Radio Free Geneva: Jesse Morrell Exposed, John 6:44 Excuses Examined

You'll constantly hear people that are Calvinist harp on this. They just keep repeating it, and they repeat it so much you start to think it's a

Biblical truth. Jesus stands outside the tomb of Lazarus, he says,

Lazarus, come out, and Lazarus said, I can't, I'm dead. That's not what he did,

Lazarus came out. Do you mean to tell me a dead person can respond to the command of Christ? Well, I can talk over your head like that.

I know the Hebrew, the Greek, I've done theology, you can tell I know. Do you really believe that it parallels the method of exegesis that we utilize to demonstrate those other things?

Um, no. Some new

Calvinists, even pastors, very openly smoke pipes and cigars just as they drink beer and wine.

Even Jesus cannot override your unbelief. A verse like that to him, you know what it would sound like if he were listening to it?

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, just uploaded the video of an encounter that Emilio Ramos had with Jesse Murrell at UNT.

As I was listening to it over lunch, there were just so many teachable moments,

I guess, would be the term we could use. So many things where Jesse says stuff is, he says stuff that's just, it really, really illustrates why we were saying some of the things we were saying just on the last program about the decree of God versus the revealed will of God, and what happens when you deny that.

Now, the problem is Jesse Murrell is a compilation of heresies.

He doesn't have just one heresy. When you think about it, most people don't just have one heresy.

Most people are not solid and everything else, and then you've just got this one thing.

Heresy spreads. Because Christian truth is a whole, once you become imbalanced in one spot, that frequently ends up causing problems elsewhere.

And so what you see in Murrell is a consistently man -centered perspective that takes him outside the realm of orthodoxy, way outside the realm of orthodoxy, as he, of course, says about us, too.

But you end up, you know, how many times have I said it? Who is a consistent Arminian? An open theist.

So he's an open theist. He's a Pelagian. He denies original sin. And he's a sinless perfectionist.

Every one of those, when you think about it, is so much derived from man -centered thoughts, never centered on...

His thought never starts with God and then informs what we believe about man. It always begins with man and then edits

God to fit with the conclusions he's come to with man. And so Jesse Murrell is a great example of what to avoid and why you should avoid it.

Because what you're, you know, we rejoice in the inconsistencies of our brothers in the faith who, because of attachment to tradition, personal experience, end up not having a consistent perspective.

And we rejoice in the inconsistency that they don't take it to its final conclusion like Jesse Murrell does.

He takes it to the final conclusion and, in doing so, leaves the orthodox realm of orthodoxy and goes right out there and is proud to be an open theist,

Pelagian, original sin -denying, sinless perfectionist. And that comes out very clearly.

So I was going to do some other stuff. I have, I do have a couple of items that I want to get to in regards to John 6, 44.

Hopefully I'll remember as we're, because I doubt we're going to get through all this. It's highly, highly unlikely that we're going to be able to get through all this.

But I'll just try to manage my time in such a way as to get to this. But it just seems to be an appropriate, you know,

I don't want to talk today about critical theory.

I just posted something from Union Theological Seminary that just demonstrates beyond all question where critical theory goes.

The problem is, as somebody else pointed out, anymore, you know, you expect that from Union, but this type of stuff we see being promoted by TGC board members.

It's everywhere. So, but I just, let's step away from that for just a little while.

It's just so, so hard. Anyway. So here is

Emilio has found

Jesse Morrell. I guess one of the problems here, thankfully, Jesse comes across clearly.

His voice does. You can't always hear him, you know, cause he's, he's facing toward Jesse. Jesse's facing toward the camera.

So you, you hear him a lot better, but there's something going on. With the street preaching around here and, and Emilio has been doing this for years.

But there's a huge crowd and they're raucous and they're yelling and there's cops around and it's an interesting, and there's some street preachers, there are big old signs and, and all the rest of that kind of stuff.

So it looks interesting, but let's just dive in because wow, it is, it's well, you'll see you ready to go.

All right, here we go. Here's Emilio and Jesse Morrell. So I may have to interpret some of this, ask, ask them.

So he's talking about asking Emilio if homosexuality is God's plan. So immediately from the start, what you're going to see illustrated over and over and over and over and over again is the absolute confusion and overthrow of biblical categories of faith that comes from a not, not a failure to recognize, but an unwillingness to recognize the absolutely biblically mandated difference between God's will as expressed prescriptively in his law.

God reveals this is, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery.

It's found in God's law. It's found in the moral fabric of how he has created. That's his prescriptive will, but that does not exhaust the

God of the Bible. And if you say it does, you end up destroying the Bible. You end up standing on your head, trying to explain how

God commanded Abraham to offer Isaac. You stand on your head, trying to explain the cross.

You end up doing what this guy is going to do. And that is, Emilio keeps asking him, what about Acts 4?

Predestined by God's purpose, not, oh, well, God can make good come out of evil.

Those are not the same things. Those are not the same things. You try to make them the same things, you're lying.

And that's what Jesse Morrell has to do, because he has an overarching man -centered tradition that will not allow him to handle the text of scripture with any kind of fidelity at all.

It's impossible. So, if you will not see the difference between God's decree and the fact that God decrees to glorify himself in the redemption of a particular people in Christ Jesus from eternity past, and that this includes all the purposes and realities of sin, and that this does not remove from man his responsibility and culpability, just as the king of Assyria was rightly judged for acting on the intentions of his heart in Isaiah chapter 10, yet God used the king of Assyria in his sinful intentions to punish the people of Israel in fulfillment of the very word that God had given to Israel in Deuteronomy 28 and 29, the blessings and the cursings.

And so, now again, remember, when you're dealing with open theists, all this goes out the window.

You don't have an orthodox doctrine of God. You have a very man -centered doctrine of God. You've got a God who's just doing the best he can with what he's got.

But that's the only consistent direction to go. If you have a God who is sovereign over all time, then everything he's saying is just foolishness.

It's ridiculous. So, he just has to throw Psalm 115 out, 135 out, and Isaiah, and all of prophecy.

Well, look, once you're an open theist, there ain't much left, but there you go.

But this also illustrates how errors in theology proper, open theism, are almost always related to errors in soteriology, because God acts consistently with his nature in the gospel.

And so, if you end up messing up God's nature by messing up his omniscience based upon his being the creator of all things, then you're going to end up with a very different perspective on the gospel.

Again, not everyone's consistent. Thanks be to God, Jesse Morales, and out he goes into all the various forms of heresy.

So, this question, is homosexuality God's plan? So, just watch. You'll see these guys do it all the time.

They will conflate and confuse God's decree to glorify himself with his prescriptive will that represents his holy nature.

So, what they want to do is they want to create the false idea that if God's sovereign over all things, then he desires that sin, that it reflects what he wants in his own experience, rather than recognizing that that sin is a part of his decree that is dealt with either through the self -sacrifice of Jesus Christ or justly in the punishment of sinners on that last day.

So, they want the idea to be that if God decrees it, then he must want it as in representing his nature.

And so, then that's how he'll say, well, I'm more loving than your God is and your God is terrible and disgusting and horrible and all the rest of that stuff.

And it's all based upon this unwillingness. And they know that we make that distinction and they know that we can defend that distinction.

It is a willful misrepresentation. It is a twisting. They have to do it because they got nothing else.

They can't stand on the whole of scripture. They can't do it. And so, you have to twist things around.

So, you're just going to see that over and over again. Because Calvinism says everything is God's plan.

And then I said, ask them if abortion is God's plan. Because they're against abortion. Is the cross

God's plan? They're against abortion, but they say it's God's plan. Is the cross God's plan? God might, at times, use sinful acts.

Now, catch that. This is going to go on for a while. What was that?

At times. Yeah. This is going to go on for a while. Is that understandable? Okay. Okay. I just want to make sure.

All through this section, Emilio's going to keep bringing him back, bringing him back, bringing him back. He's just keep doing the same thing over and over and over again.

And he's going to continue to re -translate. Well, he's not translating.

He's going to continue to misinterpret, ignore what is found in the text.

I need to... There we go. I hope that doesn't come up on top of the screen. It probably will, knowing...

There it goes. Well, we'll see. He's going to keep... Yeah, I figured it was going to do that.

I need to bring your coordinates up. There we go. Misrepresenting what

Acts 4 says. And that's... Who else do we hear doing that? Did we not hear

Leighton Flowers doing that? Now, Leighton Flowers is not Jesse Murrell. But if Leighton Flowers keeps going the way he's going, he'll end up being

Jesse Murrell. We hope and pray that he won't go there, that he'll be restrained from going there, because this is blatant heresy.

But that's the only direction he has to go. And he's doing the exact same thing.

Instead of seeing, in Genesis 50, the grammatical necessity of the parallel going to Acts 4, it doesn't say that God permitted or that once in a while He uses.

It says He predestined this to happen and involved the free will actions of many, many, many, many people.

In fact, it was the free will actions of people for generations. Hence, it would have been hundreds of thousands, millions of free will acts

God determined to bring about the cross at the time and the place in the way that He chose to do so.

I don't believe an open theist can handle that personally, at least not consistently.

But there you go. That's the situation that we need to deal with.

Now, wait a minute.

What are you laughing about? When I see you cracking up on the Rich Camp— These are just isolated incidents,

James. Right, I know. They're just isolated incidents. Yeah, yeah,

I know. There is isolated. Yeah, I know. It's sad to see someone just spin in the wind with this kind of stuff.

But it's not the last time he's going to do that kind of stuff, believe you me. I've been preaching here for 11 years.

I've been preaching for longer than that. I've been here since 2005. Really? Since 2005. Right. When I was on staff for Ray Comfort with the

Great News Network— Weekly, like me, for 11 years? I've been coming here annually since 2005. Yeah, right.

So what I would tell you is you need to take your false gospel and leave it to God. You don't want everyone to be saved, so you're not loving.

I want everyone to be saved because I'm not a Calvinist. No, I don't want anything. I don't want anything. Are you more loving than God?

Do you want everyone to be saved? No, sir. I don't want anything that God doesn't want. So you're not loving. You don't love these people.

I do. You don't want them all to repent. Now, here's the next one. If you recognize that God is righteous in the exercise of grace, that God has freedom, that God has freedom to love, then you are not loving.

And so if—now, no Reformed person, at least no Reformed person with any balance or anything else, no

Reformed person claims to know the identity of the elect. And so you preach the gospel to all men, and you pray fervently for all men to repent and to come to Christ.

He says that makes you more loving than God. Notice what that requires. If you're going to say that makes you more loving than God, then what you're doing is you are reducing

God to the level of a human being and making comparisons between us based upon your ignorance and based upon your demotion of God from being

God and accomplishing his purposes, because you don't believe he has an overarching purpose he can accomplish anyways.

Well, you're that if you do. It's a very vague, general thing and not a specific thing. So the idea is—and it's a very vacuous argument that you—I'm more loving than your

God. Well, you can't save anybody. You don't have the power to save anybody.

Your God does not have the power to save anybody. Just to mention that in passing. And so we're comparing apples and oranges here.

We're talking about a sovereign God who has the right to be free in the expression of his mercy and his grace.

If you can't find that in Scripture, you can't read the Old Testament and go, hmm,

Israel, Egypt, hmm, dealing with these in different ways. From his perspective, he must have dealt with them all the same way, right?

Because he's equally loving to all. No, that makes no sense whatsoever. But, hey, you know, that's what heresy does to you.

So, Jesse, you won't answer the question. So the cross is not part of God's plan, is that right? No, I said

God can incorporate some sins. I didn't ask you what he could do. God can incorporate some sins, but that doesn't mean all sin.

Let me ask you this. When they sacrificed their babies— Now, you won't answer the question if the cross is part of God's plan or not.

Yes or no? I've answered it many times. When they were sacrificing their babies to Israel— No, Calvinism is heresy.

I've exposed Calvinism time and time again. Jesse, you can use a million different examples, but if you won't answer the central issue—

I'm here because I love these people. I'm not here to debate with you hateful Calvinists or you heretical Calvinists.

You don't want everyone to be saved. I do. So I don't care if you call my gospel—

You know, the funny thing is, we're actually the ones that believe that if God wanted to save everybody, he could.

It's not his choice to do so. He chooses, likewise, to justly bring judgment. Your God can't even do that.

That's beyond his capacity and power. And for anybody to stand there, you know, blasting everybody as heretics, when he doesn't even believe that his

God knew when he created that they would be standing there on that sidewalk doing this.

Because there's no way God could have known that. He's going to say later on in regards to opentheism, God knows everything that is knowable.

That's the standard opentheist thing. He knows all truth, but not—

Since free will choices don't exist, then they cannot be known. That's the opentheist thing.

That means when God created, he did not know that Jesse Murrell would even exist, because Jesse Murrell is the result of many free choices of free creatures.

He didn't know any of us would exist. He did not know this was going to happen. You standing there, talking about that, and then blasting at us for having an orthodox biblical perspective, because it's so painfully obvious that none of the prophets believed in opentheism or anything like this.

I mean, it's just so plainly a shallow way around dealing with what the

Bible actually teaches, that it's— I'm here because God sent me here.

God told me to go and preach the gospel to every creature. The Bible says Jesus takes the death of every man.

That's what the Bible says. Every man. That's what it says. If he died for everyone, that includes his people.

If he died for everyone, that includes believers. So yes, he died for— You won't answer the question, will you?

I'll tell you this much. I know you don't like it, because Acts chapter 4 says that the cross is part of God's predetermined plan.

Of course it was. I already admitted it was. Okay, so then God predetermined the crucifixion of Christ.

So do you think it's evil for him to have done it anyways? Yeah, I think it was an evil thing that he did, and yet God can get good things out of evil.

Oh, okay, so then God can get good things out of evil. What does it say?

To do whatever your hand and your purpose predestined to occur.

Speaking specifically of the acts of Herod, Pontius Pilate, the

Gentiles, and the people of Israel. They were doing what God predestined to occur.

Not he's trying to get something good out of some instances of man's evil.

They're never consistent, because how in the world could an open theist—

See, an open theist does not believe that God has any purpose that he can predestine to occur. So there's no theological foundation for the actual divine act within their theological system.

So it makes sense why they can't even begin to handle the text in a meaningful fashion. But notice the subtle twisting.

Notice how that works. You basically have a Calvinist understanding.

A heckler does an evil thing, and I can use a heckler for good. You just affirmed sovereignty. You said you believe

God predestined all sin. That's the heresy. Heresy is taking truth too far. So you're taking truth like the cross was predestined, and you take it too far.

Okay, so you believe that God predestined or ordained some sin, and that gets you off the hook?

The Bible says when God saw the wickedness of man, it repented the Lord that he made man, Genesis 6, 5 -6.

That means God didn't want the world to sin. Yeah. Okay, now, one of the many texts that we can look at, the term necham, when it says repented, that does not mean

God went, oh man, I blew it. Now for an open theist, I guess they actually have a view of God where God is so reckless and so foolish that he could create creatures that all of a sudden start spewing out all this evil, and God just goes, oh no, never saw this coming.

Oh goodness, what am I going to do? Oh, it repents me that I made man.

So that would mean that the cross was an afterthought, all of redemption was an afterthought, we are an afterthought, and realize what the cost is.

We sing about how my name was written on his hand. No open theist can sing that song.

Of course, most open theists don't believe in substitutionary atonement or penal substitutionary atonement, anything like that.

Anyways, but just think about what it's like for an open theist, cannot sing that song, because God, Jesus, the

Father and the Son and the Spirit together, did not know you would exist when Jesus died. And so there can be no union of the elect with Christ, it becomes an impersonal class act.

It's an act in behalf of a class that is then defined and filled up by our actions, by creatures that God does not at the time of the crucifixion, even though will ever exist.

That's what open theism is left with. That's a very different faith.

Very different faith. It's amazing to me how many people will sing those songs, and then when you present open theism to them, it's like, well, okay, you know,

I don't know if that's all that bad a thing. It's that bad a thing, yeah. He doesn't want people to be homosexuals, you say he does.

God doesn't want babies to be aborted, you say that he does. The Bible says when they...

Did you catch it again? God wants babies to be aborted. Just start marking down.

Let's not turn this into a drinking game, unless you're doing Diet Coke or something, okay? Because it's gonna get really bad by the end.

But every time Jesse ignores the distinction between the biblically taught mandatory distinction between God's prescriptive will, his revelation of his law, and God's sometimes called decree, secret will that we do not have access to, which would explain and give you the basis of understanding.

God says you shall not kill. He says to Abraham, sacrifice your son. You shall not kill, but he decrees, predestined by his own hand, the death of his son.

Says you shall not kill, sends Syria to whip up on Israel, etc., etc.,

etc. The Bible becomes a mishmash of fantastic contradiction in Jesse Murrell's world, because he doesn't believe all of it.

He does not believe scripture. He doesn't believe it. He has...

Any person who can look at himself and go, yeah, I'm sinlessly perfect, obviously has some serious spiritual problems.

And here's what you get when you go all the way out there, and that's what you're hearing.

So you're going to hear that over and over and over again in this conversation.

I'm going to create a straw man based upon ignoring the distinction that you make and that you can defend over and over and over and over and over and over again in scripture.

That's what I'm going to do, and that's what he does. Okay, now here's another standard open theist perspective, and again, who brought this up in the last

Radio Free Geneva? I'm not sure if we played it, but Leighton Flowers. It never entered into my mind as if God is sitting there.

Now, this is where I go, Leighton, are you sure you're not an open theist? You sure you're not into...

Because Molanism would really have a problem with that. You throw Molanism out as an orthodox possibility, but an open theist is basically saying

God looks at the horrific evil that the people of Israel do, and he goes,

Oh my, I never could imagine that my creatures would do such a thing.

That's literally what they're saying. That's literally what they're saying. You have to have an extremely man -centered view, extremely man -centered view of man, of God.

For him to be sitting up there in heaven going, Huh? Oh my goodness.

Because God made us capable of doing this, but he wasn't smart enough to understand his own creatures well enough to know that they would become that depraved.

Never entered my mind. Now, the obvious consistent biblical interpretation is,

I never commanded you to do these things. There is nothing in my revealed will to you that would give you even the slightest foundation for blaming me for what you yourselves have done.

That's what it never entered into my mind. That means it has nothing to do with the holy will that I have revealed to you.

You can find nothing in what I have delivered to you in the law, through Moses, through the messages of the prophets, that would even begin to give you a ground for doing, for worshiping

Moloch and doing the kinds of things that you people have been doing. You have done this completely in rebellion against me.

That's what it's saying. That's consistent with all the scripture. You don't have to tear out entire books of the

Bible, like Jesse Murrell has to do, to understand what's being said.

But when you have to take something like that and then create a God who's going, Oh, I didn't see that coming.

I mean, it's like, it's like, it's like, it's like positing a nuclear scientist that helped with the development of the atomic bomb.

Then it goes off and goes, Oh, I had no idea. I mean, the foolishness of this

God, why in the world would you worship a God like this? Made such potentiality of such horrific evil.

And he goes, whoops. Oh my, I never thought of that. That's the

God you worship? No wonder it's a man centered gospel. You don't have a, you don't have a God. You've just got a, you just got a man who messed up and went, whoops.

It's all you got. It's all you got. It's just disgusting. I'm sorry. Started preaching there. So abortion is not

God's plan. You're a heretic. That's mean you're a heretic. That means that God, Calvinism is saying that what the false.

You're a heretic, you're a heretic, Calvinist are heretics. That's, that's advancing the, that's advancing.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. That's should go over the yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Um, the sound clip here.

But we're doing was not in keeping with his revealed will and it wasn't you're part of his plan in terms of that Those aren't the things that came in into my mind

You're saying sin was God's idea whether or not you're saying all sin was God's idea before ever before a sinner existed

I mean how you're in eternity past you say sin was God's idea. He planned it He thought of it so it came from his mind.

God ordained the Bible. Yeah, the Bible says neither came into my mind Neither came it into my mind

You're guys not the guy of the Bible because I'm gonna take this text I'm gonna ignore everything else the

Bible says about this I'm gonna make this my definitional text and I'm going to present the idea of a

God who never ever dreamt of any of this stuff had no decree and Just blundered into it.

And now I'm gonna say worship him. There you go. And that's that's I What do you do with all the texts of Scripture that say otherwise you don't worry about him

You just that's the very essence of heresy is taking only portions. This is why we emphasize sola scriptura and Tota scriptura scripture is the sole and foul rule of faith and all of scripture not just Portions of that scripture

Washer If you believe the Bible you would say sin did not originate in God's mind

Now I forgot to ask Emilio I think Emilio is listening and Emilio you can text me if you want but I Don't get the feeling.

This is your first encounter With with Jesse I get the feeling that that this has happened before I could be wrong

Let me know brother one way or the other but but notice this is this is Emilio Emilio is

I Think Emilio gets this from being the dog whisperer because he's did you know, he's a he's the

Dallas dog whisperer He's an expert at training dogs. He can take nutcase dogs and turn them into nice dogs and so We need to introduce him to Ryan Ryan raises dogs.

Oh, okay. Yeah. Well, he's done big dogs little dogs everything in between Like buddy's dog.

Well, yeah, buddy's dog just eats eats lions. But anyway So so I think this is where some of it comes from Now he would say it comes from his just you know, what a wonderful pastor he is and how patient he is

There's people right, right, right anyway, I Think some of it comes from You got to be patient with those with those dogs and and with people because they're like sheep

And So he's just he's letting all the your heretic your heretic bounce off him

Which would cause most people to be getting their hackles up and and maybe not thinking as clearly

He's a sort of remaining laser focused That you did affirm that the cross is

Incorporate sin into his plan It was God's plan from the beginning and it doesn't mean all sin was

God's Okay, so that that was the Layton flowers argument right there. That was the Layton flowers argument, right?

That's exactly what Layton was saying almost identically Just because he for our day now he didn't say for it ain't he doesn't want to do that He doesn't want to say predestined

It doesn't want to do any of that because as a he can't predestine things in an open theist universe God doesn't predestine anything in an open theist universe

Because he doesn't know what's gonna be happening. He's got to be able to interact with free creatures He doesn't know what free creatures gonna do so he doesn't predestine anything

So he so incorporate evil into his plan So what happened is then God makes something good come out of it

If if you can't understand that scripture says that Jesus Christ came specifically for that purpose

The only way to understand what scripture is say every scripture writer understood. God is sovereign over the issues of time

You're gonna hear it by the way Is by the way, I'm wondering I'm sort of watching a little bit of the stuff here in in Twitter and Before the program started

Tony. Hey, Tony Miano, dude he pointed out that Jesse Morrell denies original sin, but is he

King James only? Because I figured Tony you'll know and let me know in Twitter or you've got my you've got you can text me too um

No, I didn't say call that's not that's that's not anybody calling even though that was someone spoofing someone from Prescott So I'm sure he would have been a very nice telemarketer anyway

You can let me know one way or the other because he's gonna make the argument That the phrase free will occurs a certain number of times in the

King James Bible But the term sovereign never does as if that's an argument and I've heard other

King James only people make that argument That's why I'm wondering is that is he King James only as well.

It would make sense I mean just throw all the weird stuff in there and and and why not?

But if you can't look at any translation of the Bible and see that God is King That he rules that he reigns that he accomplishes his purpose

Those are all found in the King James version of Bible And if you can't see it the vast majority of times that free will occurs in the

King James version of Bible It's about offerings It's about offerings that are not demanded for sin But are given freely by the person has nothing to do with other person's will is free

It's the King James that likewise says no man is able It's the King James that says in Romans 8 that those who are in the flesh cannot do what is pleasing to God Those are the things that Jesse Murrell cannot believe and does not believe

Doesn't matter what translation it might be in That's that's the reality of those things

So you're not being logical you're not being logical you're committing many fallacies

You're an open theist, you don't believe God takes in knowledge Open theism is what the Bible teaches If you were really sola scriptura

You would believe the Bible that neither came into my mind that they would do such a thing If you were really sola scriptura

God says he knows the beginning and the end Every Calvinist is an open theist when they pray

Now let's two things Sola scriptura without tota scriptura results in that mess

That's why you have to have both And every Calvinist is an open theist when they pray is a lie

Okay, it's either abject ignorance on a stunning level Or it's a lie

Completely and totally I do a lot of praying in public

And You have Good luck Finding any evidence

Of me ever praying As an open theist In any context whatsoever Not possible

Whenever you pray you assume it's not decided yet You pray according to God's will Now catch that Whenever you pray you assume it's not decided yet N -O

I know that my God Knows the beginning from the end

Your God doesn't, my God does That's the God of Isaiah That's the God Jesus taught Knows the end from the beginning

He can explain why everything in the past has happened Your God can't do that You do not have a biblical

God Jesse Not even close Now this is a good illustration though folks

Of something important Because what this illustrates Is That when we pray

We are not praying To make God better We are not begging

God To be better than God is This is why When we've talked about prayer

We've opened the phone lines We've talked to people about this over and over again What we are praying

Is that we would be changed So that we would be brought Into harmony with God's will

We're not trying to make His will Bend to ours And so no

He is completely in error On this as well Completely Prayer can change

God's mind It happens all the time in the Bible God said leave me alone Moses I'll make a nation out of you

Now I love this one too Because again this is another one of those places Where you just have to expose open theism For the error that it is

When God works with Moses And he works with Moses He brings about situations

Where Moses has to stand As The intercessor for the people

Of Israel Is God Changing his course

In light of Moses' intercession Or is God using that to change Moses himself

To make him much more Of the leader that he needs to be For the people of Israel One of them requires you to believe that either

God's ignorant Open theist Or that God's not as good as he could be And that Moses, one of his sinful creatures

Has to show him the way To becoming better It's a common thing

It's a common presentation But there you go And Moses It's called intercession

He sought for a man Who would stand in the gap And make up the hedge That they were not destroyed

And Moses said The Bible says God has wings and feathers Do you believe that? Do you believe

God's a bird? That's anthropomorphic Oh that's anthropomorphic

So when God uses anthropomorphic language When the Bible says God repents No that's not anthropomorphic

No that's anthropopathic It's called anthropopathic when it's emotion Anthropomorphic has to do with the shape

Anthropopathic has to do with feeling So you don't even have your terms right Because you're being fed by Calvinist propaganda

You're being fed by Calvinist propaganda The reality is Mr. Morell That there is an entire category

Of discussion of anthropomorphic language That is not limited To spatial realities

You're the one that doesn't know Your categories Just thought I'd throw that in there

This is what the Bible says Sin was not God's plan Jesus died for everyone God wants everyone to be saved

And you're supposed to love your neighbors yourself You don't even want everyone to be saved So you're not a loving person

That means you're a false convert You're not a real Christian If you were a real Christian you would want everyone to be saved

But you're a heretical Calvinist Who only wants the elect to be saved So you're a false convert

You're a false convert Meanwhile I only listened to this over lunch

On my headphones while I was eating And I noticed something here

Look past Jesse's camera Over there on the right hand side And that looks like a

Muslim woman And Which they would say Muslimah Talking to somebody

I hope she's talking to someone who understands grace And not one of Jesse's people Because that's the last thing a

Muslim would need Would be to be talking to someone Who claims to be a Christian And is actually a heretic

That would be unfortunate But who knows He probably has a fair number of folks there

So who knows The elect are God's special people I'm the elect

I'm God's special Anyone that lives holy Calvinists are not elect Because you live a sinful life

Every day of your life you sin So you're not elect You know what the bible says

He laid his life down for his friends So if The atonement was limited Jesus didn't die

For Calvinists Because the bible says he died for his friends And he said you are my friend

You heard it here first folks Jesse believes that he's elect Thus he is a

Calvinist But he just said Calvinism is false So he just refuted his own position

This is why this guy's a heretic And I don't associate with this guy I preach here every week a true gospel

And he's here preaching a false gospel You don't even love these people You don't even love these people Jesus said you are my friend

Now what was that guy saying Tell these people That you want them to go to hell

I think is what he was saying I'm not sure We have

Trump derangement syndrome We have Doug Wilson derangement syndrome But very clearly

There is Calvinist derangement syndrome Amongst many people It turns their minds off It turns off any reasoning

It turns off the ears It turns off the mind It doesn't matter how often you repeat yourself

That's where they're going Whatever I command you Do you do everything God demands Or do you sin every day

I sin every day So if the atonement is limited Then he didn't die for you

Listen Jesus said I lay my life down for my friends They don't sin every day

Now are you catching the argument Let me lay the argument out Because there's chanting stirring in the background Here's his argument

Jesus dies for his friends He calls it If you're my friends you'll keep my commandments If you sin then you're not

Jesus' friend Therefore Jesus didn't die for you If you believe in limited atonement So Now Talk about Incredible illustration

Of How to twist scripture I mean The illustration back when

I was younger Um The illustration that I have

When I was Used a lot when I was younger And heard other people using it

I'm getting text messages Sorry but it's not about that Um Was something along these lines

Um Judas went out and hanged himself Go to another text of scripture

Go ye and do likewise Okay Oh and what you do, do quickly So now you've got three different Hey it's biblical

Right? Biblical texts You string them together And ta -da

You just proved Something I'm not sure what you proved That's Here's a great illustration of that So you ignore

Jesus' plain Statements that God the father sovereignly

Determines the identity of the elect That he gives to the son The son saves them perfectly

Um Does not lose a single one of them You can't believe any of that If you're

Jesse Murrell because you're an open theist So God couldn't do any of that type of stuff Um And so you cobble together

Some of these things And then you ignore John's own statement That Jesus functions as our mediator

Our intercessor If anyone sins we have an advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous

Um And so now you start throwing in the sinless perfection So if you sin

Then you're not the friend of Jesus And so the only people that are Actually the friends of Jesus Are not those who desire to do his will

But those who do so perfectly Talk about man -centeredness Again this is why there's no assurance

This isn't good news This is the worst news that a struggling Sinner could ever get

Is that do you want Jesus To be your friend Then you've got to do do do

Do do do until the end of your days I mean this makes Rome's Penance cycle look

Simple in comparison to The horrific message That this is from a sinless perfectionist

But this is how you Just grab text Cobble them together ignore their context

And come up with an argument So you're without sin I pray deliver me from evil So your

God fails you Does he keep you from sin every day So your God's a failure Your God is imperfect

Your God's not omnipotent Your God can't purify you in this life Your God has to wait until you die

God doesn't answer your prayer The Bible says You are my friends if you do whatsoever

I command So if the atonement If the atonement is limited He doesn't die for you Because you don't do everything that he commands

First John says If you say you're without sin you're a liar The Bible says if you confess your sin

He's faithful and just to forgive you of your sin And to cleanse you from all unrighteousness It's chapter 1 verse 9

Now watch So Instead of this being The experience

Of the Christian What Morel's gonna do is he's gonna try to make that Well that was my past And it's not anymore

That's That's gonna be the argument here as you'll see here in a moment Chapter 1 verse 9

You only stick to verse 8 And you ignore verse 9 You take it out of context

Chapter 2 says I write these things unto you that you sin not And if anyone sins

Then we have an advocate with the Father It says if. You say when You say we sin every day

What does John mean when he says So you say It says if And you say when

As if there's somehow a difference Between the two So but if you're a sinless perfectionist

Then why say if Cause there is no when That doesn't make any sense

If we say we have no sin We're a liar I have sin I used to be a drug dealer I have sin on my record

John didn't write it like that He didn't say that you have had no sin He says if you say you have no sin

He uses the present tense To describe past sins Yeah he said I used to persecute the church

And that's why I am the chief of sinners So he's using Past events

To describe himself in the present tense That's what he did So I'm not saying

I have no sin I've lied I've stolen But what

I'm not doing I'm not lying every day I'm not committing sin every day

What sins do you do every day? Oh I'm sure that I fall In my motives How about not loving

God With our heart, soul, mind, and strength? The greatest commandment How can anybody Even begin to understand

Who they are, what their motivations are Who God is, what would be required Of that And then sit there and say

Oh yeah, every moment, every day I've got it down perfectly So he wants to prove

Sin, here's your sin Is you don't want everybody to be saved Which is not true Again, our command

Is to deliver the message to All men, everywhere Repent and believe

We're just not the ones It's not my wanting Somebody that changes anything And of course in his perspective

It has to totally be the person's wanting Because God wants everybody But he can't save Anybody without their cooperation

That's the essence of synergism And this is the worst form Most consistent form

Full on Pelagian No fallen Adam No total depravity And God doesn't know what's going to be happening tomorrow anyways

You don't want everyone to be saved I'm more loving than your God is Your God is pathetic

I'm more loving than your God is Your God is pathetic Well there you go

That's deep I want everyone to be saved I'm more loving than your

God is Because your God is a false God Your God is not omnipotent Your God is not omniscient

Who cares if your God Who cares if your God knows all the future Who cares if he has all power

Your God's not all loving So he's pathetic Your God is pathetic Again with the omnibenevolence argument

Oh yeah Undifferentiated omnibenevolence argument Yeah It's very very man centered

Again this is just Taking it all to its end My hope is that if you're a synergist

Watching this That you'll recoil from this And go oh wow Okay how do

I Keep from going there Consistently I mean literally

I hope Jesse Murrell helps you to see Where the problem is

According to you You're saying God can't give us free will You're saying God can't The Bible's what

I said before you Life and death choose life That means God is giving you free will Very very shallow

So Because God holds men accountable

And says choose life or death That means that you have autonomous Free will Okay it could be

Creaturally free will But I'm not going to go there because that messes up All my theology

And besides that I can't go there You have to have autonomous free will Because I've already denied that to my

God By denying him knowledge of future events So somebody's got to have it

And since God doesn't have it I guess mankind has to have it Wow What a mess

You know what you are? You are a You are a modern day Gnostic You have the spirit of antichrist

Jesus died for everyone You say no he didn't God wants everyone to repent You say no he doesn't God wants everyone to be saved

You say no he doesn't You have the spirit of antichrist If God is not omniscient what does he know then?

God's omniscient God knows all things that can be known Okay now to catch that I want to make sure because some of you haven't watched

The debates we've done with open theists We've done a few I did an unbelievable radio broadcast I think last year

That followed up on the one we did At Reformed Theological Seminary back in 2004

Somewhere around there Anyway But Open theists

And I've been sort of assuming everybody knows Open theists believe that God Does not know

Future events because the future does not exist He cannot know what does not exist And so there's a theory of time behind it

And of course it makes time Something outside the Creative act of God So there's all sorts of issues with it

Anyway And so God Especially God knows what he wants to do

And he can know that truly And he knows the past truly But He Cannot know

This is the whole reason it was developed Is to completely defend the concept of autonomous free will Creaturally free will

He cannot know What free creatures will do That's why he could not know that you and I would exist Because we are the result of thousands and thousands

And thousands of free choices I will marry her, I won't marry her Blah blah blah blah And so From the free

This perspective The open theist Believes that God knows what's true

But the future Is not a knowable object that is true So God doesn't know

What you're going to do tomorrow On September 10, 2001 God knew that a bunch of men

Planned to hijack planes the next day But he did not know whether it would happen or not Which means he

He doesn't have any idea when you're going to die Because there's lots of different factors Where you work

Could determine when you're going to die So he Your days were not written in his book

Nothing like that All that language is hyperbolic It just has to be done away with There's no basis for prophecy

Open theism is just a foreign concept And it Demonstrates once again how far

People are willing to go To defend a tradition The tradition being free will Rather than recognizing the

Bible says God has free will we have creaturely will When my will runs into God's will I lose because I'm a creature

I'm like the grass that Flourishes and then fades away The idea that my decisions constrain

God's Is just such a wonderful Illustration of If you can believe that The greatest formative

Power in your theology is Philosophy not scripture Not by a long shot

That's an alternative He said I said Is life and death an alternative He said

I said before you cursing and blessing That's an alternative So you're the one saying

God can't give us Free will I'm saying that God in his sovereignty Gave us a free will And that's biblical

Free will is a biblical term Jesus said if you sin you're a slave of sin You're a slave Read Romans chapter 3

Nobody wills to come to God The Bible says If your will's in bondage it's because you chose to be in bondage

It's called human responsibility The Bible says If your will's in bondage it's because you chose to be in bondage

In other words there's no Belief in a fallen nature No belief in being an Adam Federal headship, original sin

Again full on plagianism Which goes pretty well

With open theism That allows you to be just 1000 % man centered

God's just Just doing the best he can But there's really not much he can do

He's done the best he can But You yield yourself a servant of sin Or you yield yourself a servant of righteousness

It's your choice It says that no one seeks after God Not even one Where's free will Jesse If everyone has free will

Why doesn't everyone seek God That's what I'm saying By their free will they refuse to acknowledge God Yeah by their free will

They refuse to acknowledge God They need regeneration Which precedes faith In order to have faith in God You're saying they don't seek

God and it's not their fault They can't I'm saying they could seek God and they refuse to do so And that's why they're accountable

That's why they're responsible The Bible says as many as received him And that Greek word means to choose

As many as received him Now that's one of the things I wanted to stop at To refute that assertion

I hate when people Abuse the languages And Jesse Morrell is

Definitely guilty of abuse of the language So what you have

In verse 12 of John 1 As many as received him

To them he gave the right to become children of God Even to those who believe in his name Who were born not of blood nor the will of flesh nor the will of man

But of God And so what he's saying is that So as many as received him

To them he gave authority To become children of God And then in functioning positively

The ones believing in his name If you look up Lombano You will find a single entry

That says to choose The problem is that As Bauer, Donker, Arndt and Gingrich The standard current

Greek lexicon points out There is only one passage In the New Testament Where that is a possible meaning

And it's only a possible meaning And that is in Hebrews 5 .1

Which And of course Hebrews uses an exceptionally Classical Vocabulary And syntax as well

For every high priest Taken from among men Is appointed on behalf of men

And things pertaining to God In order to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins And there it's not eleban

It's a Participial form Lombanomenos And Numeric standard translates it taken

But there are Other translations that could say Chosen from among Men But it's obviously

Referring to the selection Of High priests

By God based upon Genealogy etc etc There is no

Parallel to eleban At John 1 There is no basis

For saying that that's what the word means There That is an abuse of the language

And I would just Simply suggest that When people encounter this man

Those of you who actually know the language Call him on it Because He's abusing the language

A lot of street preachers do that But Doesn't make it right As many as received him

To them he gave the right to become the children of God So the choice comes before the regeneration You have

You have the cart before the horse You have the cart Okay now a serious

A person who actually seriously wants to Derive their theology from scripture This is not how you do it

Um You want to ask fundamental questions Does the bible specifically

Differentiate Between You know can we be Specific and talk about regeneration

Is regeneration the same as being Saved Is that the same thing as being forgiven

Is that the same thing as being adopted in the family of God Being sanctified etc etc No obviously there are

Distinctions that have to be drawn And so you have to be careful What you read into any particular text

To determine what is being said here He specifically Um Here in verse 13

Um It's interesting The term born Is not

It's at the end of the sentence And it's being assumed

In light of The final phrase In john 1 13

Which is but From God were Regenerated were born

From God And the whole point of verse 13 Is to say

The it starts off with Hoy Which goes back to those who believe in his name To those who received him

And it says That they Uk ex haimaton Not from bloods

That is not of descent Your descent who your daddy Or mommy was Ude ek thelematos

Sarkos Neither from the will Of the flesh Ude ek thelematos

Andros Now some will argue Um One of these seems to be

Based upon the idea of Uh Parentage So the desire of a man

And then the other would be the choice Of a man And you could argue either direction

I would assume I mean personally Andros the use of that And making it contrast to Sarkos You can go

Either direction on that but the point is That the origination Of regeneration is

Only from God It is not From any

Human Categories whatsoever Parentage, desire Choice It does not come from those things

Especially when it says thelematos That's a term for will I mean thelematos

Is much more a term for will than Lombano is a term for choice By a long shot So there you go

That's Let's see what time I didn't realize we'd already been going for an hour Yeah yeah

We'll get a little It's just too easy It's like shooting ducks in a pond

Given When someone has so many heresies Together This is useful to see how

Heresy feeds into more heresy It's useful to see Because I'm always talking about The fact that Christian truth is a beautiful Woven fabric

Well this guy has cut about every thread of it there is And so you see The massive gaps opening up In the thread

In the garment because of the number of heresies So I'm just kind of wondering If Layton Flowers isn't frantically trying to find

This guy's telephone number Oh man Now another hour long program

Oh gosh, thanks Rich I didn't say it I didn't say it

I didn't say it You say first you need to be regenerated Then you can have faith

The Bible says first you need faith And through faith you're purified Through faith you are regenerated

Faith is the instrument by which we are saved You're saying we're saved prior to faith Yeah so do you think a person is

Did you catch that? He just conflated Saved and regenerated as if they're The identical same thing.

It's very common Very very common. People who don't understand The priority of regeneration The fact that scripture plainly says

That those who are according to flesh Cannot do what is pleasing to God Repentance and faith are actually pleasing to God No man is able to come to me unless the

Father sent me Draws him. That drawing is what Must precede And we're going to talk a little bit more

About that in a second, etc. etc. A person is born again by their deeds No, by faith

Not by works of the law We're not saved by works of the law, we're saved by faith But you don't have faith because you sin every day

You sin every day Where's your faith? According to 1 John If you listen to 1

John By your righteous deeds You're born again I didn't say we're saved by our deeds

Not by works of righteousness as we have done But by his mercy By his mercy did he save us

In 1 John chapter 2 and 1 John chapter 5 You need to have faith You need to stop sinning every day

Whenever you're involved in Whatever sin you're doing We're saved by grace through faith

I said faith is the instrument We're saved by grace through faith Not that of yourselves, it's a gift of God Not of works, at least any man should boast

The bounties were saved on two good works So why are you committing evil works? Faith is a choice

Jesus rebuked them For being slow of heart to believe Why would he rebuke them For being slow of heart to believe

So when you get to heaven Jesse, when you get to heaven It's going to your free will

So I'm not sure if that other guy back there Is like, you know, sort of like Joe Ventilacion's five guys

Running around with their books or something Hey, I got one here, try this Yeah, oh boy

Oh yeah, well Anyways, I mean, we're 19 minutes 19 and a half minutes, well actually it didn't start there

So we've, I think it was about 4 minutes So we're about 15 minutes in There's over 22 minutes left

Approximately there And I'm told That I got mentioned even more than that But hey, it's

There's just only so much time And I'll keep it here On the system in case

There's more interesting stuff to get to But it's just so very, very Useful To be able to Illustrate the kinds of Errors that come from Just constantly

Tearing apart Shredding The fabric of the consistency

Of Christian Revelation Sola Scriptura Tota Scriptura You've got to have both

And the Synergist Is Not able to do that And so again, we are thankful For those who are inconsistent among them

And by the grace of God I do not go off into that level Of wild -eyed

Heresy But there are those that do And so I would just pray that Even among some of you who

You know, there's all these people Oh we love you Mr. James, not really Not the Calvinism stuff, we love everything else you do

I've never understood that I've just never understood that Because it's

That's the whole consistency thing right there Yeah And so it makes me wonder

Sometimes what people are hearing Okay, real quick I want to get this done

Before we run out of time I've got lots and lots of stuff to do this afternoon So And I hope

By early next week to have the specifics Of Stuff from London As to where I'm going to be

And especially We're looking at a debate Hopefully I can give you the exact location

Which mosque it's going to be at The second or third of May So I hope

To have that information Even if some of it only comes as I get closer to it When I actually leave Because I leave a week from Friday We'll definitely try to get that information out there

So those of you in the London area Love seeing all of our London friends And especially when debating at mosques

It's nice when a whole group of You young guys Show up And that's really

Encouraging to me When you make the effort to get out there Now A couple things

Real quick Over the years we have responded to I think dozens

Of Attempted Of attempts

To get around The teaching of Jesus In John 6 35

To the end of the chapter That plainly teach The ultimate sovereignty

Of God in salvation There are Many It's just amazing

The facility of the human mind At coming up with new ways To get around what

Jesus said In those words And especially verse 44 Now A few years ago

There was a Roman Catholic kid That put out a video About John 6

And we spent a fair amount of time Taking it apart Based upon the language

Demonstrating what the errors were And then this kid just disappeared One day someone says

Hey did you notice that You know His entire channel is gone He's gone, boom

It happens Somebody gets a job, moves away Gets married, leaves the faith

I don't know Doesn't even leave any notes Well He's back

And I think he's trying to rebuild His audience And wants to use me to do that So I'm not going to play his stuff

Or identify him I'm just not going to be used To help him to accomplish

His goal Along those lines But what I will do

Is I will Look at The primary argument

Because we had some exchanges And he was just so childish And I had complained earlier

That his videos might be 20 minutes long But there's a minute and a half of argumentation

And there's 18 and a half minutes Of Fluff Doing cutesy

Graphic stuff And just It's just, it's not

The highest level when it comes to Maturity, let's put it that way Which unfortunately these days

Is very Attractive to many people Doing the plain old Talking head thing here

Even with the swords in the background Is not quite enough To keep everybody's

Attention But Here is the issue

As The argument is put forward He was arguing

I've never answered this And I can't answer this And I'm lying about John 6 and all the rest of this Silliness But this sort of Summarizes it

Right here Who is drawn By the Father Those who are given by the

Father to the Son And then, here's the assertion being made It's Roman Catholic As well as Anyone who was drawn by the

Father And was not given By the Father to the Son So this evidently is where I have gone wrong

Is in not Recognizing this Deep truth That there are multiple

Categories And that Because what

I have said Is that Jesus is Responding To unbelievers

You have seen me Yet you have not believed You are unbelievers That's what you get that introduces

All the Father gives me will come to me The one coming to me I will never cast out Why?

Because I've come down from heaven to do my Father's will Not my own will My Father's will is all he gives me

I lose none of it, raise it up on the last day They start grumbling, Jesus responds Don't grumble amongst yourselves

No one can come to me Unless the Father who sent me draws him And I will raise him up on the last day

So The drawing of the Father Is absolutely necessary For anyone to come to Christ And everyone thusly drawn

Is raised up on the last day That's what Jesus said No one can come to me

Unless the Father who sent me draws him And I will raise him Up on the last day

And the consistency Of this teaching Because you already had the consistency in 637 There's a specific people that are given by the

Father to the Son Jesus saves them and fall away That means he has to have the power to do so It's not a synergistic thing

Then it continues in verse 45 It is written in the prophets And they shall all be taught of God Everyone who has heard and learned from the

Father comes to me Everyone So To even assert

This idea that as well as Anyone who was drawn by the Father And was not given by the

Father to the Son There is no category Anywhere in John chapter 6 of this Nowhere This is derived from trying to Substantiate some type of theological system

Whatever else it might be If you just go through John There are unbelievers

Not given by the Father to the Son And that's why They don't come to the

Son Because they don't have the ability In and of themselves To come to the Son But those who are drawn by the

Father Are the same ones who were given By the Father to the Son Because Jesus saves those given to him

Up in 6, 37, 39 Perfectly And 44 raises them up on the last day

To eternal life Same thing, same group The normal Attempted way around this

Is for someone to drive a wedge Into verse 44 And say okay No one come to me unless the

Father sent me He draws him Wedge Insert human autonomy

And The whole assumption And if you're drawn then you have the choice to believe

And if you believe therefore I will raise him up on the last day So that allows someone to say

Well you can be drawn but not do the Free will part and therefore not be raised up On the last day So the two hims become different people

That's the normal way That it's done It doesn't work It's impossible

In the context itself But that's how most folks do it Instead of asserting

Well Who's drawn by the Father? Those who are given by the Father to the Son As well as Anyone who is drawn by the

Father And was not given by the Father to the Son Which would actually mean everybody

When you think about it Because it's asking Who is drawn by the Father? Those given by the

Father to the Son and those not given by the Father to the Son That's everybody That doesn't make any sense

It's not coming from the text It's not derived from the text Of course he's a Roman Catholic It doesn't have to be derived from the text

He has an authority above Scripture That can contradict Scripture And functions as a filter so that you can't even see what's in Scripture That's the whole nature

I've been watching Some of the interaction That people have had with Matt Walsh recently

He was on CrossPolitik Now, by the way, CrossPolitik guys I saw somewhere

I didn't catch this part I only heard a part of it You didn't refer to him as a brother, did you? That would be something

We might want to talk about Next month Because Matt Walsh Is a

Roman Catholic Matt Walsh does not preach the Gospel of Grace And so He does not believe in Sola Scriptura He rejects

Sola Scriptura And the result of that is very clearly seen In his apologetic methodology

He does not see the necessity Of a presuppositional approach He does not see the necessity of dealing with the fallenness of man and sin

Man has sufficient capacity In and of himself to judge The Word of God All these things

That comes from Matt Walsh being a Roman Catholic Well, this guy we're talking about Is a Roman Catholic as well And therefore you get the external authorities

And hence the reason why you overthrow Any meaningful form of exegesis Any consistent form

Of exegesis Now, interestingly enough In the

Comments Somewhere It was in Twitter Comments About this other fellow

I ran into Somebody Who linked to an article And said, this is a great response here

It's short And I looked at it and I just went Really?

Okay Let's talk about it Let's get it done It's from Redeeminggod .com

And Let me see if Yeah, Jeremy Myers Jeremy Myers And I don't see

I don't see a date On this It wasn't really Long, but I just didn't see

A date on it. Anyway So Jeremy Myers writes What does Jesus mean in John 6 44

When he says, no one can come to me unless their father draws him And so he's trying to say that Calvinists Didn't get this right

And like I said, it's from Redeeminggod .com I'm not sure what in the world that's supposed to mean

But basically what he says Is The Calvinists are wrong Primarily for two reasons

The first indication he says Is in John 6 66 When some of those

Who were following Jesus Did in fact turn away and stop following If Jesus loses none of those who come to him

How is it that some of those Who came to him stop following him Now again

You know I'm not saying this is anywhere near One of the best responses we've ever seen

Because it clearly isn't But it does Really prompt you to go

Did you read the text Because It's sort of like Oh okay, so since Some of these people

Went away I mean here specifically As a result of this Now let me back up and tell you

Verse 65 Seems to have been missed By Mr. Myers And he was saying

And I think the imperfect there Means this was a repetitive thing He kept repeating this He was saying

For this reason I said to you That no one is able to come to me Unless it has been granted to him

Given to him By the Father Ectutu Because of this

Many of his Disciples went away From following after And were no longer walking with him

So Why do you assume that these people

Were given by the Father and the Son in the first place Just because They Were following after him

Listening to his teachings The Gospel of John talks about People a number of times

In John chapter 2 There are people that saw Jesus' miracles Ooh this guy is cool But John chapter 2 says

Jesus was not entrusting himself to them Because he knew it was in the heart of man They weren't real believers

John chapter 8 There are people who see him refute the Jews And they're like ooh he's cool

It even says they believed in him By the end of the chapter they're picking up stones to stone him So Just because there are people

Who are following around listening That is not the same thing as being given By the Father and the Son Which becomes very painfully obvious In Jesus' conversation with the disciples

For even though they're confused They remain with him So does Judas And Judas is clearly not one of the elect

But he is the son of perdition And he has a purpose to fulfill In the sovereignty of God Again Once you abandon

That element Of biblical revelation Nothing is going to make any sense

But then he says the next verse Is what really proves it

Is that after Peter says we have believed and have come to know That you are the Holy One of God Verse 70 Here's what it says

The second indication that something else might be going on Is found in John 6 .70 Calvinists who like to cite

John 6 .44 And some of the other verses in this chapter As proof for their doctrine of unconditional election

Almost never cite John 6 .70 Except those of us Who write entire chapters on the subject

Where we go through the whole thing Jesus answered them Did I myself not choose you, the twelve,

And yet one of you is a devil? So Jesus chooses the twelve

He keeps them, John chapter 17 Is going to make that clear Judas is functioning as The son of perdition

By God's sovereign choice To his destruction And to the benefit of the world Through the crucifixion

Because it was prophesied this would happen And what does this have to do with what Jesus said?

Why are you assuming That Judas was given by the father to the son For his salvation

When John never says that And John very clearly Says otherwise

See In both of these There is a Unfounded assumption That if you ever show interest in Jesus And follow him around and listen to his teaching

Or if you're the son of perdition This means that You were given by the father to the son

And therefore it can't really mean What Calvinists say that it means Now again

Inconsistent? Yeah Bad argumentation? Yeah But this kind of stuff is out there

And we've just made a habit Over the past 20 years Or so Or more

Goodness, when did John by the father come out? That would have been 91 We're coming up on 30 years

Oh my goodness Your beard is pretty white So is mine

Anyways Been doing this a long time And so we've just been sort of collecting these things

And it's just amazing The lengths to which people go To try to get around What contradicts their tradition

So there you go Jumbo edition of the program today Radio Free Geneva Lord willing

We will have two programs next week as well And then I'm off to the UK and the Netherlands Please pray for us

Help support us Travel fund always helps Got lots of stuff going on Thanks for watching, we'll see you next time