, they did recognize the non -canonical nature of those other books.

25:59

But it's frustrating, very frustrating to deal with Mr.

26:05

Osama. One more and then we'll move on from here. Check out this assertion.

26:22

Before Abraham, I am, Jesus said. No, he did not. He said, Before Abraham, I existed.

26:28

It was no more than Jesus saying, Before Abraham, I existed, or I was an existing being.

26:37

God Almighty's I am in Exodus chapter 3 was rather telling Moses when he asked God Almighty about himself and to describe himself.

26:45

God Almighty then told Moses not to go there, not to worry himself, not to concern himself. He told him,

26:51

I am who I am, just leave it at that. When Jesus said, Before Abraham, I was, he did not say,

26:56

Before Abraham, I am. The sentence is grammatically wrong and does not add up, nor does it make any sense for the following reasons.

27:03

Jesus, if he said that I am and not I was, then he should have said before Adam, Adam, not

27:10

Abraham, I am. Okay, since there were hundreds of millions of years of humanity before Adam, Abraham and Adam.

27:18

Jesus' sentence clearly indicated that Jesus existed before Abraham. Jesus said that before Abraham existed on earth,

27:25

I also existed even before him. That's all Jesus said. Okay, Jesus was using Jeremiah in the

27:30

Old Testament chapter 1 verse 5 in the Old Testament where the person said that Prophet Jeremiah was a prophet even before he was born in his mother's womb and before he ever existed on earth.

27:43

Point number two here, Jesus is quickly, I apologize because it's deviating, but it is true. Since you claim

27:48

Jesus is God, Jesus being the word, okay, he was not in John chapter 1 verse 6. All right, he goes on to again demonstrate the fact that man cannot read anything in context.

27:58

It's absolutely incredible. Even his own stuff he doesn't seem to read in context. So let's see.

28:05

Osama, to my knowledge, cannot read a word of Greek, and yet he pretends to stand there and talk about the grammar.

28:12

He must have pulled off some Unitarian Jehovah's Witness site or something like that, I would assume. But he is, of course, in error about that, and that's why he would probably not debate that subject with me because he knows that he would have to actually answer questions relevant to those issues.

28:28

And then he says, well, he sort of said Adam, except that the context was about, let me think here a second, oh,

28:36

Abraham. It was about Abraham. And the Jews had brought up Abraham, and Jesus says,

28:42

Abraham, rejoice, see my day and rejoice. He saw and was glad. And they go, what do you mean, Abraham? The prophets have died.

28:48

Who do you make us out to be? Before Abraham was, I am. I go, I me is the term. And, of course, if he was to do any kind of serious exegesis, which

28:57

I have never heard Osama do on anything, but especially in the New Testament, then he would know that the

29:04

Gospel of John uses that phrase in very important texts, not only in 858, but in John 18, five through six, when

29:11

Jesus says, I go, I me, the soldiers fall back upon the ground. I would love to hear what his explanation of that is.

29:18

And, of course, in John 13, 19, he utilizes the same text quoting from, I believe,

29:23

Isaiah 43, 10, the Greek Septuagint, identifying himself as the I am. He says to all

29:28

Muslims who might be listening today in John 8, 24, unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins. Very, very important stuff, but not handled with any meaningful eloquence by Mr.

29:41

Osama. So just some of the things that I heard that are thrown out there that I felt would be useful in responding to here on the program today.

29:49

We're going to take our break and then come back with our phone callers. We'll be right back. BibleWorks 8 is here.

30:09

Full of innovative and essential tools, users will have 190 plus Bible translations, 35 original language text and morphology databases, 29 lexical grammatical references, and an abundance of additional resources.

30:22

Pastors, you will appreciate the phrase matching tool, which will allow you to find all of the verses containing phrases similar to your search verse, giving you greater depth and keener insight during sermon preparation.

30:32

Seminary professors and students will be enriched by the way BibleWorks 8 shows the most common words in the pericope, book or chapter, plus provides a wider range of formatting options and faster access to copying preferences.

30:43

Scholars, your research just got easier with the Army External Resources Manager, a handy tool to collect, organize and display resource files from your computer as well as the internet.

30:53

Dr. James White says BibleWorks is the best Bible software available. I have used BibleWorks software for years and each new release has brought many new and useful tools to the program.

31:02

This is the program that runs 24 -7 on my office computer and it is the one that's running on my laptop when

31:07

I engage in debates. It is simply the number one research tool for anyone doing serious exegesis of the text.

31:13

For over 15 years, BibleWorks has assisted all users in their study of the original languages and that enables you to do one thing, focus on the text and that translates to focusing on the truth.

31:23

Order your copy of BibleWorks at AOMN .org and for a limited time, you'll receive free shipping and a free

31:29

MP3 download of the White Airmen Debate. The Trinity is a basic teaching of the

31:36

Christian faith. It defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us. James White's book,

31:41

The Forgotten Trinity, is a concise, understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters. It refutes cultic distortions of God as well as showing how a grasp of this significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a

31:55

Christian. And amid today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit, The Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the

32:02

Trinity. Dr. John MacArthur, Senior Pastor of Grace Community Church says, James White's lucid presentation will help layperson and pastor alike.

32:11

Highly recommended. You can order The Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at AOMN .org.

32:18

Hello, everyone. This is Rich Pierce. In a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man -centered self -help program, the need for a no -nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater.

32:29

I am convinced that a great many go to church every Sunday, yet they have never been confronted with their sin.

32:35

Alpha and Omega Ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner, making no excuses.

32:43

Man is sinful and God is holy. That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior, and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior.

32:51

We are to come before the holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well.

33:02

Support Alpha and Omega Ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

33:08

Thank you. Hello, Brother Peter.

35:08

Hi. I had a question about your view on justification. All right. It's my understanding that you believe that a justified believer cannot lose his salvation.

35:20

That's correct? That's what you believe? Yes. Well, what would you say in response to a passage such as Ephesians 5, 5 -8, which not only first describes that whoremongers and unclean people and others are excluded from the kingdom of God, and then it goes on to say to the faithful,

35:42

Be ye therefore not partakers with them, therefore clearly indicating that people who are justified believers could be partakers with those who are being excluded from the kingdom of God, clearly proving that a justified believer could lose his salvation through grave sin, which is exactly what the

36:03

Catholic Church has always taught. Well, that's an awesome example of eisegesis. I appreciate the presentation of it, because when you want to talk about justification, it would seem that you would go to the texts in the

36:16

Bible that specifically address justification rather than going to other texts, specifically warning passages and things like that, make assumptions based upon that, mainly man -centered assumptions rather than God -centered assumptions, and then read it back into the text, which is exactly what the

36:30

Roman Catholic Church has done in its definitions, especially on this subject. It would seem to me that if you want to discuss justification, why not go to the texts that discuss justification first, determine what the inspired text says there, and then make application elsewhere?

36:47

Isn't that in fact what you do, because I'm not sure why this information was volunteered, but you are not an

36:54

Orthodox Roman Catholic. You're a Sedevacantist, aren't you not? I would consider myself and say that I am a true

37:03

Catholic. Well, would the Pope consider you to be a true Catholic? No, but we can prove that he's not a real

37:09

Catholic. Okay, so, but you would do that by going to particular texts.

37:14

But before I get to that, it's interesting that you're diverting here from the issue. No, I'm not. I'm demonstrating that you're using two different standards, because I would imagine that any arguments you would use to defend your rebellion against the

37:27

Bishop of Rome and your identification of him as a false one would involve first going to texts that would specifically address the issue.

37:36

But you don't do that here. And so what I'm saying is, it seems to me that you're being inconsistent. I could quote passages from all kinds of books in the

37:44

Bible. I've written a book on this issue. Oh, that's nice. And the Bible itself says that man is not just.

37:50

It says in James chapter 2, verse 24, and there are a host of other passages. But the

37:55

Bible is infallible. You claim to believe that. I most certainly do. Have you read my book on justification? No.

38:01

Okay, all right. But I haven't read yours. So that puts us in the exact same boat. Okay, well, so saying that, you know, another passage might say something else.

38:11

The bottom line is that the Bible is infallible. And so if we have the Bible clearly teaching that a justified believer could be in the camp with those who are losing their salvation, that is a definitive example of how your doctrine is not in conformity with Scripture.

38:28

Well, let me give you an example where the Bible actually addresses justification. It's actually addressing the subject and demonstrates that what you believe is a doctrine of demons, specifically.

38:39

You believe that a person can be baptized, validly baptized, and hence enter in the state of grace, but not gain justification.

38:47

That's your whole point, isn't it? A person who, yes, an adult, an adult could receive the mark of baptism without receiving the character.

38:57

That's correct. So a person— Without receiving the justification. That's correct. If he puts a positive obstacle in the way, an impediment.

39:04

So could a person at one point be justified, but then lose that grace of justification?

39:13

I just quoted Ephesians 5 .5 .3, which clearly teaches that he can't. Okay. Except the term justification isn't in Ephesians 5, is it?

39:20

It doesn't matter because you would agree that— I just wanted to point that out. You're reading it into it, and everybody sees that.

39:26

Let me go to a text that actually does use the term, and let's see if your interpretation works. Well, it's obvious you don't have a response to Ephesians 5 .5

39:35

.3. Oh, actually, actually, I've just— anyone who's fair -minded realizes that I'm going to a text that talks about justification, and that demonstrates that since justification isn't even being discussed in Ephesians 5, that it's a bogus argument.

39:49

But again, here's the text. When we go to the actual work of God in Christ Jesus in Romans 8, we are told there that God works all things together for the good of those who love

40:01

God, those who are called according to his purpose. And then it says, For those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his

40:10

Son, nor that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined, he also called.

40:16

And those whom he called, he also justified. And those whom he justified, he also glorified.

40:22

This is called the golden chain of redemption. Now, there is the actual term, and it is

40:28

God who is doing the justification. Justification is a divine action. And so, those whom he called, he also justified.

40:36

And those whom he justified, he also glorified. Now, you just told me that there are those who are justified who will not be glorified.

40:47

So either your justification— Well, I can respond to that. He's speaking there in the context of those who are actually among the elect.

40:56

And in their case, they are justified, and they wind up being glorified. But that's not necessarily the case with every single individual who is ever justified.

41:07

And that's why the book of Romans itself teaches that believers, if they don't continue in goodness, will be cut off.

41:15

For instance, in Romans 11, it's speaking to believers, and it says, But toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, otherwise thou also shall be cut off.

41:28

Yes, Romans 11 is actually talking to Gentiles in comparison to the Jews. But, so you've just introduced a distinction here where, okay,

41:38

I've let you make a presentation. I'm going to respond to it.

41:43

I've given you more time than I've taken. So this needs to be a dialogue, not simply preaching. You're the guest, okay?

41:48

I just want to make sure I understand that. You've just introduced a distinction where you have individuals who are not predestined, who are not called, yet are justified, and then don't become glorified.

41:59

Could you show me where Paul presents that? Because to be justified, since that's a divine act, has to be done on the same basis for all men.

42:08

That's the whole point of Paul's argument in Romans 3, 4, and 5, is that justification for anyone is all on the same basis of faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ.

42:17

So you have some people, because they are of the elect, who are justified, and they therefore would be glorified.

42:23

But evidently you have other people who have, do they have a different kind of justification? Where is this justification discussed in Scripture?

42:30

It's a gratuitous assertion, because you would have to prove that St. Paul is saying that every single person who is justified is glorified, and he's not.

42:40

And just responding to what you were saying about the passage in Romans, which also contradicts your entire belief, he's not talking about unbelievers there.

42:48

He's talking about the believers, and he says, be not high -minded, but fear.

42:54

And he's speaking to them, the believers, and he says, you also shall be cut off unless you continue in goodness.

43:02

If you are assured of your salvation, if a believer can never lose his justification, he would never say that.

43:08

Okay, a couple things, a couple things. First of all, this is a wonderful example, and I really do appreciate your calling so people can hear the vast chasm of difference between those people.

43:18

Because I've talked about this many times in the program, but having someone actually do it illustrates it far better than my describing it.

43:24

There are those who read the Bible in a God -centered way, and there are those who read the Bible in a man -centered way. And there are those who read texts about salvation as something that God does, and there are those who read texts about salvation as something that man does.

43:36

And this is one of the best examples that I can give, because I keep going to these texts where in Romans 8 you say

43:44

I've made a gratuitous assumption that all those that are justified are glorified. Well, that's what

43:49

Romans 8 .30 says. You gratuitously say, well, that's because you're just looking at the elect there, but there's these non -elect people that are truly

44:00

Christians. And I say, could you show me where there's anybody like that? And of course, nowhere in Scripture do you have anyone who is non -elect who is going to be justified because the obvious reason that the non -elect are dead in their trespasses and sins and hence are never going to exercise saving faith in Jesus Christ to be justified.

44:15

But you're the one that keeps looking at these things. And you look at Romans 11 where Paul is addressing groups of people, specifically here the

44:23

Gentiles who are in danger of boasting against the Jews, and turn that into a text that then overthrows the rest of what

44:31

Romans 8 actually says when it says, what then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?

44:38

He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all. Now, who is this us all?

44:46

Was Christ given up for all men? Or was Christ given up for different groups of people?

44:53

How will he not with him also graciously give us all things? Who will bring a charge against God's elect?

44:59

Those are the ones for whom Christ gave up his life. Now, what is going on is, in fact, that you are applying your misunderstanding of certain passages and ignoring the entire tenor of the rest of scripture.

45:13

If you look at the parables of Jesus, they have no meaning. Well, let's stick with Romans 8. Let's see if you can walk through Romans 8 with me.

45:19

Let's see if you can answer my questions. Who is the us? I don't think you did.

45:25

He who did not spare his own son. I know you don't want to go to anything else, because you want to focus just on the one misunderstanding you have.

45:31

Well, show me the misunderstanding from the text, because that's what you can't do. That's what you can't do, sir.

45:39

You can't deal with these texts. No, I responded by saying that you have not established or proven, because it's not there.

45:46

Then let's walk through the text. I guess I can't finish the text. He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all.

45:55

How will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who is this talking about? Who is the audience? Did he hang up?

46:02

No, I'm here. Okay. I couldn't hear anything. Who's he talking about? Every time I try to speak, then I can't finish the sentence.

46:08

Everybody knows that that's not the case, because they've been listening. We do record this, so people will know that's not the case.

46:13

Well, the last few times I've tried to respond, you have just interrupted me. That's a fact, and the tape bears that out.

46:21

You're asking me about Romans 8, and I responded by saying that he does not say that every single person who is ever justified will therefore be glorified.

46:31

He's speaking of those who are, in fact, among the elect. They are justified and wind up being glorified.

46:37

Okay, that's why we see in the... Okay, now, no, no, no, no, you cannot, because no, no, you cannot.

46:43

Because you can't handle scripture. No, you're the one, sir, you are the one who cannot walk through this text.

46:49

Right. You just said... You can't even provide an example of a response to Ephesians 5.

46:54

Okay, I just put you on hold, because obviously everyone can see what's going on here.

47:00

I want to do exegesis. I want to walk through the text. You can't. As soon as you get to the point where the text is demonstrating your error, you jump to another text and to your interpretation of that.

47:12

I want to walk through the text. I want to ask you a question. You tell me that Romans 8 says,

47:19

I have not established that all those that are justified are glorified. Upon what basis? You said, well, this is just about the elect.

47:26

Okay, then, if this is just about the elect, I'm about to put you back on so you can answer this question.

47:31

If you want to answer this question, there's no reason to continue this. Because I think the demonstration has already been very well made as to who's doing exegesis and who isn't.

47:39

But here's the question in Romans 8, 32. He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all.

47:46

If you say that's only the elect, then are you agreeing with us that Christ has been given only for the elect and that how will he not also with him graciously give us all things only has to do with the elect?

48:04

And then does that not then mean that only the elect can be justified, that there is no basis for justification for the others?

48:14

There's the question. Can you answer it from the text? Your question is, did

48:23

Christ die for all men? Yes, he did die for all men. So the us all in Romans 8, 32 is universal.

48:35

Hello? It includes the believers. He shed his blood for all men, which necessarily includes the believers because they are part of humanity.

48:43

Okay, so... That doesn't prove that everyone who is justified is therefore glorified.

48:48

And actually, if you look at the extended context of Romans, because the chapters, okay, as you know, were put there.

48:55

Of course. Afterward. And so if we look at the extended context, it's all throughout Romans that you can lose your salvation, and that whether or not you have salvation is dependent upon whether or not you observe the laws of God, whether or not you continue in goodness.

49:12

And so the extended context, and even before that in Romans 2, it's clearly teaching you that unless you observe certain things, and it's not a given that a believer will do that, you will lose your salvation.

49:27

I honestly couldn't think of anything more opposite of what Paul actually teaches than what you just said, but again, I've got to bring you back.

49:33

I've got to bring you back to the text because you just contradicted yourself, and I think people find it very useful to see this.

49:43

You, first of all, tell us that in Romans 8 .30, those that are justified there, that's just the elect.

49:52

And so justification doesn't necessarily result in glorification for everybody.

49:57

But then in the next sentence, you just abandoned the context of that being just the elect and made it universal.

50:07

What in the context indicates that all of a sudden things have changed?

50:13

Because the text itself says, who shall bring any charge against God's elect in verse 33?

50:21

So you keep... You just made my point. Am I still on? Yes, you are. Okay, exactly.

50:26

He's talking about the elect. You just made the point in verse 33. Who shall bring a charge against the elect?

50:33

What's the next phrase? Read the next phrase. I don't have it in front of me. It is God who justifies.

50:40

Right. Who justifies those among the elect who will eventually wind up being glorified.

50:46

You just refuted yourself. And so the preceding part of the sentence that says, he who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all would be the elect.

50:59

What's your point? My point is that you can't walk through this text and keep making all the differentiations you do when the text doesn't allow you to.

51:08

Yes, you did. Your entire point of Romans 830 has been that that isn't a text that's relevant to whether God's justification is an eternal justification, that it is a divine act, and that it cannot fail because I'm limiting that solely to the elect.

51:23

And then you introduce the idea that there can be people who can be truly justified, but are not of the elect.

51:30

And I'm saying to you, that distinction throws the entirety of Romans, all of Romans and especially

51:35

Romans 8 into a complete uproar. And you have not been able to be consistent in following it. Which is why anyone who reads any bit of scripture in depth who is honest, can see that there are many passages which clearly teach that a believer can lose his justification.

51:50

Well, thank you, Brother Peter. I appreciate your joining us on the program today. Oh, there you go.

51:59

Excellent, excellent example. Once you start making charges of dishonesty, I figure the phone call's over with because that just gets a little bit silly.

52:08

But there you go. Excellent, excellent example of how you can.

52:14

There is the difference between a scripture -derived theology and one that is forced upon scripture from outside.

52:25

Remember just, was it the last program? I think it was the last program that I went through John 6 and George Bryson.

52:33

And what is it about Arminians? They can't walk through John 6 beginning at the beginning and going to the end.

52:42

They can't do it. Why? Because their theology is derived from external sources rather than scripture.

52:49

Now we just listened to an unorthodox Roman Catholic, a Sedevacantist, or they sometimes say

52:54

Sedevacantist, whatever, who therefore would not even be considered orthodox from the

53:01

Roman Catholic perspective. But hey, like I said, I'd love to hear Jerry Matitox debate with Jimmy Akin or somebody like that.

53:10

That'd be great. It'd be awesome. But there you just heard someone who has a very man -centered, did you hear that?

53:17

Romans teaches us about what we must do to fulfill. And you're sitting here, the whole point that Paul is making is the exact opposite of that.

53:27

And again, if we started, if we went through Romans 2, if we started Romans 1, if we just went through the text point by point, none of that would ever be substantiatable.

53:36

But it's not exegesis that these folks don't do. It's eisegesis. It's reading into the text. Help me understand his argument just a little bit, because in verse 30, he's saying that that is the elect, but somewhere between verse 30 and verse 31, it becomes universal?

53:53

It somehow became universal for 32, because it gave up for us all, and then goes back to the elect in the very next phrase in verse 33.

54:06

Believe me, it is sadly unusual for these folks to be challenged to do what

54:12

I was just challenging him to do. So 32 is universal?

54:19

When it says gave him up for us all. So us all is a universal us all?

54:27

Well, Christ died for everyone, but that would include believers. I think that's what he said. But given the context of the passage, why would

54:38

Paul use the word us? Well, I can answer that, but I'm not going to try to answer for him.

54:46

The point is this. The point is this. Because it would make sense if he just simply said delivered him up for all.

54:52

Here it is. From their perspective, there are people who are justified who are not part of the elect. That goes back to Augustine, okay?

55:00

There are people who are justified who are not part of the elect. That's the foundational error of the Roman Catholic view of justification, because it does not understand what justification is.

55:09

The only person who is justified is a person who has the righteousness of Christ. The only way to have the righteousness of Christ is to be united with him.

55:15

The only way to have that is to be amongst the elect. So they have this distinction.

55:21

This came out, believe it or not, in the debate with Gerry Matitix in December of 1990 here in Phoenix, where he agreed with John 6, but he said, well, that's just about the elect.

55:29

But we've got these other people who are also justified, but they are not of the elect.

55:35

Did you get the impression that the caller understood that you don't believe that anyone who's not elect can be justified?

55:44

Sure, of course. He understands that? Yeah, but he just rejects that. Again, but it's very clear.

55:51

See, the Roman Catholic operates on a much lower standard than we do in regards to exegesis, because you've got this external authority.

55:58

And so as long as you can find verses that sound like that, well, then that's good, because you're not having to derive your theology from the text.

56:07

Your theology is coming from an infallible source outside the text. And so then you find sections in the text that, well, that fits with that.

56:14

And see, it's real easy to go to text like the warning passages in Ephesians 5, for example, do not partake with them.

56:20

Well, you know, he assumed that meant that do not become like them in the sense that you then would somehow lose your salvation and, you know, justifications are even there, so on and so forth.

56:28

The warning passages in Hebrews, the warning passages all through the New Testament are addressed to the people of God.

56:35

He's assuming that as long as someone is in the congregation, that means you're in, because from their perspective, baptism, you know, brings everybody in.

56:42

And of course, that's where the problem is as well, because they don't have a biblical doctrine of justification that is involved with union with Christ, saving faith, coming from the

56:51

Spirit of God, you know, all the rest of these things. It's a package deal. See, I think that's where sometimes

56:57

I disconnect when I listen to that conversation, because there's so many things that go by so fast.

57:03

And in my brain, I've got this worldview that not all who are sitting in church are in the church.

57:13

Right. And he, yeah. Yeah, I understand that. I understand that. But again, it was useful to me because even looking at the text in Ephesians 5, even looking at what was there, what does

57:25

Paul say? For at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Now, when you address that to the entire congregation, yes, that's very true of those who are truly in Christ.

57:36

But as Hebrews makes plain, as John made plain in 1 John 2, there are those who are in the congregation who do not have true saving faith.

57:46

And they are the ones who will eventually go out from us. So it might be demonstrated they were not truly of us.

57:53

Those warnings are given to the elect so that we might know what God's will is and what is pleasing in his sight.

57:59

And if our nature has been changed, we will want to do what God has revealed is appropriate and pleasing to him.

58:06

That's how the warnings function for us. So I appreciate that. I've not heard of his book, and evidently he's not heard of mine either.

58:14

I would love, again, I would love to compare what he says about James 2 with my entire chapter on James 2 and the

58:21

God who justifies. It would, again, illustrate the exact same thing, and that is one side, you've got an external authority.

58:30

I don't care what it is. You cannot walk through the text of Scripture and do so consistently.

58:37

You'll always have to engage in eisegesis. We just saw that. Great illustration of it. Thanks for listening to The Dividing Line today.

58:42

Remember, next time, Zaynab bint Jash and the Quran. We'll see you then. God bless.