March 4, 2004

desert metropolis of phoenix arizona 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 doctor 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 doctor white call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll free across the united states it's 1 -877 -753 -3341 and now with today's topic here is james white only forty eight degrees what in the world is going on it's warmer back east than it is out west how odd welcome to the dividing line my name is james white we're live today here in phoenix arizona where it was raining a little while ago i think that's what they call that actually it's been raining a lot recently which is odd for us but it's very good for us we need that hey man when since when does rain actually come water come from the sky you know uh...

who gave you a microphone is what i want to know especially when you're on decongestants because that hey man sound like back from your old days like in the seventies when you had polyester pants and things like that actually i predate that i go back to bell bottoms well the bell bottoms were polyester weren't they uh...

no before polyester before they were cotton bell bottoms you bet oh that was even before saturday night live not saturday night live stayin' alive no saturday night fever there we go long before that well anyway now that we've thoroughly grossed out the audience totally and uh...

dated ourselves very badly uh... i mean there's people in our channel that are like you know uh...

young enough to be my kids it's just really a sort of sad thing but anyhow welcome to the dividing line eight seven seven seven five three three three four one is phone number i don't know if you saw the little blog thing i threw up uh...

sort of almost threw up on the website yesterday uh...

the guy who was uh... writing the music for the passion and how uh...

his computers would lock up like ten times a day with a picture of satan on the screen and that he then invited satan to go outside and duke it out in the parking lot all i can say is that it must have been like really uh...

odd working on the set of that particular uh... film i mean and i'm starting to wonder if there wasn't you know some talk about this and it just sort of started uh...

these things take on a life of their own they really do they start to to take on a life of their own do their own thing and uh...

i wonder if all the stuff about healings and miracles and getting struck on by lightning and all the rest of that kind of stuff uh...

if uh... you know late nights uh... working in the music studio obviously if my computer locked up ten times a day with a picture of satan on it i'd update norton antivirus hello sounds like a virus to me uh...

who there's some odd stuff going on there uh... interestingly enough my daughter's uh...

yes spirit filled norton norton is made by christians it will get rid of the devil uh...

actually i have no idea what it's who it's made by and i really doubt that but anyway uh...

my daughter's uh... fresh she's a freshman in high school there they're going to see the passion next week and that's christian high school and so they sent uh...

they sent a uh... notice home and you had to sign it and all the rest of it because it's r -rated so the teacher has to show uh...

all these permission slips to the people when they go to the movie theater and uh...

so what i decided to do is aside from signing it and saying yeah it's fine because i already took her to see it and uh...

we've had discussions beforehand and afterwards and she's got piper's book and she's been reading piper's book and right now if anybody called in and asked about the uh...

roman catholic book i read last week i don't have it you know why she stole it from me yeah my daughter has it and she's taken it to school and has been like trying to explain to people you know this is sort of significant and she reported to me uh...

on wednesday it was just sort of like nobody cares i mean i read stuff out of this book that's just absolutely freaky and nobody cares it's just like yes oh uh...

it's it's amazing anyways so what i did is i wrote a uh... full page thing and i included uh...

you know i said yes certainly she can go i've already taken her once we discussed the issue of the atonement the finished work of christ da da da da and then i quoted that whole thing it's still on the blog uh...

in regards to the introduction to the book and how the film is uh... so quintessentially catholic marian eucharistic all the rest of that fun stuff and uh...

and so i sent that along with enough because i just didn't think what kind of response that gets from a bible teacher uh...

but a bible teacher knows sort of who i am i mean uh... the summer was uh...

taking a test in there and she had debating calvinism sitting on top of her books and the teacher stole it for the entire hour was that of their home all of whom the repeating it all during the hour it was sort of funny but anyway so uh...

yes uh... it it it goes on and uh... i've got somebody in channel asking me to do to describe pt cruisers while i am on the air uh...

which is a little bit difficult to do uh... are we on the air when when we're doing a webcast i mean is that not an example of anachronism in language on the air and i mean isn't that a good example of where words have changed meaning depending upon cultural context isn't that interesting uh...

eight -cent we are the air you think that's where you're breathing uh...

uh... some of you going hey the white morpheus yes well if you've seen pictures of me recently it uh...

anyhow uh... microwave yes that's right that's right we are my we we do our broadcasting initially micro microwave wise and stuff and uh...

that's uh... anyhow people are picking on pt cruisers in channel and i'm gonna tell folks right now the next person picks on pt cruisers in channel is going to get the five minute sock i just want you know that right now if you're not in channel you don't know what a five minute sock is you do not even need to consider what it means the five minute sock is the worst kind of sock you can get and so just keep that in mind anyone uh...

up there that hit i know that there is a uh... you know uh...

i i just i said that i was going to do it i have to do it so they're there it is so anyway uh...

there there is a general rebellion now going on in channel and i'm sorry for those who are listening live i'll be done with it in just a minute there i just took care of it anyhow today on the program a couple things unless your calls your calls uh...

drive us a different direction get it pt cruisers drive us a different direction uh... two things in front of me right now i uh...

i shouldn't open these things right before the program starts i really shouldn't uh... but i did i opened the most recent edition of viewpoint uh...

john armstrong's uh... ministry letter newsletter i don't want to call it uh...

and he's been doing a whole series of how i changed my mind on these are these are discussions of why uh...

he has in essence uh... abandoned the positions he held only eight or ten years ago this one was interesting because uh...

you know the end of the story the end of the article wasn't all that bad i mean i believe at one point in time doctor armstrong described himself as reformed baptist and uh...

this particular uh... discussion is on how i changed my mind about the sacraments now uh...

reform baptists tend not to utilize the term sacraments we use the term ordinance he talks about that in here but the final conclusions weren't really all that far off from what you would read in the thirtieth section of the london baptist confession of faith and i appreciate some things for example he uh...

uh... mentions wingley and uh... he says wingley who is often cited as the champion of the widely popular evangelical view put the emphasis of the meal upon the pledge the believer makes when he presents himself to god and worship but wingley's view was not the mere commemoration of the modern notion floating around the broadly evangelical scene of north american christianity commemorations wingley's doctrine really meant contemplation in the real work of christ the late john leith suggested rightly that quote the spiritual presence of christ was not disputed by swing lee and quote so even modern swing lee and they're not faithful to the view they profess to follow obviously in the in the history of uh...

of uh... development of theological terminology uh... swing lee and has has taken on a meaning that maybe swing lee himself did not uh...

intend however it was interesting to me uh...

that's uh... the final conclusions basically were not aimed at where i thought dr armstrong put himself ten years ago in other words is pretty much aimed at at uh...

sort of a a seeker friendly slash fundamentalist slash uh...

i have no connection to church history style of uh... of viewpoint not certainly to reform baptist perspective uh...

because it talks about uh... the well it it starts off in these in these words uh...

the word sacrament once made me very uneasy if you stay with me for a few months moments i'll explain why this happened what changed i now find my whole world in life view profoundly rooted in what i would call a sacramental view of life when i heard the word sacrament as young minister i thought of hocus pocus i heard something like take the elements get the grace which is the old ex opera operato idea that in taking the elements the operation self produces the result by the way my commentary this point that's rome's view that is the the perspective that was uh...

uh... defended uh... by uh... the middle ages that was what was defended by agustin over against syprian uh...

shall we say in that particular uh... that particular situation ex opera operato over against ex opera operon t uh...

which uh... has to do of course with the idea that the the individual who is working the sacrament his state of grace is relevant uh...

to uh... uh... the operation of the uh... the sacrament itself and uh...

so that that whole discussion is a little beyond what we might be able to uh... get into today that certainly is worth uh...

discussion some point in time the future we may have discussed it already i think that after how many years we don't mind right now i don't know after all you start wondering than a dive discuss that in class last week that i discussed that at last time i was on the road times with hard to remember exactly the context was anyway uh...

he goes on to say i've asked referred the word of my christian childhood ordinance it was a warm and non -offensive work it is clearly suggested that there were things commanded by jesus by these actions uh...

it clearly suggested that there are things come in by jesus but these actions were not sacramental my rationalistic world was still intact all really i remained quite sure that the word sacrament was dangerous anyone that held the idea was probably teaching salvation to some form of priest craft ecclesiastical good works somewhere along the way i realize the most process use the word sacrament positively positively would be the best way for them they looked it up in the dictionary surprise surprise the first time i knew shorter oxford dictionary says the word is a translation of the greek word mysterion from the new testament which one i stop and go uh...

wasn't the study of the original languages a part of your preparation i mean this isn't anything new that's like uh...

nothing of i'm not trying to be offensive here but as a reformed baptist who does in fact uh...

prefer the term ordinance because of the uh...

biblical utilization of of terminology i knew that sacramentum was the latin translation of mysterion uh...

wasn't that basic church history one oh one uh... it just it just it seems to me that when people change from one view to another view they always grossly misrepresenting where they once were you ever notice that back when i was stupid like i used to be i didn't know nothing but now i know everything it's like what why do that why not just accurately represent the fact that when you held this view this is what you believe this is why you've changed but but don't don't include the uh...

though i looked it up in the oxford dictionary i think this is i went to fuller theological seminary for crying out loud and i'd doing and master of arts degree in theology years ago that was that was first semester i mean i what what is i'm sorry uh...

uh... deep breath uh... cleansing breath yes okay all right sure enough the word was actually biblical now what i felt another theological box falling apart in my comfortable rational no fear theological worldview now there's really the issue uh...

there's there's there's really the the whole this is what it's all about uh...

john armstrong thinks the rest of us who haven't joined him on his his journey off into wherever it is he's going to end up uh...

that we're rationalists and that we are narrow -minded and we're unwilling to look at other things maybe we already looked and don't like what's out there because we find it unbiblical hmm maybe our overriding commitment to the ultimacy of biblical authority keeps us from going these directions well that we couldn't allow that to be a possibility anyway and it goes on from there the the drop box uh...

here uh... aggie i'm not making fun of anybody i'm responding to uh...

the making fun of my position by someone who said they want to hold it there's a difference there i think if you think about it you'll see what it is uh...

anyway uh... dropbox in the middle says combined with the emphasis on doctrinal confession and catechism that ain't me uh...

the modern church has thus lost mystery one way to get this back is to teach the sacramental nature of the church if we restore the sacramental nature of the two signs directly given to the bride of christ by the savior himself we may well prepare our congregations for fresh visitations of the lord who is seen as present each week in the preached word and the sacraments well you know certainly calvin believe that uh...

the question is how can we translate that into something that is directly relevant to us today uh...

we use the term means of grace not terms sacrament uh... so that we recognize that it's not grace is not something that is just automatic it's not something to wear uh...

you have a uh... an action that guarantees a certain result uh...

so we use means of grace we recognize god has means of grace that he has given to us the church and fellowship and and church discipline and uh...

the ordinances the lord's supper baptism the preaching of the word uh... these are all things god has given to us they are the means that he gives to us that we are to to utilize to grow in grace and that's that's uh...

that's wonderful uh... but obviously i do think that we need to look at what the word says has been given to us in that way and to go so far as some people do to do to make everything sacramental uh...

i've never seen that result in a deeper affirmation of sola scriptura sola fide things like that i've always seen it go the other direction that's just my experience my experience is very limited uh...

all of our experiences are very limited but that's just simply what uh... i've seen uh... don't see anything on the uh...

screen here at eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one so i will uh...

go ahead and uh... mentioned to you something a lot of folks and i was thinking about this just a few minutes ago the chicago statement on inerrancy uh...

was uh... written before a number of the folks in our channel were born and uh...

uh... that that again is is is amazing thing uh...

i want to uh... as time allowed go through a lot of this it it is very very important materials it's really i think what is uh...

it not so much an ignoring of this is a lot of folks who have heard chicago statement of biblical inerrancy but and there's a lot of folks would say oh yeah i'd i'd agree with that you know they have necessarily read it uh...

but it is the living out of what this statement says that really i think makes a huge impact upon the controversies that we face uh...

there is so much that we're facing our society i was i spoke last evening it at church on the subject of gay marriage watch it is become gay marriage at all because there is no such thing uh...

gay marriage is an oxymoron we need to stop even allowing that right now the left has the the the forces that oppose god's law let's admit let's be let's not playing games a stop being politically correct the other side isn't so who cares uh...

this is a matter of spitting in god's face and hating god's law that's what the whole movement is about god -defined marriage god -defined marriage in the garden of of eden he's he created adam and eve male and female he created them there the the man is to leave his father and mother not his father and father and his mother and his mother but his father and his mother and he is to be joined to his wife and there to become one flesh okay that is the creation ordinance and those who are actively suppressing the knowledge of god and who hate god's law are pushing that down and they don't want to be reminded by anything in their society or anything around them that they are in fact time to put out so much energy to suppress the knowledge of god that is within them they hate god's law and therefore they want to get rid of any representation of god's law and if man's law somehow by god's grace happens to reflect god's law then they want to see that change and they will even simply engage in anarchy which is what's going on right now in our land uh...

so as to be able to uh... uh... suppress this knowledge of god that is there and to express their hatred toward it so i was talking about uh...

quote -unquote gay marriage and the fact that there is no such thing that god is the one who defines marriage marriage was defined long before the constitution was written everybody knows exactly what marriage was when the constitution was written but the fact the matter is we've allowed uh...

jurists who are not actually jurists these are these are rebel jurists these are jurists who are out of control they're despots they are they're they are illegal despots who now sit in positions of authority as a part of god's judgment upon this land i truly believe that that is the case uh...

unrighteous judges come from god as a plague upon a land our land is filled with unrighteous judges they're not under the control of the law they don't care what the original intent was and it is a part of god's judgment upon this land and we all get to live with it we all get to live with it there i set it up right out front and while i still have the freedom to say it and that freedom who knows when that's going to end uh...

and if you think that's conspiratorial thinking you're wrong uh... anyway uh...

i was talking about last night and i was discussing the the biblical commands in regards to this and and i pointed out that you know jesus is teaching on the subject in matthew chapter nineteen excuse me use the cough button there for a second uh...

jesus teaching on the subject of matthew chapter nineteen assumes a certain level of authority for the old testament scriptures that functionally many evangelicals no longer have and one of the reasons there is such a muted response from the quote -unquote church however you define that to this particular issue is because we have lost touch uh...

with a a uh... meaningful and heart felt doctrine of the inspiration inerrancy of scripture and we seem to think that the battle for inerrancy was over in the nineteen eighties the good guys won the bad guys lost folks just isn't that way it just isn't that way it doesn't work that way uh...

i don't think we won the battle i think the bad guys won the battle because they just redefined the terms and the good guys didn't realize they were doing it and so in many seminaries in the land today people even sign statements that say i believe in inerrancy but they don't teach in accordance with it they don't do theology in accordance with it they don't do exegesis in accordance with it it's not a a heartfelt commitment and i would suggest to you the theologian that does not bow in humble reverence to the authority of the word of god is a theologian who is not allowing the theos god to speak for himself that's really what a belief in inspiration inerrancy is is an admission that i can't know anything about god apart from god revealing himself and i must be honest in allowing god to define himself not not me myself and i that's what inspiration inerrancy exegesis is all about is honoring god by allowing god to speak for himself if you don't engage in meaningful rules of hermeneutics and exegesis what you're saying is i don't trust the word of god to speak i will speak for the word of god in my own words that's what it's all about and so i wanted to look at the chicago statement on inerrancy because it it really addresses these these primary issues and to remind our little teeny tiny audience uh...

you know someone was saying we only have 24 listeners well that's not true we haven't had more than that lots of folks listen uh...

all over the place they just don't all listen at the same time that's one of the advantages of doing a webcast is people can listen to this thing at three o 'clock in the morning if they want to they can download the mp3s they can put them on mp3 players you know this is a great way of doing things but in comparison to the big boys uh...

we have a teeny tiny little audience no question about it uh... but this teeny tiny little audience is the audience that we've been given and i really try to make this hour we spend together twice a week something that will be of use to a large portion of that audience i can't keep everybody happy you know it's sort of like angels cartoons you know you just can't keep everybody happy and uh...

for this audience uh... i wanted to go over this i know that most of you have read this i know that most of you agree uh...

however we need to be reminded of what is important you know it's it's the old peter line he says i i know you know these things but i want to set you in remembrance i want to remind you we need to be reminded we forget things we forget the most important things very very easily because the world the world is like the waves crashing against the shore the world daily is wearing away at the shore and we need to be putting out positive effort to be constantly rebuilding what the world is trying to wash away uh...

another illustration of that it's beautiful is that of pilgrims progress you've got the fire and the water is always being put on it but the fire doesn't go out why is the fire not go out because on the other side of the wall is the holy spirit pouring in the oil the fire continues on but we have to be involved in rebuilding ourselves reminding ourselves of those things that are very important and the chicago statement on errancy uh...

which was uh... put together uh... at the uh... hyatt regency o 'hare in chicago the fall of nineteen seventy eight and a number of uh...

notable folks were there uh... big names some of whom are not even with us any longer obviously seventy eight being a few years ago uh...

starts off with articles of affirmation denial actually starts off the summary statement i guess i'll go and read the summary statement since that's a good thing to do and number one god who is himself truth and speaks truth only has inspired holy scripture in order thereby to reveal himself to lost mankind through jesus christ as creator and lord redeemer and judge holy scripture is god's witness to himself uh...

i would uh... i would in fact uh... yeah that's good idea to sell someone uh...

request this could you put the u r l book one of the bomb this is why it's always good uh... to uh...

and to listen and be in jail at the same time if you can possibly do that dispose the u r l and channel and there are a number of them out there you just google it's easy to easy to pull up i pulled one up off of phil johnson site uh...

grace to you i would only uh... modify that first statement a little bit uh...

it is not just a lost mankind that's god intends this in fact i would argue uh...

that's biblically the strongest statements in regards to uh...

the purpose of scripture and the audience of scripture is actually to the redeemed to the church uh...

the purpose of scripture being to to the church so i would uh... probably being the church and that i am emphasize a little bit strong more strongly uh...

number two holy scripture being god's own word written by men prepared and superintended by his holy spirit is an infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches it is to be believed as god's instruction in all that affirms obeyed as god's command and all that requires embraced as god's pledge in all that it promises number three the holy spirit scriptures divine author both authenticated to us by his inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning important point often one upon which tremendous imbalance exists unfortunately uh...

in many modern situations number four being wholly and verbally god -given scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching no less in what it states about god's acts in creation about the events of world history about its own literary origins under god than its witness to god's saving grace in individual lives that'll be expanded upon uh...

in the following portions of the uh... affirm affirmation denial and finally number five of the uh...

summary statement the authority of scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the bible's own and such lapses bring serious lost both the individual and the church now that of course sadly describes the vast majority of theological seminaries in our land today when i say that i'm using a a fairly wide uh...

definition of theological seminaries uh... you can you can look at the from the most conservative uh...

to the most liberal and uh... in only in a small portion of that spectrum would these articles and this statement be accepted as normative and sadly in a smaller portion of that spectrum uh...

would the actual uh... application of these things be consistently brought forth and uh...

that then results obviously in a tremendous impact upon the theology uh...

and uh... the uh... practice and uh... the teaching within those seminaries and so will pick up with uh...

article one on the far side of the break uh... here on the dividing line of uh... you've just been waiting to get in eight seven seven seven five three three three four one otherwise will continue with the chicago statement on inerrancy right after this friday it's all right the the under the guise of tolerance modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality even more disturbing some within the church attempt to revise and distort christian teaching on this behavior in their book the same sex controversy james white and jeff neal right for all who want to better understand the bible's teaching on the subject explaining and defending the foundational bible passages that deal with homosexuality including genesis leviticus and romans expanding on the scriptures they refute the revisionist arguments including the claim that christians today need not adhere to the law in a straightforward and loving manner they appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to god's plan for his people the same sex controversy defending and clarifying the bible's message about homosexuality get your copy in the bookstore at a omen dot org answering those who claim that only the king james version is the word of god james white in his book the king james only controversy examines allegations that modern translators conspired to corrupt scripture and lead believers away from true christian faith in a readable and responsible style author james white traces the development of bible translations old and new and investigates the differences between new versions and the authorized version of sixteen eleven you can order your copy of james white's book the king james only controversy by going to our website at www .aomen

.org what is doctor norman geisler warning the christian community about in his book chosen but free a new cult secularism false prophecy scenarios no doctor geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called calvinism he insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant in his book the potter's freedom james white replies to doctor geisler but the potter's freedom is much more than just a reply it is a defense of the very principles upon which the protestant reformation was founded indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate james white masterfully counters the evidence against so -called extreme calvinism defines what the reform faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the reformers is the very one taught in the pages of scripture the potter's freedom a defense of the reformation and a rebuttal to norman geisler's chosen but free you'll find it in the reform theology section of our bookstore at a omen dot org you know i'm really uh...

i'm really impressed on the channel was asking if that was missing uh... my soul claim to fame in singing is that one time yes one time uh...

i backed up steve campbell singing not that song uh... but well no we did hear us to hear you guys well we did course i'm at least know that when we may have been two songs but uh...

specifically cornerstone and uh... uh... that's my one claim to fame uh...

i have a second claim to fame that's steve call me this morning steve campbell this morning and get up i've been doing the late nighters recently trying to get this book done and uh...

yes it was a memorable experience for me there is no two ways about it uh... that was that was one of the highlights of my life and um...

i got this morning in my cell phones doing the thing it does whenever you have a uh... voicemail and so i call my voicemail and uh...

steven called me steve campbell called me at five fifty six a m uh... my time and he does that man i've been laying there and made the mistake of having the cell phone too close to the bedroom and and you know i hear that you know you stumble out of bed you strain three different muscles is trying to keep from running into things and you grab the phone and uh...

uh... and he's like all brother man i didn't think you'd get up this early but the phone's ringing what do you want but i hadn't heard this time so he had left me a message we're trying to arrange doing something and or having problems doing it so uh...

anyway uh... that is that is steve camp singing and not me singing we use uh... steve's music for our our bumpers and so uh...

that you understand me saying would never confuse me with steve campbell show you that see if you if you had gone on uh...

uh... if you had gone on uh... uh... the cruise uh...

then uh... you would uh... no uh... having prior heard him saying and and then having heard me sing some of the sent me a uh...

email saying hey i ordered debating communism three weeks ago i still haven't gotten it so i just forwarded that to the people who folks i have nothing to do with that i just forwarded it to the people who do and uh...

obviously there is a problem with the order somewhere along the line and uh... we'll get it figured out uh...

so we are looking at the chicago statement of inerrancy what i like about the uh...

second section articles of affirmation denial is that when you put in both those ways and when you put affirmation and denial together you're really that's one of the things i like about oral debates is that you're putting them side by side uh...

and and she off thanks munical man i've sung next doctor oh he had a bad days uh...

no i do not sing the british accent like i could but i do not anyway uh... but however i should mention before i get back that i've been invited to go to london and if i go to london and do some debates over there i can guarantee you that if you listen to those debates and compare them uh...

compared them with uh... what comes out of the normal debate type stuff it's gonna sound british thanks i can't help it it's just that when i'm around british folks i just thought sounding british i was a good couple these articles and uh...

then uh... we have one phone call once to revisit the discussion with uh... with uh...

pierre from last uh... last program in regards john three six three six is not here but someone else uh...

articles of affirmation by article one we affirm that the holy scriptures to be received as the authoritative word of god we denied the scriptures receive their authority from the church tradition or any other human source uh...

i one thing i really appreciate concerning the chicago statement inerrancy is that it has a logical progression in its affirmations and it's it's beliefs and that is inerrancy is based upon the nature of scripture being god breathe that's what gives rise to inerrancy if you don't see the organic relationship between where the uh...

the scriptures come from what their origin and source in nature is and all the other issues concerning inerrancy and uh...

accuracy and the ability of scripture as a uh...

as a divine body to uh... to communicate truth then you're gonna you're gonna be completely lost unfortunately as it happens is so much of modern theology is you have this discombobulation this atomization of things into all these separate categories you don't see the organic whole uh...

that uh... that uh... is their article two we affirm the scriptures are the supreme written norm by which god binds the conscience and that the authority of the church is subordinate to that of scripture we deny the church creeds councils or declarations have authority greater than or equal to the authority of the bible that follows naturally from what came before though there are many who would say it is an unnatural division and not a workable division uh...

that's one of the issues that i do address uh... fairly frequently in uh... the book which and i just uh...

i'm just about done with it uh... i'm in the homestretch i'm a little i'm a little discouraged i'll be honest because i've just had so much stuff going on that to be able to sit down and and put more than forty five minutes at a time into working on it has been really difficult for the past week and a half ten days i was making real fast uh...

approaching the end and all sudden this last you know last ten yards so like when you write a hundred -mile bike race it was the last uh...

seven miles that seemed like it was half of the entire race uh... this last section is is just very difficult not because the writing is difficult i just have so much stuff going on that it's it's very hard to get away and do it but anyway uh...

i saw the cover today the new cover the title the book is now settled scripture alone and uh...

supposed to be out in october that's only uh... you know like six months from now and uh...

so i need to uh... get these last things done the edits uh... that i need to throw in there's thankfully not too many of them is about ten or fifteen footnotes i need to work on and uh...

i can see the end it's just if i could get everything out of the way i'd be able to finish it up and i will be a much happier man when i do that because i've got another huge deadline right on my my background of that so anyway how the world i get that all yes i was reading article two and uh...

that is an issue that i'd i'd deal with a lot uh... try to interact in the dialogues in the book with those who would say look without so those creeds councils declarations you can't have the bible uh...

that uh... god and you know there's truth in saying god gave the bible to the church but what is relationship what is the nature of the church over is the nature of scripture and just because there is this this intimate union in the sense that that god has willed that his church have his word and preach his word and be dependent on his word just because that intimate union is there does not mean uh...

then that uh... somehow that denigrates or lowers by the nature scripture or on the other side exalts the nature of the church uh...

to some other standard someone just asked why is the bible upside down the cover they have seen the the cover of the book uh...

actually it's a picture in the background of the bible and just think for a second ye who asks the question uh...

you can tell it's a bible because you can see it from the perspective that it's been photographed if you saw it from the bottom of the page would you know it was a bible hello you see you gotta see the top of the page to see the stuff sort of simple but this guy's from california and you know california right now is very difficult on folks uh...

sorry california listeners but we've been watching what's going on over there and it's weird and it's back to article three we affirm that the written word in its entirety is revelation given by god we denied the bible is merely a witnessed revelation or only becomes revelation in encounter or depends on the responses of men for its validity now that might unfortunately uh...

blow by a lot of folks uh... and i don't mean that in any way of saying you know that folks just aren't smart it's just that for evangelicals unless you've attended an evangelical seminary and you've been exposed to carl barton to other neo -evangelical perspectives uh...

you might not be you might not know what's going on uh...

in the evangelical seminary world in the idea of the bible is a witnessed revelation uh...

that it becomes revelation in encounter uh... that the bible becomes word of god as i experience it that sounds real neat because you know that we all know about the the spiritual encounter with the word of god and and that that time in a certain passage becomes extremely important to us uh...

in its uh... in its meaning and in its uh... uh... application our life and it's real easy for us to confuse that with well that's when it became the word of god to me no that was the word of god it contained that truth it contained that truth before you ever took a breath in fact it probably contains more truths in that passage that our dull little minds have not even yet come to know and so it did not become the word of god when i experienced it my little temporal experience me who is a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes my experience of the word does not determine the nature of the word yes in god's providence and in god's sovereign decree there are these these self -shattering life -changing experiences with the word of god and i am thankful for them and we've hopefully everyone listening has experienced those times in their life however however we dare not define the eternal purposes of god based upon my literal little brief temporal experiences of of encounters with that overall divine plan so that is what the article is referring to in essence saying look uh...

uh... we denied the bible is merely a witness to revelation very popular in many seminars becomes revelation encounter very popular in many seminars or depends on the responses of men for its validity uh...

it's would be the word of god if there were no men obviously that's a theoretical statement because god used men and it was his purpose to give it to men but uh...

anyhow so we'll uh... pick up by i guess with article four uh... i don't know if i'm gonna am i gonna do i need to like i guess i can make a little note for myself uh...

article four because i don't do that i won't remember that's just the way it'll work i'll just put a little note on my i've got one of those little sticky things on my sticky notepad things on my computer not the real thing it's a computer thing that's sort of neat and uh...

i'll just put that up there so i'll remember that so that we can do that eight seven seven uh... seven five three three three four one let's uh...

go ahead and talk with uh... kyron in massachusetts and uh... back to the issue of cosmos in john three high how you doing doing good it's actually kyron just so you can know how to pronounce a good irish name and how you doing this morning doing good uh...

listen uh... i was reading uh... uh... on your article to david hunt and uh...

because actually it goes by david his son goes by david oh sorry his son actually is a scholar he's a recognized uh...

writer and he he goes by david so some folks get him confused because i heard your conversation the other day i didn't listen live i had to listen to it later on but i heard your conversation with uh...

pierre i guess yes and you referred him to this article for more of an understanding of the word cosmos uh...

and i was uh... interested to know i've been kind of thinking what did you uh... what was your point of view of that and uh...

and i was reading it uh... uh... uh... i was kind of i'm confused because of several things uh...

i'm confused because i was reading a book by uh... palmer uh... i guess you know i've read that one of your writings i know you're familiar with the book and in here he speaks about the world and uh...

and he says and i just quickly refer to you just a short paragraph he says uh... it is just because god so loved the world of elect sinners that he said his only begotten son of the world might be saved through him then he quotes john three sixteen and seventeen i refer to that and he really says that the world is the elect sinners and i was asking about that the other day uh...

as we were writing back and forth and uh... and and and and you seem to be saying that that's not what you accept that you don't believe he's talking about the elect sinners well as i as i explained uh...

the term cosmos in the gospel of john is used in many ways and when it says that god so loved the world that he sent his unique son and or that everyone believing in him might have eternal life uh...

i try to define the word loved and world based upon its use in the passage now if the final result of the entire teaching concerning the result of the saying of the sun is that god's personal love of redemption is expressed only for the elect in that way because only the elect have eternal life and will be in his presence well then that's a proper understanding but it is a derivative understanding it is not necessarily the meaning of the term within the passages being used i do not believe that cosmos in john three sixteen was ever intended by john to be picked apart on the basis of western individualism whether you take that in the uh...

sense of individualism as in each individual person uh...

either being included in that or not be included in that each individual member of the elect be included in that or not be included in that that i do not believe would ever have crossed his mind uh...

as part of what was being recorded here whether you believe john three sixteen is the words of john or the words of jesus uh...

spoken nicodemus uh... which whichever it's inspired scripture and it was written by john and i don't believe that any of that would have been within the context of what was being discussed the context was being discussed is defined by the sentence in which it is found that sentence begins the beginning of verse sixteen ends at the end of verse sixteen and i understand cosmos in the way that i believe a jewish person writing about god's love at the time the gospel of john was being written would have understood that and that is the world of jews and gentiles now does that mean that is extensive that is all jews and gentiles make up everybody yes that is the case however they saw that in a in a generic way not an individualistic way we're not talking about romans here we're not talking when i say romans i mean western uh...

legally minded individuals here we're talking about jews this is spoken certainly within the context of the conversation with nicodemus and so i tried to hear what would nicodemus have understood cosmos to be what would john have understood that to be and as i explained in channel there are many places where that comes out when caiaphas prophesies in john eleven that's how he uses it when he talks about the reason christ has died he dies for the cosmos he dies for that is jews and gentiles and revelation chapter five the same thing takes place there men from every tribe tongue people in nation we are reading something into the text that i don't believe that ever intended to address when we looked simply at the word cosmos and say well what this means is this individualistic western way of thinking in the final analysis the sentence itself limits who has eternal life it limits it to pass hop is still on to all the ones believing that has to have something to do with cosmo and that's where palmer is getting his interpretation of that is that who in all of jews and gentiles all of the cosmon who in that's generic group is going to do the individual action of pistola which is something that only human beings do out of the the pass hop is still on is a subset of the cosmon if you take it in its broadest sense but they are the only ones who receive eternal life and so i was asking pierre last time was he insisted that cosmon there has to be taken in the individualistic sense of people who were everyone who was born before christ everyone who is a lot of time everyone who would ever be born it is it is the it is every single individual considered as an individual making up the entirety of humanity and as such then i said well if you're going to force that and i at least he was got admit he was consistent this point because pierres mormon and mormons have a uh...

expanded canon which includes a book of mormon dot com's for a price and all of the teachings of the latter -day prophets uh...

which they give various levels of authority to and from their perspective they have the idea that there is a spirit prison thereby goes to and if you didn't hear the gospel then you're gonna hit you're going to be have the gospel preach to you within that spirit prison and then you're going to be given this opportunity so from their perspective at least you know from their canon that makes sense it doesn't make sense that locally but make sense from from their perspective and i was saying however how does that make sense in light of the fact uh...

that's the sentence itself when it says uh... so that here's the reason for the sending of the sun why did why was the sun given be so that pass hoppest you on all the ones each one believing in him might have eternal life how does that define the expression of god's love and is it an expression of god's love to an individual i use the uh...

illustration of maybe uh... the canaanite or the the egyptian soldier who dies in the red sea or whatever else it might be how was god's love expressed to that person as an individual which he was insisting cosmos meant there uh...

in the sending of christ and i i still to this day do not see how god's love is demonstrated to the gypsum foot soldier uh...

who got crushed under the weight of the water in the red sea uh... through the sending of christ so that all the believing ones in him i have a true life i don't i don't see where the world that comes from so it's just a matter of taking cosmos generically rather than individually and uh...

what palmers basically saying is when you do that and you look at who it is who has a turn life the only ones who do so are the elect i just don't think that that was that's a proper interpretation but that's not what john was talking he's not trying to define cosmos in that way in that text yeah well i know uh...

in calvin commentary he also takes an individual at least it seems so to me and uh...

i'm i'm i'm not an expert on calvin but in john three sixteen in commenting he he says uh...

he said that whoever believes in may not perish he says he has employed the universal terms whoever vote to invite all indiscriminately now he does and then you and it partake of eternal life but he does go on down later on and say that uh...

that only the elect will believe well not that there's a difference here right i don't want to misrepresent him but uh...

but he does seem to say that uh... that that he's taken the view that the all you know whoever it is a universal car to two different things that that's that's two different to two completely different issues honestly uh...

because uh... pass hoppest you on does mean whoever believes that there is no such thing as a person who has true faith in jesus christ will not be say that's why when people and i've seen this that this is in a number of the popular books that are out there they attack alvin ism because they say that what you've got going on here uh...

is you've got these people actually teaching that you can believe in jesus you can repent you can watch is to be a savior and yet if you know the election will be safe that is not what anyone has ever talked uh...

the point of the phrase is that every single one who believes all the believing ones there is nothing in who so ever that denies particularity it is simply saying there is no such thing as one who believes who will not receive eternal life all the believing ones will have a true life why because god sent his son so that means that faith is never empty because christ never fails so the connection is very clear in the tax no one denies no one on the reform side says all you can believe in you not be safe not a possibility the the passage is not addressing who is or who is not going to pursue well it just simply says that if you pursue all you will have eternal life is not addressing who will and who will not jesus did address that very clearly in john five john six john eight john tenet today because because it comes back down uh...

you know that so whoever that the world is is doing gentile it is kind as as you say you're right it is not uh...

individualist kind you and your car so so he gave his he gave uh...

dot love doing gentile kind that he gave his only begotten son that so so did everyone i mean are you denying them that everyone for whom god gave his son uh...

will be saved and i do not need and for you to know the words it seems to me that every you know that i see your peers on for the world whoever the world is okay you're limiting it to to kind but you know that i don't know how long you're you're you're assuming that the term gave their has as its extent the limiter cosmo well i'll be a stand -by the extended list and i'm taking the context here because it's all it's all the same verse dot love the world that he gave his only begun to do to give it on the gun fun four the ones who believe in him well no it gave me so what does that mean that's

That's where we disagree. Well, see, because I believe, the word gar, there is an explanation of verses 14 and 15, and he's explaining about the

Son of Man being lifted up, you know, whoever believes in Him, and then he's explaining how God can do this, and it's because He loved the world, and then he goes on that He gave, so who did

He give His Son for? He gave Him for the world, you know, because in verse 17 it goes on and explains that further.

It builds on this, for God did not send the Son into the world, but that the world should be saved through Him, so He sent the

Son for the world, not just for some, but whoever the world is for.

I know what you're saying, I hear what you're saying. The problem is that the fundamental flaw in that argumentation is that,

A, it makes giving in verse 16 refer back to the entire extent of the cosmos, which it does not, because the phrase that follows says, in order that posthop is to own, that's

A, and B, that makes the giving of the Savior merely theoretical in nature, not actual in nature, and that's not what

Jesus Himself teaches. What does He say about the giving of His life in John 10? He limits it to the sheep.

He limits it to those God has given to Him, and that He never fails to save them. So, if we're going to extend it beyond this, and start looking at a broader context, to turn this giving, and to make cosmos its delimiter, is to contradict the entire teaching of John, and there's no reason in the context to do that.

Sorry folks, we're out of time, we normally would extend possibly a few minutes, but the fact of the matter is, I've got an appointment right now

I've got to get to, so I've got to finish it off. Thanks for listening today, we'll be back next Tuesday, Lord willing, on The Dividing Line.

of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks. Join us again next Tuesday evening at 5 p .m. for The Dividing.