December 9, 2004

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five three Three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white. Well, good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line. It is December 9th. Hey, just that picture on the on the blog I love my new blog yet. That is so much fun I get the feeling from what I'm being told that I'm not actually going to be using the particular client software Using For forever.

We're looking for for something else because I had that joy last night. There's only only those of you who have ever coded HTML know what I'm talking about here. But if you look at the blog today and those of you listening to archives, it's sort of irrelevant but there is a on December 8th, there is a table and it is a table on acts 1348 and the translations of acts 1348 by 10 major Translations that were done by committees, you know by groups of scholars rather than by a single person and It's sort of relevant to Dave hunts playing around with x 1348 and and really when you think about it questioning the perspicuity and clarity of Scripture and Sowing doubts in people's minds as to the clarity of Scripture.

It's a sad thing that that you would do in defense of your traditions. But anyway, I was trying to put that together and It took forever because you can tell it put it in a table. But then you have to cut and paste every single little thing in there.

And then I had to cut and paste attributes of font In there and it was a long it was a labor of love. So if you if you enjoyed the little table on x 1348 Realize that took me a long time To put together because my client at the moment just went okay.

Here's a table put everything in and So it just takes well anyway the Picture above that however above the Islamic apologetics and New Testament transmission is for those of you thinking about, Alaska in 2005 there is a picture there right now that I took from the front of the Volendam Which is a Holland America ship that I was on last That September I think it was September of 2003 as We very slowly Glided into Glacier Bay.

There's only two lines that go into Glacier Bay princess in Holland America, that's my understanding anyway, and In fact the only reason there's any ripples in the water at all in front of us is there was another ship That went another direction and we sort of switched places at one point but that gives you an idea because some of you've probably been looking at that that Alaska picture on the Advertisement in the ad column and going that no place like that exists.

That was that's been painted and that's not real and nope the picture next to it proves. Yep. That's real and That was taken by my little teeny-tiny Digital camera. I have a better one now. But it was not a bad not a bad picture at all and I got a number of others While I was out there, it was a little bit on the nippy side.

There's no two ways about that. But it was just absolutely positively Beautiful up there and we will be seeing that and Hubbard Glacier and then the place in the picture to the right Which is College Fjord on that that trip and it is just absolutely incredible so if you've been thinking about it and You're thinking about that or some other goofy thing For Christmas or something give yourself a real Real enjoyable time and come with us up to Alaska next summer August 29th, I believe through September 5th and so I just want to put that picture up there to prove that the place exists and It is truly truly a gorgeous thing.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying doing the blog some of you may have noticed somewhat of a blog Explosion, but that's because you will notice it is a real blog now and it became realer today. If you scroll down to the bottom you see we now have the categories and You can search the blog articles now now, unfortunately, I know that's just since the beginning of December.

Wow bang, I think I hope no one's busting into the office out there. It was a big bang. You can still go to the other archives the pre -2004 archives and Search those the old-fashioned way but as this art this blog grows then you'll be able to use the search blog articles feature and That'll be very very very useful.

We just closed the door that's all sound like a m1 Abrams tank closed the door. Just it was just sort of rattled everything in here. So anyway, I'm really enjoying doing that and right now we have two major threads.

I'm doing some of you know that we've been responding to Dave Hunt and his new version of what love is this and Then we also are doing a series on Responding to a article by some Islamic apologists on the transmission of the text of New Testament that is very relevant by the way to the Cruz and the topic next year and to the issue of the Da Vinci Code and all the rest that stuff and sometimes this is the kind of stuff that people skip over because it's not flashy and You have to do some thinking and things like that, but to be honest with you What I'm discussing here is the very same foundational issues that we would be discussing in dealing with scripture alone and responding to all sorts of attacks upon scripture from all sorts of different different directions and so I would recommend it to you as As I seek to present that Islam do they believe in procrastination?

Um, I'm good grief. Where do you start with something like that? So anyways, that's what's going on. I hope you all will avail yourself of that. We began a review a few weeks ago. Was it a week ago week and a half ago?

Yeah, you never can remember Listening to the response by mr. Powers on the subject of John chapter 6 you may recall that That I mentioned a I've frequently mentioned from my perspective that I have never heard a meaningful contextually based non-isagetical interpretation of John chapter 6 especially the Capernaum section which is the last half of the chapter.

Last two-thirds of chapter actually I think about the Capernaum section where Jesus is speaking with unbelieving Jews in the synagogue in Capernaum and I continue to say that I have seen some people Roll their eyes.

I have had some people mock me for saying that it is a true Statement and I have yet to have anyone Sit down with me and show me that I am wrong about that and The vast majority of people who've disagreed me about that Clearly have not looked at nearly as many interpretations on the past as I have so I have made that statement I've gone through John 6 many times wrote a book a number of years in the sub go on the subject called drawn by the father addressed John 6 and the Potter's freedom God's sovereign grace debating Calvinism and So Obviously people want to try to find some way to get around John chapter 6 and so we've been listening to a fellow By name, mr. Powers who provided a response on his Program, I guess it sort of sounds like he's I Don't know how often does it actually it sounds a little bit the quality as such it sounds like it was recorded off of pal talk or something I and Bob I Neatly have to like, you know, I feel like cleaning myself after saying pal talk.

It's just a But anyway, that's what we began listening to a few weeks ago or two weeks ago we can have go Don't remember what it is now but we had gotten about 12 minutes and 23 seconds into the program and of course I have been starting and stopping and Responding to these assertions as they are made and So we will continue with that hopefully he of the great power on the other side of the wall has the Computer ready to rock and roll because I'm about to about to hit it.

Here we go.

John 6, Whosoever, and the Meaning of Believing

We see that time after time after time in the gospel John whosoever.

Shall believe. Now, of course we mentioned I believe at the very end of the last time we were reviewing this that one of the major problems that you deal with when you talk with people who are monolingual they have they only know one language is That they assume that what they read in the Bible was written in their language or at least that the translation brings into it all.

Of the meaning of that terminology as it would be used today. What that then allows you to do is to smuggle your tradition into the text. When you talk about whosoever Over and over and over again you talk with people who assume a certain meaning of that word.

We've seen this with Dave Hunt. Dave Hunt even went so far as counting the uses of whosoever in Strong's Exhaustive concordance and we have pointed out how that is is completely misleading that you cannot study Whosoever in Strong's Exhaustive concordance because whosoever in the English language Very frequently represents a number of different Constructions in the original languages and especially in Greek.

There is no word whosoever for example in John 316 and There is that there's no term there that is simply translate it comes from How you have to smooth out the relationship of all the ones believing.

The idea is that there is no such thing as a believing one Who does not receive eternal life so whosoever that is. Anyone who does the action believing it says nothing? about whether or not a person has the capacity or ability to believe outside of Regeneration or anything else the same at all.

That's that's just completely and totally missing what the whole point is there is no Greek word whosoever in John 316 or these other passages it comes from all and then a verb and and you have different forms.

You simply can't throw these things out. I'm getting distracted by a rather talkative person in the channel that's asking what translation I use. I use Greek and Hebrew okay I mean you know. You know if normally I preach the numeric standard, but that matter so we'll just end that one right there, okay?

So we continue with the discussion here.

And when we're reading these scriptures we have to understand. Jesus of course is God. He speaks eternal truth both now and future. Right. So when we read scriptures like verse 37 All that the father gives me will come to me and the one who comes to me.

I was certainly not cast out if I'm not getting the real sense.

I'm not getting the real sense. There's a lot of excitement here about John 637. Just sort of like well Jesus said it yeah, let's talk about what it means. I mean the the meaning of the text is actually very very clear.

We mentioned when we started this that you know it's not difficult to translate this and it's you know. It's not much in way of textual variation and and so on so forth and it's like just tell us what it means.

We're going to take Calvinism.

The belief that God has predestined certain people before the world ever was to eternal life. Or eternal damnation if we're going to take that in its entirety and make it true.

But no wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute most of you caught again the mistake of making the two equals one another. Predestination is a positive thing it involves the exercise of God's grace and salvation of unworthy sinners.

If you want to talk about the issue of those who are going to be under God's punishment for eternity at least use the right term and that is Reprobation if you want to even go there, but they are not equal things because it does not take an exercise of God's power grace to Put that person in that position, but you know you don't get that kind of fair representation most time.

Anyways, but. Why can't we just follow John 637 isn't interesting. I can just simply allow John 637 following to mean what it means. I don't need to make reference to Calvin. But when our minions respond to it that spend their entire time trying to get emotions up in people's thinking.

It can't mean this because that might mean that your favorite aunt Bessie is condemned. Isn't exactly George Bryson did in the debate over and over in California his whole closing statement was this man's telling you the person sitting next to you might be going to hell.

And there's nothing that anyone can do about it. All this this emotional get the heart going get the mind going let's not get into the text of Scripture type of a situation then. In essence.

It really doesn't matter what man believes in the first place because he's already been programmed to believe. Well.

That's all very nice. We understand that mr. Powers does not understand reformed theology, and and he doesn't like reformed theology, and he has his traditions and and He wants to use terms that have nothing to do with what we believe programmed.

And it doesn't matter we believes we he doesn't understand the issue that God is busy. Creating a people in Christ Jesus who know Christ is so what they believe is very important that he uses secondary means hence the proclamation of the gospel and and the necessity of proclaiming the the true gospel and and all the rest that kind of stuff, but what does this have to do with John 637.

I Can't find out.

Therefore there is no responsibility.

Okay, well, you know this is very common. There's there's no responsibility unless you have libertarian freedom. You you know the the whole issue of compatibilism. No one's gonna get any idea here that mr.. Powers has ever dealt with Isaiah chapter 10 Genesis 20 acts.

For you know I would like to ask mr.. Powers so was pilot Responsible for what he did in the crucifixion of Christ and When you then go to acts for this is what God's hand predetermined predestined to take place.

Well, then he can't be responsible. He was just a robot right. Well obviously not. Therefore. This whole thing doesn't really make any sense. Does it. Yes. Well anyway?

Therefore man of himself is not it truly accountable to God. Because this is the way that he was made. So I guess what I'm saying is this. This is an interesting passage of Scripture.

Yep, yeah, it's a it's an interesting passage of Scripture, but so far. We haven't had any Attempt made it actually exegeting this now. I can't imagine that Kelly Powers would do this with Colossians 2 9 John 1 1 Philippians 2 5 to 11.

If he was talking about Jehovah's Witnesses would he do any of this. Of course not? But here we come to clear obvious language and Why can't a Clear interpretation be offered. And when you whenever you run into someone who does this it's really simple this is where their traditions are.

Clearly put on display. Clearly put on display, but it's not isolated by itself. What do I mean by that. Because he looked at verse 40 where this is the will of my father's everyone? Who beholds a son and Believes in him.

So number one people are going to be looking and they must also believe there is Responsibility that is required and you know I.

Can't completely blame mr.. Powers for this when people on the level of Norman Geisler do this but again Let's transport this out of the area and put in another area if if a Jehovah's Witness came to mr. Powers and He wanted to interpret Colossians 2 9 For in him all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form by skipping four verses down the way.

Reading something there, and then reading it back into Colossians 2 9 would mr.. Powers allow him to do so answer. I hope not. I Hope he would say no wait a minute. This is a narrative. This is a text and if you have to jump down Come up with something and then read it back into this that's called Isis that is putting the text on its head remember especially in John 6 these are the words of Jesus to people who are Standing in front of him and how many of us Say something and then ramble on for a little while longer, and then we finally get to the thing that would make the previous thing understandable.

That's what is being assumed here. Is that no one could really understand John 637 everybody stood there with their mouths hanging open catching flies? Because they had to wait to John 640 off off all that now it makes sense.

This is exactly what Norm Geisler did to jump down to verse 40 ignore the flow of the thought and Then insert your tradition verse 40. Oh see. People are looking and people are believing and therefore it means everybody can do it.

And there's no election and so I'll read that back into verse 37 though that doesn't really do anything for you. But I'll read that back in verse 37. No, that's not what you do with a biblical text. You don't do that with anything other than a passage that is dealing with the subject of Predestination election, but if you allow The text to speak for itself All that the father gives me will come to me the father has Sovereign authority to give a people to the son and when the father does so infallibly all those so giving comes the son and The one who comes to me I will certainly not cast out the one coming its present tense the one coming to me who is the one coming to me?

It's explained the preceding in the preceding phrase. The one who has been given by the father's the father gives a certain people the son. They come to the son and Jesus says he will certainly not cast out the one who is coming to him.

Why will he not cast out? The one who is coming to him for I've come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who Sent me he has come to do the will of the father and what is the will of father verse 39?

This is the will of him who sent me that of all that he has given me. There's the giving me. You have to make the direct connection back to verse 37 that of all that he has given me I Lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.

So the father's will for the son is of all that he's given me. He lose nothing, but raises up in the last day. That's why they all come to him. That's why they are never cast out. It is because the son will infallibly do the will of the father and it is only then Having established That truth That he says for this is the will of my father.

So we had the will of him who sent me is That the son lose nothing that he's been given but raised up in the last day. Now that's Christ's part. But did not it say all the father gives me will come to me the one coming to me I will certainly not cast out.

Here's here's how you demonstrate. We're not robots That we are not mere puppets on a string. We are coming to Christ. The true believer is a person who is always coming to Christ. For this is the will of my father that everyone who beholds the Sun that's beholding present.

That's the one gazing upon the Sun and believing in him will have eternal life. Now who's going to do that? There's nothing in this text That says oh. Everybody can do that. Everybody can do that. There's nothing in the text whatsoever that says that.

So instead if you allow the text to define this who is it who? Beholds and believes the Sun who is it that has eternal life? Well the one who's been given by the father of the Sun and as a result of that is coming to the Sun.

Before I had this defined you don't go to 40 read into it whosoever whosoever whosoever. And then just use that to explain why you're really not dealing with verses 37 and following. For this is the will of my father everyone who beholds the Sun there is no one there is no one Who has this kind of faith that will not be saved.

There is no one who believes in him who will not have eternal life. Nobody. Very often reformed theology is misrepresented as if there are people who want to believe. I want to believe. But but I'm not elect and so I can't I want to believe but God's keeping me from doing that.

That's not true. That is not true. Don't you dare cast that aspersion on God the will the father? Is that everyone who beholds the Sun who is beholding him and believing him will have eternal life every single one of them?

Why. Because the only ones who do so are those are given by the father the son and he will lose none of them. That's why they have eternal life. And if you don't believe that you've just swung the door wide open to every form of works salvation there is.

Every form it's right there as soon as we lose track of the fact that it is the son who saves it is the father. Who draws the son it's the son who raised up the last day. The gospel is Trinitarian the gospel is sovereign as soon as you lose track of that.

It's all over with you've opened the door and it'll it'll come in in different forms. It'll look differently, but you've opened the door to work salvation. Everyone who beholds the Sun believes in him will have eternal life and I myself will raise him up on the last day.

Is that not direct parallel to 39? I will raise him up on the last day. Who is this him? He is one of those who has been given to the Sun that the Sun will not lose. You see that's interpreting the text as the text was spoken and as the text is written.

That's allowing the text to define its terms in the order in which the text itself Presents them if you're gonna jump down to 40 and then jump back to 37. You need to give a reason why and Nobody can because there's no reason to other than your tradition other than I said Jesus other than refusing To listen to what Jesus said.

In other words doing exactly what the Jews did back then who ended up walking away upon them.

It says in verse 44 now, let's go down to it here. No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day. I want to focus in on this verse right now. I want to focus in on this.

Because this is the foundation verse for Calvinism this is used time after time James White uses all the time. Yep, in fact, actually I've heard him say many times that he says that he's never heard a Meaningful response of John 6.

Yep, and he believed that this is clearly in reference to the elect if only the elect The chosen of God are the ones who are going to respond. Yep, and I really have to say I don't understand how James White can come to that conclusion myself or a tradition.

Tradition other Calvinist now for the record. I find that there are things that James White at Alpha and Omega ministries. That are very solid. Thank you. He has shared some really good things in the past things on Mormons Jehovah Witnesses Roman Catholicism and other things out there the King James only debate.

He has given solid information out there so thank you in one Aspect I tip my hat to James White. Thank you, because he's shared some really good things when it comes to apologetics.

But now we get ready for the other. And you know Kelly Fowler's, you know, brother, I hope you listen and It is ain't the first time believe you me this is not the first time. That's uh that I hear this I will never never forget I was speaking in Somewhere near Chicago in many been in Chicago proper one of the suburbs, you know how it is and I Was trying to get something eat.

I Just love how this works. I really love this works. I had a very brief period of time before I was gonna have to speak again, and I hadn't had a chance to eat and So somebody somebody brought me back some Arby's well, unfortunately by time to get back it was cold Arby's which is bad enough.

Okay, I mean especially curly fries. Let me tell you something you need warm curly fries. Okay, so I wasn't even trying to get them down. I was trying to eat the sandwich anyways, so I get something so that you don't hear your stomach rumbling over the PA system, it's terrible and So I'm sitting here and here somebody comes and plops themselves down right in front of me.

Now may I mention something to folks, you know When you see somebody speaking You know, you see a speaker. It's just absolutely amazing how many folks just Don't get the idea that you know what sometimes that person would like to like eat.

Or if you know, they're they're bent over their text and they're reading and they're speaking next maybe they're preparing so many people just jump on top of you and They they want you to answer every theological question they have ever had with your mouth full and You know what?

It's just rude. It's just you know, it really is rude and yet It's amazing how many of our brothers and sisters and Lord don't even give it a second thought just hey, he's alone let's get him ah, you know and So this fella plops down across from me while I'm sitting here trying to eat.

And I don't like trying to eat and talk to folks. I went to a college once and After I spoke in Chapel They said that they were gonna have lunch With me and I walk in and they have all the tables in a row and then there's one table facing all the others.

And I'm supposed to sit there during lunch and answer their questions while trying to eat. I Get even more torture because you're sitting over a plate of hot food, but you can't eat it because everybody's asking you questions.

And so you're not just doing well, you're an old Calvin's bed. Just sometimes I just go Wow. Well are people thinking anyways and so Anyway, I'm sitting there trying to get my beef and cheddar down and The guy starts off, you know.

Really enjoy your work really appreciate what you've done a Mormon and basically it was just like we just hurt and I knew the other foot was going. The other the other boot was gonna fall the shoe was gonna fall.

I was there was gonna be a buck coming here and I knew what it was gonna be. But don't know how I did. But I knew is what was gonna be the guy says really really appreciate a lot of what you did. I just you know, I just wish you weren't reformed just wish you weren't a Calvinist and You know, I try to be a nice guy even though I'm eating my beef and cheddar and and I just sort of smile and You know what?

I want to say is I don't understand that. How can you appreciate letters to a Mormon elder? It's reformed for crying out loud. It I don't understand that It being Reformed being a Calvinist to use that terminology Is part and parcel of everything I do so, how can you say I Like a lot of what you do just wish you weren't reformed, you know, I'm sorry.

But it's all part and parcel the same thing. It's foundational to all of it. I've Anyway, it I've just never understood it and I you know, I'm thankful. Mr. Powers has benefited from some of the things we've done here, but The problem is mr. Mr. Powers is ice eating this text of Scripture and Mr. Powers is promoting a tradition rather than the exegesis of the text and if mr. Powers was promoting something Similar in regards to an improper view of the Trinity or the deity of Christ I would hope he would want me to correct him on that.

Well, that's what we're doing here on this, too and I I really hope that mr. Powers does not use this kind of Circular jump here jump there type of Interpretation of Scripture when he's dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses or with Mormons.

Or with the Roman Catholics or Muslims or whatever the things he listed there I hope he doesn't and in fact, I bet he doesn't.

Which is what proves that we're really dealing with the tradition. When it comes to this issue of Calvinism, I'm quite surprised to be honest with you because there are a lot of shocked Circular reasoning and very personal comments that he uses like why defend Calvinism against other people like what specifically the book that?

I've read through When he has a debate with Dave Hunt Called five points two views debating Calvinism. Wow.

Where was the personal stuff in that one? Hmm?

And I encourage people to read it. You can see both sides of the coin. You can read exactly The side of Calvinism and you can see the exact opposite of Calvinism In reference to what people believe about free will.

Unless you're Chuck Krismeier.

And you'll be disappointed that Dave Hunt is too Calvinistic for you. That's those who didn't hear that you those who did know exactly. I'm talking about that God's will that.

Anyone can be saved not just Certain people who are the elect that God has willed to believe therefore Forcing them to believe and that.

Therefore forcing we already commented on the misuse of that term. But it is fascinating. Again every time I hear this thankfully I haven't gotten so Tired of this that I just just give up on it. Because I understand how that could happen to somebody.

You know when I hear Kelly Powers I hear a young guy. I'd like to try to encourage his desire to do apologetics. I just feel that if you're gonna do apologetics you have to be consistent, and I've been you know what I can say that with a very Open Recognition that I've said that to many people I've paid the price to be able to say that I've paid the price.

But I have told many people that and it's cost me a lot that if you're going to do apologetics you need to be consistent and I don't believe Arminianism is consistent with scripture. Arminianism is the the blending of man's philosophies with with proof texts.

And you can't be responding to Joseph Smith's doing the same thing when you're doing that yourself at least consistently and So that's why you respond to this kind of stuff, and you'll notice that there's there's no Self-consciousness on mr.. Powers part that he has a tradition and The role that that plays as if he has to defend his viewpoint.

I Believe everybody can be saved. Well certainly God has the power to do that. But in reality what you're saying is God does not have the power to save anyone outside of their assistance. That God is trying to save everyone and failing to save.

How many I don't know I? Don't know. But he's failing. For a lot of folks he's trying and he's failing. Is that really mr.. Powers. Is that what you want to believe? Do you really want to believe? That God is trying to save and failing to save.

And if you believe that why do you pray for anyone because isn't God already doing his best? Hasn't God already put out a Absolute total effort to save every single person, and if that's true, then why are you praying for them?

I mean you may be going well. I would why would Calvinist pray because when I pray for somebody else I'm not trying to convince God to be better than he is. But I'm changed in the process. And I may end up very well getting the blessing of being used By God to bring about his will in the salvation of his like people.

How is he failing. We have a we have an Arminian in channel. Let me explain it because if that's not clear then I need to explain it. If mr.. Powers position is true then God the Father has Decreed to try to save every single individual in the world.

Has he not. If there's no election. If there's no choice of specific people then God's trying to save everybody. He didn't really put out much effort outside of Israel for a long time. Did he. Isn't that odd.

But anyway leaving that aside God the Father's trying. Jesus has died and he's trying and he's interceding for every single person the spirit is Convicting and trying to bring people to believe. God's put out a hundred percent effort.

He wants to save but he fails. It's his intention to. It's his intention to he doesn't decree he offers. Wow. That's not what I see in John 6 all the father gives me will come to me. That sounds like um that sounds like something it's certain.

It does not say all that the father gives me I will offer for them to come to me. It's just amazing when you take these the answers from our minions and and and put them into into scripture. That's just it makes no sense it just makes Makes the text mean nothing.

Let me just do one more a little quick section here. And then we'll we've got a caller.

We need to talk to as the Bible also says in Matthew 7 if Jesus if what Jesus said is true Jesus said wide is the road that leads to destruction, right? Many enter it. Narrow is the way that leads to eternal life.

If God is the author of all of our salvation Then God is responsible for creating the vast majority of human of the human race.

Then the hell boy have we heard that one before I I dealt with that very statement On the Chuck Krismeier show did I not? Did I not point out that there are a vast number surrounding the throne that no man can number they forget that part.

But did you catch that statement, I hope you heard that If God is in charge of all of salvation see. There's the difference. There's the difference. The Arminian has a man-centered gospel, that's all there is to it.

It's man-centered man's in charge of it. Man controls it. Why doesn't man get the the glory for it? Why should anyone glorify? God. For failing all the time. It just doesn't seem to me that mr. Powers has thought through the other side.

He's only heard one side of the story is going. Oh, I don't I don't like the idea that God would God would select certain people that I mean, they don't unconditionally. You mean like Israel? Well, that's different why.