Radio Free Geneva: WLC on Romans 9

You can constantly hear people that are Calvinist harp on this. God's offering,

God's offering, God's offering, God's offering, God's offering, God's offering. They just keep repeating it, and they repeat it so much you start to think it's a

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

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

Lazarus came out. Do you mean to tell me a dead person can respond to the command of Christ? You take lessons from Judas White and Jeff Durbin.

It shows in this kind of sequential format. Do you really believe that it parallels the method of exegesis that we utilize to demonstrate those other things?

No. Some new

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

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

Blablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablabl You're not always talking about necessarily

God choosing something for no apparent reason But you're choosing that meat because it's a favorable meat. There's a reason to have the choice of that meat

Eat beneath the faculty cafeteria in New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Safe from all those moderate

Calvinist Dave Hunt fans and those who have read and reread George Bryson's book. We are

Broadcasting the truth about God's freedom to say for his own eternal glory Angerings welcome to the dividing line and radio free

Geneva if you have not heard before is a special version of the program We do where initially we were responding to some of the worst

Arguments against reform theology and then we started taking on some of the best arguments and now it's just simply

Anything that has to do with reform theology if we're going to provide a response to it We roll them all together and that way we get to listen to the radio free

Geneva theme Which a lot of people really really really enjoy. So there you go. That's that's what radio free

Geneva is about today we are brought together as The official theologian for skillet.

I got my shirt Josh made that for me and then had a fellow I think named David Smith actually do the printing or something.

I Am the official theologian for skillet? So and they were just nominated for a couple

Grammys or Doves or something for their last album So yay, you may have seen

John Cooper on with me just a few weeks ago here on the program Anyways today on the program we are brought together by William Lane Craig Layton flowers and JD Greer interesting mixture of folks to bring us together for radio free

Geneva the first up of course is William Lane Craig and It is interesting to note that Dr.

Craig in years past. I don't I Think he really put out an effort to avoid becoming bogged down in the morass of theology

Theology was just something that he had to deal with Outside of the area of his true passion and expertise and that is philosophy but I I don't know what training he has in the original languages and exegesis in any of the things that are necessary to really engage in that particular subject but anyways he over the past number of years has been doing stuff on the historical

Jesus and the Doctrine of the Atonement and and now has weighed in on Romans chapter 9 and of course as Most people know

Dr. Craig, even though he is not a Roman Catholic Is not exactly on board with the

Reformation and certain aspects of the Reformation We know for example, he doesn't mind calling himself a neo -apollinarian so he holds to a

Unorthodox view of the person of Christ a form of apollinarianism So he's not concerned about what people would think about that when he debated

Shabir Ali, he pretty well threw original sin under the bus and so he really feels the freedom to chart his own course shall we say and That means we have the right to shine a light on the charting of that of that course as well

And that's what we're doing here so last week sometime This video surface, it's not an overly long video, but it is his

Explanation of how he deals with Romans chapter 9 everybody sent it to me as soon as it came out, of course and So no one is overly shocked whatsoever that we are doing a program

Specifically in response to it. So let's take a look at what dr.

Craig had say. Oh, it's almost nine minutes long I will be starting and stopping Obviously as we comment upon it

But here is dr. Craig on Romans 9 What does it actually teach now someone might say but doesn't

Romans 9 teach that human beings are Completely inert in the process of salvation

Immediately we are reminded of the fact that Dr. Craig's Depth of understanding of Reformed Theology or his willingness to actually listen to Reformed Theology have been questioned more than once To say completely inert if if what that means is

Does Romans 19 teach monergism? Well then obviously But we have we need to emphasize very strongly that mankind is not inert

Mankind is in rebellion Mankind is in active rebellion mankind is anything but inert in the spiritual realm

He is well Just just look at all the lists that the Apostle Paul provides of all the things that mankind is doing his heart isn't a factory of idols

Though made in the image of God. He is is incessantly worshiping but worshiping the created order

Rather than the Creator who is forever blessed And so if you're going to use the term man being inert

Then what you need to do is to say that man is inert in being able to do anything

To position himself for salvation to contribute to his salvation to initiate a process of salvation

Whatever else it might be That requires grace that requires freedom from slavery to sin

All the associated things that the Bible very plainly presents to us That it belongs

Entirely to God's will who is elect and who is reprobate and left agreed a very excellent

Summary, it is completely of God completely of God there is only one autonomous will in the universe and it's

God's and so to try to turn man into The autonomous decider of all things is really what you end up with in Molinism where because of middle knowledge, which has knowledge of what

Creatures who have not been decreed to be made would do in any given situation

Takes away from God the right to create Well to do what

God says he does when he speaks to Moses says hey When when Moses saying

I Let's bring Aaron along Aaron's better speaker than I am. I'm sort of slow of tongue.

What does God say? I'm I made your tongue. I made your tongue to be the way that is I made you to be the way you are

I made Aaron to be the way that Aaron is in other words those things that define those Persons is a part of God's decree, but not in middle knowledge

Person X will do what person X does in any given situation apart from God's decree to create them

So God's freedom is fundamentally denied at that point In that system and that's just one of the many many problems that comes up in Molinism unsaved doesn't

Romans 9 teach a strong doctrine of predestination and irresistible grace that Excludes any sort of human role in terms of a free response such as I have

Suggested. Yes, of course, we would agree that that is the case. And so we would expect that.

Dr. Craig is going to attempt to change the Context in which we find

Romans 9 because remember Romans 9 comes right after Romans 8 We have spent a great deal of time over the past two years on Romans 8 on this program, especially in response

To the provisionist perspective and dr. David Allen and others who have attempted to find some mechanism some way of Getting around what

Romans chapter 8 actually says not only in its assertion of predestination election the golden chain

But then the perfection of the work of Christ in behalf of God's elect No one can bring a charge against God's elect because God's the one who justifies the

Son is the one who intercedes It's all it is indeed all of God and that is the issue

Fundamentally the issue is between is it is it something that God accomplishes perfectly to his own glory

Or is it something that he makes available and tries to accomplish in cooperation with the will of man

In Molinism, it gets a lot more complicated because you have to have all these possible worlds and all the rest that kind of stuff

You got to throw in there, but it still remains the same fundamentally at the at the end is God's dependency

Upon mankind to allow the system to work up to the point The maximum point that God allows it to God wants it to be how many people get saved

How much evil there is so on and so forth is all a function of the nature of man

Not a function of the nature of God Well, I'd like to suggest for your consideration a very different reading of Romans 9 than the one that we so often hear typically people think of Romans 9 as God's Narrowing down the scope of election to just those few people

That he wants to save now I'm going to go ahead and say

That Reformed people are somewhat responsible for this straw man description that dr.

Craig just gave because there does Especially Especially if you join

Reformed theology with a pessimistic eschatology it's easy to emphasize the

Narrow way few there are that find it Perspective and the smallness of the elect

That unfortunately is always within the context of what we see in our own experiences at a particular point in time but the fact is that when you listen to the promises the promise to Abram is that his seat his seat is gonna be like the sand of the sea

As the stars of heaven that it is a a great crowd is a

Number that no one can can number and so I I Mean that that is found in a great deal of reformed theology formed writing

Because it's biblical because you there's always that tension there part of the tension is

Mankind as a whole goes this direction man the tendency of mankind is to do this You have to have

God's grace for mankind to go this direction. That's that's that's a given almost anywhere but This idea of a narrowing down of God's grace that is that is not a part of reformed theology

It's just the opposite any meaningful covenant theologian

Will talk about the the wideness in God's mercy in that the decreed

Mechanism by which the elector brought into their relationship with their head is through the gospel going to all nations and So that that gospel going out to the

Gentiles and over the past 2 ,000 years going around the world Is not something that caught

God by surprise. It's not a second Second plan. It was what God intended from the start.

So there is a a massive widening numerically in The gospel going out to all people so to describe it as a narrowing is to completely miss

Because it is being used in a numerical sense How else would that would there be narrowing given that the gospel is going out to Jew and Gentile that is

Jew and Gentile that together Jesus says I have sheep that are not of this fold I must must gather them make them one one flock one

Shepherd. What's that all about? That's not that's not narrowing And yet John chapter 10 is one of the most predestinarian

Chapters in all of the text of Scripture and yet you have it in that context so Interesting that it would be expressed the way that it is he passes over the broad mass of humanity to Selectively save those few that he has picked out.

So again the an erroneous Limitation so so immediately you've got a straw man element here that Again, you know, it's it's dr.

Craig who's entering into these areas You know when Norman Geisler wrote chosen but free

I Wasn't the only one well, maybe I was but I know I tried while he was still writing it to Encourage him to do more reading and to Listen to what reform people were saying and to recognize certain aspects of that and I I failed to get him to do that But that failure wasn't on my part

Dr. Geisler did not believe that he could learn theological truth from anyone younger than himself That was just that was just That's a given

And so I was too young For him to take me seriously, it doesn't didn't matter

What I had to say or what I had studied or hadn't studied that was I consider that a flaw in dr

Geisler's thinking not a flaw in my attempting to get him to think but anyways same thing with dr. Craig my

Experience over the years and responding with dr. Craig is he doesn't seem to have any well almost any respect for reformed people

And so it doesn't seem to read widely in in even historically reformed sources from Calvin onward the

Westminster divines Any of the great Princeton? Theologians who have addressed so many of these things so brilliantly and so in -depth over the years

And that leads to I think this fundamental Misdefinition from the start which will be relevant to how he finally tries to deal with Romans 9

I Want to suggest that Paul's burden in Romans 9 is

Exactly the opposite what Paul wants to do here is to broaden the scope of salvation

Not to narrow it down to a select few Now I would simply point out that What we what we need here is a contextually consistent

Exegesis What we need to do is to recognize that chapter divisions are not inspired

Therefore we need to reach back into Romans chapter 8. We need to see that there is a clear subject shift at the beginning of what we call chapter 9

But it is brought on by the fact that the end of chapter 8 results in this huge Exclamation of worship and praise and and And everything else in regards to what

God has done in Christ Jesus If God before us who can be against us who can bring a charge against God's elect.

That's the language and that's why neither famine or nakedness or peril or any powers that have been created or will be created or ever heaven earth under the sea he

He compasses the universe to say That because God is accomplishing his purpose in his elect people in Christ Jesus There's nothing in this created universe that can keep him from accomplishing what it is.

He desires to accomplish and so That then is the immediate

Context You end with the praise at the end of chapter 8 for what

God has done and Then in chapter 9 you have a shift to the answering of a specific objection to what has just been given to us in chapter 8 and That is if this is true, then why do so few

Jews believe the message that you are proclaiming? Why are they?

The primary people trying to kill Paul Why are they the ones following him from city to city to gain say what it is?

He was saying there has to be an explanation for all of this. Why is Paul one of the small remnant?

That is embracing Jesus as the Messiah and why is he then bringing this message outside of that narrow confine to the broader

Context of the Gentiles why is any of this happening and That's where you get the transitionary statement in Romans chapter 9.

They are not all of Israel who are of Israel just because you are a

Genetic you're genetically related to Abraham does not mean that you're his child There is something else and from the beginning

God has exercised his Sovereign choice and that's what he illustrates.

He illustrates it with the twins He before they had been born before they had ever done good or evil

So that God's purpose and election might stand it was said to her the

Older shall serve the younger. It was a reversal of the normative Relationship and what was it about God's purpose in election?

That was what Romans 8 was about that was central to that theme. It's God's Purpose in election.

That's what you've got in the prologue to the epistle to the Ephesians God's purpose. This is what the early church believed in was part of their very language and so in light of that then

Paul gives examples of the fact that God has been sovereign in Reserving for himself a certain people

Who've not bowed the knee to bail that he's gonna specifically cite that passage in Romans chapter 11, but he goes through the twins and he goes through Esau and he he goes through the the

Pharaoh Even though he destroys the Pharaoh. He uses the Pharaoh to his honor and glory.

And so there is a specific Objection that is being addressed

By the Apostle that he had faced himself We need to hear

Exegesis from the text not it is plausible. It is possible.

Maybe this maybe that That's not dealing with the text in an appropriate fashion.

So we need something more than that Wants to broaden it as wide as possible

You see the problematic that Paul is dealing with in Romans 9

Concerns Jewish persons who think that because of their Jewish ethnicity

They have a sort of leg up on salvation with God Those who were ethnically

Jewish found it Unthinkable that God would reject his chosen people

Israel and instead allow these execrable Gentiles to go into the kingdom of God Rather than his own people how

God could prefer over the Jews these Gentile dogs and save them and pass over the

Jews was just unthinkable for these Jewish people

There's there's an element of truth here that's the whole point of Why the illustrations are given that are given and that is specifically the reality that God had always exercised divine election that it was never a matter of Simple genetic relationship of What your

DNA is there was always the freedom of God To bring people to himself on his own

Basis you could not demand anything of God so None of this so far is actually relevant to the real issue

We just need to keep our eye on the ball and see where the shot goes wide shall we say so what

Paul wants to emphasize in Romans 9 is God's sovereignty in electing and saving

Whomever he wants regardless of their ethnic background Whether Jew or Gentile it is

God's choice as To who will be saved now that sounds reformed that sounds very reformed

It isn't Because behind that is the

Molinistic Running of the future possibilities and stuff like that, but he has to recognize that Romans 9 then takes us into chapter 10 and 11 where the whole

Jewish Gentile situation and the proclamation that it's by faith no matter who you are is

Presented so what he's saying is God has the freedom to save Jews and Gentiles That much is true but once you get down to and therefore does he have an a specific elect people

That's where the division takes place So you notice at the beginning of chapter 9

Paul expresses his anguish concerning those Israelites to whom all the promises of the

Old Covenant belong that are not Believers in Christ He says in verse 6 that it is not as though God's Word had failed

Rather, he says that not everyone who is descended from Israel belongs to Israel Not everybody is a real child of Abraham Just because they are his physical descendant

Just because you are ethnically Jewish Doesn't mean that you have some sort of a favored status with God Rather as Paul illustrates with the story of Jacob and Esau God has the freedom to choose whom he wills to be saved

Just being descended from Abraham physically is no guarantee

So in verses 6 to 24 Paul says God is free to save Whomever he wants and that no one can call into question

God's choice No one has the right to talk back to God No one has the right to say that God has to prefer his own people

Israel over these Gentiles if God wants to broaden the scope of salvation to include

Gentiles in addition to and even Instead of his chosen people the ethnic

Jews Then no one can talk back to God It is

God who has mercy upon whom he has mercy and has compassion upon whom he has compassion so Here is the key question

Okay, so up to this point we're sitting there going. Well, yeah, it sounds pretty good

Sounds pretty good You know So when does the other shoe drop or given how hot it is right now?

I guess yesterday we set a new record at Death Valley at 130 degrees

You know It really makes you wonder if God isn't saying, you know scorching fires and you know

Yeah, yeah, hey guys wake up California hello, but anyway

You you would you would we're just waiting right now for the other shoe to drop because we we know

That if you were to take what was just said to its logical conclusion Then God has an elect people that he has chosen from eternity past that is

Completely unworthy. There's nothing that they do in and of themselves. They're not choice meets

They they they aren't Able to do what the Bible specifically says mankind outside of grace is not capable of doing

Uh Something's gonna have to add so how how are we gonna get around this?

Well, that's that's where the other shoe or sandal as it is and the heat right now is gonna drop

Who is it there? according to Romans 9 That God has chosen to elect if it is not those who are ethnically

Jewish the answer is those who have faith in Christ Jesus Those are the ones that he has chosen to elect and save and so in verse 30

He writes what shall we say then the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it that is righteousness through faith

But that Israel who pursued the righteousness, which is based on law

Did not succeed in fulfilling that law why

Because they did not pursue it through faith But as if it were based on works okay, so a

Tremendous passage one that we use all the time in dealing with people who are attempting to insert works righteousness

But Romans 9 30 through 32 comes after Romans 9 6 through 24 and then some fulfillment passages thereafter

So are we really suggesting that the key to the interpretation of what comes before isn't provided?

until much later in the text Why Why is it upside down?

It's similar to when Norman Geisler Goes to John 640 and Inserts his understanding of what that means and that then has to determine what

John 637 means Shouldn't 37 come before 40? Doesn't the first part of Romans 9 come before this part of Romans 9 and Of course, there is an assumption concerning the nature of faith and and everything else that is related here

Romans 9 30 and 32 is coming after Paul has now

Completed his demonstration that they are not all Israel who are Israel and so it's it's

Getting ready. It's actually the the the transitionary section into chapter 10

But what is being done here is Craig is trying to say well Yes, God is free to save who he wants but the condition of that being saved is

Autonomous faith which in Mullen ism Allows for the freedom of the will does not require regeneration

So man can be autonomous and God is still saving who he wants, but the want is really the result of the combination of whatever

Choice God has made as to what his goal is maximum number of people saved maximum number of people saved in light of minimalization of evil or any combination of Possible things he doesn't want to really commit himself on that though.

You can tell sort of where he's going in his thinking But that's where God's choice is

God's choice is not personal non reformed Understanding is a salvation are impersonal.

They are involved Potentiality making man's savable creating nameless faceless groups that mankind fills in by his actions

Whether it's just faith and repentance or just faith. Maybe no repentance Or longer lists of actions and sacramental systems, whatever it might be, but it's impersonal.

It's it's creating groups That then are filled by our action

The the thing that can't be from a synergistic perspective is that God has chosen a

Particular people therefore their resurrection of spiritual life. They're They're being in drop of the

Holy Spirit of God their adoption of forgiveness. Everything comes from his hand and his hand only even though They were very much in opposition

To God and to his ways justly under his condemnation. They were not choice meets

They were not the righteous They become the righteous because that's the mechanism he uses to conform them the image of Christ But he provides a way to do that.

It is not what draws his favor to them. It is not what makes them Who they are and so This is instead of walking through the text some of us can walk through Romans chapter 9 and Start at the beginning and go verse by verse and make the argument

Notice that what has happened here is after recognizing, you know, pretty much through verse 6 7 and the rest has been skipped there's been it's not even touched and Instead now you're gonna jump into the another section read it back into this that well

It must have been talking about that because well, that's that's what we've got, right? so So what

God has done is that he has decided to save all

Those who have faith in Christ Jesus whether Jew or Gentile It doesn't matter.

It is those who have faith in Christ Jesus whom God has

Elected so here's the key issue again. Very very plain. This is you're gonna find this with everybody in Craig's perspective man has the capacity even though this is chapter 9 chapter 8 starts off with Paul saying

That those who according to flesh cannot do what is pleasing to God they cannot submit themselves to the law of God They do not have that capacity

Believing and repenting is pleasing to God Romans chapter 8 said they can't do what's pleasing to God But Craig and any synergistic system simply does not have a consistently biblical anthropology they they take any type of positive reference and just ignore the straightforward man is not able texts, that's just That's that's what you have to do

You you can't you cannot maintain a freewill perspective without that kind of a

Maneuver, and that's what you have here. So man is able to freely choose in of himself specifically by And of course within Molinism Whether man is going to believe or not is dependent upon the circumstances of which he's placed which

God places him in those circumstances but There are some people that doesn't matter what circumstance you could put him in they're never gonna believe

I guess there are other people it doesn't matter what circumstances They'll always believe and then you've got the people in the middle and God places them depending on Depending on whether he wants to get him saved or not

So it would almost seem at that point that he would have to put everyone who could possibly be saved into the context

That they could be saved but maybe there's just not enough worlds to do that. I don't know this that kind of speculative stuff to try to turn man into the deciding factor and wherever this middle knowledge came from It it it creates real havoc therefore given

God's sovereign choice ethnically Jewish people cannot Sovereign choice to save in a particular fashion

Not sovereign choice of Individuals big big difference. I mean if God has preferred to save certain

Gentiles over certain Jewish persons This is all based upon the principle of faith that Paul explains back in Romans 3 and 4

Okay, so so there's there's part of the there's part of the idea. There we go Rich is rich is not with us right now.

He's he's he's what oh he's talking to our Internet provider which doesn't allow us to do live internet broadcasting these days

Just simply by not giving us a reliable signal which is why we're having to record this but Here hear what he's saying when he says

God has chosen what God has chosen is not individuals God has chosen to save those who believe whether Jew or Gentile so there is a there is a a

Category out there and You've you put yourself in it so we

It's important to hear what he was saying before it sounded reformed because it was based on what was being said in Romans chapter 9

But it's not Because you're redefining the terms and you have a an external

Category an external framework that you're putting all this in to try to maintain the autonomy of man with respect to Abraham himself

So in Romans 3 verses 21 and following Paul writes But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law

Although the law and the prophets bear witness to it the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe

For there is no distinction Since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

They are justified by his grace as a gift Through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus Whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood to be received by faith beautiful text irrelevant to Romans 9 in context

I Mean if you have to cut the text of Romans up into little parts like like puzzle pieces and move them around That should say something to you

Why is it that you can pick up? commentaries by reformed men and Start with Romans 1 and work your way all the way through Following the argument as it builds upon itself as Paul takes a side issue here a side thing there

But he's always going the same direction How come Romans makes sense? Going straight through it

But then other people have to go well what you really need to do is we need to skip over Romans 9 7 and following that specifically says it wasn't because of what people did it wasn't because whether they did something good or bad

It wasn't because of their righteousness or their good deeds. It was completely God's freedom And it was personal in their experience.

It wasn't just categories and God is the Potter and and and skip over the fact that there is the

That the objection the very objection Paul responds to Well who resists as well?

Who are you? Oh, man? How can you pretend I'll just be honest here. How can you pretend to?

Put a video out in Romans chapter 9 and never even mentioned that Never even talk about it never even say well, what is this objection really saying?

Why why would Paul think that someone would object to his perspective in this way?

Instead you're spending all your time going back to talking about justification Romans chapter 3 That wasn't

Paul's that wasn't the way Paul went through everything Everything here is absolutely true, but it does not explain what

Paul is doing in Romans chapter 9 Because the objection is you go through chapter 3 you go through chapter 4 you're justified by faith by grace

It's not by works the law. It's not by circumcision There's there's only there can be only one body.

That's Romans 5. He goes through something. I At least we debate

Shabir Ali didn't seem to believe Romans chapter 5 is discussion of the federal headship of Adam our

Fall in Adam the corruption of our nature all the rest of those things he goes through the experience of the believer in Romans 6 and 7 in regards to sin and the mastery of sin and we've died the sin and Therefore we've been

Released from its slavery into chapter 8 and the freedom of the sons of God but the beginning of chapter 8 the discussion very clearly and Importantly of our inability outside of Christ to be able to do any of these things

We have to be in the spirit not in the flesh, etc. Etc Then you've got the explanation this all builds up to that God has done all of this

He is behind all of this. It is a part of what he has predestined from eternity past and that's what makes it certain and sure and Then having said all of that Chapter 9.

Okay, then. Why are you in the minority of the Old Covenant people? why do most

Jews reject what it is you're saying and Paul then demonstrates that God has always had an elect people.

He is always exercised his freedom even within the the very founding family of the tribes of Israel He was free to choose

Jacob I've loved Esau. I've hated It's right there.

How can you deal with Romans 9? By quoting from Romans 3 which is talking about a completely different issue and skip over Jacob I've loved

Esau. I've hated. Why does that do? Why does he still find fault who resists his will?

Who are you? Oh, man, what if God willing to with patience bear vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

I mean If you want to call that dealing with Romans 9 Okay It almost seems to me like you're just assuming that people are gonna believe whatever you have to say and they're not gonna read

Romans 9 for themselves Because if they do they're gonna go but you didn't actually read the actual important stuff

It's it's like it's not even there Well, maybe in the minute and five seconds. He has left.

He'll cover all of that In verse 27 Paul says then what becomes of our boasting?

It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith.

For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law

Then he asks specifically or is God the God of Jews only?

Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes of Gentiles also

Since God is one and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith so it is through faith that one becomes a true child of Abraham and a member of that elect body that will

Inherit the kingdom of God Well, yeah, that's true it has nothing to do with Romans 9 however, that's it's that that's the amazing part

Let me just let me just remind everybody if it's it's been a little while since you since you looked at it remember

Paul talks about the great sorrow and unceasing grief he has in his heart That he himself could wish to be anathema a curse separated from Christ for the sake of his brethren his kinsmen according the flesh for the

Israelites To whom belongs the adoption of sons and the glory and the covenants and giving the law and the temple service of the promises

Whose are the fathers and from whom is the Christ according the flesh who is God over all blessed forever

That's the great privileges that people of Israel have but it is not as though the

Word of God has failed Here's the objection. This is the objection of Romans 9. This is not what he's talking about Romans 3

Romans 3 has a completely different context a completely different set of objections in fact Romans 3 is then going to lead into Romans 4 and the assertion of what justification is apart from works and imputed righteousnesses

That that's a different realm that we're dealing with they're related Yes, because it's how

God saves his elect people, but it's not talking about the existence of an elect people which comes later

But it is not as though the Word of God has failed that's what people are saying Paul if you're right then God's Word has failed

The Jewish people are not are not believing in mass For they are not all

Israel who are descended from Israel. So there is a true

Israel and Who Who are those true Israelites that the choice meets that's slate and flowers.

That's proof. That's provisionalism That's plagianism the choice meets the good people They've got better hearts

But if you recognize just how completely Unbiblical that is then you can hear when

Paul quotes From the Elijah incident. I have reserved for myself not they reserved themselves

I have reserved for myself 7 ,000 have not bowed the knee to bail. There is a Lima a remnant

That God reserves for himself. That is his sovereign freedom

So, how does he how does he bear this out? And why does the next do the next verses?

appear nowhere in An almost nine minute video for William Lane Craig about Romans chapter 9 when they are the very essence of Romans chapter 9

Because that was a categorical Re Contextualization of Romans 9 not an exegesis of Romans 9

Sound familiar not the first time we've experienced this Nor are they all children because they are

Abraham's descendants but through Isaac your descendants will be named God's choice

To limit The fulfillment of his promises in that context

Through Isaac your descendants will be named That is it is not the children of the flesh or children of God, but the children of promise

Are regarded as descendants nothing here about faith Nothing here about foreseen faith nothing here about This is all determined on the basis of your faith you will have faith as a result of this

They've reversed it That's why they had to skip this go to the end of Romans 9 and then jump six chapters back to a completely different topic as If that is that explanation of Romans chapter 9 so The children of promise are regarded as descendants

For this is the word of the promise at this time. I will come and Sarah shall have a son and not only this But there was

Rebecca also when she had conceived twins by one man our father Isaac for though the twins Were not yet born

So they had not There's no faith. There's no choice meets

For though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad

Good or bad so that God's purpose according to his choice

Would stand I remember for William Lane Craig for the provisionalist for all synergists

God's choice is only About methodology.

It's not about who It's only

God can choose that if you believe you go into group a if you don't believe you go into group

B That's the that's the extent of his choice. There's nothing more We have far more range of choice than God does in that system

But is that what choice is here so that God's purpose according to his choice would stand

Not because of works but because of him who calls How does it get any clearer than to say not?

Because of works Not because of what someone is doing

But rather because of him who calls Luke X air gone not from what mankind does

I'll act to Kahlon toss but from the one calling Okay, how can it be any clearer than this and yet all of man's systems have to reverse

That order all of man's systems have to say The calling of God is universal

But it is X air gone whether it is your Activity because it see this isn't this isn't works of law here

Because this is contrasting simple human activity versus divine activity So we're not talking we're not doing the justification air gone here works of works of law it is not of Human activity but of the one calling because what's what's his point?

The twins weren't born. They hadn't done anything good or bad This isn't mosaic law this isn't justification you try to you you start confusing these terms

You're never gonna get a handle on what's going on. It's not of what mankind does it is of the one calling

Therefore it was said to her the older will serve the younger just as written

Jacob. I love but Esau I hate it Personal, isn't it? You can say well

Jacob represents Israel and Esau represents the Edomites But it started off with a very personal human reality, didn't it?

God had the right to choose Jacob before Esau Took a breath of air

That was God's sovereign, right? That's what people don't like that's what people don't like Now if you think that is not how it should be interpreted then why does verse 14 say what shall we say then?

There is no injustice with God is there may it never be so Whatever your interpretation of verse 13 is does it result in someone objecting?

to God's Justice if it doesn't then you probably didn't interpret verse 13 correctly, right?

Because that's what Paul immediately turns to he immediately turns to the justice of God And he says may

Genoita may it never be for he says to Moses I Will mercy whomever

I mercy and I will compassion whomever I compassion. They are verbs in Greek.

We only have Nouns substantives that we turn into verbal phrases have compassion on have mercy on but they're active verbs

Mercy and compassion are not demanded of God For God to be just and holy is what is required for God to be

God to be compassionate and merciful and Gracious is to show the full range of his character, but see people get lost and confused

Because we know God is love and if you start from that perspective and try to work backwards

You will end up sacrificing his holiness only if you start with what he started with in his own revelation

You know like flooding the earth That's why a lot of people don't believe it because they read the

Bible backwards but God started with certain basic revelations of who he is and That's what makes it so beautiful to see who he is his mercy and his love and his compassion

Become beautiful only when they are kept in the biblical balance that is presented in Scripture With his holiness and his wrath against sin.

That's what makes them deep That was that's what makes them beautiful. I will mercy whom

I mercy. I will compassion whom I compassion so then so then it does it is not of the willing one

Neither the running one the one trying to do something But the mercy in God Therefore it is not of the willing one

That's the end of provisionalism right there That's it It's done. It is directly contradicted by Scripture.

It is not of the willing one That's what they say. It is. It's all of the willing.

That's what William Lane Craig just said It's all of the willing one. No, it is not the one willing

Neither of the one trek on toss the one running the one engaging activity the one trying to earn something from God Nope But to LA on toss they you the mercying

God it is all of God's mercy It's not a mixture

It's not God's mercy makes the categories and then we fill in the willing and the running no

For the scripture says to Pharaoh for this very reason I raised you up That in you

My power might be demonstrated and that my name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth

The whole reason that Pharaoh was where he was with had nothing to do with something called middle knowledge He was placed there so that God would demonstrate his power in the destruction of Pharaoh so then

What does it say verse 18? so then he mercies whom he wills and He hardens whom he wills.

There's no way around the language. There's no way to play games and come up with Allegra allegory

Jesus or Anna Anna Jesus Anna and the Lala Jesus Find some way of trying to get around it.

It's straightforward. He has mercy on whom he desires. He hardens human desires. It's his desire It's his desire

Fell I does not mean Anything other than he wishes So he has mercy on whom he wishes and he hardens whom he wishes

That had to do with an individual There were some Egyptians who did come out of Egypt So it's not just a race thing in any way shape or form.

It's God's freedom So as soon as he says so then he has mercy on whom he desires he hardens whom he desires you will say to me then

Why does he still find fault for who? resists his will again, if your

Interpretation of Romans 9 does not result in the objections that Paul himself

Anticipates then you're missing Romans chapter 9. You're missing the Apostle a

Lot of people miss the Apostle Paul's response on the contrary who are you a man who answers back to God?

The thing molded will not say to the molder. Why'd you make me like this? Will it? Paul's answer is found in the fact that God is our creator anything you can do with this creation as he sees fit as He sees fit we are the thing molded

God has the right to mold us as he sees fit And so does not the potter have a right over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another

For common use and by the way before you jump off into some other uses of the potter and clay analogy listen to Paul's application first because his application is specific in the language application is to purposes

Have a right over the clay to make them the same lump one vessel for honorable use another for common use

That's God's freedom So before you run off to repentance issues in Jeremiah or whatever else it might be you've got to listen

What does it mean to make a vessel for honorable use another for common use from the same lump?

Who has the right to do that? Because then he explains what if God although willing to demonstrate his wrath and make his power known

Endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction

Prepared for destruction people try to get around that one, too But in context and we've dealt with this many many times before there's been various Really tricky

Greek ways to try to look at at the participle there and try to Get away from the idea that God prepares certain vessels for destruction

The reason that people don't like that is actually found the beginning of the verse what they don't like What mankind finds terrifying is that God would be willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make his power known

There are people who will just look you straight in the eye and say if that's how God is I'll never worship him and I my

Response is that's right. That's exactly what the word says Not only is that exactly what says about him.

It's exactly what it says about you Exactly what it says about you Yeah, so and I hope you're hearing me when

I say How can you pretend To have dealt with Romans chapter 9 when you didn't read a word of what

I just read You didn't deal with a single objection that Paul raised to his own position

Instead you skipped it all Read part of the transition into the next chapter and then jumped six chapters back all to create an artificial

Context that allows you to skip over the hard words

How do you do that? But that's why we have

Radio Free Geneva. Oh goodness, I I I'm just so thankful to be able to just open the text and just Walk through it.

You might say that's because you're just a simple person. Well, maybe so Maybe so but Wow Wow Wow Wow All right, thankfully

Thankfully Um Layton Flowers is thing and I can't really blow this up because it was only 480

If I blow it up, it's gonna get all fuzzy -wuzzy So it was it's it's it's interesting. I think he just does on his phone or something.

I don't know. I mean, I'll go ahead and There you go, so there it is it's one minute my my sincere congratulations to Layton Flowers I He had to have taken some kind of sedative or something

Gotten a one and it's it's exact. I mean right here. I did one 0 -0 spot -on

Layton. Congratulations, sir I think you must be taking some classes or you're in a in group therapy or something for all those three hour videos, but Hi Hi, I'm Layton And I can't make videos under two and a half hours long

Hi Layton, we can't either YouTube has banned us all Long video makers anonymous,

I guess Anyhow, so here is

Layton Flowers on predestination you ready? Here we go Predestination Predestination can be broken down into two basic parts pre

Destination which simply means that the destination has been pre decided but for whom has the destination been

Predecided God has decided beforehand the destination of those who are in Christ Jesus by faith

He has not predestined who will and won't follow Jesus All of us are held responsible for God's Word because we're actually able to respond to the truth of God's Word we can either accept the truth so as to be set free or if we suppress it we may grow hardened to that truth and Eventually cut off from the light of God's Word.

God does not predestine who will and won't believe in Jesus Predestination does not mean that God has faded the eternal destiny of everyone before they're even born

This type of theistic fatalism can lead to a victimhood mentality where people believe they ultimately have no responsibility in light of God's Word Okay, there you go.

There's what well, of course you did

Well, yeah, but he's still hey, I'm not I'm not taking anything look we've got to give Layton all

Layton can get I mean You know, I mean, this is this is what the man does and so we've we just we just don't want to Hmm They dumped you you you're you're you're online with with Cox and they dumped you

Yeah, that's I'm not expecting that customer services could get any better in the future.

That's that's my concern Venezuela here we come How do

I can't feel about carrier pigeons, what are we gonna do start start? Because I've got you know, like like this is a jump drive right here.

Yeah, this is this is a jump drive right here I'm not sure how big this one is but it's

We just may have to start doing massive production of these and then carrier pigeons And then they just have a fly over your house and and then you can watch that Yeah, Venezuela, here we come

Yeah, it's exciting. Anyways, okay, so there's there's what? What brother

Layton has to say and you'll notice that he didn't say much about predestination What he talked about was what predestination can't possibly mean

And that we have the the ability to do things

Even though at one point he actually uses similar language

John chapter 8 where Jesus For Layton, we have the ability

To respond to the message and free ourselves Jesus said the

Son has to set you free that's one of the many many major differences between biblical theology and that of soteriology 101

But let's look at if we could The use of the term pro or rid zone pro or rid zone

There is a total of two four six Utilizations in the

New Testament. I noticed just looking at all of them here They're all either aorist finite verbs or Aorist participles, which is interesting one an active participle and one a passive Participle just glancing over them here but let's look at them in order and let's see if The idea and this is something that Layton has said many times before Predestination just simply means and we talked about this and we played his comments on The webcast.

I don't know about a month or so ago That the destination is determined, but whether you're gonna get on the plane or not

Is up to you So, you know some of you may have noticed I Was in Arkansas over the weekend

Had a great time there folks down Arkansas are real kind very nice to you But I didn't have an enjoyable trip coming back

I was supposed to get home at 6 55 p .m. I Got home at about 250 a .m

So there was about an 8 hour delay, which included a lot of running around from Pillar to post and terminal terminal and gate to gate and Yeah, it was it was a lot of fun.

The idea was, you know, I was stuck at Dallas They had a bunch of massive storms came in and it wasn't their fault.

I Might my wife I can now announce since she has lost her job.

Thanks to the great panic of 2020 One of the reasons I've never really talked about what she did and stuff

Was because of the company that she worked for for almost quarter century is American Airlines and Well, it was

America West then it was US Airway Airways then American Airlines Everyone's gonna be merging with everybody eventually except for Southwest because they just don't want to do that with anybody but anyway

It wasn't so I'm a I'm what's called a spouse. I know what they're going through I know that they are under tremendous stress when massive thunderstorms come into DFW and they're shipping planes off other places and landing them other places and having to get him refueled and and Trying to shuffle all the crews and you know

So there's a lot of people don't understand all that and they get really mad the gate agents never do that folks again agents

Do not they're just standing there that they have no control over nothing. Give them a break

Please in fact little hint here if you're nice to them you get treated a lot better Than if you're not

So anyways, we're running around all sorts of different places and it was a long trip back

But the idea is I'm stuck to DFW and there's flight 153 and they keep saying it's going to Phoenix It gets delayed another hour delayed another hour delayed another hour moved to another gate, but it's predestined

To go to Phoenix. I thought it was predestined to be canceled to be honest with you But somehow it made it and like I said, we got in Just before I don't know 245.

I forget what it was. It was ridiculous. I got to bed around 315 So maybe it's 215. I don't know it was Long time there wasn't anybody around let's put that way if I had wanted to eat at the airport

There wasn't anything to eat at the airport at that point at that point in time. So but the idea is predestined

But whether I got on because there were some people gave up You know, I was given the option because I still have my flight status

I won't for long, but I saw my flight status not because of her because I'm executive platinum The the help desk said would you just like to go tomorrow morning and go find a hotel room or something like that?

I could have Chosen not to get on flight 153 But flight 153 was predestined to go to Phoenix, Arizona from DFW Okay, that's the idea there's there's your idea of predestination, let's see if that fits

With what we have in Scripture. There's only six passages to look at right? so Acts 4 28.

Oh I just preached on this a few weeks ago at Apologia. You might want to look up that particular sermon but here the early church upon experiencing persecution

Looks to the Old Testament looks to Psalm 2 says ah fulfillment They're opposing the

Sun and his reigning over them. And then they talk about the nations. They define the nations for us

They talk about Pilate and Herod and the Romans and the Jews And they're all gathered together against God's Holy Servant Jesus To do what?

Acts 4 28 to do whatever your hand and your will

Predestined to take place Predestined to take place

So what was? predestined the events

That led to Jesus crucifixion the actions of human beings of Pilate of Herod the

Jewish leaders the Roman soldiers According to acts 428 to do whatever

Your hand that's God's direct activity your hand and your will

Predestined to take place. That's the prayer of the early church. That's the inspired word of Scripture acts 428

That's not a plane is predestined to go to Phoenix That is

God actively Working in time to accomplish his purpose to do what he has predestined to take place and that included the free actions of men

They are subject to and the result of The exercise of power.

What is your hand? What how's that? I was using the Old Testament Your hand is not shortened your arm is a you have the power you have the ability to accomplish

Your hand and your will predestined to occur acts 428 next

Romans 8 29 the golden chain of redemption those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed the image of his son so that he might be the firstborn amongst many brethren, so I Think Leighton would say see here here.

What you have here. Is that the destination of? believers in Jesus is

To be conformed the image of his son has he insert believers in Jesus there

Because he'd look at for known he would say God knew that they would believe actually

What he does with for known is this really strange thing the the people that God knew in the past Even though that that destroys everything in Romans 8

Just just sets it on its head. I think that's how he tries to get around this but the reality is

That it's two verse. It's repeated twice. It's 29 and 30 So those whom

God chooses to enter into relationship with pro -egno

He predestines to be conformed the image of his son So he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

These are the elect God's elect Those who are chosen,

I mean we could expand this vert this list of verses greatly if we included choosing

Election, we're just looking at predestination right now and Those whom he predestined these he also called so notice that in 29 exact same

Greek verb Pro artisan, it's the heiress It's just simply a statement of an act of predestination so in 29

If you say that the emphasis is on The goal which is just everyone who believes will be made like Jesus then you're gonna you break that the chain up Because those whom he foreknew personal

He predestined Still personal to be conformed image of son.

There's nothing more personal than the Shaping of the elect to be like Jesus so that he might be the firstborn amongst many brethren and Those whom he predestined these he also called is calling personal

Of course it is because it's powerful this actually accomplished them because those whom he calls these he also justified

Now, how is a person justified in Scripture? Well Romans 3 4 or 5 haven't been justified by faith

So the calling of God has to result in what our faith, but you see this is all about what

God does and Man -centered systems start with man and so they limit what

God can do the Bible starts with what God does and Fits everything in under that which is highly important So whom he predestined these he also called whom he called these also justified and we justified these he also glorified

These are all things that God does in direct parallel. You can't break it. You can try you can't break it this is

God's self glorifying action and Merely the idea of a destination doesn't fit hasn't fit in any of the three that we've looked at so far

So let's go to first Corinthians 2 7 So it's a little bit different But We are speaking from God a

Wisdom in the mystery that has been that has been revealed the having been revealed mystery which

God predestined before the ages unto our glory

So there is a that now we're talking about remember what first Corinthians 1 and 2 is about First Corinthians 1 the message of the cross foolishness

But to those who are the called both Jews and Gentiles Christ the power of God It's by his doing that you're in Christ Jesus sovereignty sovereignty sovereignty all over first Corinthians chapter 1

Then first Corinthians chapter 2 you start getting into the natural man Can't understand the things the

Spirit of God, etc, etc. And so now we have the the mystery of God's wisdom

It has been revealed which God predestined before the ages for our glory

So here again, it's active member the head his hand and his will here

God predestines to accomplish something here the object of predestination is not persons or the elect

It is the message of Of the cross it is this mystery of The body

Jews and Gentiles together Christ the wisdom of God, even though from the world's perspective such foolishness

God has predestined this to happen so there is a active active predestination and the result is

The message itself and the fact that that is to our glory Our glory that's what it says our glory because we are the ones who are the mercied recipients of That tremendous message.

There's only two more Ephesians 1 5 Having predestined us unto adoption through Jesus Christ unto himself according to the kind intention of his

Will now Ephesians 1 4 of course said before the foundation of the world You have numerous terms here, but here

Predestination is used the direct object is us If I recall correctly

Layton threw a word in here. Let me since only a minute long. Let me go back to where he had

Ephesians 1 up. Yeah, let's see what it says here

The destination has been pre -decided but for whom has the destination been

Pre -decided God has decided beforehand the destination of those who are in Christ Jesus by faith

He has okay. There you go. Those who are in Christ Jesus by faith are predestined to a particular location

They are predestined to a particular result as the result of being in Christ Jesus by faith

Okay, so compare that with Ephesians 1 4 and what it says because again what you have here is man centeredness

God centeredness one -ass turn the text upside down Just as he chose us

Not just as we chose him. That's backwards Just as he chose us in him

Before the foundation of the world that we would be holy and blameless before him not because we are holy and blameless in love he predestined us to adoption as sons

Through Jesus Christ unto himself according to the kind intention of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace

Which he freely bestowed on us in the beloved one When does belief show up?

Well, uh It's down here in verse

There it is verse 12. Well verse 12 We we are the first to hope in Christ and then verse 13 believed in Christ So once again, you have to turn everything upside down change the order the

Holy Spirit evidently couldn't get things in the right order and Read this back in Instead of just reading it just as he chose us in him

Before the foundation of the world that we would be holy and blameless before him in love.

He predestined us to adoption Predestined us not predestined adoption as the result of anyone who believes that's a different sentence my friends

You need to think this through because this is very very common. This is how people

Get around the words of Scripture by saying that what's it's actually saying he predestined adoption as The result of those who will freely believe in him

It's not the same sentence not the same meaning you can't get that out of you out of Ephesians 1 5

Just it's not there It's not there, but that's what people will attempt to do

And then the same the same text has the has the last utilization of the term in verse 11

Also, we have obtained an inheritance having been predestined According to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will

So in whom we have obtained the inheritance How do we obtain the inheritance?

Having been predestined according to his purpose

There you go That's that's

The one who works all things After the counsel of his will what a what a tremendous promise that is

That is given that is given to us in Ephesians 1 11 now is that? Commensurate with the simplistic the airplanes going to a certain place

Because the having been predestined is the we who have obtained inheritance So I would assume the assumption would be well all he's saying is is that those who believe who receive an inheritance

He's predestining Well, that doesn't make any sense because having been predestined according his purpose works all things after counsel's will is us

So you can't there it doesn't fit It doesn't fit when you try to come up with a

Definition for predestination that limits God's freedom that makes God less free than we are

You're always gonna end up with a mess You're always gonna end up with a mess. So there you go.

What does predestination look like? Well, we just looked at all of them and There's much more we could look at one last thing and It's it's it's a brief article.

I just wanted to comment on it and Even though I just grabbed it today.

I think it was from February. I Seem to recall seeing that well, wait a minute. Let me click on it here

Actually have a have a link that I can I can bring it up if wow, we are having problems.

Yeah, February 22nd 2018 at church leaders, and this is

JD Greer the Past President of Southern Baptist Convention who got another year

Thanks to the Great Panic of 2020. I Still honestly as an outsider just go how did that happen?

What why was why was that allowed to happen that? No, that shouldn't have no.

Hmm. Anyway, JD Greer Heresy Can be what you believe but perhaps just as often heresy is the weight you give an issue you believe

If you give a certain issue too much weight, you will become a fundamentalist Christian. I'm not sure how those two sentences even relate to another

How did you go from heresy? To you will become a fundamentalist

Christian Fundamentalism might be understood in part as too much weight given to certain aspects of Christian doctrine or practice the word

Fundamentalism historically doesn't mean that but in common parlance. That is how it might be understood. Well Okay The term has a historical meaning

But yes, especially today independent fundamentalist Baptist That term fundamentalist has the meaning

That there are certain things that that all things really the meaning for fundamentalism today is that all things are equally important So if you differ from them at any point

You are out of the kingdom so the Trinity is

No less or no more important than the pre -trib rapture to many of these folks or pantsuits on women or Where you go swimming or Especially Style of music.

Oh goodness, you know, you don't want that African beat That's just as important as the Trinity So the real problem with fundamentalism is a complete lack of being able to order beliefs in any meaningful fashion to where?

What is core and definitional is at the center? Everything's at the center Everything's at the center

So it's not just a weight issue everything gets the same weight that's the problem That's the problem anyway

Under don't be a fundamentalist Christian. Some people give such enormous weight to minor issues that the gospel itself is obscured

Well, that's that's true Very true in a lot of fundamentalism today. That's that's true

Calvinism is one such issue where where I Suppose it's a person can be prone to being a fundamentalist

Christian Maybe Actually reformed theology has freed a lot of people from the kind of fundamentalism that Elevates secondary and tertiary issues to Gospel derived issues by focusing people upon what the actual gospel itself really is

We only have so much bandwidth as a church So I choose rather to be known for the gospel than for a tough stance on particulars of Calvinism They're less important than the heart of the message

Well, what exactly would that be? Dr. Greer is what I'd like to know is

The sovereignty of God less is which is not part which is not at the heart of the message The God is sovereign over his creation that man is dead in his sin

That God's grace is free That the Atonement actually saves that that the

Spirit of God actually needs to raise us to to Spiritual life that we are secure in Christ Jesus because the

Son has come to do the will of the Father which one of these is Like pantsuits or a rock beat because those seems to be the things that they're always talking about Whenever I see the

IFB preacher clips is is is that? So at the summit church,

I often say Calvinism is not an issue to me until it becomes one to you but when it becomes one to you it becomes one to me and I'll probably take whatever side you are not

What? What what does that mean? What someone believes about the finer points of Calvinism is not usually the issue finer points of Calvin Are we talking in for lapsarianism versus super lapsarianism we're talking about covenant theology issues between Presbyterians and reformed

But what are we what are we are even talking about Calvinism at that point? It's how they believe it.

We may have trouble achieving absolute clarity together on Every one of the five points, but we can be absolutely clear on the fact that the

Bible condemns a divisive and uncharitable spirit Over something about which gospel -loving

Christians have this have historically had trouble finding complete agreement Okay Why do

I get the feeling that it's only the Calvinists here why aren't why isn't there anything about Arminians, why isn't anything about free willers?

Why isn't there anything about? the opposite of these things In Martin Luther's preface to his commentary to the

Romans He pointed out the God unfolded the doctrines of election Romans 9 not Romans 1 Luther says the doctrine election was intended to explain why

Romans 1 through 8 worked like they did Not function as the only gateway for believing the gospel of Romans 1 through 8

Many Calvinists have practically speaking moved the doctrine election from Romans 9 to Romans 1 Making it the only door through which you can really believe the gospel

This is as bad as what you're just looking at Luther is right

That the substance of the proclamation of the gospel comes first for Paul, well, actually

It's the substance of human sin that comes first that starts in Romans 1 18 And he's right the

Romans 8 and 9 is the explanation as to why? Romans 1 through 8 first part of the chapter actually works

But that means it's foundational That that means that with Are we really saying that the

Holy Spirit of God revealed this stuff? But we shouldn't really be overly overly concerned about it so much so that you can take the opposite view of somebody

I sound like what he was saying. Maybe it's just really badly expressed. I don't know. I Don't know but Moved the doctrine election from Romans 9

Romans 1 making it the only door through which you can really believe the gospel Well, every church has to make the decision as to whether you're gonna preach part of Romans or all the

Romans and Paul gave us all the Romans and I'm not sure if you want to read

Luther's commentary the Romans without reading his debate with Erasmus on the bondage of the will

I Noticed bondage the will didn't get quoted here because I could give you some hum dingers from Martin Luther on that particular subject

Because even as he said Erasmus you alone of all my opponents have put your finger on The hinge upon which it all turns the

Reformation which was the issue of the human will That was the same

Luther That was the same Luther Don't hear me encouraging some kind of doctrinal reductionism

We should think deeply about election as with all great biblical truths and form deep convictions about it Then how can you take different positions?

I didn't get that everything in the Bible is important, especially things relate to salvation evangelism I have my own convictions but we must learn to be comfortable with certain scriptural tensions and Live with grace and freedom in some places

God has not bestowed clarity to the degree We prefer as Alistair McGrath says the ability to live within scriptural tensions is a sign of maturity not immaturity.

Well Yeah, but are you are you saying that the Are you saying that?

Differences in understanding within the church are these tensions? Because yeah, I went to fuller tension was the term used at fuller for contradictions

So whenever I hear someone talking about tensions, I'm like, what are you really trying to say? And I'm really not sure half the time.

I'm really not sure what JD Greer is saying. I Really wish he'd be much clearer Supposedly Deuteronomy 29 29 was

John Calvin's favorite verse. I'm not sure The secret things belong to Lord our God to the things revealed belong to us to our children forever

We may follow all the words of law according to that verse God has chosen to keep certain truths hidden from us

But every single point of the doctrines of grace is a point of revelation Not hidden from us

Most systematic theologians myself included don't like the concept of hidden things as a guy who minored in math in college

I want to resolve all tensions remove all mysteries try to bring every hidden thing light Moses prophesies our failure and Tells us sometimes we need to rest content with revelation

We have going no farther than God has gone Which can mean pulling back from putting a as fine a point on something particularly as it relates to setting boundaries for fellowship as we might typically like that but that's not

I Don't see okay, let's put this way in my experience churches that decide that on key issues such as Does the death of Christ actually save those for whom it is made or does it simply make men savable?

churches that allow either answer to that question end Up dividing eventually

They end up dividing eventually just be up front have a statement of faith explain it

But when it and if someone wants to go to a different church, God bless them God bless you but are we saying that this is not a part of the revelation as to whether that's

That's what Scripture is teaching. I'm gonna be preaching about this on Sunday an apology.

This is what my sermon is on. I'm second part of the Sermon on the Atonement. I did

Romans 8 last time and I'm gonna do the Hebrews passages this time around Furthermore we should never allow our theological system to ignore or explain away the plain teaching of certain segments of Scripture.

That's for sure God gave us every word of the Bible in exactly the form. You want us to have it.

Yep If God want us to value a theological system more than the Bible then he would have spelled out that system in greater detail for us

Okay but does that mean as is normally the application is that the

Revelation of Scripture is not consistent with itself That's normally how

I hear this being used Charles Spurgeon a confessedly Calvinistic preacher

Yes, he was But he was not a systematic theologian and anyone who's read him knows that just keep that in mind

Once remarked after reading Romans 10 13 dear me whosoever shall call whosoever Why that is a

Methodist word is it not at this point many Calvinists would have gone on to explain Why that verse doesn't really mean what it looks like it says but Spurgeon went on to say the whole truth is neither here nor There neither in this system nor that be it ours to know what is scriptural in all systems and to receive it

Yeah What's that supposed to mean? Why is that the last? Well, actually, it's not the last

I'll go the next one I was actually gonna try to read the whole thing, but it goes

Way too long Perhaps it is more than a little ironic considering the tone of the conversation today that John Calvin himself wanted to be known as the

Ecumenical reformer you say Calvin's life. You see he had no desire to start a sect of Calvinists. That's true He wanted the truths of God's grace to influence all evangelical preaching in fact in his institutes

He never lists out the five points of cows And of course there's some debate as to whether he even believed limited atonement is usually presented a though I personally believe that he did

I'd agree so unemphatic was his treatment of it, but not unemphatic was his treatment of The results of the atonement that's different thing

The point is he would never have said Calvinism is the gospel. Well not in those words

But this is this is historical anachronism, this is historical anachronism.

He would have Probably burned anyone who used the term Calvinism. He would never want his name attached to anything.

But the point is we're now talking about What he did make central to his proclamation of the gospel and So I want to know which which parts are

Dismissable that that's what I that's what I would like to know He was zealous I believe to see God's glory above all

God's priority in salvation God's sovereignty over all things especially his church and God's guarantee of his people's salvation as My Calvinist friend

Andy Davis says Calvin would hate the name Calvinist would be annoyed by the vast rate of Calvinist today That's true. He would be that doesn't that does not

Change the reality that I'm not seeing How I'm not seeing if JD Greer sees

That it is reformed theology that protects The freedom of God the deadness of man and hence the central aspects of atonement justification and righteousness

It's a reformed understanding of Paul and James That balances works and faith

These are vital issues and it's not fundamentalist To point these things out.

It's actually protecting the church From either downgrade or division the gospel not the five points of Calvinism is the center of our faith this assumes

That when we're talking about the sovereignty of God we're talking about man's deadness is that the man's deadness of sin is not part of the gospel

The definition of sin is a part of the gospel How man believes regeneration the atonement the the act of grace

This is not part of the gospel the fact that Jesus says that he will not lose none of those or give that's not part of the gospel

Once you make these divisions you have so reduced the gospel That I'm not sure you could define it anymore because you're afraid to get into any of the controversial areas if you believe in the loftiness of God's glory the salvation belongs only to God and the

God is sovereign over the world And that and that he that has begun a good work you see it through then you can

I you and I can stand in? alignment Even if we parse some of the particulars differently,

I anyway,

I Really prefer straightforward stuff personally I like Just you know come straight out with it come straight out of it

Anyway, so there's Radio Free Geneva for today. We're gonna do our best

By Thursday to have functional internet again Because I really don't want to do this for the 30th anniversary of Of our first debate just up and down up and down crash crash crash

We're gonna do our best, but it's sort of out our hands because we're sending him once it leaves here.

It's in good shape It's where it's going from there that who knows so Lord willing.

We'll see you on Thursday for our 30th year celebration of the beginning of our debating ministry and Till then