Ergun Caner 2005 Clips

Nah, let's not, but then a part of me says, look, when faced with bullies and when faced with those who simply will not speak the truth, what are you supposed to do?

If you back down, you back down, I suppose. But cannot help but, well, yesterday, or day before yesterday,

I wanted to, Jason Smathers posted the videos, with better sound, to Eric Cantor's lectures to the

Marines from April of 2005. As some of you may know, over the weekend,

I received a notification from YouTube that one of our videos documenting the lies of Eric Cantor, specifically where people were saying, he just made misstatements, and so we took a lecture of his and we played these quote -unquote misstatements and demonstrated they were not misstatements, it was not somebody who said something too quickly and said something wrong.

It was part and parcel of the very fabric of his assertion. And that video is not currently available.

It will be again. We will dispute this. We just need to do it the right way, and we'll get it back up there in the proper way.

It is obviously an act of gross dishonesty, gross deception, on the part of whoever filed this.

It says Eric Cantor, but it could have been a third party representing Eric Cantor, who is attempting, and a number of people, a number of different channels received these,

I think they're called DMCA notices, and Eric Cantor would not care if all of the material that we have, which

Muslims see across the world, were to be taken down just to protect his lives. He would not care about that.

What does that tell you? What does that tell you about Eric Cantor and his priorities? It is an amazing, amazing thing, but remember, only a few weeks ago, back in May, Eric Cantor was saying, hey,

I've been exonerated, I've been examined, and I have been exonerated.

I am absolutely innocent, I repudiate everything, those colleagues who are friends found me innocent, three schools looked at all, finding exonerated, false accusations nor sins,

I says, this is Cantor saying, I will not repent for their false accusations nor sins

I did not commit, ever. So his followers, who back in 2010 were saying, oh, you just need to be nice,

Dr. Cantor, because he's already repented, he said he was sorry, he's confessed, you need to be nice.

He seems to have forgotten about that. Or you were wrong in the first place, and he never did, which is probably more likely the case.

Anyway, when these videos were reposted, I started listening to them, and I don't think

I ever went through these on the air. I think by the time that they were available, we had pretty much documented everything, and they were starting to become a bit of a

Cantor overload, and I don't think we ever went through them. So in light of the fact that the 2006 presentation, which demonstrated that these were not misstatements, has been temporarily taken down, and I'm sure that Ergon Cantor is just gleeful about that.

These videos, which I posted on the blog yesterday, these videos come directly from the

United States Marine Corps, and they are not copyrighted. No claim can be made that these violate someone's copyright.

Just can't be done. And so there they are. What's Cantor going to do about it?

Now remember, what is it like to claim to be a Christian and to have spent years trying to clean the internet of your lies rather than admitting you lied?

What is that like? What is it like to contact churches and say, could you take this sermon down? Could you take the recordings of this

Bible conference down, please? And what's it like to go to places to speak and say,

I need to make sure that this isn't being recorded? You know, what?

I don't, I cannot even begin to conceive of it. I cannot conceive of what it's like to live that kind of a life.

I really can't. So before we get back to, I'm going to get back to the Calvinist Call -In

Show and Michael Brown's show. I promised Brian that I will play the entirety of his call today.

He's nervous about that for some reason, but I said last time I was going to play the entirety of the call and then we'll move on from there.

But before we get to that, I want to just again allow

Eric and Kanter, we weren't able to find it in time of the program, but if you go back to just a few, literally weeks ago, a few months ago, when the

Ankerberg Show started putting out its series, the new series, with Ergin and Ymir Kanter, in the very first one, one of the things that I noted was it was like, well, you know, they're sons of a

Muslim who were born, Ergin was born in Sweden and moved to Ohio, and I'm like,

I wonder what happened to where they had to start telling the right story. What happened to being born and raised in Turkey?

And all that kind of stuff. I wonder why they're telling a different story now. Well, it's obvious.

We forced them to tell a different story. The very people that they now are trying to bury, that they call false brothers and false accusations and all the rest of the stuff, those very people are the ones who forced them to stop lying in that way, without ever admitting it, without ever admitting it.

And so here from 2005, let's just listen to some of the things. Now remember, this is extremely important for one simple reason.

The room is filled with Marines. Marines, military personnel, many of whom are going to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in 2005.

And here's a man, they've been told by their colonel that he is a former

Muslim, that he was raised as a jihadi. They think this guy's telling them the inside scoop of how these people think.

And he's a kid that grew up in a divorced home. The first divorce decree was when he was eight stinking years old.

His mother did not continue in Islam, according to his brother, and hence would have only been exposed to Islam during visits with his father.

And even the colonel's telling him that he moved here when he was 14. No, he moved here when he was two and grew up outside of Ohio.

Outside of a town in Ohio. And yet all the lies are in this presentation.

All of them. They're all here. Which Ergin Kanter now either says, I never said it. Some of his supporters say, all those videos are edited.

Folks, this video, I just saw Jason posted, and I'm going to ask Jason, did you post on your blog the pictures of the

DVDs? Because you linked to it. And I'll watch the channel when he, it takes about a 30 second delay or they can get back to me.

But I've seen the picture of the DVDs from the United States Marine Corps. Are you telling me the

Marines edited these videos? But there are actually people that are so dedicated to this man.

So blind that they'll actually go, well, those things have been edited.

Yeah, Jason says he did link to it long ago. So the links are on his website. So you can see the actual

DVDs themselves as they were sent by the United States Marine Corps. So you could tell me these have been edited?

Don't think so. Don't think so. All right. Let's, let's just listen. Like I said,

I'll let you spend the last portion of the program on the Calvinist Call -In Show. But let's just, let's just listen to what, remember,

I, I wouldn't have done this, except that Eric Encanter is now trying to use, deceptively, he's lying about copyright stuff.

The video they took down is textbook fair use, textbook fair use.

But we're going to make sure we got all our ducks in a row. So when it goes back up, it's going to stay up. But it's

Eric Encanter who has started to try to rewrite history. It's Eric Encanter who is being aided in this.

He could never have gotten away with this if Liberty had done the right thing when they let him go. Never could have gotten away with it.

Couldn't have gotten away with it except that Norman Geisler posted that series of absurd excuses defending him.

Could never have gotten away with it if Veritas Theological Seminary didn't just close its eyes and become Pravda Theological Seminary.

All of these things. He has been aided by the good old boy network, so he still stands behind pulpits lying through his teeth to this very day.

To this very day. It is shocking. It is shocking, but that is what is going on.

Let's listen to what. Now, here's the kernel. Now, this first one, I'm going to crank the crank the volume up here because the guy introducing him gives all sorts of falsehoods about him.

Now, I'm not blaming him. He's going with the information he's been given, I'm sure.

But the first thing, if these were misstatements, how come the kernel's making them?

And why doesn't Kanner correct him? He doesn't correct him. He instead expands upon what he said.

Let's listen to what he says. Dr. Kanner is a Turkish -born Muslim. Dr. Kanner is a

Turkish -born Muslim. No, he's not. He was born in Sweden.

He was converted to Christianity. At the age of 14, he moved from Turkey to New York City.

At the age of 14, he moved from Turkey to New York City. No, he had been living in Ohio for a dozen years by the time he was 14 years old.

Toledo and eventually ended up settling in Columbus, Ohio. From Columbus, Ohio, he moved to a very small community right on the outskirts of Columbus, a town called

Dehanna, which is about 10 miles from the town of Ivory. Now, we happen to know that's true.

At least that's where he was in high school, because we have his high school pictures where he's claiming that he always wore

Islamic dress, which they don't actually wear in Turkey anyways, but he claimed he was wearing it, and of course the yearbook says otherwise.

So there you have that, and then here's where the colonel explains why they should be listening to what this particular fellow has to say.

He is a duty expert on the issue that we're going to be addressing and dealing with this afternoon, understanding

Islamic culture. Understanding Islamic culture. Here is a man who has never lived in Islamic culture.

Sweden is not an Islamic culture, and nobody listening to me right now remembers what the culture was like when they were two anyways.

So here you have a man, these people are going to be deployed into Islamic cultural areas, being instructed by a man who has no direct experience.

He's claiming it! He's going to lie about it! I don't know about you, but it should anger anybody.

It really should anger anybody that this took place. And then, for Cantor to be saying today,

I'm innocent as the driven snow, I've been persecuted by them hyper -Calvinists and by Muslims, is just disgusting beyond belief.

Because he has seen it on both sides. Because he's seen it on both sides, that's arrogant

Cantor. He saw it as a Muslim, his father was a mujahideen.

His father was a mujahideen, he was one of those engaged in jihad. Actually, he was an engineer.

And I don't think he blew himself up or anything else. He might have thrown a cigarette butt at somebody once, but that's not really, that's not jihad, sorry.

A cleric in the Muslim community. Cleric in the Muslim community. Because he gave the call to prayer, that makes him a cleric.

That's not actually the case. He converted to Christianity. Christianity ended in two brothers and his mother.

He was disassociated with his father. Arrogant Cantor can cram into a single presentation.

I have the honor of telling you that my people got to vote. My people? Who are my people? He was talking about the

Iraqis. They're his people? No, he's half Turkish and he never lived there.

He grew up in Ohio, born in Sweden. What do you mean, my people? Obviously trying to present himself as sort of Middle Eastern, to make himself relevant.

My full name is Argon Mikel Mehmet Giovanni Janel. Turkish. Sunni. Jihadim.

My father was Mujahideen, my grandfather was Mujahideen. Kurdish, Eastern Turk.

So there you go. He was Mujahideen. He's a jihadi.

Not sure how he became a jihadi outside of Columbus, Ohio. He's going to claim that he was trained in a couple of different madrasas, including one in Cairo, Egypt.

And I would just love to know how it was, before Skype, that Arrogant Cantor trained for jihad in a madrasa in Cairo, Egypt.

I can understand now. You can do it by Skype. That would be sort of boring. And I think they'd probably be a little afraid of the government tapping into your feed.

But this was back in the 70s. So I'm not sure how a kid from Columbus, Ohio managed to study jihad in Cairo, Egypt.

But that's one of the many questions that we would love to have answered. But, of course,

Arrogant Cantor says he'll never answer those questions because, well, Jesus didn't, so he won't either.

Wow. Wouldn't want to answer for that one. And I get to speak in churches most of my life, or in debates.

I debate Muslims and Baha 'i and Buddhists and Hindi and all types on university campuses.

So, like I said, I spend most of my time getting yelled at. Now we happen to know that that's not true either. And we have, of course, invited

Dr. Cantor to provide examples of his debates.

His websites had claimed he had done more than 60 debates with Muslims, including debates in Arabic in mosques.

And he will pretend to speak Arabic in this. He has now admitted he does not speak Arabic. Was that just a misstatement?

It must have been just a misstatement. Now, of course, a misstatement that you make multiple times in one presentation and then repeat it in other presentations over years worth of time, in most of the world, for most rational people, that's called a lie.

But in the Arrogant Cantor world, accepted by Norman Geisler and others, that is a misstatement.

I'm not sure how you'd really define the difference there, but that's sort of how it goes.

It is also an opportunity for me to tell you, to peel behind the veil a little bit and show you some of the assumptions with which my people operate.

So he's going to tell the Marines about his people. Now, I'm really not sure that the

Marines are overly concerned about what the Swedes are really thinking about, but that's not the people he's talking about, of course.

Well, how about the Muslim community in Ohio? That's probably still not their real concern either.

He wants to claim a people that are not his. He wants to pretend that he can speak for them.

And I, for one, am saddened that we're sending military people out with this kind of lecture and teaching.

I knew nothing about America until I came here when I was 14 years old. Now, how can you say those words?

How can any rational person defend that statement when we know it was a lie, when we know beyond all shadow of a doubt that his younger brother

Emir was born here in the United States, that he came here before his third birthday?

And it's been proven, it's been documented beyond all question. There has not been, Kanner has not even tried to dispute the legal documentation of that particular issue.

How can you? There is no other rational answer than to say he's standing in this place purposefully, premeditatively lying.

We can document that he said this before 2005. We can document that he said it after 2005.

So for years, you have misstatements, which are actually lies.

That's how you define a lie, isn't it? Everything I knew about American culture,

I learned through American television. Ah, here we go. Whatever they allowed into the Turkish region.

So, let me ask a question again. Now that we know, and it's been admitted by the change of their own story, that Ergin Kanner actually is growing up in Ohio, didn't the television work in Ohio?

Was he picking up only Turkish television stations on skip from the ionosphere or something like that?

No! He is in the regular elementary school in Ohio.

He's watching Sesame Street like everybody else is. This entire story about Andy Griffith and the

Dukes of Hazzard and all the rest of this stuff is pure bunk. It's fantasy.

It is made up. It's made up, and he told the story multiple times, not just this one time.

You can't say, well, you know, he must have had some bad cough syrup that morning, I suppose. No, it's completely made up.

So that they could broadcast for free. And so for me, America was anything I saw on television that came from American television that was allowed through by the censors.

Andy Griffith was one of them. Now, by the way, many people have pointed out, yeah,

Andy Griffith probably would have gotten through the censors, but do you really think the Dukes of Hazzard would have gotten through the censors? No!

I mean, that is just so obvious. It's just painfully laughable.

And I fell in love with Andy Griffith. I didn't understand what they were saying. There was the captions beneath.

But I thought all of America was like Mayberry. And I moved to Brooklyn, New York. Not a lot in common.

I watched Dukes of Hazzard. I wanted to marry

Daisy Duke. Wanted to work at the

Boar's Nest. Wanted to fly a car. We drive like that normally, by the way.

I don't know if you know if you've ever been to Turkey, but we drive like that most of the time. Oh, William, no, if you've ever been to Turkey, what are you talking about?

But I can guarantee you, Eric and Ken will learn how to drive in Ohio, not in Turkey. No question about it.

There's just no way around it. And the sad thing is they're just listening, going, yeah, yeah, yeah, oh, this is great, this is wonderful.

A yield sign is a sign of your lessening manhood if you actually obey it. So I wanted to be part of that.

I wanted to play American sports. I watched Chicago Cubs baseball. Didn't understand baseball.

Watched Chicago Cubs baseball. Assumed that all Americans spoke like Harry Caray. Thought the purpose of baseball was to lose, because every time

I was watching the Cubs play. Now, what's he doing?

He's telling funny stories. He's getting his audience to like him by telling funny stories, and that's pretty much all

Eric and Kanter does do. If you've listened to his sermons, they're all pretty much just funny stories. But the fact of the matter is none of this is true.

It's just... And then something more personal comes out, because as we have been told by people who know

Kanter personally, he is a massive devotee of wrestling.

Not real wrestling. The fake, really silly wrestling that, you know, you break chairs over people's heads and do weird stuff like that.

And I guess he's got posters and just all sorts of paraphernalia of wrestling.

Well, he manages to find a way to sneak that into his mythology as well. The last television show that I watched,

I'm embarrassed to tell you, but for the sake of authenticity, I should tell you. For the sake of authenticity.

Wow. There you go. For the sake of authenticity.

We are going to continue and expand our fantasy. I watched, every two weeks, for four hours,

Georgia Championship Wrestling. Do you really think Georgia Championship Wrestling was being broadcast in Turkey?

I mean, seriously? Now, remember, this is a guy who actually lives in Ohio. This whole Turkey thing is a fantasy on his part.

That was America to me. And nobody told me it was fake. And I thought that Americans were the toughest people on the planet.

Because... Did somebody just get shocked? Well, sir,

I thought Americans were the toughest people on the planet. You got hit in the head with shoes and boots and got up.

Yeah, right. Okay. That's what he was learning in Turkey. So we press on from that.

Just a few more things here and then we will transition because we've already heard enough, I think.

We are taught from birth. You are Akaferin. The infidel. That's close.

At least I could hear Kafar in there. At least that was fairly close.

You are sons of Satan. That's not how I'd say Satan, but anyways.

My madrasa in Istanbul, Turkey. My madrasa in Cairo, Egypt. Let me play that one more time. Just to make sure.

Because there's still going to be people saying, You stuck that in there. You edited that in. Because I know there's some people.

It doesn't matter if you watch the videos. That must be that Photoshop stuff you all was doing to us.

Because there's no way he'd lie to me. Listen to the words again. My madrasa in Istanbul, Turkey.

My madrasa in Cairo, Egypt. Istanbul, Turkey. Cairo, Egypt. Really? Anybody who lives over there is chuckling at that one.

Really? You just slid between those places.

Which are hundreds of miles removed from one another. And culturally very, very different. And you just slid between those at age 12?

Really? Right. You know what shocks me is that nobody was sitting there going,

Man that sounds weird. Now maybe somebody was. I don't know. I don't know. I wish there was someone going,

That sounds really weird. This is odd. What do you mean madrasa?

What are you talking about? And of course he also in another presentation mentioned

Beirut. So he had three. It's just like what he did. The thing that caught him up.

Was when he strung together Arabic sounding names. Shabir Ali. And Nader Akhmed.

And Abdul Salib. He's just stringing stuff together.

It's flying by the seat of his pants type stuff. Absolutely amazing.

That he would make these claims. There's no question of what the doctrine of jihad was. So now we know what the doctrine of jihad was.

I know what it was in these particular places. Because I was there. That's called lying.

Through your teeth. I was sworn to jihad. At the age of nine.

Now I asked just a little while ago in channel. And the initial divorce decree was at age eight.

So at age nine. What we're being asked to believe. Is that Ergin Kanter.

Living in Ohio. Is sworn to jihad.

Evidently during one of his parental visits with his father. Now the context he's given it.

Is Turkey. And Istanbul. And Cairo. And all the rest of this stuff.

And we all know that is ridiculous. That's not where he was.

And it would be so easy for him to demonstrate these things. We've given him years worth of opportunity now.

And how does he respond? Gotta get those videos down. Gotta find a way to get those videos down.

Until I was 18 years old. And I became a believer in Jesus Christ. I was sworn to jihad. I followed the protocols.

I knew the three waves. I understood what you do before you take the death plunge.

As we call it in Arabic. It's called the death plunge. I understood why the guys were in the bars with the hookers the night before.

The bombing of 9 -11. Because he drank and he married. Tomorrow we are forgiven. Now notice he again makes reference to Arabic.

Which he has since admitted he does not speak. But don't tell that to them.

I understand that it is in fact doctrinaire for roughly 40 % of Muslims worldwide who are

Sunni. 30 % who are Shia. Now at this point I'm like what?

I mean he's got to know what the actual percentages are. That it's above 85 % of the world's population of Muslims are

Sunni. Less than 10 % are Shiite. So I think what he was trying to say.

Was that 40 % of the Sunnis. And 30 % of the

Shiites. Hold to this view of jihad. How in the world he's supposed to know that.

I don't have any earthly idea. But I'm going to try to assume that that's what he was talking about.

So anybody who says that Islam is a religion of peace. You are ignoring a significant portion of the

Islamic population. And it doesn't help the discussion of the dialogue. You can see now that when

I get into debates. I'm probably not their favorite candidate to debate. Now here's a guy who has never done it.

He's making up a fantasy. And there he stands in front of all these machines.

As you can see. I'm probably not the favorite one they want to debate. Because I've got this stuff down man.

Are you all impressed? Wow. Pure fantasy. Pure fantasy.

Man he must have really been high during this time. Just like oh this is awesome. Just get this whole room full of uniformed marines.

Hanging on every word. Wow he must have been really excited. Like oh this is great.

Well there's more. There's more. But anybody.

Anybody. Who can listen to that.

And then listen to him talk about it. I've been exonerated. I'm pure as a driven snow.

All false accusations. I repudiate all of them. I will not repent for their false accusations.

Nor sins I did not commit. Ever. Ergon Kanner. This was just back in May.

May 6th. There you go. And now.

He takes the absolute path of the coward. Let's try to get rid of those videos.

Let's file false copyright infringement claims.

Make people work hard to get this information back up. Maybe they just won't do it. I was told by someone who knows the law.

If we respond and say no this is not a copyright violation. Then the only way to get it down is to sue us.

But that opens up the door for being sued. And of course my thought is. Would Ergon Kanner be so mad.

So insane. As to allow this information to become part of the public record. That's a question.

That's a question. That we have to think about. Well anyway as I said.

I want to get back to our discussion. Of the

Calvinist call -in show on Michael Brown's show. He said he listened to. I'm not sure if he listened to both programs.

At least the first one. Maybe both of them I don't know. And said he'd love to respond to some of those things.

But obviously you know. So I mentioned that there was one caller that I knew.

And it was the one that made Michael most upset. Obviously clearly. And this is our good friend

Brian from Long Island. And I'm just going to fire it up. It lasts for about five minutes.

I'm just going to let us listen. To the entirety of the call.

And then try to make some comments on it. And so this was from just a couple weeks ago. On the

Calvinist call -in program on Line of Fire. Here's Brian. 8 -4 to the phones with Brian in Garden City, Long Island.

Thanks for calling the Line of Fire. Hi Dr. Brown. Thank you for allowing me to be on. You're very welcome.

Wow this is amazing. Because the exact opposite. Feeling, viewpoint, practical application of the

Gospel happened to me. Because I was of free will when the Lord saved me 16 years ago.

I believed that God revealed himself to me. And I made that choice. And that in some way, shape, or form,

I figured it out. I made the decision to choose Jesus Christ. And from that point,

I became kind of a prideful guy. In thinking that, you know, I can convince people if I give you a very logical, biblical reason to trust

Jesus Christ, and you don't. I had an arrogance because I'm saying, why, how can't you see this?

It's here. And so you have to have some kind of pride if you believe that God's grace is necessary, but not sufficient.

And he took you from death to life. When we were dead in our trespasses and sins, we were dead in our sins, you know, the following words,

God made you alive in Christ. So Brian, just a couple of questions and we'll keep talking on the other side of the break.

So you'll get to answer these, all right? You said you have to have some kind of pride. You're actually the first person

I've ever met that shared that you thought you were somebody because you got saved. I've never met in all my life, in all my travels around the world, anyone who had that attitude.

Everyone I knew is just blown away by God's mercy and couldn't believe that God accepted someone like them.

Okay, I've got to jump in. I'm sorry, because I'll probably forget too many different points.

I'm sorry. What Brian said was that the pride came from his belief that if, basically if God's trying to save everybody equally, that grace is necessary but not sufficient.

And he specifically used that terminology. And I can guarantee you where that terminology came from. And Brian will tell you where that terminology came from.

If grace is necessary but not sufficient, and God's trying to save us all equally, and Brian figured it out, and he presents the facts to somebody else, and they can't figure it out, then where's the difference?

Because if you're all getting the same grace, and God's trying equally with everybody, his point is that if I make the right decision, it's all up to me.

And if somebody else doesn't get it, then it's all up to them. And if I make the right decision and they make the wrong decision, then isn't the whole difference all up to who we are?

Somehow I am better? I have more spiritual insight. I have a softer heart.

I have something. And his point was that you can get to the point where you explain to people, here's the gospel, and if they don't get it and you got it, and God's trying to save everybody in the same way, then, well, you did something better than they did.

Right? So that's the argument, and he wasn't saying, well,

I'm somehow better than somebody else in the sense that God chose me over somebody else because of something in me.

He wasn't saying that. He was saying, since it's totally up to us, and God's trying equally with everyone, and he does not have an elect people, then that can become a ground for pride, and it did in his situation.

So that, as I understand it, is what Brian was actually saying. And attributed it all to his grace and goodness by saying yes to him, that pleases him.

But that's one thing. So when you say you have to have some kind of pride, I 100 % categorically take issue with that.

But here's my question I want to ask you, and you'll come back to the other side of the break, you'll get to speak, so I'm not cutting you off, okay?

Just the parameters of talk radio here. So you believe that God regenerated you before you believed, right?

That you were made alive before you believed, so you were born again before you believed.

Just want to make sure that's your point. And we'll come back, and it'll be right to you, Brian. Well, again, the relationship of faith and regeneration, very important question.

We have addressed it numerous times. We have talked about it, if you all recall, back in 2008, there was a fairly lengthy discussion due to some comments made on the

Calvary Chapel program focused upon 1 John 5, verse 1.

Everyone believing has been born from God. And when you look at the syntax of the language there, the reason one is believing ongoing is because one has been born from God.

It's not by believing I caused myself to become born of God.

Now, we didn't get into this particular issue in our debate, unfortunately, and I don't think it actually even came up even in the radio programs that we did.

But faith is the gift of God. And specifically, the assertion is made, in Philippians 1 .29,

it has been granted to you not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.

It has been granted to you to believe. Now, Dr. Brown said earlier, well, that's granted to everybody.

But I completely and totally disagree. It's not granted to everybody. It wasn't granted to the Amorite high priest.

It hasn't been granted to all sorts of folks. Faith is not merely something that's granted to everybody, and then this prevenient grace brings everybody to this moral neutral point, and then we're the ones that make the decision.

I mean, that may be the assertion. Where do you find that in Scripture? I certainly do not find that anywhere in Scripture, either.

So, let's pick up on the other side of the break of the program.

Oh, God of burning... Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural...

It is our first -ever Calvinism call -in day. If you hold to Reformed doctrine, Calvinist doctrine, what

I believe wrongly called the doctrines of grace, is if those who don't hold to them don't believe in the doctrines of grace, and for the billions of people that God chooses to pass over in Calvinism, these are hardly the doctrines of grace.

Well, let me defend the doctrines of grace, if I might. I believe that it is a perfectly appropriate phraseology because we are the only ones who are saying that grace is actually sufficient to accomplish the purpose for which

God assigns it, and that is the salvation of His people. I think it's perfectly appropriate to point out that there are some people saying that grace is necessary but insufficient, and that there is a universe of difference between saying grace is necessary but not sufficient and saying that grace is, in and of itself, sufficient.

And so, the doctrines of grace, the reason we use that terminology is because we are amazed by God's grace because it is something very different.

It really is. To look at grace and recognize that apart from that, not in the sense of, well, it was necessary, but that grace actually saves.

That was the dividing line of the Reformation. That monergistic, synergistic division is the dividing line.

Read Bondage of the Will. Luther sought, Erasmus sought, the very first written debate of the

Reformation on that very issue. And it remains vitally important to this day.

But if you hold to them, we want to have a friendly discussion. 866 -348 -7884. Again, all of our listeners in Charlotte, your clocks are not off.

We are now privileged to come your way two hours a day, live. We'll remind you again a few more times this week.

So, Brian, in Garden City, you had said that you have to have pride if you think somehow that you received salvation or said yes to the

Lord. I mean, that never dawned on me in 41 years in the Lord. Actually, he said that he had pride and that that perspective does, in fact, provide a ground for pride.

I don't think you would say that you would have to have pride. It would be the logical outcome, if you really think about it.

God's trying to save everybody equally. And if I am saved and somebody else isn't, it's because I am better.

And you say, oh, no, no, no, it's not because you're better. You just accept it. Why did you accept? That's doing something good, isn't it? I mean, repenting and believing is good, isn't it?

You did something good that they did not. If you do something good and someone doesn't do something good, you are better than the person who doesn't do something good.

Right? So that's what Brian has been trying to communicate.

And I've never before met a person out of everyone I know around. By the way, just again for, what was it the camera said?

Authenticity's sake. I do have this at 1 .2. This is a little bit faster. It'll help us to get through things and maybe cover all of this because we're only about halfway through the call right now because I keep interrupting.

But that's okay. There's no problem with that. Around the world who's born again that ever felt they were proud or they did something, look at me, because I figured it out.

So to project that on others is very bizarre to me to be honest with you. Well, let me say, if you have two people that are both good, whatever, nice people, however you want to categorize them, and they're both giving the same information about the

Lord Jesus Christ, and one repents and trusts Christ and the other one doesn't, there has to be a reason why one did and one didn't.

And there has to be something in the positive for that person because you're not giving the glory to God that changed the heart.

You're saying that basically I changed my heart. And I don't believe the Scripture. You have to make... Brian, here, the

Scripture from beginning to end calls us to choose and commends us for saying yes to God.

Well now, Brian raised a question, and I would like to hear the answer to the question, does

God have to change the heart? And what is involved in that? I mean, God opened

Lydia's heart. The Old Testament biblical example is taking out a heart of stone and giving a heart of flesh. Michael, can a heart of stone choose to be taken out?

Can a heart of stone choose to excise itself and become a heart of flesh?

That is a divine act. But if what you're saying is God can't do that divine act until that heart asks for that, well, there you go.

And what Brian is saying is if two people in the same situation receive the same information, one is saved and one is not, then it's all about the person.

It's not about God's Spirit. It's not about God's grace. It's not about God's power. It's not about God at all because God is trying to save everyone equally.

And since people aren't saved, then the difference is found in the person.

Right? I mean, that's his point. And condemns us for saying no.

Why will God say to anyone, well done, good and faithful servant? Now, at this point,

I think there's some confusion. Why will God say to anyone, well done, good and faithful servant?

Well, the only people he's saying that to are people that he himself has changed. So, there seems to be a category.

In fact, there's some real major category problems in what's going to follow after this because they're, obviously from my perspective, and I think a biblical perspective, talking about the capacities and abilities of the natural man and talking about the capacity and abilities of the born -again individual, the regenerate man.

Those are two different things. Certainly biblically it is because they're talking about a person who's alive with the

Spirit of God and a person who is not. And so, why would

God say to, okay, now you've shifted from the discussion where it was, which was, how can the unregenerate person do what is pleasing to God?

Exercise, saving faith, etc. Now you're talking about, why would God say to a believer, well done, thou good and faithful servant?

And evidently the argument is, well, look, if man's really dead in sin and grace is everything and God's going to accomplish his purpose, then there's no reason for God to say, well done, thou good and faithful servant, because you're just an automaton anyway.

Seemingly is the assumption here. Now, again, Michael says that he was a staunch

Calvinist for a number of years. Well, as a staunch Calvinist, then he should know that God uses means. That God uses means.

That, for example, the means by which he saves his elect people is through the proclamation of the gospel.

Now, could God do it a different way? Could he just do it without any intermediacy? Well, of course. But he's not chosen to do so.

He's chosen to use means. We, those who proclaim the gospel, become the means by which

God calls the elect unto salvation. And so his law goes out.

It is a means. The law has more than one function, and it has a different function in the life of the unbeliever than it has in the life of the believer.

In the life of the believer, it becomes a revelation of God's very heart. It becomes the means by which we know what is it to be pleasing to God?

How do I live to be pleasing to God? Well, God's law tells me. That's why in the new covenant, that law is written upon my heart.

It becomes an internal thing. I love it because it represents God's holy character, and I want to be holy as he is holy.

But is that the function of the law to the unbeliever? Of course not. Of course not.

To the unbeliever, the law involves the very thundering of God's voice in the ears of the unbeliever, and it's used to restrain the unbeliever.

And that's why in societies like ours that are just overthrowing all moral restraint, they don't want to hear any of that stuff.

They don't want us to have the freedom to repeat God's law. And that's part of God's judgment. But it has different function.

So evidently the assumption is, well, God can't use means. So he can't, you know, if a person becomes a new creature in Christ and God has made revelation as to how he should live, that means everybody has to have the capacity of living that way.

God can't give his law that therefore has one purpose in the life of the unbeliever and one purpose in the life of the believer.

Not possible. And I say it's most definitely possible. It's not only possible, that's exactly what the

Bible teaches. And so part of the argument that is being made here that I think Michael is in error on is that God can't use means.

He can't use means. Well, of course he uses means. Well, if God commands us to do something then everybody has to have the capacity to do that in and of themselves.

No. That's not true. That's an old fallacy. Be perfect, even as your

Father in Heaven is perfect. Well, once we fell on Adam, we couldn't fulfill that. We couldn't fulfill love

God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. So why are those commands still there?

Well, they reign in the sin of the unbeliever and for the believer, they become the guide that shows us how we are to live.

Use his means. I think it's an important distinction. Why does Jesus rebuke people saying, you will not come to me to have eternal life?

Why does God say that? Because they won't. See, again, the assumption is, well, but unless he gives them the ability.

But the lack of the ability that is there is because they're sin. And God can use and has used in the life of many of his people the thundering of that law, of that word of Jesus, of that word of rebuke as a means of drawing his people unto himself.

But the error is, the assumption is, that means everybody has the capacity to fulfill these things. It's just not the case.

That's just not the case. And to say, well, God has to extend that, has to extend that grace.

Grace can never be demanded. God is not under any obligation to save any person or any number of people at all.

Say to Israel, all day long I held my hands out to you, but you were disobedient people.

Yeah, and in the same breath, he talks about the remnant that he has reserved for himself. Look at Paul's discussion of that in Romans.

So he recognizes, he's saying, yeah, man in his sin has a hard heart and that hard heart will never remove itself.

Man in his sin is the valley of the dry bones and unless the spirit comes, those dry bones did not say, oh yeah, go ahead, blow the spirit upon us.

They were dead. It was a supernatural act of God that brought about the life that entered into them.

In the same way it's a supernatural act of God that takes out the heart of stone and gives the heart of flesh. It's God that reserves for himself the remnant.

He does extend his hand, but then in the same context he reserves for himself the remnant.

That's really the consistent testimony of the Old Testament itself. Because they refused to choose and those who humble themselves,

God gave grace. When you humble yourself... Now see, did you catch that? Those that humble themselves, God gives grace.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. This is a fundamental anthropological difference.

Fundamental anthropological difference. To say that you have to humble yourself and therefore you'll receive grace, again, to talk...

We're confusing two areas here and I'm trying to keep them clear. Are you saying that the unregenerate enemy of God that cannot do what is pleasing to God can do what is pleasing to God?

Romans 8 says he can't. He can't. U dunantai, not able to do so.

Not able to do so. So, if you're saying...

Can the unregenerate person humble himself before God?

Is humbling yourself before God something that's good or bad? It's something that's good. Is that what God's law demands?

Yes. Are they able to submit to God's law? No. That's direct didactic teaching.

Don't talk to me about, well, the thousands of verses of Scripture, blah, blah, blah, blah. Been there, done that, got the t -shirt.

Let's not use that kind of argumentation. Let's be very specific. Romans 8 says those who are according to the flesh cannot submit themselves to the law of God.

They are not able to do so. We went through that last time. Now, what about the regenerate person?

Well, the regenerate person wants to humble himself. The regenerate person hears the call of God to humble himself and is constantly seeking to humble himself.

And whenever he encounters pride, he wants to detest that and hate that and not experience that.

So the very same command that the unregenerate person cannot submit to, the regenerate person desires to submit to.

And unfortunately, that distinction didn't remain firm in this discussion.

That's the key. You say, God, I can't save myself. I can't figure it out. I need your help. I need your mercy.

Have mercy on me. And who says that? Who says that? I say, only the person who is the recipient of God's saving grace says that.

Hearts of stone do not say that. Dead bones do not say that. Lazarus was not saying that in the grave.

There are just so many examples that we could give. And God loves that.

God gives grace to the humble. And he says, humble yourself. Why does he say humble yourself if you can't humble yourself?

But it takes grace to humble yourself. Why does he say humble yourself if you can't humble yourself? Again, just explain that.

For the unregenerate, it becomes that law that God sometimes blesses to curb man's sin and sometimes he uses it actually to exacerbate man's sin when his judgment is coming upon a people or a nation.

But for the unregenerate, it becomes the revelation of God's purpose. It's the guide. It's what's written upon the heart.

And we're not seeing that distinction here. It's going back and forth between the two and it's going to get even worse as the call goes on.

I thought I was going to get through the whole call, but even playing it at 1 .2, I'm not going to get all the way through the call because I've only got about a minute left.

What I'm saying is you also have that no one seeks God. You also have that God loved

Jacob and hated Esau before either one had done anything wrong. All right. Let's just stay with one point because the

Jacob -Esau thing will come to you, but you're 100 % wrong in the interpretation of that. 100 % wrong. 100 % wrong.

Now, I think Michael says again, I think we can go toe -to -toe on this and I think I've got the better argument by a long shot, but to say 100 % wrong just by taking the national privilege perspective,

I think we've poked a lot of holes through that over the years. 100 % wrong.

Hmm. Okay. Well, I'll say the national perspective viewpoint is 100 % wrong and I think

I can demonstrate that. And I'll demonstrate it clearly scripturally. But just hang on one second.

Tell me why God said, for every verse you quote like this, I'll quote 50 that call for a human choice.

Why does God say... Okay. That's as far as I'm going to be able to get. If you're a

Calvinist, you just heard Michael Brown say, I never really understood the position I said I held because we all say man makes a choice.

The assumption that Michael is making is if man makes a choice, then he can make any choice.

But that's not what the Bible says. Why did Jesus say, if you continue my words, then you will know the truth and the truth shall set you free because they were slaves to sin.

Did they make choices as slaves to sin? Yes, they made choices as slaves to sin. But the choice to do what was right, the choice of freedom, the choice of life was not theirs until they are set free from their chains of bondage, until they are regenerated, until that heart of stone is taken out.

We believe that man makes choices, but those choices are determined by the desires of the heart that are presented to the will and the unregenerate will will not present desires of holiness to the will and therefore you cannot make those choices.

Right? Right. Exactly. Phew. Well, I'm going to mark right there.

I'm going to mark it right here in my wonderful audio program and say start here.

There we go. I thought I was going to get through all that. Sorry both to Michael and Brian who I know, I know

Brian's going to be listening, maybe listening live right now. I don't know. And I have a feeling Michael will listen as well eventually.

We will pick up at that point with Brian's call. Thanks for listening to The Vying Line today. We'll see you next time.

God bless. I believe we're standing at the crossroads

Let this moment slip away We must contend for the faith above us fought for We need a new

Reformation day It's a sign of the times

The truth is being trampled in Won't you lift up your voice

Are you tired of plain religion It's time to make some noise Howling old

Wittenberg Howling old I stand up for the truth

Won't you lift up Howling old

Wittenberg The Dividing Line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries. If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -4602 or write us at P .O.

Box 37106 Phoenix, Arizona 85069. You can also find us on the

World Wide Web at aomin .org that's A -O -M -I -N dot O -R -G where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks.