Live On Air Debate With Roman Catholic Scott Windsor on Bible Interpretation

Introduction to John 6 and the Debate With Scott Windsor

And good afternoon, welcome to the dividing line my name is James White and we have a live program for you today and specifically, we have a program on the subject of the interpretation of Scripture and Specifically, we'll be looking mainly at John chapter 6 as well as some other passages.

Let me give you a little bit of background in regards to what brought this particular subject up. My special guest today, which we'll bring on in just a moment is Scott Windsor and Mr. Windsor runs a website, which I'm sure he'd be more than happy to tell you about and more than free to do so and also a mailing list off that website the axe mailing list and as well as a Chat room which like our chat room for those of you interested had to move this Past week due to the collapse of the Internet Due to wonderful fun folks who like to destroy free and nice ways of people chatting.

Anyways, that's another subject. We won't get into today. Mr. Windsor and I have been talking about the subject of Roman Catholicism for a very long time and In fact, I think we began discussing these issues back in the days of BBS's and if you are too new to computers to know what that is a BBS is a bulletin board system and this was back before the days of the Internet and as a result you would write a message to someone and you'd put it on one computer and then eventually that computer would call another computer and send mail and pick up mail and and Eventually it would go through a network and get to the other guy's computer where he could read it and then he'd respond to it.

And it was very very funny how it all worked out going back and forth and so on and so forth. So many moons ago probably a little bit farther back than we would like to actually admit we started talking about the subject of Roman Catholicism, mr. Windsor was a convert to the Roman Catholic faith and in point of fact It was those conversations that ended up Prompting the writing of Such books as the fatal flaw and answers to Catholic claims which are the works that I first published with the crown publications back in about 1990 and So that is a little bit of the background.

What has happened recently is the to prompt this particular program was that Mr. Windsor indicated that I have been proven wrong many many times in the past and specifically the issue that came up was John chapter 6 and The interpretation of that.

Mr. Windsor indicated that my interpretation is in error. And so I thought well, I think it would be edifying for everyone involved To hear a discussion on the subject of John chapter 6 specifically Verses 35 and following in regards to the issue of the sovereignty of God in salvation and specifically how it is that Roman Catholics and Protestants engage in the interpretation of scripture and so that's what we would like to do today on the program and So let's go ahead and see let's first of all test and make sure that we've got everything working and see if Scott and I can talk with each other and go ahead and bring him online Scott.

Are you there? Can you hear me? Okay, good I can hear you just fine now as well. So when we do have some interaction, we'll be able to hear each other. Well, I would assume you'd probably agree with me that if we're going to talk about my interpretation of John chapter 6 I'll sort of have to give it first wouldn't that make sense?

Okay, well why don't we go ahead and now you would you be able to hear me well enough when you're on hold to Catch the gist of what I'm saying. Yes. Okay. All right. Let's go ahead and put Scott on hold and let's I'm gonna take about Five minutes and I was gonna grab one of my where did it go?

Hmm. Oh, hey, look at this My palm pilot just happens to have a program on it that allows me to do a timer. Isn't that wonderful? I Just love this thing. Anyways, so I'm gonna take about five minutes and I am going to Present a my understanding of John chapter 6 and then we will give Scott the same amount of time and he can explain to us his understanding and Where he feels I've gone wrong.

And if if it works out with Scott what we might be able to do is each take a little time Afterwards to respond what the other person had said give more time if needed to explain exactly where each one of us is coming from then we'll have some interaction and Then we'll see if there's anyone out there who would like to discuss the Subject with us and you can feel free to do so at eight six six five five zero thirty nine fifteen.

That is a toll-free number eight six six five five zero thirty nine fifteen. If you would like to discuss that issue with us if if the calls are a little bit on the light side Then we can go on and discuss some of the other passages that also teach the same issue in regards to the sovereignty of God.

John 6:35-45 and the Sovereignty of God in Salvation

So I'm going to go ahead and start that little timer there and ask everyone to look at John chapter 6. We're specifically looking at verses 35 through 45. But obviously we cannot isolate any passage from its context.

John chapter 6 begins with the feeding the five thousand. Then Jesus sending the disciples away walking upon The water to them the crowds following after him the next day and they encounter him in The synagogue in Capernaum and the discussion that follows thereafter Is a discussion that I think we need to keep in mind.

Results in all of those alleged disciples except for the twelve walking away from Jesus. So there is something about what Jesus says throughout this entire presentation. That is highly offensive to these surface level disciples who truly are not looking to Jesus for spiritual nourishment and Specifically in verse 35 Jesus says to them I am the bread of life.

He who comes to me will not hunger and he who believes in me will never thirst and so immediately Jesus presents this concept of himself as Spiritual sustenance because obviously coming to him and believing in him is not a physical action.

And so the hungering and the thirsting here is spiritual hungering and thirsting but notice verse 36. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe so the context here is Explaining why it is that these men can see Jesus.

They can see him perform miracles. They can hear the incarnate Son of God speaking these words of life and yet they do not believe. Why is that? That is the focus of the following verses. And of course, I think the most important verse we can look at verse 37, which is then explained in 38 and 39 the Lord Jesus there says all That the Father gives me will come to me and the one who comes to me I will certainly not cast out for I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who sent Me.

This is the will of him who sent me that of all that he has given me. I lose nothing. But raise it up on the last day. This should be the section of Scripture that we focus our attention upon in the time that we have today.

Verse 37 the Lord Jesus says all that the Father gives me will come to me. This is a phrase that leaves no doubt as to what is being said the action of the Father giving to the Son Must in the text precede the coming of anyone to Christ.

That is the divine action of the Father. Giving his elect people to the Son determines who it is who will come to the Son. These men who do not believe will not come to Christ. They will not see in him their Spiritual source of sustenance.

It is only those that the Father gives to the Son who will come to the Son and Everyone that the Father gives to the Son will come to him. That is the basis then of the second part of the verse which says.

And the one who comes to me I will certainly not cast out who is the one who comes to Christ. It is only the one who has previously been given by the Father to the Son. He is the one who comes to Christ and as a result Christ will never Cast that one out.

Well, why will he never cast that one out? Well, because he is fulfilling the will of the Father as we see in verse 38. For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.

So the Son Explains the reason why he will not cast out any of those who are given to him in The context of he is fulfilling the Father's will he has come down from heaven not to do his own will. But the will of the Father and what is the will of the Father for the Son verse 39 explains this very clearly.

This is the will of him who sent me that of all that he has given me now. That's the same all we saw in verse 37. That's the same all that is the elect of God. That's the same all of the people who come to Christ that of all that he has given me.

I lose what I Lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day and this really is the fundamental issue and I'll close with this. This passage requires Christ to be a perfect Savior who is able to save in and of himself.

Not through a cooperative effort with man that may or may not succeed. This is not presenting to us of Jesus Christ who tries to save but fails in so many instances. Due to a lack of cooperation the part of those he's attempting to save.

No. The Son is a powerful Savior who is able to save all of those who are given to him by the Father on that last day that is the presentation I believe of the reformed understanding the reformed perspective regarding the subject of John chapter 6 very briefly stated of course, but done so in about five minutes.

So with that in mind I would like now to to give an equal amount of time or in fact a little more if you'd like since you have the double duty Scott of both the presenting your own understanding and then critiquing my own.

So if you'd like to take a little more time, I had to talk very quickly five minutes goes by very very quickly so whatever time you need and feel free to. In fact before you get started, why don't you?

Let folks know how they can get to your web page and How they can contact you unless we forget that sometime in the future.

Well, my web page is www .americancatholictruthsociety .com. Is that all one word. All one word.

There's a shorter version. A little bit more confusing right? I understand. Comm. Okay, and they can get on your mailing list there and so on so forth. There's mailing list there.

There's the exit email list, which is a moderated email list for Catholic apologetics and then there's the battle axe email list, which is nearly unrestricted to kind of let it go almost like a Like a news group or like the IRC or well, even our.

She's a little bit more moderated, I guess. But uh.

Okay, so already. Well if like I said take take whatever time you would like. Obviously within reason and let us know how you understand the passage and what you feel. The the error of my presentation was.

Scott Windsor’s Response on Drawing, Coming, and Perseverance

Well, first of all when we start off with the we believe that he brings all men touched upon that in your book. So looking at you know, this is the drawing all men are drawn to Christ. And I would say that the key passage in John 6 is not the drawing.

It is so much as it is the coming that these are the people that are drawn to Christ. Well, you know, that's not the giving of the Father though. That's the drawing. We're all invited the free gift of God, which is salvation to our souls.

That's the gift is the gift which I believe at the end. It's not the beginning. It's not that the start of our walk with the Lord God will give us to Christ and then once we are given he will not lose us coming on the last day.

Excuse me dry mouth. I should have got a drink of water before I started. Some what some people will operate reject the gift those people are not any less drawn. You know in a nutshell from John 6 is that you focus on the drawing and not the coming and I can stop there for now.

Okay. All righty. Okay. Well, I guess the probably the best thing we could do would be to look at Some of the things that she said and we can have some Dialogue back and forth in regards to it. The fundamental assertion then that's that you're making is that so the key is not so much the drawing as as the coming and You made a mention that that's later on.

If you have the text there in front of you may we could Work through it together with the I know as you can see there are folks in the chat channel. They're listening and and of course people listen to the the program many times after.

It's all over with because we do archive it. When you look at John 6 37 and the first phrase all that the father gives me Will come to me Would you agree or disagree that the giving of the father Precedes and determines the the coming to the son.

John 6 37 all that the father gives me will come to me and what I'm suggesting is that the giving on the part of the father to the son of a People the all all that the father gives me in the Greek language anyways that act of giving Occurs prior to the coming to Christ of any one of those who are so given.

Hence the the first response I would make to the criticism that the key is not so much the drawing as the coming is that in Jesus's own words He places the drawing the the giving of the father to the son this divine act Prior to anyone's coming to Christ, and so I guess the first the first question is For me anyways, how do you understand that phrase and from your perspective?

What does it mean that the father gives anyone to the son at all?

Well, I would say that yes, it precedes the drawing I say proceeds to the drawing was on Calvary so go on to say that the actual giving of the father went of when that. You know you have to read into the scriptures to say that he did it.

When I converted he did it. When I was baptized, you know, when did the giving happen? I believe the giving of the father is He will give all that. Persevere. We have free will to survive in our life and and we need to persevere.

We have a choice in this matter. And if we decide to turn our backs on Christ We're lost again. We're back into the same boat We were in before only worse. Because even if the Bible even tells us it's worse to be have known the truth and rejected it than to have never heard the truth.

Okay, I'm a little there are a number of statements that you made there first of all you said that the Drawing here. We don't know when it is and yet Jesus specifically says in verse 38 that he's come down from heaven not to do his own will.

But the will the father and this is the will of him who sent me that of all that he has given me I lose nothing. So obviously the giving has to take place prior to Christ's entrance into the world. So we are given a time frame as to when this giving took place it is prior To Christ coming into the world and I would assert that in light of the rest of Scripture.

Ephesians chapter 1 says that before time itself This act on the part of God the father of predestination took takes place. So I think we are given the time frame and whatever the time frame is it's before the incarnation.

It's before any single individual comes to Christ. So I think that's the first thing I'd point out from from John 6. You then said that the I think and and correct me if if I misunderstood you I think the next point you made was that the father gives those the son who persevere is is that what you said?

Yes. Could you show me where in John 6 it says that? Those who the father foresees will persevere are the ones that he gives to the son.

It doesn't that's my point again. It doesn't pinpoint who those people are. You have to look into other parts of the scriptures where it tells us. You know that we're in you know, we're in this race, you know.

Run to win, you know. Don't just walk through the track. You've got to run and win this race, you know. Because if you just walk around the track here, you may not make it. Well, let me see if I understand this.

So when when Jesus says in verse 39 That the father's will for him is That of all that he has given Christ, he loses nothing but raises it up on the last day. Is the son able to do the will of the father?

Well, sure, and but again, he has not told us who those people are yet. He says that those who are given will make it. This is giving gonna happen. It happens that when they're judged and when they're judged they're given to him and they will no longer.

If there was no longer any question There's no no doubt that these people are saved and are going to heaven, but until we are judged we can't know that.

Okay. Now you say that this giving may even take place the judgment. How can that be. In light of what? I've already pointed out to you that in verse 37 all that the father gives me will come to me our coming to him is After the father's giving.

The the there is there is no way that The the Greek term that is translated there will come to me, which is a future verb. Is is going to be taking place? Before the action the one all the father gives me.

So the giving the father Precedes our coming to Christ hence would precede the judgment and as I pointed out in verse 37 It precedes the incarnation as well. So if that's the case, how do you respond to that?

Information from the text itself.

Well again it with the time period is give you something and you will come. You might come two minutes later. You may come three seconds later. You may come a millennia later. Established as to when the coming well, the coming will happen during our lives, of course.

But the point I'm making is that the giving which which again your primary criticism of the interpretation was that the key is not so much the drawing as the coming. And I've said to you. I'm sure you'll for many many times that I believe one of the biggest differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants in their view of soteriology and their interpretation of Scripture is the difference between What I would call anthropocentrism and theocentrism that is a focus upon the role of man as central or a focus upon the role of God as central and What I'm suggesting to you is that the verbs in John chapter 6?

The verbs have God as the one acting and man is the one acted on and The time frame is given in verses 37 and 39 because the act of God in giving us to the Sun must precede our Coming to the Sun. So my point it sounds to me like what you're saying Is that our coming and in fact our persevering is what determines what God will do.

And I am saying that the plain reading of the text both in the original language and in any English Translation is that what God has done in eternity determines whether we come and whether we're raised up on the last day.

Well as you said earlier we cannot isolate any passage. Mm-hmm. We can't take this one passage without looking at the total context of the end of all the scriptures might. We follow this tradition. You can't overlook that God the concept of free will.

Treaties on on free will. If you take away free will you take away a justice. If we're all puppets.

Well, of course, I don't believe we're all puppets and Augustine's view of free will is very different than the semi Pelagian view today. But so is it would you then be be be saying that in point of fact your?

Interpretation this passage is is not actually provided by an exegesis of the passage itself, but is instead primarily determined on the basis of the teaching magisterium of the church and. For example, can you point me to an infallible interpretation of John 6 37 to 39 in any?

Official teaching in the magisterium. I'm not aware of one.

Well, when you you bring up the word infallible there's very few times and they would. The quote-unquote unfallible teachings. We have the magisterium. We have the consistent teaching of the church which would represent, you know a part of the in your book.

And that's the Eucharist. You know. There's a consistent teaching in the church From all the way back to the first century that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Christ. It's us to eat in. In John 6.

We must eat and drink his body and blood and if we don't do that, we have no life in us.

Well, do you think Scott that's what Jesus meant in John 6 35 to 45? Must be understood in its own context before you ever get to John 653 and following and that in point of fact if you've misunderstood him in those previous verses.

Don't you think that greatly increases the probability of your not understanding What Jesus is saying when he talks about eating his flesh and drinking his blood. I.

Would have to probably wholeheartedly agree with you there. And I take the concept of what I said in the first part of there that the giving Happens later the coming, you know, those who are not lost.

That's later. That's our judgment. Once he gives them to us, you know us to him. We are not lost. There's no way there's no possibility of loss. But there are so many other parts of Scripture that tell us how we can be lost.

You know James 5 19 and 20 tells us, you know, the one who's gone away if you if you bring him back. You've saved a sinner from death and covered a multitude of sins.

So if in point of fact the text of John chapter 6. And I think we both believe that the Bible is consistent with itself and that it is inerrant in the inspired Word of God if the text of John 6 does indicate That the giving of the father to the son is not at the judgment and in fact is prior to any human action of our coming to him and in point of fact is before the Incarnation of Christ and and in light of the rest of Scripture We know we're specifically told that is before the beginning of time itself Second Timothy 1 9 and 10 Ephesians 1 3 through 11 so on so forth.

If in point of fact the text indicates that then your position simply would not be tenable. Would it.

Yeah, if I followed what you were saying, yes, but I don't follow what you're saying. I'm saying that there's the the giving the the drawing Happens now. It happened in the past the giving and the coming happens later kid.

Can you explain though and I don't want to I don't want to be In hospitable here though. But verse 39 says in order that all which he has given me it's a perfect tense. There ditto Kenmoy is the verb.

How can that fit? With your position a perfect tense verb is a complete action the past with abiding results the present. So there is no question on the basis of Jesus's own words John 6 39 that the giving of the father the son Preceded The words that he's speaking here.

So you you can say well, I don't believe that. But what positive evidence Can you give to me? that that isn't a perfect tense verb or that it doesn't refer to a.

Past action that is completed. We're looking at you know, when you get down to that very, you know Grammarical level I think you're going to find a microscope and we're going into you know. Dissecting little words and what each word means.

What is the whole of Scripture. Say we can't look at this one word. I can speak of a future event where when I have given you something it will happen. You know and that could be very well be what this verse is talking about when we look at the consistency of Scripture.

We're talking about persevering to the end, you know, what's the purpose and persevering if it's already done?

Well, so what you're saying is and and and I would love to go after all those those other Discussions and we can in time but I want to stay with the text. So what you're saying is that the verb choices that the Lord Jesus uses.

That getting down to that level Is is putting it or to find a microscope? And so when you say well, we don't know what the time frame is. Even though the the Greek verbs tell us exactly what it is that we shouldn't utilize that.

Now the time frame and we have to understand also that God does not exist within our time frame. What the Father knows he has foreknown Everything that will happen in our life and that's a very Catholic understanding of predestination.

We understand the the God knows all and what knows all that will happen, but he gave us free Will. He gave us the ability to choose him or reject him and he knows what our choices will be. But he does not affect that choice more than you know, the fact that he has given us the opportunity He sent his son to die for us.

And if we accept his son, we are saved. Not a bully pulpit. For for God to say, you know, I'm gonna pick Joe Paul over there.

But I'm not gonna pick Sally Smith over there. So so God has no freedom in who he saves He just we are the ones who control this. God is unfree.

Gave us that gift that was his will to give us the gift to be able to choose him.

Is there any place in Scripture you can point me to that says free will is a gift of God? Not in those words. No, I could not. Are you aware who the first person was in church history to use the phrase free will?

Yeah, Tertullian actually is the one who introduced it to theological language it is 31 minutes past the hour. We need to take our first break if you would like to get involved. We have one person online.

And my ears just exploded right out of my right off my body here. Eight six six five five zero thirty nine fifteen is the number and you can get online right now. We'll be right back and welcome back to the dividing line.

I'm taking insurance out on hearing loss. Oh Ouch well, hey, we are having a discussion today on the program concerning The interpretation and meaning of John chapter six. I I honestly think we've already gotten to the the main issue.

And that is I would suggest that theology and that tradition are to be theology is to be derived from Scripture and tradition is to be tested on the basis of Scripture and that Jesus is words. Were very much Given to us so that we can for example look at exactly what he said that his words are life and that if looking at something such as the Meaning of verbs the the tense of a verb is something that is is going too far then I would point out that Every passage that has been cited such as John 12 32.

Or references in James 5. I can simply say well, you know, that's putting it under too much of a microscope. We we need to We need to look at the whole context of Scripture and the whole context of Scripture is very clear that it's God who saves that.

It is to his glory and to his alone that we are dead in our sins and our trespasses. There's nothing that we can do in of ourselves and I can make then the presentation that Jesus doesn't lose any of his sheep.

That it is very clear that he saves all of those that are given to him and that all the passages allegedly about apostasy are about either loss of rewards or about false believers themselves and while all of those things I just said may be true I believe that the only way to demonstrate that they are true is to drive them from the exegesis of the text of Scripture itself and so How would you how would you respond?

Oh ouch, how would you sorry about that Scott? How would you respond to my statement that look I I can say the same thing I can say Well, it's you Scott that are missing the entire context of Scripture and the sovereignty of God and and all the rest of stuff.

The only way for us to decide that I believe is To go into the text of Scripture itself. I get the feeling that from your perspective You would say no, the only way to decide that is to listen to what you identify as the soul infallible Church.

Well, it's not just that but also, you know I thought you know came to me be a little birdie that whispered in my speaking Greek. Which is what you say when you go back to the original tongue that you know.

That was a translation. Jesus when he spoke to the people spoke in their language which was Aramaic and the tenth would have been left to the interpreter not to. You know, it's we don't necessarily know that in Greek.

If Jesus had been speaking Greek That was the tenth he used but then again we can say use the word has to mean, you know. You know, my mother has given me love when.

Past present future. So if you take that position then that the Greek Of John 6 is not finally determinative. And that the are you saying that the Greek of John 6 is an interpretation that is fallible.

I'm not saying it's fallible, but I'm saying that when we get down to that minute, you know looking at you know. These little pieces of it and ignoring, you know, just to prove a point. I think we're going too far.

Well, obviously, I don't believe I'm ignoring anything. I would see I make the exact same charge to you. I believe you're ignoring the the rest of Scripture that is so clear on the sovereignty of God and the deadness of man and sin.

But my point is then we get down to the interpretation of Scripture. It sounds like you just said well Jesus wasn't speaking in this language. Well, let's let's let's say just for a moment. The Jesus was speaking in Aramaic in the synagogue Capernaum and not in Greek.

It is my understanding that the historical official position of the Roman Catholic Church is that the canonized Versions of the Gospels are in the Greek language and that there is no canonical John Written in any other language than Greek.

So it seems to me that Rome has said these are the original Books, these are the canon of Scripture and not that these are a simply good translation, but we really can't place much weight in The tenses of verbs and in point of fact, I would say That Robertson Janice and Carl Keating and Patrick Madrid and Stephen Ray They all have gone into the tenses of verbs in the Greek without once saying well, you know.

But this is just minutiae.

Well, I mean on top of that to go back to another point you made the these are the books.

Yes in the original languages I mean it has always been understood that the Gospel of John was written in Greek and If anyone has read the early church fathers if you rate read chrysostom if you read Athanasius they argue on on the very same basis that I am in regards to for example Athanasius uses the form ago I meet John 858 to demonstrate the deity of Christ.

The church fathers at Nicaea made reference to the very same verbal forms that I am and It never seemed to cross their mind that they were somehow In any way shape or form making an error. Well, anyways, we've got some callers calling in.

Let's um, then this is always this is always a trick. This is always tricky. So Scott stay near your phone in case something weird happens. Getting more than one person on and making sure that you both can hear each other is Very very tricky.

So let's um, I'm assuming that we have Johnny online somewhere out there in the control room and Because I see lights flashing. So Johnny, are you there? Okay, Johnny. Say something say hi to Scott and make sure you two can hear each other.

Okay, I heard Johnny for a second there so did I but we've lost Johnny since then. Oh. He said I am here and then the lines gone. Okay, do we have anyone else mr. Pierce in the mighty control room of the Death Star.