The Great Debate X - Is It Possible for a Non-Christian to Enter into Heaven? (White vs Rutland)

6 views

June 23, 2005

This is the 10th debate in the Great Debate series covering the topic of whether or not a non-Christian can enter Heaven. In this debate, Dr. White takes the negative whereas Bill Rutland takes the positive side. This is certainly one of the more gentlemanly debates with both sides behaving in a cordial manner towards one another. The focus of the debate are two sections of the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, namely, sections 841 and 1260. Both sections describe how non-Christians may enter Heaven. To be honest, Mr. Rutland has an indefensible issue because he had to prove that these sections in the Roman Catholic catechism are, in fact, apostolic teaching. You will note an almost universal salvation theme crop up in the debate, and the notion that there will be those who are saved outside of Christ. This debate exposes another error in Rome's soteriology-in addition to her errors regarding justification, sanctification, purgatory, and the concept of the free will of man, sections 841 and 1260 also present a sort of "back door" into Heaven. It is also interesting to note that Mr. Rutland repeatedly tried to bring up those who die in infancy and those who are mentally incapacitated as a defense of sections 841 and 1260. However, those subjects are described in section 1261 of the Roman Catholic catechism. (2 Hours 55 Minutes)

Comments are disabled.

00:01: The following presentation is a production of Alpha and Omega Ministries, Inc. and is protected by copyright laws of the
00:07: United States and its international treaties. Copying or distribution of this production without the expressed written permission of Alpha and Omega Ministries, Inc.
00:16: is prohibited. Welcome to the 10th annual Great Debate.
00:24: Delighted to see you folks here today. As always, it's great to see you folks.
00:34: I'm Chris Arnzen from WMCA Radio. Thank you. I assume that's for me and not for WMCA Radio.
00:47: As always, I have a lot of people to thank who make this event possible every year. First of all,
00:53: I want to thank you, the audience. This wouldn't be happening if you weren't coming year after year and filling this place.
01:01: I'm so touched to see that there are so many people who seem to care very much about truth.
01:08: In this world of wishy -washiness and theological irrelativism, it's always great to see you folks.
01:16: I'm just amazed that this has been 10 years. It seems like only yesterday, when
01:23: I first called James White and invited him to participate in the first Great Debate, and the warm, friendly voice on the other end of the phone said,
01:32: How did you get my number? James has become a very dear friend over the years.
01:44: James has become a very dear friend over the years. In fact, I asked him once that if he ever,
01:51: I should say, if I ever get called home to the Lord before he does,
01:57: I asked him to preach at my funeral. I had recently been to a funeral where a friend of mine had passed away, and I was disturbed that everybody in the funeral home was saying very wonderful and nice things about this person, which obviously all funerals should include that.
02:13: But I happen to know that this person believed that he was a sinner in need of a Savior, and nobody ever mentioned that at the funeral.
02:19: So I called up James one day, and I said, James, I would like you to preach at my funeral if I go before you, but please make sure that you tell everyone that I was a sinner.
02:31: And he paused and said, What else did you think I was going to say? But the thing
02:41: I really, one of the things I like most about James White is that he is a man who stands for his convictions, even in this day and age of post -modernism, where the things that Reformed Baptists believe are highly criticized, even by evangelicals.
02:56: And he's been mocked, he's lost friends, he's gained a lot of enemies.
03:03: And I, too, being a Reformed Baptist, know what it's like to be treated harshly because of my beliefs. I've been spat upon, mocked, and beaten to unconsciousness.
03:12: Reformed Baptists have taken church discipline to a whole new level. But one thing
03:23: I want to clear up, the stereotype about Calvinists being narrow -minded bigots. You know,
03:28: I hear that most from evangelicals, that we're some kind of cultic people that don't want to associate with anybody else but Calvinists.
03:35: And I just say to them, I want to set this record straight right now, I say to them, Look, I've got close, intimate friendships with Pentecostals, Charismatics, Arminians, Wesleyans, Nazarenes, Free Will Baptists, and many other non -Christian religions.
03:56: But I would like to introduce properly my friend
04:01: James White right now. James White is director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, a non -profit, theologically reformed, evangelical,
04:09: Protestant, Christian apologetics organization in Phoenix, Arizona, where he also serves as one of the elders of the
04:14: Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. Dr. White was appointed scholar -in -residence in the College of Christian Studies at Grand Canyon University and was chosen as adjunct professor with the
04:23: Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary's Arizona campus. Dr. White has lectured in Greek, Hebrew, systematic theology, and Christology for Golden Gate, and theology and church history at Grand Canyon.
04:34: He's also professor of apologetics for Columbia Evangelical Seminary in Longview, Washington.
04:39: He is the author of over 20 books, including The Roman Catholic Controversy, Mary, Another Redeemer, Scripture Alone, The God Who Justifies, The Potter's Freedom, and Dangerous Airwaves, Harold Camping Refuted, and Christ's Church Defended.
04:52: He has also contributed to such publications as Table Talk and the CRI Journal. He has engaged in more than 45 moderated public debates on a wide variety of topics.
05:03: Dr. White has also served as critical consultant for the New American Standard Bible Update. He is heard frequently as a guest in such national radio programs as The Bible Answer Man, The Pancanagraph, and Janet Parshall's America, and he hosts a weekly internet broadcast called
05:18: The Dividing Line. His website, where you can hear The Dividing Line, is www .aomin
05:24: .org. Ladies and gentlemen, Dr. James White. Just to let you know,
05:35: Dr. White does not only debate Roman Catholic apologists. He has debated homosexuals, liberals, cult leaders, and that was just at my house last
05:44: Thanksgiving. But this is an interesting debate that you don't want to miss, even if it means you're flying out to Seattle, Washington.
05:57: He's debating somebody that I'm sure that Bill Rutland would also like to debate. He's a notorious liberal theologian named
06:04: Dr. John Dominic Crossan. You've seen him, perhaps, on the Peter Jennings specials about Jesus, which are just totally horrible and unbiblical.
06:13: But I think this is a very important debate, and these are on your seats, so if you want any more information about them, you can look at those flyers.
06:24: Let's see. Now I'd like to introduce to you
06:31: Arnold Pilsner. Arnold Pilsner has been a dear friend and a big help to these debates every year on the
06:37: Catholic side. He's the director of Americans United for the Pope, and it's been a privilege to get to know him over the years, and I really appreciate his help greatly.
06:45: And Arnold is going to introduce to you our Catholic debater, Bill Rutland. Arnold? Thank you,
07:01: Chris, for your introduction. My greetings to you, Chris, and to Dr. White, and to our moderator,
07:07: Pastor Sisko, and to all of you in the audience tonight. It is a pleasure for me to be here this evening as we celebrate the 10th anniversary of the
07:17: Great Debate. I also welcome this opportunity to introduce our Catholic debater,
07:23: Mr. William Rutland. Bill Rutland is a convert to Catholicism. Prior to his conversion,
07:30: Mr. Rutland received his seminary training at the Salvation Army College for officers training in Atlanta, Georgia, and served as an ordained minister with both the
07:42: Salvation Army and the Southern Baptist Church. After several years of intense prayer and study,
07:49: Mr. Rutland and his wife, Linda, converted to the Catholic Church in 1999. Mr.
07:56: Rutland is now a lecturer and teacher of the Catholic faith. Bill Rutland is a contributor to This Rock magazine, a well -known
08:04: Catholic apologetic magazine, and he has appeared on the Journey Home broadcast on the
08:10: Eternal Word television network. He is also the former director of religious education at St.
08:17: Vincent de Paul Catholic Parish in Rogers, Arkansas. Mr. Rutland has debated
08:22: Church of Christ preacher and radio talk host Wayne Greeson, Dr.
08:29: Bill Jackson of Christians Evangelizing Catholics, and Dr. Richard Howe, philosophy professor at the
08:37: University of Arkansas and former faculty member of the Southern Evangelical Seminary.
08:44: Mr. Rutland is recognized by his peers in the Catholic apologetics field for his excellence of his work.
08:50: Bill Rutland brings to the debate a well -rounded knowledge of the Catholic faith and from both a historical and biblical perspective.
08:59: Please welcome to the great debate Mr. Bill Rutland. Thank you,
09:11: Arnold. I'd like to introduce to you now our moderator. He's been our moderator for, what was it, three years now?
09:17: I believe it's the last three debates, and by far he has been the most highly praised debater from both
09:22: Catholics and Evangelicals who have come to the debates. His name is Pastor Bill Shishko of the
09:28: Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Franklin Square. I've known him about 20 years. Pretty soon after I converted,
09:35: I met Bill, and it's a miracle in itself that after 20 years he still calls me friend. Mr. Bill Shishko.
09:46: Now I'd like us all to bow for a silent word of prayer. Amen. Before I bring
10:02: Pastor Bill up to the podium to begin the debate, I want to mention that all of you have your ticket,
10:09: I assume still, and what I'd like you to do is as you're listening to the debate, jot down a very brief and concise question because at the end of the debate we're going to be taking questions from the audience.
10:20: And also, if I do not have your name, address, and email address on file and you want to keep coming to these debates, please put your name, address, and email address on the back of the ticket as well.
10:30: We're going to be collecting those later. And now, Pastor Bill Shishko. Welcome to the
10:42: National Spelling Bee, Mr. Ardson. Please spell
10:48: Apogiatura or however you pronounce it. Let me go over the ground rules for the debate.
10:56: The debaters have agreed upon the format in advance and they have designed this primarily for your benefit.
11:03: So these rules will help maximize your benefit. There will be a strict observance of the time limits, including the break.
11:12: You will have 10 minutes for the break. If you take longer for that, it's only going to cut down on the time for questions and answers.
11:19: Your interruptions by applause during a speaker's presentation will only take away from your speaker's time.
11:27: So please save your applause for the end of the various presentations. Let's please act in a manner as befits those who profess the name of Christ.
11:38: There's no place here for boos, for hisses, for calling out heresy, or loud sighs, or that's a lie.
11:46: This is not an ecclesiastical version of Cinderella Man. So please, let's be respectful.
11:53: If you have a cell phone, either turn it off or turn it on the vibrate mode, you will find no one who loathes the interruptions of gatherings by cell phones more than I do.
12:06: So please help me to keep my Christian temperament by turning off your cell phone or putting it on mute or something else.
12:14: Chris has already mentioned, write out your questions on your ticket, include your address and email.
12:21: We can pass your address and email on to our respective debaters for their list as well, if you would like.
12:27: However, you must give the questions to me or have them passed to the recipients of them at the break so that we can go through them and use the ones that will be most beneficial.
12:41: As I was explaining to our visiting southerner, Mr. Rutland, New Yorkers do not know how to ask questions.
12:47: So let me remind you of what a question is. It is an inquiry asking for an answer, a clarification or for added information.
12:57: Please don't use your ticket to write the Gettysburg address or to give a sermon. Ask a question and distribute it.
13:04: Here's the format for the evening. The opening remarks will be 25 minutes each, beginning with Mr.
13:11: Rutland. There will be two rebuttals, one before the break and one after. Rebuttals will be eight minutes each.
13:18: Following the second rebuttal, there will be two cross -examination periods. As I've explained to Dr.
13:24: White, I still do not understand why cross -examination is at the end, but I defer to my friends here.
13:31: The cross -examination period will be at the end for 10 minutes. There will be closing remarks of nine minutes each.
13:37: And if we observe these time limits, we should have about 25 minutes for questions. And I would suggest to you that the easiest way to follow what's going on in the debate is to use what's called a flow sheet.
13:49: You're better to use a sheet of paper in the landscape mode, with one column for Mr.
13:55: Rutland's remarks, the main points that he makes, another column where rebuttal and cross -examination will be presented, another column for Dr.
14:04: White's material, and for rebuttal and so forth. Then you can follow the debate across what would be regarded as a flow sheet.
14:12: So without further ado, I will turn this opening over to opening remarks, first by Mr. Rutland.
14:31: And as you heard, my name is Bill Rutland. I bring you greetings from the beautiful state of Florida and from the beautiful city of Defuniac Springs, Florida, otherwise known as the gateway to the
14:43: Redneck Riviera. But it is great to be here in New York, first time
14:49: I've ever been to New York, and flying in over the city at night was just an awesome and stunning view, and so the whole trip has been worth it just for that.
15:00: But hopefully I will make it worth your while this evening also. I'd like to begin tonight with a rabbinical story, and it takes place when
15:10: Israel crossed the Red Sea, escaping Pharaoh's armies. And it seems that as they were crossing the
15:19: Red Sea, some angels were watching from heaven. And as God was passing by, he heard a lot of rejoicing from these angels.
15:29: So he stopped and he said, what's the cause of your rejoicing? The angels looked at him and they said,
15:36: O holy one, your people, Israel, have crossed the sea in safety, but to the
15:43: Egyptians the water has become a grave. God, in his anger, turned to the angels and said, you wicked and evil angels, depart from me, for how can you rejoice when these, my beloved children, lay dead at the bottom of the sea?
16:05: John writes in his first epistle, Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God, and everyone who has been born of God knows
16:16: God, and whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
16:24: Our issue here this evening is a simple question with a very complicated answer.
16:32: Can a non -Christian enter heaven? The question is if God's love extends to those outside of the
16:47: Christian faith. If the God who says, I shall have mercy and not sacrifice, himself sacrifices millions of people for no better reason than they have not had the opportunity to hear and to understand the gospel of Christ.
17:08: I believe to properly understand our question tonight, we must first ask, what is a Christian? I offer you a definition from the dictionary.
17:17: Quote, a Christian is a believer in Jesus Christ, his savior. Somebody who believes that Jesus was sent to the world by God to save humanity, and who tries to follow his teachings and example.
17:33: With this definition in mind, we will continue. Dr. White's burden here tonight is to assert that God's love does not extend beyond the bounds of the
17:49: Christian faith. That God does not have salvific love, concern, and care for those who have never heard the gospel.
18:08: In holding that only Christians may enter heaven, Dr. White is in the unfortunate position of having to prove an absolute statement, what is called a universal negative.
18:23: A universal negative, my friends, is logically unprovable. Commenting on this in 1993 in a debate with Catholic apologist
18:32: Patrick Madrid, Mr. White writes on his website, my argument regarding this issue was simple.
18:41: If the Bible asserts that one, it is a rule of faith, and two, it is sufficient to function as a rule of faith, and absent from the proof on the part of Mr.
18:50: Madrid of some infallible rule of faith, my position would be established. I pointed out the impossibility of proving a universal negative.
19:02: A universal negative is the statement, a non -Christian cannot enter heaven.
19:09: In his debate with Mr. Madrid, Dr. White illustrated this fact by holding up his pen, and he said, if I say that this pen is the only one like it in the entire universe, what
19:23: I would have to do is first off look in all of your pockets and pocketbooks, go to all the stores in the world that might possibly sell pens, even go to other planets, the moon and the stars, and he ends up by saying, looking for another pen like this, and of course,
19:46: I could not do that. Yet my friend Dr. White here tonight purports that he is going to prove for us a universal negative.
19:59: In order to prove here tonight that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven, or to put it positively, only a Christian may enter heaven,
20:04: Dr. White needs to establish that there never has been, is not now, nor will there ever be a circumstance in which
20:12: God would grant heaven to the non -believer. Dr.
20:18: White is not in a position to prove his statement beyond a reasonable doubt.
20:26: Because it is an absolute statement, Dr. White must show us the proof and the truth of his proposition beyond a shadow of a doubt.
20:36: An absolute statement demands absolute proof, and as we will see, neither scripture nor logic will be able to establish
20:46: Dr. White's position. My task, on the other hand, is not to prove for you an absolute, but a possibility.
20:57: The Catholic Church teaches that it is at least possible for the non -Christian to enter heaven.
21:08: That there may be a circumstance by which God would grant heaven to a non -believer.
21:21: Let me reiterate. The Catholic Church does not teach that there is anything salvific or worthy of salvation in other religions.
21:34: Let me be clear, brothers and sisters. There is but one church, and that church is the
21:43: Catholic Church, established by Christ himself on the man Simon Peter.
21:53: Basic to our respective positions here tonight is the Catholic and Calvinist understanding of God and man and the relationship between them.
22:02: Although not formally within the preview of this debate, these understandings are nonetheless, will shape much of what's being said here tonight.
22:09: Although Dr. White is certainly under no obligation to respond to it, since this is outside the purview of our debate.
22:17: Dr. White and I would both agree that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were born in a state of original holiness, and that they lost that original holiness by disobedience to God.
22:31: And as such, all men being the descendants of Adam and Eve are sinners before God.
22:42: Sadly, this is where Calvinists and Catholics part company.
22:48: Because we differ as to the nature and the extent of man's depravity as well as the nature of God's sovereignty.
22:53: Calvinism holds that original sin causes men to be totally depraved and dead to God in every way.
23:07: Okay, so this is not a real fire drill, right? Okay.
23:17: Where was I? Oh, yes. Because of man's complete depravity and his total lack of free will, according to Calvin, God in his sovereignty chooses those who will gain heaven and negatively those who will be damned to hell.
23:33: This is called total depravity. Therefore, Calvinism's position and Dr.
23:40: White's position is that no man who is outside the select few have any hope of heaven.
23:46: This is true for those in the formal church as well as for those outside of it.
23:52: I am very sure this is an over -simplistic summation of the
23:58: Calvinist theology and Dr. White's beliefs. And if I am wrong on any points here,
24:04: I'm sure my friend Dr. White will correct me on it. Catholics, on the other hand, believe as the
24:11: Council of Trent put it, though free will weakened as it was and the powers in downward bend was by no means established.
24:19: Therefore, although God's call to salvation is unmerited and gratuitous, it in no way compels the sinner's consent.
24:28: In this, I am not denying God's complete sovereignty. Rather, I am asserting the fact that the sovereign
24:34: God is sovereign enough to impose upon his self a self -limitation so that all men can hear the call of the gospel and all men can freely consent or freely reject.
24:49: Catholic theology teaches that although people are born in sin of Adam and thus estranged from God, they have not lost all their capacity for God.
24:58: And man can know and understand the rudimentary things of God. Thus, the apostle Paul can declare that no man is without excuse before the judgment bar of God, Romans 2 .1.
25:11: Now, in the time I have left, I would like to turn to what
25:16: I would call the Roman Catholic controversy with my apologies to Dr.
25:22: White for the shameful plagiarization. This controversy is the
25:30: Catholic position of no salvation outside the church. On January 31, 1953, the issue came to head with the excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney.
25:44: Although the official case for Father Feeney's excommunication was disobedience to the church, it was spurred on by the fact that Father Feeney taught very fervently that no one except a baptized
25:57: Catholic could enter heaven. This debate was finally settled at the
26:04: Vatican II Council. In his dogmatic Constitution on the Church, otherwise known as Lumen Gentium, Vatican II asserts what the church has always taught and believed, that quote, it is the sole church of Christ in which the creed we profess to be one, holy,
26:21: Catholic, and apostolic, which our Savior, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him with the other apostles to extend and rule it, and which he raised up for all ages as a pillar and mainstay of the truth.
26:40: Sadly, many Catholics today, in a spirit of ecumenism, do not believe this.
26:52: Although we confess that the Catholic Church is the one, holy,
26:58: Catholic, and apostolic church at every mass. Having said this, then, how are we to understand the
27:07: Catholic doctrine of no salvation outside the church? Lumen Gentium sets up a hierarchy of sorts.
27:15: It starts with those who it calls fully incorporated into the church, who, possessing the spirit of Christ, accept all means of salvation given to the church, together with her organization, and who, by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion, are joined to the invisible structure of the church of Christ, who rules her through the supreme pontiff and bishops.
27:40: Translation, faithful Catholics. Least we
27:47: Catholics feel too exalted by this position. The fathers of Lumen Gentium remind us, all children of the church should nevertheless remember that their exalted condition results not from their own merits, but from the grace of Christ.
28:02: If they fail to respond in thought, word, and deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they shall be judged more severely.
28:12: Next, Lumen Gentium talks about the catechumens, those who are coming into the church.
28:20: And then it speaks of those for, excuse me, then
28:27: Lumen Gentium speaks of those for there are many who hold sacred scripture in honor and as a rule of faith in life, and who have sincere, zealous religion, and loving, believe
28:39: God the Father and almighty Savior, who seal by the baptism, which unites them in Christ, and who indeed recognize and receive other sacraments in their own churches and ecclesiastical communities.
28:50: Translation, Orthodox, and Protestant. All of these communities drink from the same wellspring, which flows from the
28:59: Catholic Church. In some of them it comes as a rushing river, and some of them a trickling stream.
29:07: In September of 2000, the Vatican raised eyebrows, both inside and outside the Catholic Church, in a document called
29:16: Dominus Iesus. The secular news media let out a corporate cry.
29:21: The BBC said, Vatican declaration provokes churches. CNN claimed, other churches, not the true church, says the
29:30: Vatican. CBS said, George Bush absent from the Texas National Guard.
29:35: I'm sorry, that was another story. I apologize. CBS said, Vatican, our brand is best.
29:42: Washington Post, Vatican claims monopoly on salvation. So what great crime causes hysteria?
29:49: The document simply restated what the Catholic Church has always believed and taught, that she is the one holy
29:56: Catholic and apostolic church. Next, Lumen Gentium goes on to speak of those that are the first people which the covenants and the promises were made, and from which
30:10: Christ was born according to the flesh. In view of divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, and the gift of God is not without repentance.
30:21: These are the Jews. Then it speaks of those who profess to hold to the faith of Abraham, and together with us, they adore the one merciful
30:31: God, mankind's judge, on the last day. These are the
30:36: Muslims, of whom we shall have more to say in a little while. Lastly are the polytheistic religions, and those who have no religion at all.
30:46: These too may find salvation somewhere between the judgment and the mercy of God.
30:52: Lumen Gentium goes on to state, those who through no fault of their own do not know the gospel of Christ or his church, but nevertheless seek
31:01: God with a sincere heart and are moved by grace in their actions to do his will, that they know through the dictates of their conscience, those too may achieve eternal salvation.
31:12: Nor shall divine providence deny the existence necessary for salvation to those who through no fault of theirs have not yet arrived at explicit knowledge of God, and who, not without grace, strive to lead a good life.
31:30: Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is considered by the church to be a preparation for the gospel.
31:39: As I have already admitted, some liberal scholars have made much of the words of Lumen Gentium.
31:47: Let me restate, and please, brothers and sisters, let me be clear. The Catholic Church does not believe that Jesus and his sacrifice on Calvary is unnecessary to salvation.
32:03: Number two, the Catholic Church does not believe, nor does it teach, that there is anything of salvific value in the religions of mankind.
32:12: For while the church does recognize certain elements of truth in other religions, and God will honor those things which non -Christians struggle to obey in the faint light of natural law, she also recognizes that unregenerated man is all the more open to the temptations of the devil,
32:36: Lumen Gentium states. But very often, deceived by the evil one, men have become vain in their reasoning.
32:45: They have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and have served the world rather than the
32:50: Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to imminent despair.
32:57: Hence, to procure the glory of God and the salvation of all these, the church, mindful of the
33:02: Lord's command, preach the gospel to every creature, takes zealous care to foster the missions.
33:08: And God would, Catholic brothers and sisters, that we would take to heart very seriously those words of Vatican II.
33:16: Next, I would like to turn our attention to one of the paragraphs that we are going to be looking at tonight, paragraph 1260 in the
33:25: Catechism of the Catholic Church. It says, Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the
33:35: Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known only to God of the past from history.
33:44: Every man who is ignorant of the gospel of Christ and of his church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved.
33:57: It may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism if they had known it was necessary.
34:05: The hallmark of the church's teaching here is that Jesus Christ is not just Savior of a select few, but He is the
34:14: Savior of all mankind. Secondly, because He is the Savior of all mankind, all men then are called to the same destiny, which is heaven.
34:25: And thirdly, because He is the Savior of all mankind, God will call out, sometimes in a way only known to Himself, to all men.
34:37: But what do the scriptures say? Do they paint a picture of a God who creates people for no better reason than to stock the shelves of hell?
34:46: Or does He create, does it paint a picture of a God who reaches out, seeks for all men to come to Him?
34:57: Let me please, in the short time that I have left, give you a few scripture verses. Luke 3 .6
35:02: says, All mankind will see the salvation of God. St. John 3 .17, God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him.
35:12: John 6 .51, Jesus gives life to the world. Romans 5 .18,
35:18: Just as the one that trespassed was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness that brings justification and life to all men.
35:29: For God, Romans 11 .32, has bound all men over to disobedience, so that He may have mercy on them all.
35:36: 1 Corinthians 15 .22. For in Adam all die, so in Christ all may be made alive.
35:43: 1 Timothy 2 .4, God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of Christ.
35:51: Hebrews 5 .9, Jesus, once made perfect, became the eternal source of salvation for all who obey
35:59: Him. And John 1 .4 .14, We have seen and testified that the
36:04: Father has sent His Son to be the Savior of the world. Through these verses, we of course could add many more.
36:12: But please know, I'm not trying to flood Dr. White with scripture verses, because I understand that there's no way in this limited period that he can respond to each and every one.
36:20: Rather, I want to show that scripture is clear that salvation is for all mankind.
36:32: My time is going away very quickly. I have not addressed the issue which
36:41: I think Dr. White wants most to discuss here tonight, and that is of the
36:46: Muslims. And so the Catechism of the Catholic Church in this second paragraph we will be examining tonight says,
36:55: The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator in first place amongst those are the
37:01: Muslims. These profess and hold the faith of Abraham, and they together with us adore the one merciful
37:07: God, mankind's judge on the last days. As we have seen from our discussion of Lumen Gentium, the
37:14: Catholic Church does not teach that one can be saved by adhering to Islam.
37:22: Therefore, the phrase the plan of salvation does not mean the way of salvation. Rather, it means that God in his infinite mercy wants to call all people to him, yes, including the
37:37: Muslims. But what of the radical fundamentalist Muslims who believe that they are serving
37:43: God by killing those who they consider to be infidels? The Catholic Church answers yes.
37:51: They too may, may be saved.
37:59: But then again, our Lord Jesus Christ told us that a time will come when anyone who kills you thinks that he is serving
38:08: God. And that they that do such things have not known the Father nor have they known me.
38:15: So what is the fate of those who kill in the name of God, who strap bombs to themselves, who blow up wedding parties, who fly airplanes into buildings because they believe that they are serving
38:26: God? I do not believe that God will excuse their evil because he has put their law in his hearts.
38:33: In his book, Truth and Tolerance, our new Pope, Benedict XVI, points out that we must distinguish between destructive forms of Islam and the forms in which we believe we can perceive a certain proximity to the mystery of Christ.
38:52: A man many times will not gain favor by God by following his religion, but by rising above it.
38:59: Our Lord Jesus tells us that the time will come when he will separate the sheep from the goats and he will say to those, the righteous, you have seen me hungry, naked, poor, and blind, and you serve me.
39:18: To those, he says, inherit the kingdom of life. No, I do not believe that the fundamentalist
39:25: Muslim who blows up things is doing so out of mercy, out of the mercy or out of service for God.
39:37: Nor do I believe a Southern Baptist preacher who blows up little girls in a Birmingham church because he believes that the scripture teaches that black people are not as good as whites will get a break from God either.
40:08: It is indeed a pleasure to be with you once again on this, the 10th of the Great Debates.
40:15: I want to thank all of you who, some of you who have been here. Anybody been here for all 10? Boy. How about five?
40:25: All right. Well, thank you very much for being here and thanks to all those who make this encounter and this discussion of God's truth important.
40:33: For those of you who have been to the Great Debates, you know that in each one of the debates that we have discussed purgatory, as we have discussed the priesthood, the
40:42: Marian dogmas, justification, the mass, sola scriptura. In each one, we have eventually come back to the question of authority.
40:54: And I have suggested more than once that no authority is trustworthy that is in fact self -contradictory, that teaches more than one thing or teaches in contradiction to itself.
41:07: And so, we are in a search for truth. That which is self -contradictory cannot itself be true.
41:14: And yet, in I believe this very room situated the long ways during that particular debate, either that or it was upstairs, one of the two, we heard one of the
41:23: Roman Catholic apologists only a few years ago tell us that many sons of God, those who have been baptized into the
41:30: Catholic Church, had at one point had a relationship with Christ who had been justified, would someday be in hell.
41:38: And so, we had the assertion that sons of God can end up in hell. And yet, this evening, we are reading sections in the
41:45: Catholic Catechism that refer to Muslims and to people of other faiths who are not only heirs of salvation, but may, in fact, enter into God's presence.
41:57: And it seems odd to me that you would have people who had once been justified in hell, whereas people who had never even heard of the gospel ending up in heaven.
42:08: The passages have not actually, we didn't get the chance to really look very closely at them in the opening presentation, so I'd like to read them to you once again so you understand exactly what we are talking about.
42:19: Section 841 says, the church's relationship with the Muslims, the plan of salvation, this comes directly from Lumen Gentium, the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the creator in the first place amongst whom are the
42:32: Muslims. These profess to hold the faith of Abraham and together with us, they adore the one merciful
42:40: God, mankind's judge on the last day. Remember that assertion. Then in section 1260, we have since Christ died for all and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the
42:54: Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers in a way known to God of the paschal mystery, that again from Lumen Gentium, but then the catechism says, every man who is ignorant to the gospel of Christ and of his church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved.
43:18: It may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism explicitly if they had known of its necessity.
43:30: Now, how are we to understand these words? Well, I think the words of the late
43:35: Pope from September 9th, 1998 are helpful in understanding at least his way of understanding it.
43:42: He said, through the practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and following the dictates of their consciences, members of other religions positively respond to God's invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even though they may not recognize
44:03: Him as their Savior. That is the papal understanding at least of the former
44:11: Pope of this particular concept. Now, the debate tonight is not whether one can in fact come up with a way of defending
44:22: Roman Catholicism against the charge of being internally self -contradictory here. For me,
44:27: I go back to the Council of Florence from 1442, and there I read in a dogmatic statement, it firmly believes, this is the
44:36: Catholic Church, it firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the
44:41: Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart into everlasting fire, which is prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock.
44:58: Now, I think the context of that is clear, I think the meaning of that is clear, and I don't think that's what the
45:03: Catholic Catechism is teaching. But our debate tonight is not can you find a way of explaining all the statements about extraclesium nullus salus that have appeared down through the ages.
45:15: I think it's relevant, we may get into it, but that's not really the subject of our debate tonight.
45:20: The question is, does the Bible teach this form of inclusivism? That is, that God's mercy is going to be expressed to people that He is never going to extend grace to introduce to Jesus Christ.
45:36: That He will save people in Christ, but He will not, during this life, even introduce them to who
45:42: Jesus Christ is. In fact, evidently, He will leave individuals in their idolatry and in their heresy.
45:52: Did the apostles teach that you can worship a foreign god, deny the deity of Christ, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the existence of the
46:01: Holy Spirit, and every aspect of the gospel, and yet be redeemed upon death?
46:09: But Rome goes farther than that. Not only Muslims, but all men ignorant of Christ and His Church can be saved if they seek the truth, follow that which is good in their own religions, etc.,
46:25: etc. I would call this if they have saving ignorance. Now, let's outline who it is who can be saved outside the gospel, according to Rome.
46:37: Those engaged in idolatrous worship, as long as they say it isn't idolatrous. Remember the
46:44: Muslim who adores the one true God with us. And so I would ask all of you, do you believe that we worship the same
46:50: God as Islam? Number two, those who have saving ignorance of the truth, and yet, number three, who likewise seek after truth, number four, who likewise follow the light given to them in all of men's religions, and finally, who likewise follows
47:08: God's will, even while ignorant of Christ and His Church, all dependent upon his or her understanding of it or their own conscience.
47:19: Now, I don't understand exactly how all of this works, and that's going to be part of the cross -examination, is to see if we can figure out exactly how these issues fit together.
47:32: We are told in section 841 that Muslims acknowledge the Creator, is a unitarian, arbitrary
47:41: God called Allah, the same Creator that we worship who created with a purpose, a specific purpose, to demonstrate
47:48: His mercy and justice through the gospel of Jesus Christ, the incarnation, and the creation of a people zealous for good deeds.
47:55: I don't believe that that God is the same. If we are consistent, don't
48:00: Mormons fit in here as well? Mormons profess to hold the faith of Abraham as well, don't they?
48:07: Should they come under this provision? They say, together with us, they adore the one merciful God, mankind's judge in the last day.
48:15: Do they join in true worship and adoration? I want to read a few words from the Quran.
48:21: And this would, any Muslim that section 841 would be talking about would be someone who would believe these words are absolutely true and yet they can be saved believing these words.
48:34: Surah 572, they do blaspheme who say, God is Christ, the Son of Mary. But Christ said,
48:39: O children of Israel, worship God, my Lord and your God. Whoever joins other gods with Allah, Allah will forbid him the garden, is specifically what he says.
48:48: That is, they will not have eternal life. And the fire will be his abode.
48:55: There will be, there will, for the wrongdoers, be no one to help. They do blaspheme who say,
49:00: God is one of three in a trinity. For there is no God except one God, Allah. If they do not desist from their word of blasphemy, that's the word trinity, verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.
49:13: Section 75. Christ, the Son of Mary, was no more than a messenger. Many were the messengers that passed away before him.
49:21: His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their daily food, see how Allah makes his signs clear to them, yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the true.
49:34: And so are we to truly believe that a person worshiping in this way, who believes Jesus is but a messenger, is worshiping the one true
49:42: God with us? And are we to believe that God would leave one of his redeemed people, one of those that he wants to have with him in his presence for eternity, in that kind of ignorance of his son throughout their life?
49:56: Does not the Holy Spirit have the ability to bring all of those that God wishes to have in his presence to a knowledge of that, if that is what is being asserted?
50:07: Section 1260. Indeed, Mr. Rutland is right to point out that the assertions of Rome go directly against that of my own
50:16: Reformed faith, where section 1260 begins with the concept, since Christ died for all, but we're not told exactly how.
50:25: Was it by substitution? Did Christ bear the penalty of sin of each and every single individual, so that that penalty of sin will be brought against Christ and upon every person in hell, so there will be double jeopardy for all of those sins?
50:39: Is that how it happened? Was it by substitution? I don't believe that it can be in light of the Roman Catholic doctrine of the
50:44: Mass and the idea that the Mass is the representation, the one sacrifice of Christ, and therefore you can come to the
50:51: Mass over and over again, as you have heard in the previous debates, and yet die impure. You remember the debate on justification.
50:57: You remember the debate on purgatory, where these things came out. Christ died for all, and yet it says, all men are called to one and the same destiny.
51:05: Are they? There is no elect. We've heard the elect described so far as the chosen few.
51:12: Actually, the Bible describes them as having the number of the sands of the sea, but we've had this description, and it seems that the
51:19: Catholic catechism is denying the existence of the elect, and yet isn't it interesting that Augustine long ago said, what will he give to those whom he has predestined to life, who has given such things even to those whom he has predestined to death?
51:33: Hmm, Augustine said that a long time ago. That was even before Calvin, wasn't it? What blessings will he in the blessed life shower upon those for whom, even in the state of misery, he has been willing that his only begotten son should endure such sufferings even to death?
51:47: He also said, what did he mean then in saying to them, you, to the Jews, are not of my sheep, that he saw them predestined to everlasting destruction, not one to eternal life by the price of his own blood?
52:03: That's from around the years, the beginning of the 5th century.
52:09: What about the elect? What about the fact that the Apostle Paul said he endures all things for the sake of whom?
52:15: The sake of the elect. It's a Biblical term. We need to at least understand what it is referring to.
52:22: Going back to section 1260, the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers.
52:29: What does that mean? How is a Muslim who is faithful to his beliefs, who does as the
52:36: Pope said, and responds to the positive things in his religion, whatever those positive things are, how is that Muslim made a partaker of Christ when part and parcel of his fundamental confession is that Jesus Christ did not die upon a cross,
52:52: Jesus Christ did not die as a sacrifice for sin? How is it that that Muslim is going to die and when he comes back to consciousness after his physical death, he discovers that in point of fact he is now going to spend eternity worshiping a
53:07: God he thought was the great Satan? Is that what God's plan of salvation revealed by the
53:14: Apostles actually is? I ask this question with all honesty because it seems to me that when the
53:21: Ethiopian eunuch was going down the road and he was looking at the Scriptures, God worked a miracle to bring the
53:28: Gospel to that man. He didn't just leave him in his ignorance, he didn't do what section 1260 says, it may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism explicitly if they had known of its necessity.
53:44: Well why do we need to do missions if in point of fact section 1260 is true? I know
53:50: Rome says we have to, right after this they explicitly state that, but the point is if such a person as this who would have desired baptism if they had known of its necessity can go to heaven, if they're going to make it, if they're going to go to heaven, why risk sending a missionary to them who might because of their personality, because of something else offend them, offend their free will, now they've heard the message, now they know the necessity, but they're offended by the messenger so they reject it and now they're lost.
54:23: If they're already going to be saved, leave them there. Keep your mouth shut. If we may suppose that they would have desired baptism, where is the necessity of the messenger?
54:36: Why Romans 10? Just skip from Romans 9 to Romans 11. I don't see where this is what the apostles themselves taught.
54:47: Section 1260 says, every man who is ignorant of the gospel of Christ and of his church, what level of ignorance?
54:53: What level of ignorance? Am I ignorant of these things? I would think after 10 years
54:59: I better not be. But what level of ignorance is enough? Is there anyone in America that this would fit?
55:06: What level of ignorance? We don't know, we are not told. What does it mean to be ignorant of Christ and his church?
55:12: Is there anyone who knows everything there is to know? We are not told. What about those who've been deceived?
55:19: What about deception? Is that the same as ignorance? Again. The passage talks about those who seek the truth.
55:27: I thought when Paul wrote to the church at Rome in describing men outside of Christ, he said there is none who seek after God.
55:35: There is none who does what is righteous. John described men as those who flee from the light because their deeds are evil.
55:44: They're not truth seekers. You have to have that heart of stone taken out and a heart of flesh put in before you are going to seek the truth and continue seeking that truth.
55:57: Who are these people? Who are they who are described in Romans chapter 1?
56:04: Romans chapter 1, which was referenced in the opening presentation, says that men already possess the knowledge of the true
56:12: God. They already know he exists. They already know they're to give thanks. They already know they're to honor him as God.
56:18: But the participle that's used by Paul says they katakanton, they are holding down or suppressing that knowledge.
56:28: They already have the truth and they're suppressing it. Who are these people? I suggest to you the people described in the
56:34: Catholic catechism don't exist biblically. It's a null set.
56:39: It's an empty set because there is no such person who fits these categories.
56:47: There are no truth seekers in that way. Time is going past very, very quickly.
56:53: But let me suggest to you that the primary refutation of this form of inclusivism is not to go to John 14, 6,
56:59: I am the way, the truth, and the life, because that's not the issue here. Rome is not saying these people are being saved outside of Jesus Christ.
57:08: That's already been made clear. They're saying that they can be saved in ignorance of him in this life.
57:13: They can stay in their religions or in their non -religions as long as they're responding to this positive stuff, but when they get to heaven, they're going to find out they're actually saved by Christ.
57:26: How do you respond to that? You don't go to John 14, 6. I suggest to you the only way to respond to that is to answer a simple question.
57:34: Why did God create the world the way he did? And when you look to the biblical answer, we discover that God created the world the way he did with the cross as the centerpiece of human history.
57:53: Jesus Christ is the lamb slain from the foundation of the earth. It was God's purpose from the start that Jesus Christ was going to enter into amazing thought that it is his own creation, that he was going to take on human flesh, and that the
58:10: Father was going to join a people to him undeservedly, not because of anything that they have done or ever could do.
58:17: He was going to join a people to them. They were the ones that God had set his love on from eternity past, and that Jesus Christ was going to die in their place, rise again in their place, and that God was going to glorify himself,
58:33: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in the gospel of Jesus Christ and the creation of this special people that Titus 2 describes as zealous for good deeds.
58:44: God is about redeeming a people in Jesus Christ. That's what all of creation is about, let alone is that what the gospel and the cross is all about.
58:56: And if we accept that biblical testimony, then this entire concept of inclusivism has no foundation.
59:04: Why in the world would God choose to glorify himself through sanctifying a people, conforming them to the image of Christ, and yet for many he would never take the time to introduce that someday -to -be -redeemed person to the
59:22: Redeemer in this life? They're not conformed to the image of Christ. Believing what the Quran says about Christ does not conform you to his image.
59:32: Believing what Buddhism says about getting rid of attachments, you've all seen that recently in the current
59:37: Buddhist primer on Star Wars, right? We all saw that. You know attachments are the way to the dark side.
59:43: That's what Buddhism says. No, the Bible says we have been attached to Jesus Christ. We are in him.
59:50: And so are people in that religion being misled in that way, going to become heirs of eternal life and God somehow going to glorify himself in that?
59:59: Where do the apostles teach this? Indeed, think with me for just a moment. Think about Jesus' words in these last five minutes that we have together.
01:00:09: When he prays to the Father, knowing that the cross is right before him, knowing that his betrayal is at hand, and when you know death is right around the corner, what you say then is extremely important.
01:00:22: He prays to the Father and we have an opportunity to hear literally inter -Trinitarian communion.
01:00:30: And what does the Son say? And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true
01:00:36: God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent, that they may know you. Do you think
01:00:41: Jesus is really saying that someday they may know you? After they die, they may know you? No.
01:00:48: I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the works you gave me to do, and now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
01:00:58: I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world.
01:01:05: Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.
01:01:10: Whoever is going to be in heaven, John 6 tells us, John 17 tells us, John 10 tells us, the
01:01:16: Father has given to the Son. Whoever is going to be in heaven, the Father has given to the
01:01:22: Son. Now ask yourself a question. Is there any reason to believe that Jesus or John or any of the apostles believe that those given by the
01:01:30: Father to the Son would remain in ignorance of the Son throughout their life? And in fact, not just ignorance, but abject heretical denial of who the
01:01:38: Son is as we see in the teachings of the Quran. Is that what the apostles taught? That's our thesis this evening.
01:01:44: That's our issue this evening. Is it biblical? Is this teaching biblical? Jesus says in verse 9,
01:01:52: I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.
01:02:00: Verse 14, I have given them your word, and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world just as I am not of the world.
01:02:09: Who's this world? Who's demonstrated hatred toward Christians? Evidently, people are going to be going to heaven someday in this particular presentation of inclusivism.
01:02:21: I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world just as I am not of the world.
01:02:28: Sanctify them in the truth. Jesus Christ's desire for everyone who will be with him in heaven is that they be sanctified in the truth.
01:02:39: Is the Quran true? Is the person engaged in animism, following what's good in his religion, and I question even the existence of such a thing, is that person being sanctified in the truth?
01:02:55: Notice what Jesus says, your word is true. Seems to me these people know the word of God. It somehow has been delivered to them.
01:03:02: Maybe that's why Romans 10 says how shall they hear if they are not sent a preacher? Verse 20,
01:03:07: I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me. How? Through their word.
01:03:14: That sounds like preaching, doesn't it? That sounds like missions. That sounds like God ordaining the ends and the means.
01:03:22: That they may all be one just as you, Father, are in me and I in you and they also may be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.
01:03:29: Now listen to that, folks. How does that fit with the Catholic catechism?
01:03:35: Listen to that verse again. That they may all be one just as you, Father, are in me and I in you that they also may be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.
01:03:45: Are those described in the Catholic catechism one with us in worship and adoration? Does the world see that Jesus Christ was sent by the
01:03:53: Father because of the unity that we all have in that? There is no unity in saying that we worship the same
01:04:01: God with all these other religions. There is no unity in that because it's not biblical.
01:04:09: The issue here is the gospel and I'm going to take time to look at every one of those passages that were listed and I've got a whole lot more
01:04:16: I can list the other direction. We've done that over these 10 years but I do believe that tonight's topic is one of the most important ones that we have addressed.
01:04:25: For here, I honestly believe we see what happens when you don't follow sola scriptura.
01:04:33: I believe Rome once taught Acts, now she teaches not Acts, and if you don't believe in sola scriptura, if you don't have a single divine theanustos, infallible rule of faith, then you've got to follow whatever the current pope is saying.
01:04:51: Would you have believed what the Catholic catechism says today in 1445 after the
01:04:56: Council of Florence? I don't think you would. That's why we need to follow the Bible as the sole infallible rule of faith.
01:05:04: Thank you very much. We now will have the first of two periods of rebuttals, eight minutes each, beginning with Mr.
01:05:20: Rutland. Thank you,
01:05:36: Dr. White, for acknowledging that the Catholic church does teach that there is not salvation to be found under any other name than that of Jesus Christ.
01:05:51: Mr. White here, though, tends to confuse the acknowledgement of God with the worship of God.
01:05:58: And the catechism does not say that the Muslims are correct in worship.
01:06:04: But what it does say that they acknowledge that the God that they worship is the
01:06:10: God of Abraham, and Abraham was the one who received the promise. May I say one more time what
01:06:19: I said in my opening statement? A man does not receive salvation so much by following his religion, that is, non -Christian religion, as in rising above it.
01:06:35: God has put in the heart of each and every man knowledge of good and of evil.
01:06:43: In fact, that's what the original sin was all about. Now, Dr. White has painted a picture of, a very extreme picture of Muslims.
01:06:55: But I am not talking about Muslim theology, nor am
01:07:01: I talking about the Koran. In fact, I don't know much about the Koran. I'll confess that right here and now.
01:07:07: Never even read it. You'll have to forgive me. I am a product of the Alabama school system.
01:07:19: In fact, we had driver's ed and sex ed in the same car, but that's another subject. Mother Teresa tells a story of a
01:07:31: Muslim family who her sisters came to, and this
01:07:37: Muslim family was starving, and her sisters gave them a meal of rice. But before they even ate, they took that rice, and they gave it to a
01:07:46: Hindu family who was also starving. This is what the
01:07:52: Catechism means when it talks about the possibility of Muslims being saved.
01:08:00: Because, you see, Jesus said, you saw me hungry and you fed me to those who would receive righteousness.
01:08:10: There's a story about St. Francis that I love. He was a little crazy, but he was crazy in a good way, so that makes me think that there's hope for me also.
01:08:21: But he decided one day that he was, this was during the time when the Muslim armies and the
01:08:26: Christian armies were fighting, and he decided one day that he was going to go and convert the
01:08:31: Sultan. And so, Brother Francis and his friend join the
01:08:39: Christian army, get sent to the front lines there at Jerusalem, and they promptly desert.
01:08:45: They go to the Muslim camp. The Muslims think that they're soldiers wanting to surrender.
01:08:51: They take them and they bring them into the presence of the Sultan's cousin. The Sultan's cousin then demands that they renounce
01:09:00: Christianity, and he orders that a tapestry be brought in with crosses embroidered all over it and rolls it out and orders on the pain of death,
01:09:14: Francis, to trod on the cross. St. Francis, without missing a beat, trods right across the tapestry, turns around, trods right back across it again, and then he says to the
01:09:35: Sultan, The cross that I have trodded on is the cross of the thief.
01:09:43: But I come to bring to you the cross of the Savior, the cross of life. You see, what that Sultan was rejecting was a false notion of who
01:09:54: Jesus was. And so we can say, as the Catechism says, that there is at least a possibility.
01:10:03: Notice, the Catechism is not saying that all Muslims are going to be saved by being good Muslims, or Hindus, or Protestants, or Catholics either, for that matter.
01:10:14: But what it is saying is that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son.
01:10:20: And because of that love, God reaches out to all of us. God is not a judge sitting there meting out judgment, saying,
01:10:30: Arbitrarily, you're going to go to heaven and you're going to go to hell. God is the father whose son has gone into a foreign land.
01:10:42: The father who goes and yearns for his son to come back. God is a father.
01:10:50: Now Dr. White asks the question, well, if this good pagan or Muslim or whoever, if that person would desire baptism if he really knew about it, then what's the use of evangelism because then you might have some obnoxious type of missionary who might change that person's mind against God.
01:11:18: Well, I guess there are such things as obnoxious missionaries. I rather doubt that God would choose one like that to send to a person who is going to desire baptism, but that's another story.
01:11:31: I don't know. But let us consider the opposite. What about a
01:11:38: God who from the foundations of the world has already determined who is going to go to hell and who is going to obtain heaven?
01:11:50: What about a God who creates mankind, Adam and Eve, puts them in a garden, puts in their midst a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and says to them, don't eat of that tree of the knowledge of good and evil, yet he has already foreordained that they're going to eat it and when they do exactly what he has foreordained for them to do, he condemns them.
01:12:12: Is that the kind of God? Anyway, Dr. White did not address my accusation that what he is trying to present to us here tonight is a universal negative.
01:12:28: Now he said a lot about that the church maybe had flip -flopped and I'm glad that he pointed out that we're not here to debate that, although he did spend a lot of time on it.
01:12:39: If Dr. White would like to debate church infallibility, I would be more than glad to do it some other time, not tonight though.
01:12:49: But Dr. White did not address the fact that his proposition that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven is a universal negative which he cannot prove.
01:13:00: Now Dr. White's a very good debater and he may stand up here tonight and completely demolish my argument and my position within the realm of possibility.
01:13:11: But, just because you can shoot holes in your opponent's position does not mean that you establish your own.
01:13:16: And for him to prove that God at no time will ever, ever, never, nor has he ever allowed a non -Christian into heaven, he's going to have to prove to you that universal negative.
01:13:31: And to do that, he's going to have to plumb the depths of the very mind of God.
01:13:37: My time is up. Thank you for yours. Mr. Rutland began his opening presentation talking about the story about the
01:13:52: Egyptians and the angels. I would direct you to Romans chapter 9 verses 16 through 19 for a biblical view of the destruction of the pagan armies of Egypt.
01:14:03: That destruction was in fact to God's honor and to the demonstration of his power and name throughout all the world and the destruction and the spoiling of the
01:14:11: Egyptian gods. God did that and he did that to his own honor and glory. I would refer you to the inspired interpretation of that particular event.
01:14:19: Secondly, we are told that people go to hell for another reason. They have never had an opportunity to know the gospel.
01:14:26: That is a common canard, a misrepresentation of the reformed position. People go to hell because they love their sin and would rather go there than to bow down and worship to the one true and holy
01:14:36: God. I was then told that I have to prove a universal negative. No, I have to deal with sections 841 and 1260 of the
01:14:43: Catholic Catechism that say that God will save people outside of a faith relationship with Jesus Christ.
01:14:49: That is not a universal negative. We are talking here about the fact that I am on the negative side, he is on the positive side.
01:14:55: It is his burden to demonstrate that the apostles taught what 841 and 1260 taught, not my burden to prove some sort of universal negative.
01:15:04: Secondly, we are told that the elect simply means the select few. As I've pointed out, that is not a reformed perspective.
01:15:11: We are told that God has placed a self -limitation on himself in regard to the free will of man. We were not given any biblical passages.
01:15:18: I would simply refer you to Jesus' own words in John 644 where he said, No man is able to come to me unless the
01:15:23: Father who sent me draws him. In John 665 where he kept repeating that so often that the disciples turned away and walked away and did not follow him any longer.
01:15:33: Jesus did not concern himself about what was attractive to the natural man.
01:15:39: He spoke the truth and trusted the Holy Spirit of God to bring spiritual life in the hearts and minds of those who would follow him.
01:15:46: We were told a God who creates people for no better reason than to stock the shelves of hell was the description of the reformed perspective.
01:15:53: No, we're talking about a God who creates people so as to glorify himself both in the demonstration of his holiness and his justice in bringing his wrath against the ungodly and his mercy and his love in the undeserved redemption of those rebel sinners that his love is placed upon from eternity past as the
01:16:13: Bible tells us in Ephesians chapter 1. We were then given John chapter 3 verse 17 which simply says all the believing ones will not come into judgment but will have eternal life.
01:16:24: Who's going to believe? I say to you faith is the gift of God given by God to his elect people.
01:16:29: John 6 51 well John 6 I invite you to read the whole thing especially reading verses 37 and following is one of the clearest presentations of the sovereignty of God and salvation
01:16:39: I've ever read. Romans 5 all men we were told yes, all men who are in Christ.
01:16:44: Romans 5 presents two humanities those are in Adam those are in Christ. If you're in Adam you receive only what Adam can give to you and that is death and if you're in Christ you receive what
01:16:53: Christ gives to you and that is life. Two humanities there in fact I would suggest you read even Augustine on a subject such as that.
01:17:00: Romans 11 32 talking about Jews and Gentiles 1 Corinthians 15 22 says all will be made alive that's talking about the resurrection not talking about some idea that all men somehow are going to be given salvation even that is not the position that's been taken by my opponent this evening.
01:17:16: 1 Timothy 2 4 is talking about Jesus Christ 1 Timothy 2 5 then says that he is the mediator between God and men.
01:17:23: The question I would ask you is why in two verses before 1 Timothy 2 4 do we have a description of kinds of men that is rulers and those in authority and if all men there means every single human being who has ever lived which
01:17:35: I guess would include even the pagan Canaanites that God didn't even send prophets to while the children of Israel were in Egypt if that in fact is what it means then does that also mean that in 1
01:17:45: Timothy 2 5 Jesus Christ intercedes before the father for those who remain in hell and how long does he keep doing that and why does his work fail?
01:17:54: You see the difference between having a God -centered view of salvation and a man -centered view. Hebrews 5 9 was cited and yet it says for all who obey who will obey?
01:18:04: Who is the one who is given a spirit to obey the commandments of Christ? Who is the one who is raised to spiritual life who even has the ability and desire to obey but the elect who receive the work of the
01:18:17: Holy Spirit of God in their lives and that is a sovereign work. There is one other verse given but I couldn't get the reference. It didn't make any sense to me as to what the reference was and I would be glad to respond to it should it be given to us.
01:18:28: We were just told in the last rebuttal period that the catechism does not say that the Muslims are correct in their position.
01:18:36: No, it doesn't. However, what it does say is that they together with us adore the one merciful
01:18:44: God. Does it not say that? And did not the Pope say through the practice of what is good?
01:18:50: We keep hearing Mr. Rutland say well they're saved by transcending going above rising above their religion but John Paul said through the practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and following the dictates of their consciences members of other religions positively respond to God's invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ even though they may not recognize
01:19:12: Him as their Savior. And then in December of 2000 he also said all who seek God with a sincere heart including those who do not know
01:19:20: Christ and His church contribute under the influence of grace to the building of this kingdom. I'm just letting the Pope define these terms.
01:19:27: I think that's the best way to do it is to understand what the current perspective is.
01:19:32: The problem is and here truly is one of the major issues as I mentioned at the end of my opening statement if you had followed the plain meaning of the words of the
01:19:43: Council of Florence in 1445 you would not believe what Rome teaches today. If you follow the plain meaning of the
01:19:49: Catechism today and you didn't know that the words of the Council of Florence came from an allegedly infallible council you would think that what those words were said were wrong.
01:20:00: That's what happens when you have a non -inspired ultimate authority. You have no foundation.
01:20:09: That's why Sola Scriptura is so important. Finally, what about a
01:20:16: God who elects from eternity we were told? Well, what about that God?
01:20:26: Isn't that the very same kind of objection that is raised in Romans chapter 9 against God? After Paul says
01:20:33: God hardens whom he hardens and he mercies whom he mercies man says well well then who can find fault?
01:20:41: There's injustice with God. You see these objections are nothing new but my friends if your objections are the same objections the apostles were responding to that's not a good thing.
01:20:55: If you're raising the very same objections the apostles were
01:21:01: What does that tell you about this debate? Because the debate thesis is is this belief biblical?
01:21:07: Is it in accordance with apostolic teaching? I haven't seen one bit of evidence so far that this teaching was what
01:21:19: John and Paul were teaching to the Thessalonians to the Romans to the Galatians.
01:21:25: I see just the opposite. And that's the debate this evening. Don't miss your focus.
01:21:32: That is what we're debating tonight. Thank you very much. Please use the back of your tickets to write down any questions that you have.
01:21:48: Remember it must be a question that's something that ends with a question mark not an exclamation point.
01:21:55: Write down your email address or your home address if you want to be put on the mailing list for next year's debate or either for Mr.
01:22:03: Rutland or Dr. White's organizations. Also, I've been asked to ask how many in attendance are
01:22:12: Roman Catholics and how many are Protestants? How many of you are Roman Catholics? Raise your hands.
01:22:18: I would assume that you are, Mr. Rutland. Very good. And how many are Protestants? Even as a
01:22:26: Baptist, you still call yourself a Protestant. Also, I am to direct the audience to visit the book tables.
01:22:37: Dr. White's book tables are to your left, my right. Mr. Rutland's book tables are to my left, your right, and the life -changing books tables is by the door.
01:22:48: I don't know if there's some symbolism in that, but the life -changing books table is by the door.
01:22:57: You have 10 minutes for the break. The debate will resume promptly at 925.
01:23:05: I will turn the podium over to Mr. Rutland. In his last rebuttal,
01:23:28: Dr. White pointed out that we are dealing with the two sections in the
01:23:35: Catechism concerning Muslims and those who have never heard the gospel of Christ.
01:23:42: He says that it is my burden to prove to you that they are consistent with the gospel.
01:23:50: The gospel should be preached, Jesus said, to all men. He told his disciples to go out into the world, to every nation, and to preach the gospel.
01:24:05: I have a problem, though, why Jesus would say for them to go out and preach the gospel to all men if, in fact, all men were not meant to hear the gospel.
01:24:19: I think that is a very big problem. The second problem is this. Dr. White's position that he is taking against these verses in the
01:24:30: Catechism is that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven.
01:24:37: In other words, there never has been, there is not, there never will be a circumstance by which
01:24:46: God would grant heaven to the non -believer. Now, we could give all kinds of examples, and we could stand up here and we could kill that statement, the death of a thousand exceptions, but it won't make it go away.
01:25:03: You see, Dr. White is wanting you to believe that only
01:25:08: Christians can go to heaven, and that is exactly what those, that is exactly what those two verses in the
01:25:15: Catechism are not, are not telling us. In his book,
01:25:21: The Roman Catholic Controversy, he in a section entitled The Great Scandal, Dr. White writes this,
01:25:28: In the realm of faith, I have a true but limited knowledge of God. In fact, no one outside the Trinity itself has exhausted and complete knowledge of God.
01:25:37: I do not believe that we as finite preachers ever possess such knowledge, and I do not have exhaustive knowledge of God.
01:25:45: This does not mean that I have no knowledge of Him at all. Of course not. To take it a step further, I do not have exhaustive knowledge of everything the
01:25:53: Bible says about God. While for years I have studied the Bible extensively, learning its languages, studying its background, still
01:26:01: I do not know everything that the Bible teaches about God. I would dare say that no man, no matter how intelligent or diligent, can mine or ever has mined the nuggets of truth about God from the
01:26:13: Scriptures. Does this mean I have no knowledge of God at all? No. I have a true knowledge of God based on the
01:26:18: Scriptures, but my knowledge is limited. Which brings us to the scandal. My knowledge is limited.
01:26:25: And what is more, it is fallible. The very fact that what I know is limited means that I may be in error about the conclusion
01:26:34: I have embraced simply because I do not have all the facts and have come to that conclusion prematurely.
01:26:41: Now Dr. White has stood up here and told us, in a roundabout way kind of, that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven.
01:26:53: And that's really what this debate is about tonight. Can a non -Christian enter heaven, whether he be
01:26:58: Muslim or atheist or anything else? And Dr. White, although he hasn't really affirmed it real strongly, but Dr.
01:27:07: White affirms that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven. That is a universal negative.
01:27:14: That is an absolute statement. In the section that I just read, and I apologize
01:27:19: Dr. White, I'm not trying to pummel you by your own words, but in the statement I just read, he told us no less than seven times that his knowledge is fallible and that he could be in error about what he believes.
01:27:32: Yet, on the same hand, he purports to stand up here and tell us that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven.
01:27:40: He purports to know the very mind of God, who God himself said is higher than our knowledge could be, as high as the heaven is from the earth.
01:27:51: But he purports to stand up here and infallibly tell us that he knows as a matter of fact that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven.
01:28:08: Well, I would ask then, what about Abraham? Was Abraham a Christian? But you might say, oh, well, wait a minute,
01:28:17: Abraham heard directly from God. He had direct revelation, and although at the beginning it was only about a paragraph, okay, granted, what about Rahab, the harlot whom
01:28:29: Hebrews counts as among the heroes of faith? Rahab was not a
01:28:36: Jew. Rahab never heard from God, yet she hid the
01:28:43: Jewish spies because she was afraid that when they came to conquer the city, they would kill her and her family.
01:28:52: And so she acknowledged that she was the God of Abraham and the
01:28:58: God of Joshua out of her fear. But yet,
01:29:05: God took that imperfect knowledge that she had, and Hebrews tells us that she is among those who are in heaven.
01:29:17: Let us consider also infants who die in infancy, or those who for some reason have not the mental capabilities to understand and to hold to the gospel.
01:29:29: Can they, too, go to heaven? They're not Christians. Well, what does the Westminster Confession of Faith say?
01:29:36: It says this, elect infants dying in infancy are regarded, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the spirit who worketh when and where and how he pleaseth, so that are all the other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word.
01:29:57: Are these people who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word
01:30:02: Christians? They've never heard of Christ. They've never accepted him as Savior.
01:30:11: They've never contemplated or heard the gospel. But yet, even
01:30:17: Dr. White's own theology says that at least some of these are going to be in heaven.
01:30:23: Let me remind you again, let me remind you again, my friends, of the definition that I gave of Christian at the very beginning of our time together and a definition which
01:30:34: I guess by Dr. White's silence he accepts as being valid. If not, then maybe he'll give us another one.
01:30:40: It is this, a Christian is a believer in Jesus Christ as Savior, someone who believes that Jesus Christ was sent to the world by God to save humanity and who tries to follow his teachings and examples.
01:30:54: So I ask you, was Abraham a person that acknowledged Jesus as Savior?
01:31:00: Was he a person that followed his teachings and examples? How about Rahab? Did she acknowledge
01:31:08: Jesus as Savior? What about the babies who die in infancy? Did they acknowledge
01:31:14: Jesus as Savior? But yet, if Dr. White is going to answer in the affirmative, he has to redefine
01:31:20: Christianity to the point where it loses all meaning of the concept.
01:31:26: My time is up. Thank you for yours. This debate is defined by the thesis.
01:31:39: Sections 841 and 1260 are not talking about infants. Section 1261 talks about infants, but we are not debating section 1261, are we?
01:31:49: The debate this evening is about the specific positive teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. And so to evade the thesis by going on to other issues, such as Abraham, who was not a
01:32:00: Muslim, by the way, who was a follower of God, Rahab, who is described as a hero of faith that God revealed himself to, is to, in essence,
01:32:09: I think, demonstrate that the thesis has already been lost. We cannot demonstrate that what the
01:32:14: Roman Catholic Church has said in sections 841 and 1260, which, by the way, as we demonstrated, except for the last two sentences of 1260, comes directly from Lumen Gentium, that is a council of the
01:32:26: Roman Catholic Church, that the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church regarding the very nature of the gospel is not apostolic.
01:32:33: It is not what Paul taught. It is not what John taught. It is not what Peter taught. It is unbiblical.
01:32:42: We are told that the gospel should be preached to all men. And, of course, every Reformed person believes that because God has ordained the ends as well as the means.
01:32:54: God has ordained His elect people. We have not had a single effort put forth to deal with the biblical passages that teach this particular truth, and He has ordained the means by which
01:33:06: He is going to draw them to Himself, which is through the foolishness of preaching. And it is our great privilege, as the redeemed, to be used as the messengers of life to the others that God in His mercy draws unto
01:33:22: Himself. But our debate tonight is Rome saying that that's one way God saves, but it's not the only way.
01:33:30: That in some mysterious way, God is going to save people, but unlike you special people, where He is very merciful to you, and He introduces you to Christ, and He regenerates you, and He gives you
01:33:41: His Spirit, and He gives you His truth, for some reason there are these others who are sort of second class citizens. And they are not regenerated.
01:33:49: And they are not given the truth, and they are not introduced to Christ, and they are not given the Spirit, but I'm going to take them to heaven anyhow, and I wonder when they get there why they are going to ask, why did you leave me to walk in darkness my entire life when you sent
01:34:06: Philip miraculously to speak to the Ethiopian eunuch, and you sent missionaries all over the world, but where is this anonymous
01:34:14: Christian, this second class Christian in the Bible? We haven't found it. We haven't seen it anywhere whatsoever.
01:34:23: We are told that the gospel should be preached to all men, and yet we go back to section 1260, and I'm the one that keeps reading, it may be supposed that such persons, these good people, these people who seek for truth, even though the
01:34:37: Bible says that that's not what man does outside of the Spirit of God, and does the will of God in accordance with his own understanding, though that's not what man does outside of the
01:34:43: Spirit of God, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism explicitly if they had known of its necessity.
01:34:52: Where is that in Scripture? Mr. Rutland has come here, and he has undertaken the positive side to defend this as a biblical truth, as at least, maybe if it's not stated, at least it's consistent with what the
01:35:04: Bible teaches, but we have shown numerous reasons why that is not the case.
01:35:11: Our debate is not a philosophical discussion of my understanding of my alleged infallibility.
01:35:20: I'm not infallible, neither is Mr. Rutland, neither is any other living human being on the earth.
01:35:29: That's not the issue. The issue is not, oh, you're making a universal negative.
01:35:35: Yes, I'll tell you what universal negatives I'm making. Let me give you an illustration. If I stand up here and say, there is only one true
01:35:41: God, is that statement questionable because I, personally, am infallible? Or if when
01:35:48: I represent God's infallibility, is the conclusion of that infallible word itself infallible?
01:35:55: Do we all have to believe that there's maybe, possibly, some other gods out there? I mean, we are. We're not infallible, you know.
01:36:02: We've been given a clear word from God, have we not? And that's what we're talking about today.
01:36:07: The Bible clearly says how God saves in Jesus Christ. The Bible clearly reveals what the gospel of Jesus Christ is, and it doesn't require me to be infallible for that message.
01:36:21: And so it is not a matter in any way, shape, or form, it is not a matter in any way, shape, or form, of my having to claim infallibility for myself, or claiming universal negative.
01:36:31: Mr. Rutland is here, and I say to Mr. Rutland, if you're going to substantiate your position, you need to show us those
01:36:38: Muslims who are in heaven today, who denied the deity of Christ, denied the crucifixion, denied the resurrection, denied the gospel, and yet they're there today, and they were shocked when they found out who it was that they were saved by.
01:36:50: I want to know who they were, and I want to know that the apostles taught that that was what was going to take place, and we have not seen that in this presentation this evening.
01:37:04: What is the gospel? Why has God chosen to save the way that he's done so?
01:37:12: It is ultimately, Ephesians chapter one tells us, why has God in eternity past set his love upon undeserving people?
01:37:21: Why in eternity past did God choose to draw men and women to himself and to join them to Christ and to adopt them into the family of God undeservingly?
01:37:34: Paul tells us. It is to the praise of his glorious grace.
01:37:41: That's why it's undeserved. That's why it is free and totally free on God's part, and it's totally sovereign on God's part.
01:37:48: It is not a matter of cooperation. It's not a matter of synergism. It is free on God's part because, you see, if it's not, then it's not all to the praise of his glorious grace.
01:38:00: Grace does not join with human actions in bringing about salvation.
01:38:07: And salvation is not to the praise of his glorious grace if it is dependent for its fruition upon the quote -unquote free will of the rebel sinner man that the
01:38:17: Bible describes as the enemy of God. The scriptures are very clear about that.
01:38:25: We have not heard a response because there is no way to demonstrate.
01:38:34: And I would imagine most modern Roman Catholic theologians and scholars would actually scoff at the idea that the apostles actually believed this.
01:38:45: Oh, that's development. That's development. You know, Cardinal Newman showed us the way there.
01:38:52: But the thesis tonight is that the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, which is very clear in sections 841 and 1260, is
01:39:01: Biblical and consistent with the inspired revelation of God. And when we keep our eye on what the actual thesis of the debate is, we will see that there is no way that Mr.
01:39:16: Rutland has even begun the task of substantiating the burden of proof that is his in this debate this evening.
01:39:23: Thank you very much. We now enter the cross -examination period.
01:39:33: Questions and answers. We will begin with Mr. Rutland cross -examining Dr. White for ten minutes, and then
01:39:40: Dr. White cross -examining Mr. Rutland for ten minutes. Dr.
01:39:50: White, in my opening statement, I defined the term Christian as, quote, a believer in Jesus Christ as Savior, someone who believes that Jesus was sent to the world to save humanity, and who tries to follow his teachings and examples.
01:40:06: Would you agree with this definition that I have given? Or if not, would you please offer an alternative definition?
01:40:13: No, sir, I do not. It is an unbiblical and subbiblical definition, and I have attempted to offer a better definition in the sense of allowing the scriptures to define what the gospel is, and defining it not so much as describing a
01:40:26: Christian as describing what God does in making a Christian. And so, no, I do not believe that that is a sufficient or a biblical definition of a
01:40:34: Christian. Okay, but if we are to discuss the question of can a non -Christian enter heaven, whether he be
01:40:43: Muslim or whether he be any other non - Christian faith, it seems to me that first we would have to have a working definition and understanding of what
01:40:52: Christian is. So would you please give me a definition of what you believe a Christian is? A Christian is a person who has been redeemed and justified by the work of God in his life.
01:41:05: That is, the Holy Spirit has brought spiritual life to this individual. That is called regeneration. A person has been adopted into the family of God, forgiven of their sins, declared righteous on the basis of the work of Jesus Christ on their behalf, and is now being conformed to the image of Christ by the work of the
01:41:19: Spirit of God within them. In Kings 2, 2, 7 through 12, we are told that Elijah had been taken to heaven in a chariot of fire.
01:41:36: According to the definition that you just gave as a Christian, would you say that Elijah was a Christian? You are confusing, of course, the use of the term
01:41:44: Christian in the New Testament with believers in Jehovah God in the Old Testament. This is not, to my understanding, even a part of the debate as far as Roman Catholicism is concerned, because obviously we believe that Jesus Christ revealed himself as Jehovah God in the
01:41:59: Old Testament, and therefore those individuals who believed in Jehovah God and worshipped him were guided to do so by the very same
01:42:06: Holy Spirit who works within us. According to Romans chapter 3, their standing before God is founded upon the very same faith that ours is, and founded upon the very same sacrifice that in the certainty of God that allowed him to overlook the sins previously committed, the certainty of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ allowed him to be propitious and forgiving to their sins.
01:42:25: And so we do not believe that there is a distinction to be made. I am not a dispensationalist, and hence
01:42:31: I do not make the kind of distinction that some Protestants do at that particular point in time. So your answer,
01:42:38: Dr. White, was yes or no, was Elijah a Christian? In the context of this debate, yes, he was a
01:42:43: Christian in the sense that his faith was in Jesus Christ. He did not know the
01:42:49: Incarnation because the Incarnation had not yet taken place, but his faith is in Jehovah God who became incarnate in Jesus Christ, and he was worshipping the one true
01:42:58: God and had faith in the one true God, which is not what a Muslim is doing, it's not what a Janus is doing, it's not what a
01:43:04: Buddhist is doing, etc., etc. Can you tell us clarify, please,
01:43:09: Dr. White, how a person can have faith in someone that has not been born yet? Well, God is eternal, and Jesus Christ happens to be the one who revealed the
01:43:19: Father in the Old Testament. In fact, according to the Gospel of John, Chapter 12, when
01:43:25: Isaiah saw Jehovah sitting upon his throne, according to John, it was Jesus Christ whom he had seen, and therefore the
01:43:31: Jesus Christ who became incarnate, the foundation of your question is flawed.
01:43:36: The one who became incarnate had faith in the one true
01:43:43: God, Dr.
01:43:50: White, I think you've already answered this question, but I just want to ask it again for the record, if I may.
01:43:55: Do you claim personal infallibility? I certainly do not. Thank you. Given that you do not know completely and infallibly the mind of God, can you affirm with absolute confidence that there never has been, that there never will be, and that there is not now a circumstance in which
01:44:10: God would grant heaven to a non -Christian? Well, again, sir, I've already answered that question, and I will answer it very clearly in saying to you that since the presupposition of your entire question is that God has provided a way of salvation outside of the incarnate
01:44:25: Lord Jesus Christ and his death upon the cross of Calvary, and the union of a people with him, I say to you that I do know what the
01:44:31: Bible teaches about that, and therefore I say to you, yes, the word of God condemns as a pernicious error the belief that a person can come unto
01:44:39: God the Father by any other means than a personal faith, and relationship with the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Yes, I do believe that that is a statement that can be made with the full authority of the word of God.
01:44:50: So your answer is yes or no, that you know infallibly that God will never grant heaven to a non -believer?
01:44:57: Of course. You're asking me to say something I don't believe. I believe that the word of God is what is infallible, and that what we represent, that which is infallible, it has his authority.
01:45:06: The word of God teaches that the only way into the presence of the Father is through Jesus Christ and him alone, and that one must be united with him to have that privilege of being in the presence of Christ, and therefore on the basis of the biblical revelation, not my infallibility, but the infallibility of the word of God, I answer the question.
01:45:23: Okay. Dr. White, is this taking away from my time?
01:45:31: Okay. Dr. White, can you give me one verse of scripture which states that only a
01:45:37: Christian can go to heaven? Mr.
01:45:42: Rutland, since the term Christian has very rarely in the New Testament, if we are reduced to that kind of argumentation, which is like, show me one verse that uses the word
01:45:53: Trinity in the Bible, I really personally think that that shows a lot of disrespect to the audience.
01:45:59: They know what the issues are here. I have never claimed that there is a single verse in the Bible that makes that simplistic claim.
01:46:05: I have said that when you look at what the Bible says about God's purpose, about the gospel, about the atonement, about grace, about man, about sin, about God's punishment, that none of that fits the teachings of the
01:46:19: Roman Catholic Catechism in sections 841 and 1260. All righty. Dr. White, I do apologize if I have insulted the audience in any way.
01:46:27: That was not my intention, but we both agree that God is completely sovereign to act as he pleases.
01:46:34: Is it then at least possible for God to grant heaven to a non -Christian if he wished to do so?
01:46:40: I'm not sure that you and I do believe in the same form of sovereignty, sir. I don't believe that that as a foundation for the statement.
01:46:49: I don't know what you mean by that or believe by that. I certainly don't see that being taught in Roman Catholicism, especially in regards to the concept of sacraments and sacramental forgiveness or sins.
01:46:57: But, leaving that issue aside, if you're talking only about a theoretical thing where the word of God is not relevant, the teaching of the word of God is not relevant, if before creation started could
01:47:08: God have done anything that God wanted to do, of course God could do anything he wanted to do. The question of the thesis of the debate is, does the
01:47:16: Bible reveal that God does that in regards to Muslims and others in the fashion described in sections 841 and 1260, and my assertion there has been that the
01:47:26: Bible does not indicate that. Dr. White, when St. John tells us that God is love, how would you define godly love?
01:47:35: Actually, 1 John chapter 4 says God is love, and it does so by demonstrating that those two terms are not interchangeable, that is, by using the article with God and not with love, they are not interchangeable with one another.
01:47:49: And so when we talk about God being love, we are not saying there is only one attribute of God. God is also holy.
01:47:55: God is also just. God is also a fiery furnace and wrath, and he is many other things that the
01:48:01: Bible describes to us. And so the truth of omnibenevolence does not result in either universalism or inclusivism.
01:48:09: What it does is it provides the foundation of the incredible truth of the Incarnation of the Son of God to die upon Calvary's tree on behalf of God's people.
01:48:20: I'd like to return now, Dr. White, to something that I brought up and that you briefly addressed, but I'd like for you to clarify it a little more.
01:48:28: In Hebrews chapter 12, St. Paul lists the harlot Rahab as one of the heroes of the faith. It tells us in chapter 11 that she is in heaven.
01:48:35: Therefore, since she has been granted heaven under your definition, was she a Christian? She was a person who had faith in Jehovah, which is demonstrated by her activity as a her activity as a hiding the spies and allowing them to get out.
01:48:47: She showed faith in the power of God to deliver her on the basis of the promise that was delivered to her by the spies.
01:48:54: That is the issue of the faith chapter is that these people acted upon God's promises, even when they did not have evidence at that time that those promises would be fulfilled.
01:49:05: That was what Rahab does. That's why she's in the hall of fame for faith, and that of course is why she had faith in the one true
01:49:14: God. Dr. White, in your book, The Roman Catholic Controversy, which I enjoyed very much, by the way, you state that you could be wrong about your understanding of the
01:49:25: Bible. With that in mind, could you be wrong about what Scripture teaches about soteriology?
01:49:31: The context of my statements was in regards to the common misassertion of Roman Catholic apologists that to hold to sola scriptura, one must claim personal infallibility.
01:49:43: I was demonstrating that no such person has personal infallibility. I have invited folks many, many times to demonstrate that I am in error on my soteriology.
01:49:53: I just ask that they do so from the pages of Scripture itself. Thank you.
01:50:03: Mr. Ruttenwald, the noble Muslim who worships Allah and will go to heaven, does
01:50:09: God leave him unregenerate and spiritually dead in this life? Could you repeat the question, please?
01:50:16: I don't understand exactly what you're saying. The noble Muslim, the Muslim who has the possibility of going to heaven, is he left unregenerate in this life?
01:50:27: First off, we have to ask what you mean by noble.
01:50:33: If by noble you mean innocent, there is no man that is innocent in the eyes of God.
01:50:39: We all obtain heaven through the grace of God by the sacrifice of his son.
01:50:45: Is he regenerated in this life? I will have to say that I don't know the mind of God and how
01:50:51: God works in that fashion. Is it possible that spiritually dead people will only be made alive after this life?
01:50:59: Is that what you're saying? I don't think that the Bible sheds any indication on that.
01:51:04: Personally, I do not believe that a spiritually dead person will have some kind of after -world conversion experience.
01:51:12: If you don't know if the man is spiritually alive, that means that all the descriptions we have in 841, 1260 about seeking truth, doing the will of God, this is done by men who are spiritually dead, right?
01:51:27: Well, Dr. White, I'm sure you know that in Catholic theology it teaches that we can only know
01:51:34: God through a divine act of God revealing himself. It's called actual grace.
01:51:40: I believe our Wesleyan brothers call it pervenient grace. God is the one that does the first calling.
01:51:46: He leads it to man because he will not violate man's free will. He leads it to man to accept that calling or to reject that calling.
01:51:54: But as to your question, again, we're back to how does God work, and we do not simply know the mind of God.
01:52:02: So you do believe, in light of this, that spiritually dead men can seek the truth, do the will of God?
01:52:08: I believe that men who are spiritually dead, as you put it, and I would not accept your definition of that, that those men still have a certain inborn, inane knowledge of God, and that God calls to those men, and he calls them to him by his grace.
01:52:31: It is not that man, left to his own natural desires, will find
01:52:36: God. God calls to every single man because every single man is included in the plan of salvation.
01:52:43: So God calls by grace the Muslim who continues his entire life embracing the worship of a false god, a different Jesus, and believing that to worship the
01:52:55: Trinity is to commit the impartable sin. Is that the call of God's grace to them? Well, you're assuming in your question that I know the heart of every single
01:53:03: Muslim, which I don't. You're also assuming in your question that I know the mind of God, which
01:53:09: I do not. The catechism doesn't answer the question? The catechism, sir, says that it is possible.
01:53:17: It doesn't say it will happen, but it holds out the possibility. And that's exactly what we're debating here tonight, sir, and that's exactly the question that you've been debating all night long.
01:53:28: Is idolatry a mortal sin? Idolatry? Mm -hmm. Could you define mortal—I'm not supposed to ask questions,
01:53:36: I'm sorry. Is idolatry a mortal sin? I'm using the term mortal sin as you would define it.
01:53:41: I'm asking you to define it. Is idolatry a mortal sin? If I know that God is the true God of the universe, if I know that God calls me to a relationship with Him and I reject that and I say, oh holy highlighter,
01:53:57: I worship you as my God, that, sir, is a mortal sin. So if you claim—do you claim that there are men who do not know that there is one true
01:54:07: God who exists in heaven? Yes. So how do you explain
01:54:13: Paul's words when he says, for what can be known about God is plain to them because God has shown it to them for His invisible attributes, namely
01:54:22: His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived ever since the creation of the world and the things that have been made. So they are anapologia, without a defense or an excuse.
01:54:31: Is this not about everyone? Is this only about a certain people, Romans 1? It is only about a certain people because a baby that dies in infancy does not know that there is a
01:54:39: God in heaven. A man who is in a coma all of his life or is severely mentally disabled does not know there is a
01:54:47: God in heaven. So obviously Paul is speaking of people that have a functioning awareness of the world about them.
01:54:55: But that wasn't the question that you asked me, Dr. Washington. Okay. Well, 7th section 841 and 1260 makes the exact same assumption that you just did.
01:55:03: That is, it's not talking about infants and it's not talking about those without the mental capacity. Then I bring you back to the same question.
01:55:10: In the context of sections 841 and 1260, is there any of those individuals that do not know that the true
01:55:19: God exists? In a rudimentary form, I would say no.
01:55:24: Okay. So then you would agree that this is descriptive of the same people we see in 841 and 1260 when it says they are suppressing, verse 18 says they are suppressing the truth.
01:55:37: Is that not descriptive of everyone who is under discussion in 841 and 1260? No, it's not of everyone because we don't have knowledge that everyone is suppressing the truth.
01:55:50: So Romans 1, 18 through 20 is not about all people other than infants and those lacking mental capacity.
01:56:02: It's only about a specific group. I would say that mankind who has an awareness of God knows the rudimentary things of God because when we see the things in nature, we realize that there is a creator.
01:56:19: Now that is a very basic and rudimentary thing, but that's what Saint Paul is speaking of and it's that very spark which
01:56:26: God uses then to call that man to him in an act of grace. Actually does it not say that they are without an excuse?
01:56:37: Where is the word grace in Romans 1, anywhere in Romans 1, a spark of grace?
01:56:43: Could you show me where you just got your statement that this is the spark that God uses to call them in grace?
01:56:49: Where do you get that from the text? What Paul is pointing out there, sir, is he's objecting to the person that says, well,
01:56:57: I never knew there was a God, so therefore God can't judge me. That's the context that Paul is using there.
01:57:04: And so in that context, all men know there is a God. When we stand before God, we will not have the opportunity to say,
01:57:14: God, I didn't know that you existed, therefore I stand redeemed in front of you.
01:57:22: That's what Paul is talking about there. Where? Could you show me the verse where you have this person saying that? Well, obviously that's my commentary on the scripture and not the words of scripture itself.
01:57:33: But commentaries can normally tell you where in the passage they're commenting on. So where in verse 18, for example, for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
01:57:45: Who doesn't that include? Who is not, by their unrighteousness, suppressing the truth of God? Okay, the normal, normative state of man is exactly as you just described there.
01:57:59: I would agree. So the Muslim described in section 841, who together with us adores
01:58:08: God, do you believe that Muslims adore God? Their understanding of God, yes. Is that what section 841 says?
01:58:16: When it says, and together with us they adore the one merciful
01:58:22: God, mankind's judge on the last day. Is it your understanding that the catechism is saying it's their understanding or are the words fairly clear here?
01:58:32: Well, the Muslims do believe that there is one God that will judge all on the last day.
01:58:37: That's what the catechism is pointing out. And it's also pointing out that there are certain things that the Muslims believe about God that we also believe about God, and it's also pointing out that they go back to the faith of Abraham.
01:58:49: It is not saying, as you are trying to suggest, that everything they believe about God is correct, nor is it saying, as you are trying to suggest, that there's anything within their religion that can save.
01:59:01: Mr. Rutland, I haven't suggested either one. It simply says, and together with us they adore the one merciful
01:59:09: God. Are you saying that that means together with us they adore a different merciful God than we adore?
01:59:15: No, they acknowledge the same God that we acknowledge. Sir, can
01:59:21: I finish your question, please? They acknowledge the same
01:59:26: God that we do. They understand him in a different way. There's a very big difference between acknowledging something and worshiping in the same way.
01:59:34: What does the word adore mean? The word adore means to hold in high respect, but we're not trying to parallel Muslim worship with Christian worship.
01:59:44: That is not what the catechism is trying to say. Then why does it say together with us? Because we both have a one true
01:59:52: God that we worship. We are all monotheists. That's all the catechism is trying to point out.
02:00:03: We now have our second cross -examination period, beginning with Mr. Rutland cross -examining
02:00:08: Dr. White. Excuse me while I reset my timer here.
02:00:20: There we go. Dr. White, I know that you have said that this is not part of the debate.
02:00:31: I would differ with you that it is. But the Westminster Confession speaks of those who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word, and as having the possibility of being granted heaven.
02:00:44: With those incapable of being called by the ministry of God, would they be those that are included in ones who have never heard the gospel, and if so, why?
02:00:56: No. The confession is talking about two groups which are explicitly excluded from the debate this evening by sections 841 and 1260, but I'll go ahead and answer it anyways.
02:01:05: It's specifically talking about infants who die in infancy and those who lack the mental capacity to be able to hear the ministry of the word, those who are mentally deficient, they cannot speak, whatever the situation is where they cannot have understanding, and that's what the confession is addressing at that point.
02:01:22: Since section 1261 of the catechism itself addresses this as a separate topic, then obviously by committing to the thesis of this debate, which identifies 841 and 1260, we have excluded that from the thesis of the debate this evening.
02:01:41: That's a whole other interesting issue that we could develop very fully because there's a lot of discussion about abortion and what's going on with stem cell research and all the rest of this stuff that's very, very interesting in that area, but it's not the subject of the debate this evening.
02:01:54: Okay. Well, let us change the subject here a little bit. 1 Timothy chapter 4, verse 10,
02:02:01: St. Paul states to his young protege, we have put our faith in the living God who is the savior of all men and especially those who believe.
02:02:11: If in your view, Christ's sacrifice is limited to, and I'll use that horrible word again, a select few, how can
02:02:18: St. Paul speak of two classes of sinners for whom Christ died? That is the all men and those who believe.
02:02:25: Well, of course, you're assuming and improperly assuming in light of the fact that 1 Timothy chapter 4 is not a satirological passage.
02:02:32: It's not discussing the atonement of Christ, the nature of the atonement, nor the extent of the atonement, and so you're going to a passage that is about something else, assuming that the term soter here automatically refers to the extent of the atonement, and then reading that back in to say, well, you have
02:02:47: Jesus as a potential savior, resulting in the idea that if you use the term all men here, rather than Jews and Gentiles, the natural understanding that Jews would have when they speak of the world, which we see in passages like Revelation chapter 5, verses 9 through 11, where men of every tribe, tongue, people, and nation are made kingdom and priest unto
02:03:05: God by the sacrifice of Christ. If you ignore that and try to make it every single individual on the planet, then what you have as a result is
02:03:13: Jesus Christ is the savior of those who are in hell. And what does that mean? Does that mean that it was his intention to save them and he failed to save them?
02:03:21: That becomes the issue. I would invite anyone to actually take the time to go to where the
02:03:26: Apostle Paul actually addresses the issue of the extent, intention, and purpose of the atonement, and to derive their understanding from that, not from a passage that makes a passing reference and reads something back in to it.
02:03:38: That is called eisegesis, not exegesis. Well, Dr. White, that was an interesting answer, but can you explain to us a little bit more how when
02:03:50: St. Paul says we have put our hope in the living God, who is the savior of all men and especially those who believe that we are not talking about soteriology?
02:03:59: Well, it's amazing to me. I don't think you actually believe we're talking about soteriology in the context of this debate because I don't think you believe that Jesus saves every single human being on the planet.
02:04:09: But if you want to change that to tries to save, then we can discuss that. But yes, I'd be glad to. Jesus Christ is
02:04:14: Lord of all. We sing the song all the time. Does that mean every person confesses that he is? He is Lord of all because there is only one
02:04:21: Lord to be had, even by those who do not know that. And there is only one way of salvation. There is only one savior, and it is
02:04:27: Jesus Christ. But the only ones who know that are those who have been raised to spiritual life, given the gift of faith, and that's why they're described here as believers.
02:04:36: They know who he is, and they experience him as savior, and no one else does.
02:04:44: That is the message of the gospel, but that's not what's being discussed particularly here because you will notice that what he's talking about here, starting in verse 6, is talking about within the church how to reject myths fit only for the godless and the gullible to train yourself for godliness.
02:05:02: He's talking about a different context there. We can go to Hebrews if you'd like to discuss the extent of the atonement.
02:05:12: Going to what we were talking about earlier, sir, that God is love, which is an attribute of God.
02:05:20: Can there be a true loving relationship if one of the parties is not free to accept or reject the other's loving call?
02:05:27: Yes, most certainly. It's called resurrection. There is a loving relationship that existed between Jesus and Lazarus, but Jesus had to say,
02:05:34: Lazarus, come forth, for that relationship could be truly loving. And that is the situation that we have.
02:05:42: The Bible teaches that man is dead in sin. That is biblical language, Ephesians chapter 2, that man is unspiritual, he is fleshly, and that he needs to be translated out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light.
02:05:55: That's the work of the Holy Spirit of God, it is a sovereign work, and I firmly believe that when the Son of God says to he who is spiritually dead, come to spiritual life, that there is no person on the face of this planet who can resist the almighty call of the
02:06:12: Son of God. The Son of God has the power to save and to save perfectly. He must fulfill the will of the
02:06:19: Father revealed for him in John 6, 38 -39. So sir, you would say then that a master -slave relationship can be, or is, a true loving relationship?
02:06:36: The law itself speaks of the situation in the Old Testament, where a slave would so love his master, and so enjoy being in the house and serving under the law of God, which constrained and controlled the issue of slavery in that society, which is very similar to laws we have in regards to employment today, that that person could choose to remain in the house as a slave, and in fact had to go to the door and have the awl put through the earlobe in a demonstration that this person was giving up the jubilee freedom that they would receive every seven years to remain in the loving relationship they had with their master.
02:07:12: And so there you have a clear biblical example of that exact situation, and the term doulos, which is translated slave, is used of every single believer in Jesus Christ.
02:07:22: We are servants, slaves of Jesus Christ, and it is a loving relationship because we know he is the one who has given his life on our behalf, and we have life only because of him.
02:07:30: So what you're saying, just to clarify what you're saying there, is that a person who is forced to accept another person's call then can truly be said to be in a loving relationship.
02:07:49: I love when the term forced is used, of the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and taking out the heart of stone and giving me a heart of flesh.
02:07:59: Thank God that I was forced to lose that heart of stone and get a heart of flesh.
02:08:05: Thank God that I was raised to spiritual life when I was a rebel sinner and I hated God and I ran in my rebellion against him.
02:08:12: Yes, sir, I say to you that that is what has created the love in my heart because as the scripture says, we love him because he first loved us.
02:08:29: Okay, thank you for clarifying that. I'm sorry,
02:08:35: I do preach once in a while. That's okay. I apologize. Interesting relationship, love relationship there, but let's move on.
02:08:44: Do you think that it's possible to enter heaven without saving faith? Do I believe it is possible to enter heaven without saving faith?
02:08:51: No, I'm supposed to ask the question. I was repeating the question to make sure that I understood it, sir. If what you mean by that is do
02:08:59: I believe that Jesus Christ will save anyone without birthing saving faith within them and being drawn by the
02:09:06: Father to the Son, no, I believe that God in his sovereignty has decreed that all those that are going to enter into the presence of God, the
02:09:13: Father is going to draw to the Son and the Son will raise them up on the last day, John 6, 44. Yes. Okay. I'd like to go back for a moment and I hate to keep harping on this.
02:09:24: Maybe I don't, but I failed to see in our proposition, and of course the proposition that a non -Christian cannot enter heaven has everything to do with the verses in the catechism that we are talking about.
02:09:40: But I failed to see how an infant dying in infancy could in any way be construed as being a
02:09:49: Christian. Would you please explain one more time? I know you already have, sir, but if you could do it one more time,
02:09:54: I would appreciate it. Well, what I have explained is that you have taken the positive side of this debate.
02:10:02: You are defending the Roman Catholic position as expressed in sections 841 and 1260 of the catechism.
02:10:08: 841 is about Muslims, not infants. 1260 is about people who act, they will, they seek after the will of God, they believe in truth.
02:10:16: It's not about infants. 1261 is about infants. If 1260 and 1261 were not differentiated, then you might have a basis for making your argument.
02:10:24: The fact of the matter is, bringing up infants is not the issue of 841 and 1260 and cannot be relevant to the substantiation of those assertions.
02:10:34: We come to the closing remarks once again. Oh, I'm sorry, you have your question. I shall not be denied.
02:10:51: All right. I would like, once again, we had run into a point where I was becoming very confused.
02:11:00: Your catechism, which you believe, do you believe that the writings of the Roman Catholic Church in the catechism, in Vatican II, Vatican I, the
02:11:10: Canons of Creed, the Council of Trent, do you believe these writings clarify or confuse the
02:11:16: Christian people as to what the gospel is? I believe it clarifies. I also believe it depends on which camp you're coming from.
02:11:24: Obviously, many non -Catholic Christians are very confused about what the
02:11:30: Catholic Church believes. Okay. And when the catechism says, together with us they adore the one merciful
02:11:39: God, are we talking about one God here or are we talking about more than one
02:11:44: God here? When it says one merciful God, can we identify who that God is? Well, the
02:11:50: Jews themselves, excuse me, the Muslims themselves identify the God as being the God of Abraham.
02:11:56: We identify the God as being the God of Abraham. And as I've already stated, what the catechism is pointing out there is that we both worship the same
02:12:06: God in that he is a monotheistic God who is the creator of man, who will judge man at the end of the world.
02:12:12: It is not, let me finish please, it is not, and I want to just say this as clearly as I can, it is not saying the
02:12:20: Muslim religion is correct, it is not saying the Muslim religion can save. All it is pointing out is that they are one of the three monotheistic religions in the world today.
02:12:29: That they adore the one true God, yes? Together with us, yes? We adore one
02:12:37: God, they adore one God. So what does together mean? Together means separately? No sir, together does not mean in corporate worship.
02:12:45: Together means that we both acknowledge there is one God who is the creator of mankind who will be the judge at the end of the world.
02:12:51: That's all the world is saying. So I am misreading this. I am somehow misreading the language of this when it says, together with us they adore the one merciful
02:13:00: God, that that means we and Muslims together adore, which is not just simply acknowledge, but adore the one merciful
02:13:09: God, that for me to think that what that means is we are both worshiping God, not that all of Islam is true, not that all of Islamic theology is true, but that we adore the one merciful
02:13:17: God. I somehow am misreading this text. I don't know if you are misreading it sir, it certainly is being misrepresented, let me put it that way.
02:13:28: Do you believe that the Bible teaches that there is an elect people? Yes sir,
02:13:34: I do. So could you explain why 1260 says, since Christ died for all and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny which is divine, are the non -elect called the same destiny as the elect?
02:13:50: Well your phraseology there starts with the basic assumption that we both mean the same thing by elect.
02:13:57: Unfortunately, and this is just my belief, I am not using it as a criticism, but unfortunately Calvinism is a very man -centered theology in that it puts
02:14:09: God into the context of space and time. God, when we say he is foreknowledge,
02:14:15: I like to say rather he has omni -knowledge. That is God is eternally present everywhere.
02:14:22: God knows every choice that I am going to make and the outcome of that. God also knows every choice, the outcome of every choice that I may have made.
02:14:31: And so in the divine, eternal perspective we can say yes there is such thing as an elect people.
02:14:38: At the same time we can say that man has free will to accept God or to reject
02:14:43: God. Now how is that? How can God elect a person and man still have free will to accept or reject?
02:14:49: Very simply sir, that is the reason that he is God and we are not. So every person has the ability in and of themselves to come to Christ, yes?
02:14:58: No sir, I did not say that. Who has the ability to come to Christ? With, are you speaking sir, well
02:15:04: I am not supposed to ask the questions, I am sorry. If you need clarification, ask away. Your question was who has the ability to come to Christ?
02:15:11: Yes. Anyone who God has called. Alright anyone who God has called, would you say that is also drawn?
02:15:19: The word called means drawn? I would not say necessarily that the word called means drawn in the sense that we are incapable of resisting that call.
02:15:32: So all those who the Father draws will not be raised up on the last day? All those that the Father calls will be raised up on the last day.
02:15:38: Will all those who the Father draws be raised up on the last day? Could you clarify your meaning of draw please? John chapter 6 verse 44, the words of the
02:15:45: Lord Jesus. I know the reference I was asking you to clarify what you mean by draw. No one can come to me unless the
02:15:51: Father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day. Okay. Are there those who are drawn by the
02:15:56: Father to the Son who will not be raised up on the last day? See, still I am unclear, well
02:16:01: I am not unclear what you mean by the word draw. I think I know exactly what you mean. And if you mean by the word draw that God gives a call to the sinner, that the sinner is incapable of resisting, if God infects, hog ties the sinner and drags him into his presence,
02:16:21: I would reject that that is the meaning of the word draw. If you mean that God gives every sinner by grace the right to accept or reject his loving call then
02:16:32: I would say yes, God draws the sinner. John 6 verse 37 says, everyone whom the
02:16:38: Father gives me will come to me and the one who comes to me I will never send away. Who does the Father give to the
02:16:43: Son? First off, again you are making the mistake of putting
02:16:48: God into a spatial time relationship. God gives the Son all of those for whom heaven was created.
02:16:56: All men were created for heaven but all men will not go to heaven. Therefore the ones that God has given to Christ are the people
02:17:09: God elects, a people for Christ. And I don't believe that that verse is speaking of a particular person but of a people.
02:17:19: Verse 37 says, everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me.
02:17:25: Do individuals come to Christ or do non -individuals come to Christ? Well I don't see inanimate objects coming to Christ so I would assume that he is speaking about individuals there.
02:17:37: So everyone whom the Father gives me will do something only persons do.
02:17:44: So in contrast to what you just said, verse 37 is about specific people, isn't it? It is about that class of people which
02:17:52: God has given to Christ, yes. And which action comes first, sir, the giving by the
02:17:58: Father to the Son or the people coming to Christ? Which action comes first, the giving of,
02:18:06: I'm sorry would you repeat your question? There are two actions in verse 37, in the first phrase.
02:18:11: It's everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me. That is,
02:18:16: Father gives, will come to me. Which action comes first? Well there again you're trying to put it in a time -space relationship which in the mind of God we simply cannot do.
02:18:28: So your question really is building the straw man of what the Gospel is trying to proclaim there.
02:18:34: Are you saying that the grammar of the text does not indicate clearly from Jesus' viewpoint which action comes first?
02:18:39: We can't know. I'm saying that what you're doing, sir, is you're isolating the text from the context of the entirety of the
02:18:47: Gospel and trying to build a case on it. So you can't answer the question given the grammar of this text on the basis of your understanding of the entirety of the
02:18:57: Gospel? No, sir, I cannot accept your interpretation of that text according to my understanding of the entirety of the
02:19:04: Gospel. Sorry, I haven't given my interpretation. I've asked a simple grammatical question. No, sir. Would you agree on the grammar of the
02:19:09: Greek that the giving of the Father is an action that is prior to the coming of anyone to Christ?
02:19:17: Would you at least agree that on the grammar of the text, whether you want to interpret that way or not, at least at that point that that is the case?
02:19:27: There again, no, I would not agree because although you say that you are not interpreting, you are trying to squeeze that text into your interpretation of what you think it means.
02:19:37: Can I finish my answer? And you're trying to segregate that from the rest of the
02:19:44: Gospel. You're trying to segregate that from the fact that God calls all people.
02:19:52: Sir, according to the Catholic catechism, there are men who are ignorant of the
02:19:58: Gospel of Christ and his church, who seek truth, do the will of God, and will be saved. Yet Jesus said that everyone whom the
02:20:05: Father gives me will come to me. Could you please explain how it is that there will be people who have salvation through Christ who never came to him in this life?
02:20:20: Yes, sir, I could. Infants who die in infancy. Is that what 1260 is talking about, sir, or is that 1261?
02:20:26: No, sir. The question that you specifically asked me is that, will there be people that come to Christ that do not specifically know
02:20:35: Christ, and the answer is yes. No, sir, that's not true. I read section 1260. Every man who is ignorant of the
02:20:41: Gospel of Christ's church but seeks the truth, that's not an infant, and does the will of God, it's not an infant.
02:20:50: Now we come to closing remarks. First, Mr. Rutland for nine minutes, and then
02:20:55: Mr. White for nine minutes. The cover on this table here has taken a liking to my shoe for some reason.
02:21:12: Every time I get up, it grabs me and tries to pull me back. So I'm not drunk, as you might suppose, it's that I keep stumbling over this down here.
02:21:23: Just wanted to make that clarification. Gee whiz, time goes by fast. Since we've only just begun, it seems he didn't get his timer.
02:21:36: Oh, that's okay, I can get it. Okay, thank you very much. I think
02:21:48: Dr. White would agree with me that there's so much left unsaid, that there's so much more that we could go into, and that we have both only barely scratched the surface of what we're going to say here tonight.
02:22:04: I think that Dr. White did an excellent job at presenting his argument.
02:22:12: In fact, I think Dr. White has demonstrated for us why he is considered to be the foremost
02:22:18: Catholic apologist in the United States today. Therefore, I did?
02:22:26: Don't scare me like that. You scared me there.
02:22:32: That's okay. Don't start rumors. You can stop the timer.
02:22:39: No, no, that's okay. I do apologize for that.
02:22:47: I think it was wishful thinking on my part. Anyway, I think that Dr.
02:22:56: White has demonstrated for us why he is considered to be the foremost Protestant apologist in the country today.
02:23:08: But yet, I think it speaks volumes that even Dr. White, with his superb debating skills and his theological knowledge, in the end could not establish his position.
02:23:17: I do not say this as a criticism of Dr. White, as I pointed out in my opening statement. His task was doomed from the start.
02:23:28: He says that our discussion tonight was not about can a non -Christian enter heaven, yet on his very website he has that in great big letters, because he knows as well as I do that the very basis of the parts of the catechism we are looking at here tonight have to do with that very fact, that a non -Christian, be he
02:23:55: Muslim or be he not Muslim, can achieve heaven, not will, but it is possible for him to achieve heaven.
02:24:07: And therefore, it is very appropriate that I ask the question of Dr.
02:24:12: White to prove to us that there is no circumstance, there never has been, never will be a circumstance in which
02:24:22: God would grant heaven to a non -believer. Now, I'm sure when Dr. White gets up here for his closing statement he will protest that again and he'll say that I'm not addressing what the catechism says.
02:24:32: I am addressing it. The catechism states, and boy it's been kind of twisted around here tonight, but the catechism states that all men are called to Christ.
02:24:46: Do all men come to Christ? No. Is that a fault on the part of Christ? No.
02:24:53: It's because God has given us loving free will. Dr. White accuses the church of inclusivism and having an anthropocentric view of salvation.
02:25:10: And if inclusivism means falling on the mercy of God, then I will have to say guilty as charged. But rather,
02:25:18: I would say the Catholic church starts and ends with the incarnation of Christ, that the
02:25:26: God of the universe came down, as St. John tells us in the first part of his gospel, came down and took human flesh so that he might take human sin.
02:25:41: Jesus Christ, my friends, did not force himself on anyone in the gospel.
02:25:50: When the apostles in John 6 wanted to walk away, Jesus did not keep them there but respected their free will.
02:26:00: The Reformed impulse is to stake a claim on the hard ground of exclusivism.
02:26:06: Some fundamentalist denominations and those that arose out of the restoration movement, such as the Church of Christ, are what
02:26:13: I would term hyper -exclusivism. And they see only their brand of Christianity as being true and salvific.
02:26:22: I'm not saying that of Dr. White, I'm simply pointing out a fact. From time to time then we hear these strange testimonies of someone saying that they were saved out of Protestantism or that they were saved out of Methodism.
02:26:37: I understand this exclusivist impulse because I was once an evangelical with strong fundamentalist leanings before I came to Rome.
02:26:45: My theology locked God's grace away in a little box, locked
02:26:53: God's free will, his sovereignty away in a little box, which only could be unlocked by an altar call or a sinner's prayer.
02:27:04: Any suggestion that God's mercy extended to those outside the Christian faith brought a visceral reaction within me, an anger with God.
02:27:16: Although I claimed to believe in God's complete sovereignty, his freedom to act was limited with what agreed with my theology.
02:27:24: In short, I had baptized God as an evangelical fundamentalist. He could not be a
02:27:29: Catholic because, well, that was dead ritualism. He could not be a charismatic because, of course, that was sheer emotionalism.
02:27:37: I had taken God captive to my theology and put him in a box that only agreed with what
02:27:46: I said was correct and what I said was wrong. It was only when
02:27:53: I was headed Romeward that I began to realize that God did not need my permission to act.
02:27:59: He was not a slave of my theological presuppositions, and I must admit that for a time
02:28:06: I was a bit like Jonah in the desert, weeping over the death of my little theological tree.
02:28:14: God and God alone can grant heaven to anyone that he wishes. Please allow me in the time that I have left to sum up my argument.
02:28:24: The wellspring of salvation flows from the side of Christ. Christ saves all men.
02:28:30: Christ calls to all men. I'd like to end this evening with one of my favorite illustrations.
02:28:37: There was once a wise man that lived in a village, and the village kids would come to him, and they would hide things in their hands, and they would ask him what they had in their hands, and he could always tell them for some reason.
02:28:48: So a young man of this village decided he was going to trick the old man, and he said, what I'm going to do is
02:28:54: I'm going to catch a small bird, I'm going to put it in my hands, and I'm going to go to the old man, and I'm going to say, old man, what do
02:29:00: I have in my hands? And he's going to answer, well, son, you have a small bird in your hands. But I'm going to say, yes, old man, but is it alive or is it dead?
02:29:11: And if he says it's dead, I'm going to open my hands and let it fly away. But if he says that it's alive,
02:29:18: I'm going to crush it and let it fall at his feet. So he instigated his plan, he went and found a small bird, he brought it to this old man, and he said, old man, what do
02:29:26: I hold in my hands? And just as expected, this old man said, young man, you have a small bird in your hands.
02:29:33: And he said, yes, old man, but is it alive or is it dead?
02:29:39: And without hesitation, the old man said, my son, that is up to you.
02:29:47: You have heard, my friends, the truth tonight. I would ask you to step away from your theological presuppositions, to really consider
02:29:57: God and all of his love and all of his majesty. Are you going to allow
02:30:03: God to be free, to be God, to save anyone that he desires to save, or are you going to limit him to a select few?
02:30:11: My friends, that choice is up to you. My time is up. Thank you very much, and God bless you.
02:30:27: Indeed, I do ask the question, are you going to allow God to be free to save whoever he chooses to save, called his elect people, or are you going to demand that God try to save every single person equally and make it up to the man or the woman as to whether the triune
02:30:44: God will fail in his own self -glorification? I do ask that question, but I do so on the basis of Scripture.
02:30:52: Mr. Rutland has said that I failed to establish my position. Some of you may notice that we sit on certain sides of this, and for 10 years now, the person who has the responsibility of proving his point sits over there, and the person denying the thesis sits over here.
02:31:10: When I debated Mitchell Pacwa on the priesthood, it was his job to demonstrate that the priesthood was biblical, and he sat over there, and I sat over here.
02:31:21: When I debated Father Pierce Provinscus on purgatory, it was his job to substantiate the assertion that purgatory is a biblical doctrine.
02:31:30: He sat over there, I sat over here. The thesis tonight was that what is found in sections 841 and 1260 of the
02:31:38: Catholic Catechism, which has been read in your hearing, which specifically is not about infants, is consistent with the
02:31:45: Bible, that it's apostolic teaching. That was Mr. Rutland's job to establish, not my job to establish something else.
02:31:54: And so the debate is very clear, and if in point of fact the only defense is, well, you didn't prove your point when it was your job to prove yours, that indicates something about the nature of our debate this evening.
02:32:05: Now, in the documents of Vatican, we tried, I tried to read the section fairly concerning about whether Muslims adore the one true
02:32:16: God with us. Interestingly enough, I was told I was twisting the meaning. And yet, according to Nostra Aetate 3 from Vatican II, which
02:32:26: I didn't read, I could have, but I was trying to get a direct answer on this issue, let's let the church decide.
02:32:34: The church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself, merciful and all -powerful, the creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.
02:32:45: They take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable degrees, just as Abraham, to whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God.
02:32:53: There's Vatican II's own interpretation of its own words, which are then quoted in the
02:32:59: Catholic catechism. I wasn't twisting anything. Mr. Rutland, however, needs to realize that these words have spawned all sorts of different views, even amongst
02:33:09: Roman Catholics. I guess denying sola scriptura doesn't actually create unanimity of opinion, does it?
02:33:15: It does not. We just heard it said, and then before the
02:33:22: African tribes attack from outside the room there, you can hear the war drums coming, we'll need to hurry up here so you can all can get to the dance, which obviously is starting a little early this evening.
02:33:35: Mr. Rutland just said, Jesus did not force Himself on anyone. Look at John 6,
02:33:42: He let the disciples walk away. Yes, He did. But if you read
02:33:47: John 6, John 6, 35, where He starts talking about the sovereignty of God and salvation,
02:33:53: He says, you've seen me, but you are unbelievers. You don't believe.
02:33:59: And the whole discussion is why they don't believe. And yeah, Jesus doesn't chase down unbelievers when they walk away.
02:34:06: But we were just told, God never forces Himself on anyone. Tell Lydia that.
02:34:12: Lydia sitting next to the river, Paul comes and he preaches the gospel and what does the
02:34:18: Bible tell us? The Lord opened her heart to respond.
02:34:25: Opened her heart! That's the most intimate part of the human being and God opened her heart.
02:34:34: Yes, that's what grace is. And Lydia was thankful.
02:34:44: Paul on the road to Damascus, smacked on his backside. No force there.
02:34:56: Excuse me, Paul, may I voluntarily knock you off your horse and knock you blind? No force there.
02:35:06: Paul preaches to the Jews and the Gentiles in Acts 13. Who believes?
02:35:14: This little phrase in Acts 13 .48, and as many as were ordained unto eternal life believed.
02:35:24: They believed. They weren't left in their darkness. They didn't go on in their religion. They didn't go on in their falsehoods.
02:35:32: When Paul spoke to the Galatians, he said, you once worshipped those which are by nature not gods.
02:35:38: They had stopped doing that now. God doesn't leave His people in idolatry.
02:35:46: I tried to just allow the text of Scripture to point out that in the grammar, and we speak in grammar, we use grammar, we use tenses.
02:35:56: That's what the Word of God's written in. And in John 6, Jesus says, all the Father gives me will come to me.
02:36:01: It is the giving of the Father that precedes the coming. Mr. Rutland's position makes the coming the basis of our being given by the
02:36:08: Father. He has it backwards, but we can't even get to the point where we can actually answer the question whether we can even read the grammar of the text.
02:36:18: Why? I submit to you because Rome's authority overrides the text of the inspired
02:36:24: Word of God for the consistent Roman Catholic. Since Rome defines the interpretation,
02:36:31: Rome defines the meaning of both Scripture and tradition, she's not under the authority of either one.
02:36:37: That's sola ecclesia. And you just saw what happened when we tried to get into the text of the
02:36:42: Word of God to allow the incarnate Son to explain that the ones the Father gives
02:36:48: Him, He doesn't leave them in darkness. He draws them to Christ, and He does so effectively and efficiently and without fail because it says they all come to me.
02:36:58: Why is any one of you tonight coming to Christ? It's because God the Father in eternity placed
02:37:04: His love and mercy upon you, and He draws you to His Son, and that's the only reason you do. That's why none of us can boast, and we will never be able to boast in eternity itself.
02:37:15: That's why. But if you can't even allow the words of Jesus to be entered into the debate because, well, we don't know, and that's contradictory to what
02:37:24: I think about the Gospel, and we just can't look at the grammar, how can that function to substantiate in a debate that has the thesis of demonstrating whether something is biblical or not?
02:37:37: If you can't tell what the Bible says, how can you prove something is biblical? If you can't look at the very grammar of verbs and nouns and say this is this and that is that, how can you prove something is biblical?
02:37:52: Jesus said, all that the Father gives me will come to me.
02:37:58: We've agreed no one can be saved outside of Jesus Christ, right? Okay. All that the
02:38:03: Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me
02:38:11: I will never cast out. Those are personal actions, folks. Coming, earlier Jesus said the one coming to me will never hunger, the one believing me will never thirst, that's what hunger and thirst is in John 6.
02:38:21: It's a spiritual hungering, a spiritual thirsting, that's why a lot of people miss John 6. But this coming is a personal thing.
02:38:29: According to section 841 of the Catholic Catechism, a
02:38:35: Muslim can be a Muslim. According to section 1260, a
02:38:43: Buddhist can be a Buddhist, and I know they're not saying because of being a Buddhist they come, but by following what's good in their religion, by following their consciences, they can have salvation.
02:38:54: I say to you, Jesus said otherwise. And that settles the issue, and my prayer for you is that God will give you by His Spirit a desire to believe only that which is inspired and true and given by the
02:39:13: Spirit of God in the Word of God. That is clearly what we've seen tonight regarding the gospel of Jesus Christ.
02:39:20: Thank you very much. I've been asked about videotapes.
02:39:47: Both Mr. Rutland's organization and Dr. White's organization will be given copies of the videotape.
02:39:54: If you're interested in securing videotapes, you might speak with the respective parties regarding how that can be obtained through them.
02:40:04: The first question is one that in one sense goes beyond the debate topic, but it's been raised by a number of parties that will be addressed to Dr.
02:40:14: White. Incidentally, the format for this, the question will go to the one being asked.
02:40:20: The person will have 90 seconds to answer, and the opposing debater will be given 45 seconds to comment, and we'll go back and forth with the questions.
02:40:29: But the question is, the debate topic, the teaching of the Catholic catechism, paragraphs 841 and 1260 affirming that non -Christians can enter heaven is compatible with the biblical gospel, but a number have asked questions in general about non -Christians going to heaven, so I think this is within the purview of the topic, and it's to Mr.
02:40:52: White. You'll have 90 seconds to answer, and then Mr. Rutland, 45 seconds to comment. Mr. White, you're obviously a
02:40:59: Reformed Baptist, and so you believe that it's pointless and invalid to baptize infants, for example.
02:41:06: Infants, therefore, are obviously not Christians, since they've not accepted Jesus Christ as their personal
02:41:12: Lord and Savior. So if an infant or young child should die before he or she accepts
02:41:17: Jesus, that is, before he or she becomes a Christian, do you teach that they cannot enter to heaven?
02:41:23: After all, they are non -Christians, and also, if, as most Baptists teach, babies do go to heaven because they've committed no personal sins, are you not then teaching that these babies enter heaven apart from the salvation of Christ?
02:41:35: In other words, aren't you saying that Christ is not their Savior, that Christ is not the
02:41:40: Savior of some people, such as babies and the mentally retarded? Scripture does say that Christ is the only means of salvation, does it not?
02:41:49: So how do you reconcile this obvious contradiction in your Protestant theology? Dr. White.
02:41:55: Well, it is obviously not a contradiction in my theology, and yes, it is an important question.
02:42:02: Unfortunately, 90 seconds doesn't do it much good, but I will answer the question recognizing that, again, it is not what we're talking about in 841 and 1260.
02:42:11: Specifically, when people ask about infants who die in infancy and others, there are two extremes.
02:42:17: There are those who simply say any infant who dies in infancy is automatically entered into heaven, and then there are those who would say on the opposite end that no, outside of a personal act of faith, no one can enter into heaven.
02:42:27: I take a middle position. I grant to God the exact same freedom in saving there that he exercises in saving adults.
02:42:35: That is, even the Westminster Confession, my own confession, talks about elect infants recognizing that God has the freedom to choose, in that matter, amongst all the fallen sons and daughters of Adam, no matter what their age might be, their period of development, or anything else.
02:42:49: And that in point of fact, if God chooses to take a person out of this life before allowing them to store up for themselves a tremendous amount of wrath, one could argue that that is, in fact, merciful to that person, rather than the person that he allows to store up wrath for 90 years and then suffer for that wrath in his or her particular situation.
02:43:11: And so I simply say the judge of all the earth will do right, and that God has the right to save, through Christ, freely, the elect in any way he chooses to do so, but that does not mean that you can make the extreme statement on either end of that particular spectrum.
02:43:28: Mr. Rutland, your comment, 45 seconds. Well, I do think, and this has been a contention through this entire debate, that the infants who die in infancy is a valid topic of debate here, because the catechism in both of those verses is teaching that a non -Christian can go to heaven.
02:43:50: I think that it's a contradiction to Dr. White's stance that only a
02:43:56: Christian can go to heaven, and then say, well, babies that die in infancy and those mentally incapacitated, well, they can go to heaven too.
02:44:05: They're not Christians. So what Dr. White is having to do here this evening is he's having to radically redefine what a
02:44:11: Christian is to the point that it simply has no meaning. Mr. Rutland, if not
02:44:18: Christ, what is the specific biblical qualification for heaven? 90 seconds.
02:44:25: If not Christ, what is the specific biblical qualification for heaven? Well, I would say that there is,
02:44:32: Christ is the specific biblical qualification for heaven, because Christ saves, and there is no other name under heaven by which men may be saved.
02:44:41: Dr. White and I have both agreed that, and thank you, Dr. White, for acknowledging this, the Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation except through Jesus Christ.
02:44:50: So I would simply say that Jesus is the qualification for entering heaven, and I will leave it at that.
02:44:59: Dr. White, 45 seconds. Well, the problem is, of course, what Rome is saying in those two passages about adults very clearly, is that by seeking the truth and doing the will of God, a person in ignorance of Christ, outside of union with Christ, in fact, in this case of Muslims, while rejecting the truth about Christ, can, despite that, be redeemed by Christ, saved by Christ, in their rebellion, in their idolatry, and brought into the place of righteousness before God.
02:45:30: I tried to ask if a person is made righteous or regenerated in this life, and Mr. Rutland doesn't know. So we have this group of people never referenced anywhere in the
02:45:38: Bible. We don't know whether they're righteous. We don't know whether they're regenerated. All we know is they have a possibility of getting into heaven. Where does the
02:45:44: Bible teach that? Dr. White, what happens to those who never knew
02:45:52: Jesus Christ, and a specific question with it, are people like Gandhi going to hell?
02:45:57: Ninety seconds. Romans chapter 1 tells us that God has revealed
02:46:05: His existence, specifically His eternal power and divine attributes, with sufficient clarity in creation, both internally as we look inside of ourselves, and externally as we look outside.
02:46:18: He has left His fingerprints all over everything, so that man knows that God exists, and man culpably, as a result of his fallen nature, suppresses that truth in unrighteousness, that this is the universal condition of mankind, that this is what man is doing.
02:46:38: And then He describes what happens. You take that desire that God has placed within us to worship, combine it with that sinful attitude, the result is idolatry.
02:46:49: Now idolatry can take many different forms. It can take the form of worshiping science.
02:46:54: It can take the form of worshiping creation, being materialist or an atheist. Or it can take the form of man's religions, whether that be the religions of men where you bow down before a hideous idol, or more advanced or enlightened religions of men where you can remain in rebellion against the one true
02:47:13: God, His demands upon you, and His revelation in Jesus Christ. It's all idolatry, no matter how high it might be or how moral someone might consider it to be.
02:47:25: The Word of God says, until you submit to Jesus Christ, you're in rebellion against God. Mr. Rutland, your comment, 45 seconds.
02:47:33: Well, I would submit to you that Dr. White's own theology would, in my view, say it's impossible for the sinner to suppress the knowledge of God in that he's not ever given, the unelect is not ever given the opportunity to accept
02:47:50: God in the first place since he was preordained to hell. And so I believe that to say, well, a man has suppressed the knowledge of God and therefore he's going to go to hell is to say that he has a choice.
02:48:07: I believe that Dr. White's theology, if I may be so bold to answer the question, would teach that, yes,
02:48:13: Gandhi is in hell. Dr. White, I'm sure, will correct me if I'm wrong. Mr.
02:48:19: Rutland, do you believe in universal salvation? If not, how can you interpret the scripture passages that you did at the beginning of your presentation, such as God wanting no one to perish and yet refute universalism?
02:48:37: 90 seconds. Well, first of all, the Catholic Church does not teach universalism. Universalism says in the end everyone will be saved.
02:48:46: And that's certainly not what the Catholic Church teaches, certainly not what Dr. White believes either. To say that God wills for all men to be saved is not the same thing as saying that all men will be saved.
02:48:59: You know, I hope that there's peace in the Middle East, but it doesn't mean that there will be peace in the
02:49:07: Middle East. God, being sovereign, though, gives us a choice on whether we're going to accept or reject him.
02:49:15: So God wants us to accept him. God wants us to become children, but he leaves that up to us.
02:49:23: Therefore, we cannot say the Catholic Church is teaching a universalism which says in the end that all men will be saved, because obviously all men, sadly, will not be saved.
02:49:34: There will be some that will go to hell. And I believe if there are any tears in heaven, it will be
02:49:42: God weeping over his children like Rachel and refusing to be comforted.
02:49:49: Dr. White, 45 seconds. My God will not be disappointed in eternity.
02:49:55: He will not sit upon his throne weeping over his failures. The scripture says that all things are being worked according to the counsel of his will, all to the praise of his glorious grace.
02:50:07: And my God will not be a sad God. My God will be a rejoicing God, and we will be rejoicing in his presence because of the perfect fulfillment of his plan.
02:50:15: Roman Catholic theologians, there are many universalists today. And let me just ask every
02:50:21: Roman Catholic in the audience, what if the Pope after Boniface is one? What are you going to do?
02:50:29: How could you have known what you believe today in 1445 after the Council of Florence?
02:50:34: You couldn't have. That's why I believe in the soul of scripture. Dr. White, how do you define salvation?
02:50:43: In the Epistle of John, he states, quote, where there is love and charity, God is present, end quote.
02:50:50: Therefore, if a Muslim lives the reality of love, then he or she is living in God's presence and thus can be saved.
02:50:58: God's loving grace is healing and saving. How would you respond to that? Ninety seconds. Well, of course, the
02:51:04: Bible never says that. There is no quotation in the Gospel of John that says where love and charity are present,
02:51:10: God is present. I don't know what translation of the Bible you're using, but the Bible does not teach that. The Muslim is in the presence, and I didn't get a chance to point this out, but remember,
02:51:20: Islam came after Christ. It comes after the clarity of the revelation of God.
02:51:26: And so for it to misrepresent the doctrine of the Trinity, for it to deny the cross, it does so culpably.
02:51:32: This was not created in ignorance. The scriptures already existed.
02:51:38: And so you have the very same situation you have in the book of Galatians, where you have a perversion of the message of Christ.
02:51:46: And what did the Apostle Paul do? If we're going to follow the apostolic example, what's the apostolic example? Paul called down the anathema of God, the curse of God upon anyone who would change the
02:51:58: Gospel. Why? Because the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation.
02:52:04: And if we have God's priorities, then the Gospel has to be our top priority, not the feelings of postmodern men.
02:52:13: And if we are to honor God, then we are going to follow the apostolic example. And when we follow the apostolic example, the
02:52:21: Gospel comes first, and it is the only means of salvation. Mr.
02:52:27: Rutland, 45 seconds to comment. I believe in this debate, the whole focus has been on the
02:52:33: Catechism, paragraph 841. Not a whole lot of focus has been focused on 1260, which
02:52:39: I've tried to point out. The issue here is not, can a Muslim be saved in his
02:52:45: Muslim religion? The issue is that, if a man follows the dictates of his heart as revealed to him by God's pervenient grace, by the revelation of the natural world and natural law, is there at least a possibility that he may go to heaven?
02:53:02: And the answer that the Catholic Church gives to that is yes. The answer is not that he will.
02:53:07: The answer is yes, there is a possibility. Mr. Rutland, are you teaching that the conscience is a sufficient guide in spiritual truth?
02:53:21: Ninety seconds. God gives to every man a revelation of himself, as St.
02:53:30: Paul says. That's why St. Paul can say that none of us can stand before God and say, well,
02:53:37: God, I didn't know. So therefore, you have to overlook my sins. Where conscience is the only guide, that conscience being enlightened by God's active or pervenient grace, then sometimes it may be the case that, yes, that conscience is sufficient for salvation.
02:53:58: Do I know exactly what we mean when we say that? No. Because the salvation of mankind is locked into the mystery of God, and we simply can't tell
02:54:09: God, you're going to save this person, you're not going to save that person. That's just simply presumptuous of us.
02:54:16: Dr. White, 45 seconds to comment. I think I'll simply allow the Church and the
02:54:21: Pope to comment. Every man who is ignorant of the gospel of Christ and of his church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved.
02:54:32: It may be supposed that such persons would have desired baptism explicitly if they had known of its necessity.
02:54:38: And John Paul II, through the practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and following the dictates of their consciences, members of other religions, notice they're still members of those other religions, positively respond to God's invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ by being in those religions.
02:55:01: That's what the Pope said. I think the Pope's interpretation of the Catechism might be the one you might want to go with.
02:55:08: The time is 11 o 'clock. You have been an excellent, excellent audience, and you're learning how to write questions.
02:55:17: Well, it took four years. I'm sure on behalf of all of you, thanks.