Dave Hunt on YouTube! #2

Well, you would think that after writing Debating Calvinism with Dave Hunt that I would have gotten tired of discussing this subject with Dave Hunt, but since his lectures are on YouTube, I think it's appropriate to take some time to comment on some of the constant misrepresentations that Dave simply refuses to be corrected on.

Limited Atonement and the Meaning of Christ’s Blood

For example, he's going through the tulip in his presentation, and he gets the subject of limited atonement.

Now, the Calvinists have many arguments, and we go into them all in the book. We don't have time for that, but the Calvinists would say, you mean some of Christ's blood is wasted? I mean, if Christ shed some of his blood for people who will end up in hell, then his blood was wasted.

Wait a minute. You can't divide the blood of Christ up and say some was shed for this person, some for that person, if there was only one sinner on earth. All of Christ's blood would have to be shed. Is that not true?

He paid the penalty for sin, not just for individual sins.

Now, one of the saddest things about trying to deal with Brother Hunt is the fact that he just won't hear what the other side has to say. His traditions are just too dogmatic, too thick. What is the Calvinist saying when he talks about the blood of Christ?

Is he talking about dividing up the blood of Christ? No. The point is that the whole concept of general atonement leads the idea that Christ intended to do something. He tried to do something, but he was incapable of doing it.

He failed to do it, so that the idea of his blood being wasted is only relevant in the context of saying that it was his intention to do something. It was his intention to save everyone, but he failed to save everyone, and that means there are going to be people in hell whose sins were completely forgiven, completely propitiated.

The wrath of God has no place in them, and yet they're going to be in hell, because Christ failed to save them through his propitiatory atonement. That's the issue, and you just can't get Dave to deal with the real issues, because he's absolutely dogmatic in his traditions.

These are the issues, and that's it. That's all there is to it. Now, I started to look at the rest of this particular clip, and I started realizing the misrepresentations are so many that if I stopped and started, I'd never get finished, and so I started putting titles, just brief little things pop up on the screen, and it worked just fine.

So here's the rest of this particular clip with all my commentary provided right there on the screen.

Irresistible Grace and the Human Will

It stands for irresistible grace. Let me quote the Westminster Confession, quote, All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only. He is pleased in his appointed and accepted time effectually to call by his word and spirit out of that state of sin and death, effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ, yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

Now we have a problem, and we go into it in quite some length in the book. Many Calvinists deny that man has a will, that man can even make a choice, even though Christ said, you know, if any man wills to do his will, he will know, John 7, 17, because the Calvinist makes God the cause of everything.

They overdo sovereignty to the extent that no one, you can't even sin independently of God, that he is the cause of everything. So then, if you're going to be saved, God must irresistibly cause you to believe.

So grace, I think that's misnomer. How can grace be irresistible? It's not gracious to force something on someone, is it? And then they've got the will to deal with. Oh, well, he graciously changes their will without making them be willing.

I don't know how you would do that. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. Now, unless we gave this person a new will, no, they don't say that. He has a will, and somehow this will has been changed without his his agreement to it.

But graciously, he has been changed, so now his will will something else. I don't think you can do that. That's like, you know, we'll talk about it, I guess, tomorrow or to maybe this evening, the Taliban.

That's one of the problems with with Islam. You don't even have to believe. You don't even have to be willing. They put a sword today in Indonesia, a machete at your neck and say, you will confess. There is no God but Allah.

Muhammad is his prophet, or off with your head. You don't even have to believe. But what does the Bible say? Well, Ethiopian eunuch says, here's water. What does hinder me to be baptized? Well, Philip says, puts a sword at his throat and says, you will or else.

No, Philip says, if you believe with all your heart, with all your heart. Now, what does it mean, believe with my heart? If somehow God is going to cause me to believe what I didn't want to believe. Well, we'll get more into that, but we got a little problem with the will.

Martin Luther wrote an entire book, The Bondage of the Will, and I've had Calvinists say to me, well, have you read Martin Luther's Bondage of the Will? Yes, I have, and I could punch enough holes in there to drive a fleet of trucks through it.

I don't think too highly of Martin Luther's exegesis and logic even. For example, he will take Psalm 73 where the psalmist says, I was looking at the prosperity of the wicked, and I became envious of them, and because there are no bans on their death, I mean, they seem to prosper, and here I am.

I'm trying to please God, and things are just going so bad for me. And then the psalmist says, so foolish and ignorant was I. I didn't realize their end. In the end, they're going to get it. And he says, so foolish and ignorant was I.

I was as a beast before thee. Oh, Martin Luther jumps on that, and he says, you see, the will of man is like a beast. If God rides it, it goes where God wants it to go. If Satan rides it, it goes where Satan wants it to go.

That is not what that psalm is about. That is not what that psalm says, and Martin Luther does that continually in that book, and the Calvinist is very firm. I'm getting ahead of myself, but that man does not have a will.

Perseverance of the Saints and Eternal Security

Well, the P, the I, Irresistible Grace, the P stands for Perseverance of the Saints. Westminster, that God will not allow any of the elect to lose the salvation which he has sovereignly given them. And I thought that I was at least a one-point Calvinist, because I believe in eternal security, and I'm sure probably some of you here don't.

But Jesus said, I give my sheep eternal life. They will never perish. I think if I had eternal life today, and I didn't have it tomorrow, it would be a strange kind of eternal life. And it's not to my credit, and if I somehow have to continue in the faith to such an extent that I keep my salvation, then I think I could walk the golden streets up there and boast a little bit.

Lord, it was wonderful that you died for me, but I did do my part, too. I kept myself saved. Jesus said, he that hears my word and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life, shall not come into condemnation.

That seems like a promise. But has passed from death to life. Now, I believe that I'm saved eternally because Christ promised that, and I have accepted his promise. But the Calvinist believes he's saved eternally because he's one of the elect.

Whoa, now we've got a problem. We'll get to that. How do you know you're one of the elect? That is a real problem. Plagued the Puritans with doubts about their salvation. And I will even, if I get to it, I will even quote to you R .C. Sproul.

I think that name would probably be known. Expressing his doubts about his salvation because his performance wasn't quite up to what he thought it ought to be. Okay, so, I don't think you could come to these conclusions just as an ordinary person reading the Bible.

Calvinism has been imposed on the Bible. And they have this framework of belief. And now, they try to interpret the Bible in such a way that it says what they want it to say.