Steve Gregg vs. James White Debate: Part 1

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line

The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence

Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll -free across the

United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white And good afternoon. Welcome to a special edition of the dividing line where we are going to be doing

Five days worth of debate on the subject of doctrines of grace. It is my understanding

And of course this first day we are going to be flying by the seat of our pants Is my understanding that Steve Gregg's program starts at three and a half minutes after the hour giving us approximately two more minutes

Before we would actually be getting started. We are attempting to make contact. We have called the station a

Couple dozen times now and the phones are still busied out. So We are attempting to make contact

With the station at the number that we contacted before But they still have their phones busied out so if there's someone who has

Contact with them might want to let them know that if they want to talk to us They've got to put the phone back on the hook

Anyway, I don't honestly know exactly how things gonna work out today my suggestion was that we divide the available amount of time into four segments and that Each of us get two of those we go back and forth twice a little bit shorter tomorrow and Then starting on Monday Shorter again, so it's more like the crossfire type format that Some folks might be familiar with so don't exactly know how that's going to work.

But since It is Steve Gregg who has the radio program and which should begin in about one minute he's the one who has the

Hard breaks. He's got to be up against news at the top of the hour things like that and we can be

Fairly flexible so we will stretch we may have a little silence all depends on how it goes as to how to make this work, but We will find a way to make it work

My understanding is that at least the radio station one of the three stations.

I think that he's on likewise live streams and So there should be plenty of capacity for everyone

To be able to listen to the program. So looking through our high -tech glass studio window

I see Rich has made contact and so looking at the at the clock here.

We should be coming up on The program here at any moment and then we will be having our debate

Good afternoon and welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast

My name is Steve Gregg and we have a special format for the program today. Unlike usual we normally are simply taking calls from listeners who have questions about the

Bible they'd like to ask and That's what we'll be doing again once we have completed a series of five programs beginning today

Today and tomorrow and then there's the weekend then we have money through Wednesday. We'll be doing We call it a debate between James White and myself, but we'll tell you more about him in just a moment and James I hope you're there

We were let me see if I can put him on here. I Think he got through.

Hello James. Are you there? There we are All listening to you. Okay. I'm so glad we got through we had trouble connecting until the last minute

But yeah, I've got a friend here in the studio Paul Spurlock who's going to be a timekeeper for this debate

This is going to be kind of casual But we're going to be having measured portions and we've got 55 minutes all together

When we take out the time for the beginning and end of the show, we really have about 50 minutes

And so we're going to divide that up four ways and James and I are each going to take 12 minute segments four of them in this program and we're going to present something now

James You and I didn't get a chance to talk beforehand since you're on the line there we're going to start up in just a moment, but I Was hoping to use my first portion to give a presentation and my second portion to interact with you a little bit

Is that okay with you? You're free to do however you'd like. Yeah, that's that's fine I was going to start off with a general presentation and then go from there

Okay, yeah, you can use your second portion for whatever you want. I just wanted to clear with you if I could do this Okay, I'm going to turn this over to Paul He's going to just mention who

James White is and he's going to get us started And by the way, I will say James I thought I'd take the first portion so that gives you the benefit of having the last word on the program.

It's totally up to you Okay Paul Thank You Steve like he said, my name is

Paul Spurlock I'm a local pastor at Twin Lakes Church in Aptos and as far as relevancy to this program I'm a graduate of Talbot School of Theology in Southern, California And also back in school there for their

MA in Christian apologetics So I'm a novice and a fan of both men and excited to be a part of this and let me begin by Telling a little bit about Steve for some of James dr.

James White's listeners Steve is a lifelong Bible teacher anyone that knows him knows that knows the word

Well, he is the founder of the Great Commission School He's the father of four children a career Bible teacher

As I said teaches all over the world with youth with a mission or why wham? He's the author of Revelation for views and most notably he is the host of the narrow path

So Steve, we're excited to hear what you have to say today and also a joining of course as you know as dr.

James White Dr. James White is the director of Alpha and Omega ministries out of Phoenix, Arizona.

It is an apologetics oriented ministry Dr. White is a frequent debater, especially with Roman Catholics or Latter -day

Saints and most recently with Muslim apologists He's the author of many books perhaps most relevant to this discussion the potter's freedom

He is also the elder of Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church or one of the elders there He's married has two children and as a professor at Golden Gate Theological Seminary And also very notably

I think he is a critical consultant for the Lachman Foundation on the New American Standard Bible So welcome, dr.

James White our format today Will time permitting allow both men to have approximately 12 minute sessions

They can either present as they wish or offer rebuttals or questions to the other So with that, let's get right to it

Steve you have the first 12 minute session Okay. Thanks Paul Well, I'm going to be

Addressing my audience primarily As the one who's not the Calvinist James White is a

Calvinist and that's what our subject is for this debate I could call myself an Arminian except it be

I'm not sure that that'd be accurate because I've read some books about Arminius and his teachings and I don't agree with a lot of them

So I don't know if I'm taking the Arminian position or simply the non Calvinist position

My opinion is that the position that I take is What most people would take if they're not trained in theology as I am not and it may be what

I would call the default Position until somebody trains you to believe that Calvinism is true

I believe that if you simply read the Bible you get the impression that God operates in a certain way in his creation and in redemption and that man operates a certain way in creation redemption but And by the way the views

I hold are pretty much the views that were held by the church from this from the end of the Apostolic Age until the time of Augustine and in the 5th century

Augustine Introduced ideas that we now call Calvinism I hope you're familiar with them because I don't have time to go through the five points right now

We will have five days together to talk about various things I'd like to just suggest that my main points of difference that I want to talk about between my own view and the

Calvinist view Would be on the area of what does it mean to say that God is sovereign? first of all and secondly

What is the condition of man in his natural state? And I will state what

I believe the Calvinist view to be on that so that I can tell you why I don't believe it the

Calvinist view Takes a it takes a view of God's sovereignty that suggests that God ordains all things that occur

This is what Calvin said. This is what Calvinists usually say. I'm not sure exactly in what way Dr.

White will prefer to state the view that he holds on that but generally speaking The idea is that God ordains everything that happens

There's nothing that happens outside of God's ordination There are Calvinists that I have talked to before and their books

I've read that have said there's not such a thing as a single renegade Molecule that every molecule in the universe is being directed by God in its course

Of course scriptures are used like, you know Not a sparrow falls to the ground apart from the will of your father the hairs of your head are numbered that give a give us the idea in scripture that God is paying attention to the minute details of things in life and the

Calvinist view then is that nothing happens except what God ordains to happen and At least that was

Calvin's view not all Calvinists say it quite the same way My understanding is that God does not ordain all things that happen at least not in any direct sense

God allows certain things to happen. This is a this is a position that Calvin did not allow

Calvin said that you know, it's a cop -out basically to say that God permits things to happen

Calvin said that God actually ordains everything that happened and they are infallibly going to happen because God ordained them before the foundation of the

World or whenever it was that he ordained them. I don't believe the Bible teaches that I don't believe the

Bible presents that view of the sovereignty of God if it does Then Calvinism has as its upshot the whole impact of that doctrine on man's salvation

Which would be that a man is going to be saved or lost? as God decided before he was ever born that he should be saved or lost now

Arminians also believe that God knows beforehand who will be saved or lost

But Arminians have always said that God ordained that those that he knew would be saved or that he knew would believe

That they would be saved he foreknew they'd believe and therefore he drank for day may be saved And he foreknew who would not believe and therefore he ordained a be lost the

Calvinist view. However is of an unconditional Choice on God's part God did not see that some would believe and choose them for that reason but God just chose some without any reference to anything that he saw in them at all and therefore

It was strictly a unilateral choice on God's part to save some and not to save all now

This doctrine I believe does not square with what we read in the scripture for the most part I do believe there are some verses that of course there are that's why

Calvinists are there There are some verses that have a rather Calvinist sound to them I think they need to be examined more closely in the context of Scripture But in general the

Bible seems to indicate that God does not ordain all things that people have a choice in the matter that a person can be a believer or not a believer as as they wish and What's more that there are things that people decide that are actually a great disappointment to God and God complains about this

Which we would not expect him to do if he had ordained it to happen God's continually complaining in the Old Testament, especially in through the prophets about how badly people have turned out which

Gives the very strong impression that God did not determine that they should turn out this badly He's actually disappointed with it.

And this is the impression you get That's why I call my position a default position until someone teaches you that God ordains everything you get the impression from hundreds of places in Scripture that God is not ordaining everything that he's unhappy with many things that go on and That he's making offers to people that he wants them to accept

But they do not that he makes promises that are conditional But they don't meet the conditions and don't get the promises.

And so this is the impression that the Bible gives it seems to me Everywhere that God does not ordain everything that happens

Although Calvinism says it does and of course the upshot for that for the issue of salvation is if God does ordain everything

Well, then God is the one who decides whether you or I will be saved and that was decided before any of us were born

Now, I know many people think even people who are not strictly Calvinist think well, doesn't the Bible say that doesn't the

Bible say? He chose who would be saved. Well, we'll have to look at specific scriptures to know if that's what the Bible says or not

I personally don't believe that the Bible teaches that God ordained Certain individuals to be saved and with the same

Choice ordained certain people to be lost and that's just the way they're fated to be If you believed according to Calvin's because God determined that you would believe you couldn't do anything else

But believe because you were selected by God for that destiny if you don't believe again, it was not your choice

It was God's choice God Determined everything and therefore you had no choice in the matter at all You're going to be damned because God chose for you to be damned.

That was his choice He could have saved you but he chose not to That's how I understand the Calvinist view of sovereignty, and I don't believe the

Bible teaches it now I also on the view of man one of the main points and basically a fundamental foundation of the five points of Calvinism is something called total depravity and Is taught in Calvinism teaches that man in his natural state at birth is

Totally So embodied to sin so dead in sin so incapable of making any response to God That in our natural state.

There's nothing we can do to Approach God or even to really want to approach

God that our hearts are strictly hostile to God from birth That we hate God and we hate his laws all people do says

Calvinism and Because of that hatred, of course, we are incapable of Wanting to repent or wanting to believe or wanting to glorify

God. This is just not what? That's not what we're wired for we're wired for sin and the desire to Please God the desire to even be saved the desire to repent is not something that will occur to us at all in our natural

State because it's we're too much at enmity with these ideas in our natural state.

That's called total depravity I don't believe the Bible teaches that what I do believe the Bible teaches is that all people are sinners and all people are lost and all people, you know are

Enslaved to sin and need to be set free by God, but I don't find anything in Scripture That tells me that they can't want to be free.

I don't find anything in Scripture that says they cannot believe that they cannot choose to believe now, of course, the

Bible doesn't use the term choose to believe and Obviously one of the discussions that Calvinist and non -Calvinist have is is believing a work is it not a work?

Is it something that is meritorious if a person believes and God didn't make him do it? Does that person get credit for his salvation because he believed can he boast about that?

Paul said the answer is no Paul said that if we're saved on the basis of our works We could boast but if we're saved on the basis of our faith, we can't he said boasting is excluded from that statement

So the non -Calvinist believes that a man is saved by believing.

Why does he believe? well, maybe for any number of reasons, but he believes and that is his choice he believes or he chooses not to believe and This is not a matter of boasting because believing is not a meritorious work

This is just a matter of putting the ultimate decision of whether one will be in relationship with God After God has already made his overtures

It puts the final decision in the Camp of man and this is of course

Some would say this it calls it a man -centered theology is not a man -centered theology It's all about God, but it does allow man a vote

It does allow man a right to decide whether he's going to be involved with God or not And that's a view that is contrary to Calvinism and which

I believe is implied throughout the scriptures That a person is held responsible for whether they believe or not

That would suggest that they had the ability to believe or not because if they're held responsible they must be the actor who incurred responsibility by their action and And it's not

God who decides if I will believe or not or else He is the actor and it is his responsibility then and if there's any penalties to be had

They'd be incurred by the person who's the actor who did the thing culpable. So Basically, it's the view of God's sovereignty and how he rules and the view of man's condition before he's saved that I disagree with most strenuously and I think are the main core of the differences that Calvinists have with our minions and We'll have plenty to say about that.

I'm going to have to sign off here in just a moment and let dr. White speak but We will be having

I want to just make it clear We will be having five days on this program to discuss the various issues related to this and dr

White and I are just going to have like Twelve minutes segments here and so I'm going to turn it over to Paul to then turn it over to dr.

White All right. Thank you Steve. Nice opening. Dr. White. It's your turn for 12 minutes Okay.

Thank you very much. It is my privilege to be with you today I'm hoping possibly in the next segment that Steve would give us a positive presentation of his own perspective

I'm going to try to pretty much stay focused upon a positive presentation of my own in this brief period of time

I Agree completely that the two issues the two primary issues that were raised just now are the key issues that we will keep coming

Back to over and over again. That is is God free in the matter of salvation Does God have the freedom to create in such a way that he is going to bring glorification to himself?

Through the redemption of a particular people in Christ Jesus and that he can do so perfectly he can do so To his own glory without possibility of failure without frustration

Does God have that kind of kingly freedom and as a part of that?

Is it true that man is a slave of sin? That he is dead in sin the enemy of God all phrases used

Biblically of the state of man in sin that he is a rebel sinner Undeserving of even the first bit of God's mercy and grace and yet despite his constant suppression of the knowledge of God that is descriptive of mankind's very nature

That God shows mercy and grace undeservedly to a large number of people called the elect

So that they are as the sand of the sea that men from every tribe tongue people and nation will surround the throne

Having once been God haters now having been changed by the grace of God through the work of the

Holy Spirit Into those who love and bow the knee willingly before God can God do this to his own honor and glory?

Or do we have some other message in Scripture? I am going to want to focus upon the fact that I am coming from a position.

It's a very well -known position It's a well -documented position I'm an elder in a reformed Baptist Church And so the 1689

London Baptist Confession of Faith the Westminster Confession of Faith Savoy Declaration other documents such as this

Will reflect my understanding of the teaching of Scripture that God is eternal that God is unchanging

And that he has a decree. He is the creator of all things including time itself He is not limited by time and since he has created all things

Then I would submit that either all things have a purpose coming from his sovereign decree

Or things do not either God knows the future and the past because he's the creator of all things and therefore has perfect knowledge of These things or God passively takes knowledge in and that leaves open wide doors to such issues as open theism now

I have read some of mr. Greg's materials and I have before me his statement

He does not feel it open theism really is a major issue that it does not endanger any central

Christian doctrines I come from the position that open theism is a heresy that it denies fundamentally the very nature of God And if we need to get into the biblical texts that address that then we can do so so I would like to go to the scriptures because fundamentally

I am a Calvinist because I am first and foremost

Dedicated to the exegesis of the text of Scripture and as I engage in apologetics with a wide variety of individuals in just a matter of days

Debating Sheikh Jalal Abu alrub over in the Fullerton, California on the deity of Christ I will purposefully use the same methods of exegesis in that debate with a

Muslim Sheikh That I will use in this debate on the subject of the freedom of God. We must use the same kind of exegesis

We must be consistent in our argumentation That is why I am reformed and so when we look at the issue of the sovereignty of God over his creation

We know that Psalm 135 6 says whatever Yahweh pleases he does in heaven and in earth in the seas and in all deeps

This is just the opposite of what we have of man. Man does not do just what he pleases In fact, the contrast is drawn out in Psalm 33

We read let all the earth fear Yahweh. Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him for he spoke and it was done

He commanded it stood fast Yahweh nullifies the council of the nations He frustrates the plans the people's the council of Yahweh stands forever the plans of his heart from generation to generation that is never said of mankind, but it is said of God when he compares himself to the false gods in Isaiah 46

He says remember the former things long past for I am God and there is no other I am God There is no one like me declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times

Things which have not been done saying my purpose will be established and I will accomplish all my good pleasure

Please note that God's ability to give prophecy his ability to explain the very events of history

Not just what's going to happen in the future though He does know this and he knows it perfectly and I would like to ask anyone who does not believe that God has a sovereign

Decree how it is that God can know this And and know it was certainty But notice the connection between his sovereign purpose his good pleasure

Being established and what is going to happen both in the future and what has happened in the past Explaining why history has unfolded the way that history has this is part and parcel of God's sovereign decree

This is also comes out in Isaiah 41 present your case Yahweh says bring forth your strong arguments the

King of Jacob says Let them bring forth and declare to us what is going to take place as for the former events declare what they were that we may

Consider them and know their outcome Please notice God challenges the false gods to explain history to explain why things happen in history if things happened without purpose

In this world if mankind is out there as a as a libertarian creature

Creating new realities that have no purposes then how can God make this this challenge to the false gods to explain what took place in history and why it

Happened it goes on to say or announced to us What is coming declare the things that are going to come afterward that we may know that you are gods indeed do good or evil

That we may anxiously look about us and fear together It is a part of the description of the true

God of the Bible that he has this kind of authority He has this kind of power That is why the

Proverbs writer can say the king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of Yahweh He turns it wherever he wishes and even the pagan

King Nebuchadnezzar After God had taken his reason away from him when his reason returned to him

He says in Daniel 4 I blessed the Most High and praised and honored him who lives forever For his dominion is an everlasting dominion in his kingdom endures from generation to generation

All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing but he does according to his will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth and No one can ward off his hand or say to him.

What have you done? This does not sound to me Like a God who in his eternal purposes is frustrated who desires to do something but does not accomplish these things

I think we need to look at the fullness of what Scripture presents here Same thing in Isaiah 29 16 where we have you turn things upside down as if the potter were thought to be like the clay

Shall what is formed say to him who formed it? He did not make me can the pot say of the potter? He knows nothing.

We are the pots and God is the potter He is sovereign over the work of his hands as in Isaiah 45 9

Woe to the one who quarrels with his maker and earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth will the clay say to the potter?

What are you doing or the thing you are making say he has no hands Of course, this is the very concept that is then picked up in Romans chapter 9 when the

Apostle Paul addresses the very objections that will be raised to his gospel of God's sovereign freedom and salvation

That we have laid out for us in Romans chapter 8 then in Romans chapter 9 He then answers those objections especially based upon the unbelief of the

Jews and demonstrates the freedom of God in salvation and uses these very same kinds of categories in establishing that very thing and so the sovereignty of God in salvation is simply an outflow of a positive and recognition of the sovereignty of God in all of creation if we if we view

God as Being limited in his knowledge limited to time limited in some fashion then we will have no basis upon which to build the very high doctrine of God's sovereignty and God's salvation in Jesus Christ being a perfect work that he presents to us

So in the brief amount of time I have left I would just direct people to the outworking of this This is going to come up a number of times in our discussion

I'm sure and that is that the Bible presents to us the the outworking the the

Interface between God's sovereign decree and man's responsibility. Yes, God holds man accountable

We know for example in Genesis chapter 50 That so when Joseph and his brothers act after Jacob has died

Joseph's brothers come to him expecting for certain that that he is going to wreak havoc upon them and Instead Joseph's response to them says do not be afraid for am

I in God's place as for you You meant evil against me But God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result to preserve many people alive

So therefore do not be afraid I will provide for you and your little ones So he comforted them and spoke kindly to them

Genesis 50 19 through 21 Now, please note that in the

Hebrew language There is a direct parallel bound in Genesis 50 20 you meant evil against me

God meant it for good Using the very same Hebrew term you have here one action.

What was that action that action involved? numerous Violations of God's moral law it involved lying to Jacob it involved deceit it involves selling into slavery

It was an evil thing to sell your own flesh and blood into slavery and in fact to hope for his death this was an evil act and No one is saying that the brothers were innocent of this act and yet Joseph recognizes that that one act is clearly and plainly a part of the sovereign purse purpose of God In fact, notice what he says

God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result to preserve many people alive if it can be

God's eternal purpose To keep these people alive to keep the promises to Abraham Going To bring a people down to Egypt and to bring them out and to demonstrate his power over the gods of Egypt and all these

Other things God has to be sovereign But it does not change the fact that Joseph and his brothers are held accountable for doing what their hearts

Desired now Genesis 50 is not the only place that clearly presents to us this interface this

Connection between God's sovereign purpose and the responsibility of man. It is there for us in the very text of Scripture and When I have some more opportunity in the next section

I would like to look at some other texts that likewise lay that out and Then pursue what the Bible does say concerning the fallen nature of man and that man is the enemy of God that he is enslaved to those things and as Jesus said

He who commits sin is the slave of sin and slaves may want freedom, but they cannot bring about their own freedom

And therefore the two foundations of this particular issue Come to fruition in those texts, but my time has expired.

And so I turn it over to Paul. Thank you. Dr. White. Very good Yes, 11 minutes 50 seconds

You're obviously a pro at this and before we go on to the second half for those of the listening audience

Just be aware and be sure to mark your calendars for tomorrow Friday April the 4th as well as next

Monday Tuesday and Wednesday for the remainder of this five -day interchange in debate with Steve Gregg and dr.

James White so Steve now your turn for the second half your second 12 minutes All right.

Yeah. Thank you. Dr. White for that. I talked to I gave a very good I guess defense for the prerogatives of God In that he was not stating anything.

That's distinctively Calvinistic. Although he did make distinctively Calvinistic applications of it the scriptures he gave certainly are not distinctively a

Calvinistic because the scriptures he gave tell us that the counsel of the Lord stands forever He does whatever he pleases

Whatever the Lord pleases he does He says nevertheless the Lord's counsel that will stand

God says I work and who will reverse it I make peace and calamity my counsel shall stand.

I shall do all my pleasure, etc all of these things are True in whether whether Calvinism is true or not.

You see a Calvinism and and Let's just say Arminianism They do not differ from one another in deciding whether God has prerogatives or not whether God can do whatever he wants or not

In fact whether God does what he wants or not Calvinism Arminianism both agree about that That's that's the doctrine of the sovereignty of God's that God has the right to do whatever he wants and he ends up doing

Whatever he most wants to do the question is what is his counsel? What is his purpose?

What is it that he wants to do and there's where the Calvinist and the Arminian disagree with one another? The Calvinist believes that what

God wants to do is to show his glory by saving a remnant of humanity and by damning the rest and showing his glory in his in his grace and in his

Judgment the Arminian thinks that God wants to show his glory in Offering salvation to all people and he desires all men to be saved but he does not desire to force that upon people because salvation is

Itself a relationship with God and relationships are not of really very much worth if they are forced if if a person is forced to be in relation with someone they don't want to be in relationship with or did not previously want

To be and they were made to that's not the same thing as a relationship That's I mean at least it's not a friendship

It's not the kind of relationship God's looking for with his people so says at least the Arminian You see the

Arminian and the Calvinist both agree that God has the right to do and does do whatever he? Prefers to do whatever conforms with his purpose and his plan

It's just that the Arminian believes that part of God's purpose and plan is to leave some of the decisions about a man's individual destiny to that man to make and The question of whether he'll have a relationship with God or not

God plans and purposes to leave that up to man Why do I believe that well?

I believe that because the Bible indicates that God desires all men to be saved and I believe that that's something that doesn't happen so if not all men are saved and God wants it to happen there must be more than one will in the universe and There must be things happen that aren't what

God would prefer now even of course Calvinists say that God has two wills And there's a sense in which that's true the difference is that The Calvinist believes that God wills to glorify himself in the damnation of many people

The Arminian believes that God wants to glorify himself in the salvation of as many as will receive him the main difference between the

Calvinist Arminian in this respect is Is one not again of whether God has prerogatives whether God's sovereign whether God has these privileges or not or the power?

Armenians agree with all those things The difference is whether God loves everybody or not and in that respect the

Calvinist emphasizes God's Privileges and his prerogatives and the Arminian Emphasizes God's love and both

Calvinist Arminians. I have found do want to glorify God You know I'm although James White and some other

Calvinists have indicated that Arminians believe what they do because they practically worship human free Will I have never met an

Arminian who worshipped or was particularly obsessed with human free will But I have all

Arminians believe there is such a thing as free will But what the Calvinist and the Arminian both are interested in is the same thing

Namely that God be glorified and that he be represented as he really is The difference is the

Calvinist thinks that God is most glorified by emphasizing his his divine rule By emphasizing his divine prerogatives and privileges well

Arminians believe in all that too But Calvinists don't believe that God loves all people in a saving way some

Calvinists say that God loves all people in one way or another but not all the same way and Some Calvinists say there's some people

God just doesn't love He loved Jacob and hated Esau. He just didn't love Esau the

Arminian believes that God loves everybody and that God desires all to be saved and therefore the

Arminian emphasis on God's character is A focus on his love and the

Arminian does that without denying any sense God's sovereignty again To the Calvinist the word sovereignty means that the the person is sovereign

Meticulously controls every detail, but that's not what the word sovereignty means the word sovereignty means a king a king is a sovereign

He does he may or may not Meticulously control everything that's in his power to control, but he's sovereign because he has the right to do what he wants to do

The Calvinist I think does not grant God all the rights Dr.. White frames this debate as one of God's freedom in fact his book the

Potter's freedom Makes his whole case for Calvinism arguing that only Calvinism makes

God truly free No Arminians believe that God's free to do whatever he wants to do But Arminians just believe that God doesn't do all the things

Calvinists say he does It's not a question of what can God do or is God free to do everything the question is what has

God actually said that? he does and the Arminian believes that God gives people the opportunity to believe and repent or not as they

Choose and then he judges accordingly Because their choices now that is a difference certainly, but the point here is

Excuse me. I just had something crash here the point is that God's love is the focus of the

Arminians position, and they think that God is more glorified by Emphasizing God's love actually to tell you the truth.

I think most men would agree that their wives would be more flattered or let me put this way

I think a husband more flattered if his wife said to him or You know I can tell you really love me

Then if she said to him I can tell you really control me You know not that either one would be terrible

But I think it's more of a flattery for a wife to say to her husband or to someone else about her husband my husband Really loves me in fact.

He loves the children in fact. He loves the neighbors He's a very loving man That's more glorifying to the husband than for her to tell people he controls everything now there's nothing wrong with God controlling everything, but every king can control things the question is what kind of a person is he and We believe those who are not

Calvinist that God is more interested in us knowing what kind of a person he is

More than what kind of a being he is and that's why I'm not as concerned about Openness theology as some people are because openness theology, you know

It's not certain Openness people are not certain whether God knows all future things or not because they're not sure whether the

Bible says he does Calvinists and others are many believe that God does know all things and that he has said so But that's just a matter of how much

God knows I don't know that God is as concerned that we know how much he knows as how much he loves and That's just a difference in perspective the

Calvinist thinks that Defending God's prerogatives is how you glorify God the

Armenian says God has all the prerogatives But we need to defend the fact that he's a loving God and he's not a

God who has chosen To simply damn people who never had any opportunity to do anything other than be damned.

So that's the main difference. I would Think we need to emphasize here Dr. White gave a quite a few

Points here. I would like to say Dr. White did not in that presentation exegete any passages, of course

I'm not claiming that I have either neither of us have exegeted any passages He just listed passages and he did so giving the impression that this list proves the

Calvinist point What I'm saying is anyone can list passages until we look at what they actually say and don't say we won't know

Whether they support the Calvinist point or not. He gave this story of Joseph's brothers Selling him into captivity and pointed out that Joseph said in Genesis 15 verse.

I think it was verse 20 He said to his brothers you intended it for evil. God meant it for good

Okay, God didn't mean for Joseph to go to Egypt and that was for good Now the question is did

God put it in the brothers hearts to do evil or was that already there? You see that's not answered in that question.

We can say for sure. God did intend that Joseph go into slavery He even intended once the brothers had decided to do this to let them do it

God can let sinners do what he they want to do if he wants to that doesn't mean that he

Put it in their hearts or that he ordained that they would sin in my understanding Joseph's brothers hated him before God ever intervened in that situation

I think there probably lots of times they would like to kill him but God never let them but God intended for Joseph to go to Egypt so he could save his people ultimately and Therefore God did not interfere when the brothers made this particular plot

We have a similar situation with Jesus being delivered to the hands of the Jews God intended for him to be delivered over to their hands to Peter tells us in the book of Acts But there were many times they wanted to take him and kill him earlier than that Then God didn't let him

God allowed them to do what they wanted to do at one point because it fit his plans for that to be done

But he didn't put it in their hearts He didn't make them have these ideas. These were the ideas they had and God used them

God simply exploited them and said okay. It's my intention that Joseph going to Egypt It's my intention that Jesus be crucified and here are some willing dupes

Who are planning to do something that'll bring that about so I won't interfere and I think that that's how

God does ordain history But I don't think that he does necessarily Ordain everything that happens.

There's not necessarily the Bible doesn't tell us that the scriptures that dr White quoted don't tell us that there's a meticulous providence only that there's in general

God does what he proposes to do So the next question is what does God propose to do? Does he propose to save some people and damn others without them having any kind of?

Freedom to make any choice about that Well, he might but that we'd have to find out if the Bible says that or not because if the

Bible does not say that He does that he's still free He's free whether he does that or not He's free to do what he wants

The one thing that I think Calvinists don't do is give God the freedom to create a world Where there's such a thing as free will on the part of the creatures if what if God really wanted to do that Well will the

Calvinists allow him to do that or does that that's just not one of the options God is allowed to have The Arminian thinks that God is truly free to do whatever he wants to do

He could be an Arminian type of ruler or he could be a Calvinist type of ruler But our belief is that what the scripture reveals is that he he rules man

Not with this kind of iron hand that makes people just submit to everything he says Because they can't do other

I believe he gives them choices and then he dishes out Desserts for their choices, which is of course the way most

Kings rule God is not like most Kings But the Bible does tell us that this is pretty much what he does at least as I understand the scripture

I'm gonna let dr. White have some extra time here I think I only have about a what less than a minute left anyway, so Paul turn it back over to you

Thank You Steve actually Steve I did rob you 30 seconds of your opening segment because you're the host and we were a little behind time

So maybe you'll get that back at the end, but dr. White now your turn for your second 12 minutes Well, thank you very much.

I just like to say God's love is truly only seen with biblical balance and clarity in Light of God's holiness and his justice.

It is not an either -or situation It's not emphasizing God as ruler versus God as lover, but to truly understand the depth of his love

We must first understand the depth of his holiness and therefore the price that is paid for the redemption of his people

But I haven't even gotten to that point yet We're still looking at just simply the sovereignty of God in his nature from a biblical perspective

I want to go back to what was just said about Genesis chapter 50 and I would invite people to look at the text what we were just told in Essence is that God is dependent upon and this was

Steve's term dupes to come along and fit into his plan I guess if the dupes don't come along then he can't do his plan.

That's not what Genesis 50 we had Again, this is being recorded So I'd ask people to go back and listen carefully to the number of different words

God permitted God allowed God let this fit into his plan That's not what

Genesis 50 says Genesis 50 said you intended it for evil God intended for good for a certain purpose.

The purpose was to save people alive God is not dependent Upon sinners coming along and happening to have the right plan to fit into his plan

His plan is to take the people to Egypt. His plan is to do it in a particular way Given that there are time frames in prophetic utterances in Scripture It cannot be that God just goes well,

I generally won't put my people down Egypt So, let's see if I have some dupes who come along who have the proper attitude that I can fit them into my plan

That's not what Genesis 50 says and and reference was made to the text I was going to be going to in Acts chapter 4 where the early church once they experienced persecution

Praying in in prayer to God say for truly in the city There were gathered together against your holy servant

Jesus whom you anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate Along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever your hand and your purpose predestined to occur and Now Lord take no other threats and grant that your bond servants may speak your word with all confidence

While you extend your hand to heal and signs and wonders take place the name of your holy servant Jesus This is

God's predestination this is his Determination that He wasn't just looking for dupes to come along in the form of the

Romans and the Gentiles and Pontius Pilate and Herod They did what God's hand intended to do now every single one of those men had a completely different intention in their involvement

Herod was different than Pontius Pilate who was different than the Gentiles and certainly their motivations were very different than those of the leaders

The peoples of Israel and yet this was what God had intended at the right time

That was the time it was to happen It was to happen there in Jerusalem not a year before not a year later his time was fixed from the time that he was born and So it is not as if God is looking for somebody to fit into his plans

And he could have these this take place at some other point in time. It's similar to when when

Paul is is struck down on the roads of Damascus And he is converted that time

I believe I have heard and I don't know if Steve still holds this perspective. He he believes Paul could have said no

Paul could have resisted at that point in time and then what what's God gonna do now? He has all these plans

He has all these people who wants to get saved all these churches to found and now he's got to keep moving his plan back because his plan is dependent upon the synergistic cooperation of the creatures and there simply isn't any basis for looking at Genesis 50 or Acts chapter 4 and coming to that kind of a conclusion and I would just simply add in just briefly in passing

Maybe we'll get chance to maybe not but look at Isaiah chapter 10 verses 12 through 17. There is another tremendous text

Presenting the compatibilistic perspective that God has a sovereign decree that is a certain decree

It takes place at a certain time. It is not simply a plan That's malleable that he fits different people into if one says yes great

If one says no, then we'll find somebody else That's not what you find in the prophetic utterances of the

God of Israel in the Old or in the New Testaments And so with that in mind then

I I do want to find some opportunity To look just a little bit at what we have in the scriptures in regards to the nature of man

That is does the Bible tell us that man is truly depraved that he is the enemy of God and that in fact that good

Which we see in the unregenerate man is God's common grace extended to him That in fact if it were not for God restraining the sinfulness of man

That the result of course would be the unrestrained exercise of evil

But that God does restrain the evil of men that he has that power and ability

And in fact, it is rather interesting to me that we do find places where God restrains men keeps men from sinning in scripture, and I don't know how a

Libertarian free will can be explained if God keeps men from sinning or the many passages where he hardens men

So that they resist Even the message of repentance. This is the very substance of Isaiah's commissioning as a prophet is that he is to go and he is to deliver a

Message, but God says I am going to harden the people's hearts and ears so that they will not do so for it is my intention to bring judgment upon These people and so this is found in scripture

But the the number of texts in the Bible that speak of this are are overwhelming

We know that back in Genesis 6 That Yahweh saw the wickedness of man was great on the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil

Continually we see in in Genesis 8 21 the Lord smelled the soothing aroma

Lord said to himself I will never again curse the ground account of man for the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth this is a this is he who knows the hearts of men telling us what the heart of man is all about and many centuries later

Jeremiah 13 23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?

Then you also can do good who are accustomed to doing evil. There is something about rebellion there is something about slavery to sin that puts a person in a position of servitude to it and That then comes out in Jeremiah 17 9 the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick

Who can understand it Psalm 51 5 behold? I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin my mother conceived me

Psalm 58 3 the wicked are estranged from the womb These who speak lies go astray from birth

It is no wonder then that you can have the tremendous text in Romans chapter 1 which we hardly have time to get into But I would assert that if we do not see that Romans 1 2 & 3 are giving us a universal not just a limited but a universal description of the entire simplest of man we will have no basis for justification by grace through faith the entirety of Paul's argument his presentation of the gospel in the book of Romans is dependent upon a recognition that while Romans 1 takes a number of texts from the

Old Testament the Concepts of of God's creatorship and man suppressing the knowledge of God that the

Jews would have gone Oh, yes, go get him Paul then Romans 2 comes along and says who are you?

Possessing the law but not doing a lot to think that simply by possessing it you're going to be made right before God and Then it's in that tremendous text in Romans chapter 3

That you have this this collection of texts, and it's not just well all he's talking about are especially bad people here

Because when he says these listen to how he concludes His statement as it is written there is none righteous not even one there is none who understands there is none who seeks for God All have turned aside together.

They've become useless there is none who does good There is not even one their throat is open grave with their tongues

They keep deceiving the poison of asps and is under their lips whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness their feet are swift to Shed blood destruction and misery in their paths and the path of peace they have not known

There is no fear of God before their eyes now. I just simply have to ask is that limited by Paul's own

Words by his own application is that limited only to particularly bad people

No look at verse 19 now We know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law so that what?

Every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may be held accountable to God his

Application is he's taking these texts He's bringing them all together Romans 1 2 & 3 and he says look

Everybody Jew and Gentile all have fallen short of the glory of God all stand under this condemnation

Every mouth is closed every tongue has been stopped from wagging the head of every individual is brought down No more does the does the criminal stand before the judge saying

I'm as bad as that one I'm not as bad as that one No The picture that is painted for us by the Apostle Paul here is of a person who stands before the judge

Head down accepting the authority of the judge and the righteousness of the verdict

And so this is about all men and it is only until this bad news this entirety of the presentation of the sinfulness of man has been clearly presented by the

Apostle Paul that we have the Explication of what it means that Jesus Christ is

Savior that Jesus Christ has given himself as a propitiation for sins Now it comes in but it's only a message for those who stand before God with their heads bowed in recognition of the righteousness of the condemnation that is theirs and That is why then when the

Apostle Paul gives the same kind of presentation in Ephesians chapter 2 He says and you were dead in your trespasses and sins not slightly dead not mostly dead

You were dead in your trespasses and sins trespasses and sins this is a spiritual thing in Which you formally walked according to the course this world according to Prince the power of the air of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience and Then it's same idea in Colossians 2 13 when you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh

He made you alive together with him having forgiven us all of our transgressions Colossians 2 13

And so you have this emphasis within the context of his own presentation that comes out in Romans chapter 8

Those who according the flesh that their minds the things of the flesh But those recording the spirit the things of the spirit for the mind son the flesh is death the mind son the spirit is life and peace because the mind set on the flesh is

Hostile toward God for it does not subject itself to the law of God Please notice this for it is not even able to do so and those who are in the flesh

Cannot please God now unless someone's gonna say that well what Paul's really saying there Is that while you're still in the flesh you can choose to not be in the flesh and while you're still according to the flesh

You can choose to set your mind on things of spirit While you're still in the flesh you can choose to do what is right before God you can submit yourself to the law of God That's the exact opposite of the

Understanding of the text that has been held Well, it's the only understanding that makes any sense within the context of Paul's presentation

Romans chapter 8 Which is consistent with what he said in Romans chapter 1 which is consistent with the prophetic word as well

This is a testimony of Scripture to the total depravity of man his sinfulness and hence his need of a perfect Savior.

Thank you Thank you, dr. White Give you with the time very good gentlemen, we're a little ahead of schedule actually

So he since I took 30 seconds away from you at the outset. Why don't you take another? Two minutes dr.

White you can then have a minute and a half. I think we may have time for that We don't have time for that We can't we can't hear him there.

Yeah, the music is gonna be playing here winding the show down in about in less than one minute So I have to give some announcements at the end, but but we will certainly

Have you know, we'll even it up in the coming days dr. White I just want to thank you so much for coming on the program it's a privilege to have a man of your caliber here and I'm glad you deigned to actually to to give us this time because I know you're a busy man and I look forward to actually taking on those very scriptures you just used with you tomorrow and We will

I'll certainly be open to your input and as to how you want the format to go but Thank you so much for joining us today and We'll talk to you again tomorrow.

Dr. White. All right. Thank you Okay, we're gonna go back to the dividing line here because we have about a little bit about one minute ourselves here

I I Can't help but think of the nother Ahmed debate where he's given 20 minutes and he only takes seven and that's just be nice to me

You know if someone Wants to take extra time or whatever Dale I gotta do is ask well, you know Obviously, I keep a very close time on eye on time and and did so it will be very interesting

I haven't even gotten to the texts that present the doctrines of grace yet I've not gotten a positive presentation of Steve's position yet.

I would like to see a positive presentation But it sounds like he wants to go through some of these texts

That's great. But I really think we need to get to Romans 9 we need to get John 6 I think that's what the audience wants to hear as well

And so I'm hoping we can do that. And if we do the interaction part later on that's great fine.

Wonderful Even the five hours we're gonna spend is not nearly enough time to actually do this I think I probably did more than five hours worth of radio free

Geneva's last summer in response, but then again, I was quoting him, too So anyway, we will we will see how all of that goes

But remember tomorrow same time two o 'clock Pacific Daylight Time another dividing line.

We'll have five Dividing lines six actually between now and Thursday And I don't know what we're gonna do about phone calls

We may not take phone calls, but we have a dividing line after the last program

In other words there be one on Wednesday then the next day We'll have one so we might just dedicate that to open phones at that point and taking calls and so on and so forth

Thanks for listening to the dividing line member be back tomorrow 2 p .m. Pacific Daylight Time.

Thanks for listening. God bless The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 973 4602 or write us at P.

O box 3 7 1 0 6 Phoenix, Arizona 8 5 0 6 9 You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org

That's a o -m -i -n dot o -r -g where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks