January 6, 2005

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James white.

Opening Comments on the Broadcast Schedule and Blog Response

Well, good morning. It's an unusual time for the dividing line on a Thursday. Actually, I think there is a time when we did it on Thursday mornings if I recall correctly for a while. We like to keep everybody hopping, but I'm teaching a class right now.

And so we only have a certain amount of time. The class is in the afternoons from 1 to 5. Yes, 4 hours is a long time. 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 is the The toll-free Phone number that means there's no reason for you not to call and you know who you are.

Those who've been following the blog know there's been a great increase in activity of late Over the past couple of days due to the fact that I began reviewing Dave Armstrong's book and Providing a response demonstrating a lack of exegetical content within a book that claims to provide exegetical content simply by doing that.

I am a mean terrible horrible nasty man and there has been an explosion about 66 pages now of Comments from folks who are mighty brave behind a keyboard, but Those same folks for some odd reason They are very very brave in their assertions in that situation.

But they won't pick up a telephone or maybe they will. I've invited them to call today. 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 where's Apollonio? There's four lines open. Apollonio says what I say about Romans 5 1 is ridiculous.

It's so easily refuted, but if that's the case, then I would assume that these folks would call. We'll see 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 is the phone number. Because see when you get on the phone then you have to answer questions and You know when someone says that pointing out that The ground of our peace with God is the fact that we have been Justified and this is put in the past and and you know the grammar and the syntax of the passage.

I'm sure that Apollonio Will be able to respond or maybe some of the other other folks from from Dave Armstrong's blog who seems so very very Confident of what they believe. Yes, I know we have one caller already.

Tony in Maryland is not one of them. Don't worry, Tony First one up to ask a question that starts off like this and the light. What turns the M? It's like well wait wait wait. I know no not me. No don't worry, Tony boy.

We'll get to you, and we know that you're not they're not one of them, but anyways Poor guy I did have something I wanted to do first as as all those brave folks Line up to call in today, and I'm sure that they will.

I'm I mean certainly people would not say the things these people say. And then not be willing to say it to my face and then answer questions about their position. I mean especially those who so confident about how how ridiculous and outrageous my argumentation is certainly they'd want to come on this program where were the people who actually like what I have to say are listening and demonstrate the the compelling nature of their argumentation.

Yeah, anyway I Have a couple things. I wanted to play for you today, and that means we're gonna have to have the the sound on the computer up and ready to go and What I wanted to listen to and honestly I haven't listened to this yet.

So I haven't had a chance to do so of course had read these comments as they have been presented and So I've this be the first time I've had a chance to listen to the actual comments. I think as I recall These are about eight minutes long.

Let me let me see well. We'll see here as soon as it's. Oh we had a wrong number call. What a bummer I Think we should put the wrong number on sometime. What would be really cool is if we get a is if we get a telemarketer.

Would that be fun? You can see that someone calls up, and they they start they start into their their spiel. And you say could you hold on just a moment throw them on? That'd be that'd be sort of enjoyable oh are we having a.

Yes, we are having a let me see if I can find that. Let me see that we got sound up let me see if this is I.

Am usually referred to as the master. There are some who call me.

Him. It's a problem with blogs isn't it. You don't you if you put sounds on it.

Then it's sort of crass, and you can't force people do that, but I I should I should make that sound available for On the blog listen to this before reading any further reviews of Dave Armstrong's book.

Anyway, hey, you know you got to have some type of sense of humor here because evidently most people do not. It's amazing. Anyways, let's listen to. Let me let me see. It didn't tell me how long this is.

Well. It will eventually. Let's listen to the comments from Richard Mao at the night of evening of friendship in the Salt Lake City tabernacle.

Richard Mouw’s “Evening of Friendship” and Mormon–Evangelical Relations

Thank you. It's difficult for me to find adequate words to Express how thrilled I am to be here this evening. Here we are evangelical Protestants and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Gathered together in this Salt Lake tabernacle for an event that's described as an evening of friendship. I'm not being melodramatic when I say that this is surely an historic occasion. To be sure there have long been friendships between some evangelicals and some LDS folks.

But they have not typically appeared on the public radar screen. Our public relations between our two communities have been to put it mildly decidedly unfriendly. From the very beginning when Joseph Smith organized this church in 1830 my evangelical forebears hurled angry accusations and Vehement denunciations Against the Mormon community a practice that continues from some evangelical quarters even in this present day.

I Think it's fair to say that on some Mormons have on occasion responded in kind. Friendship with each other has not come easily for our two communities, but in recent times things have begun to change.

Evangelicals have worked together on some important matters of public morality here in Utah. The standing together ministry has been willing to take some considerable risks in countering the aggressive and often disruptive Evangelical attacks against the LDS Church.

And pastor Johnson's well attended dialogues with Bob Millett have done much to encourage a new spirit of Frank, but friendly exchanges about important matters of faith on a personal level over the past half a dozen years, I've been a member of a Small group of evangelical scholars who have been engaged in lengthy closed-door discussions with a small group of our LDS counterparts.

We've not been afraid to argue strenuously with each other. But our arguments have been conducted. I think it's fair to say In a sincere desire genuinely to understand each other and in the process We have formed some deep bonds of friendship.

I know I've learned much from this continuing dialogue, and I'm now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously Misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community indeed. Let me state the case bluntly on this important occasion, especially to you LDS folks who are here this evening.

We evangelicals have sinned against you. The God of the scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors. And we have been guilty of that sort of transgression and things that we've said about you.

We've told you what you believe without making a sincere effort. First of all to ask you what you believe. We made much of the need to provide you with a strong defense of traditional Christian convictions.

Regularly quoting the Apostle Peter's mandate that we present to people like you a reasoned account of the hope that lies within us. But we have not been careful to follow the same Apostles counsel that immediately follows that mandate.

When he tells us that we must always make our case with gentleness and reverence. Toward those with whom we are speaking. Indeed we have even on occasion Demonized you Weaving conspiracy theories that about the what the LDS is is really trying to accomplish in the world.

And me and even at our best we have been this is true of both of our communities. We have talked past each other setting forth oversimplified and Distorted accounts of what the other group believes. I formed some wonderful friendships with Mormons in the past few years.

These friends have helped me to see the ways in which I have often misunderstood misinterpreted Mormon thought. To be sure as a result of these conversations I also remain convinced that there are very real issues of Disagreement between us and that some of these issues are matters of eternal significance.

But we can now discuss these topics as friends. And tonight many more of our friends have gathered in this place For a very large and public large-scale evening of friendship, and I say God be praised In just a month and a half.

We will greet the year 2005 which marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Joseph Smith. During this year there will be many occasions to space pay special attention to Joseph's life and teachings.

And I hope that many in the evangelical community will take part in those events. But this evening we're not here to talk about Joseph Smith. But about the one whose birth we will celebrate just before the bicentennial year of Joseph's birth makes its appearance.

This is the one about whose birth we sing in words that I should add that Many of us love to hear sung in recordings by that Greek choir that sings these words in this tabernacle. The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.

What a wonderful thing it is That we can meet together Tonight to talk about the Lord Jesus and about who he is and what he has done on our behalf. There's much here to talk about. I Personally take great encouragement from the words that Joseph Smith uttered on the occasion of the founding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in April of 1830.

We know Joseph said I'm quoting we know that all men must repent and believe on the name of Jesus Christ and Worship the Father in his name and Endure in his name to the end or they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God.

And then he added and we know that Justification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true. And we know also that Sanctification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true to all those who love and serve God with all their mights minds and strength.

Well, I greet you this evening in that spirit as one who wants more than anything else To love and serve God with all my might mind and strength in the power made available by the amazing Grace that sent the Lord Jesus to Bethlehem Into the garden of Gethsemane and to the cross of Calvary Where he shed his blood to pay the debt of our sin a debt that we could never pay on our own.

This is the spirit in which my brother Robbie Zacharias is going to speak to us this evening. But the spirit of devotion to the one whose name is above every name. The one who alone is mighty to see. The one before whom someday every knee will bow and every tongue will confess.

That he is Lord to the glory of God the Father. May this wonderful evening of friendship point us all to that great day. Thank you, and God bless you.

Critique of Mouw’s Claims About Mormonism, Romans 5:1, and the Need to Answer by Phone

All right. Well, there are the comments and I Am considerably more concerned than it was when I read them. I Guess hearing them only makes it makes it all the worse. It makes it the worse because of What was said by?

Dr. Mao. Again, I know I could go back over all this. I've already written about this and have documented his errors and his misunderstandings of Mormon belief. The fact that he allows a Few scholars at BYU to define the theology of the church and on that basis accuses us of having lied About what born false testimony about what Mormons believe when in point of fact, we were the ones Who were citing the Mormon leaders and citing them accurately There is much it is it is fascinating them that he did use the phrase people like you.

We are commanded as Christians to respond to people like you from first Peter 315. I'm not sure if anyone really caught that what it What it's a meant in in reality. But It was sad, especially to hear at the end knowing what Joseph Smith believed knowing what Joseph Smith's Theology was to hear him say I speak to you in the same spirit that to me.

That's the worst part because when you know what Joseph Smith meant when he talked about justification and sanctification Perseverance when you know that the Book of Mormon and Moroni 1032 says ye come unto Christ and be perfected in him and deny yourselves of all ungodliness and if you shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness and love God with all your might mind and strength then is His grace sufficient for you.

When you realize what that means when you realize that this man Changed the text of the Book of Romans to say that God does not Justify the ungodly. When you realize that when you've actually taken the time to study this religion Rather than just simply meet with some of its more liberal representatives Then you realize that what was being said there again, the the apologists for Mormonism were Laughing there themselves into a tizzy Listening to this man who has who has bought it hook line and sinker just oh Let's let's hand these people the greatest Defensive mechanism they could ever come up with and that's that's what's taking place.

It's an amazing thing to listen to. It truly truly is and it was it was a sad thing to observe there 877 -753 -3341 is the phone number to call. I think we still have Four lines open for oh, we lost Tony.

I'm sorry Tony could feel free to call back. I'd normally try to establish some some direction. The the question that Tony was going to ask was about oneness, I guess and of whether whether oneness Pentecostalism if someone in oneness can be considered Christian.

I'm assuming that the question at that point was Can you? And it's it's a very very common question because let's face it with what we face within and this we've addressed this many many times, especially in the context of the Phillips Craig and Dean situation the Bishop TD Jake situation the fact that Evangelicalism in essence has decided and I you know again Evangelicalism what in the world does that mean anymore?

That there is a term that no longer communicates anything. Really doesn't I mean, what does it mean? Are we talking about? Generally conservative groups that generally have a Generally higher view of the Bible and is that all we can do with that anymore.

It seems to be but the The fact the matter is that at this point in time. Anyway, you can still find a fairly Clear majority of quote-unquote Evangelicals who will say you know what if you violate two of the three Major the two of the three foundational doctrines of the Trinity.

We will not fellowship with you. So in other words If you're a polytheist we will still Put you off to one side. We will not fellowship with you except in Salt Lake City. And if you deny the deity of Christ if you deny the equality of the persons We're still not we're still not ready to invite you to our CBA meetings unless you have some really good products.

But the third that is the existence of three divine persons. We have monotheism the equality of persons the existence of the three divine persons that one most evangelicals to be honest with you. Just they don't understand themselves.

Therefore they're not comfortable accusing someone of heresy about something that they probably themselves might be a heretic on anyways but they just haven't taken the time to find out and so TD Jake's and Phillips Craig Dean and I'm being told that Dean's gone.

Is that does this new? It's now no longer Phillips Craig and Dean. It's Phillips Craig and Howard. Is that what we're hearing here? That's that's news to me gonna have to look into that gonna have to send the plaid man out to do some research.

Plaid man, you haven't you have an assignment someone tell plaid man. That plaid man needs to to find out about this because plaid man knows who he is. And and that's plaid man's job. So plaid man needs to do that.

And I just had a a general truth posted to me in another window. Sorry, that's inside joke very very inside but anyway Anyway the point being We'll buy the CDs and we'll let these people come into our churches because they're Wrong on a particular element of the Trinity that we don't we can't be overly cut.

You know passionate about this anyways. Because we don't really know what it means and don't really understand the relationship of the of the father and the son and so. So it's a big question and an answer to Tony's question.

My answer to Tony would be found in the book of first John and It is found in the first John chapter 2. In fact, if you want to look that direction and And You can find a discussion there first John 2 22 Says who is the liar, but the one who denies the Jesus of the Christ?

This is the Antichrist one who denies the father and the son whoever denies the son Does not have the father the one who confesses the son has the father also if you understand oneness theology and its denial of the eternal nature of the Son and I'm talking about classic oneness Pentecostal theology here and Those who embrace the Jesus only Baptism etc, etc.

We've discussed this Doing this very briefly because we've discussed this almost ad nauseum in the past we've we've gone over this very very carefully in the past in the archives and It seems to me that passage says you cannot confess One without confessing both one that's Pentecostalism does not and so Tony I would answer your question in that particular in that particular fashion 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1.

I don't know where Patrick is. I wonder where Jim Scott is. Apollonio hasn't called in. We did have a Muslim fellow Josh Wilcox. He he seems to want to rip and shred too, but none of these folks will give give examples.

So, you know since I've been I I'm just asking for some help here folks since you're so absolutely positively convinced that. That I have been so blatantly refuted. Help me out here, man. I just don't see it.

Maybe you could you could call in. Anyway, I don't think that's gonna happen. So I do have other things prepared, but you know if those phones start ringing Mr. Mr. Phone man buddy. You let me know and we will break into anything, you know, well, we will we'll get to it and we will you're on it.

As the door locked to see any trucks prowling by on the street out there with You know stuffing it guns. Yes, five lines five lines open we could have all these folks who have just been so brave behind their keyboards they could they could call in but Maybe we'll have to do it another time.

That's what have to what maybe we could do another at another time we could. You know that then they'd be able to call in then. Oh, what's that? You what is it? You hear on the phone lines right now? Yeah, we're scaring everybody else off though to Phillips Craig and Dean are now Howard Howard and fine.

That's good, that's that's very good. Anyway, I do I was listening to the as we wait For these brave folks who are so so very brave I wonder if I have sir Robin's so Brave sir Robin, we could play that as opposed to anyway.

Now everybody's when you're just being mean you're just being mean now. They they can sit over there and insult you without grounds all the time. But if you dare respond Even with humor, that's mean. It's just very mean you get you're not supposed to do yet.

We could talk about post-modernism to that. That's always fun and we can redefine terms. In fact, I found out that I'm a Gnostic. From someone who who absolutely positively refuses whatsoever to In any way shape or form identify what a Gnostic is and why I'm a Gnostic.

But then again since he's become so so postmodern. Why not? I I think John Kerry's a Gnostic. I Guess I need to turn my sounds off. I was gonna play it when anyways, thank you Sham guy. We appreciate that Sham guy just Added to the to the to the that was a good one to run away.

Anyway, I do have I was listening to the radio yesterday. And so we'll move on with other things waiting patiently for the substantiation of all of the Wild stuff that's thrown around out there. We they will they will show up.

We just know they will because they say there they say there. They've they've refuted me so I Just waiting to hear. Anyway, I was listening to the radio yesterday and there were a couple callers on a certain nationwide talk program on the subject of the will and the subject of Calvinism and the subject of 1st Timothy chapter 2 and It was interesting.

It seems now that there are our folks Who are viewing the Bible answer and broadcast as a resource for how to battle Calvinism and that's sad, you know, it's it's just shouldn't be that way just should not be that way and Unfortunately, those folks don't get to hear the other side, especially on exegetical issues and so we had a fellow who called in and here's a fellow who is in dialogue with a Calvinist and it's starting to sound at times and I really wish this would be challenged.

But it's starting to sound at times. Like when someone calls in says I'm dialoguing with a Mormon or a Catholic or some other cultist or something and It's just it's just sad to listen to these these calls and and they're not they used to get both sides.

They used to get you know. Here's some resources from R .C. Sproul and here's some resources from the other side and and that's that doesn't seem to be the case. And and it's really sad, but what was interesting was There were three calls before the half-hour That I list while I was working out and so I heard this call and it was about a Certain passage of Scripture and then there was a call that was irrelevant as far as this goes and then the next call right before the half-hour I found fascinating because it was a fellow who was being consistent with the idea of libertarian free will and It was interesting to hear what the response was so since we still got five five lines open.

Is that what you're is that what you're telling me five? Full lines and not not a single one of those folks who are who Can sit there and say you're checking good. Okay, check check on them again. Um, no lights blinking.

No lights five five count up again one two open, okay, just checking so those folks who sit there and and slap each other on the back and talk about All right. I can't believe I make believe that that boy's so stupid.

They they're not calling in. They're not they they're checking dial tone because it has rained Lee recently. So we don't we don't want these poor folks, you know, just the guy dial tone. Because sometimes when it rains we have problems it's what I used to rain.

Here in Arizona hold up it checked everything what every line checked out good, so they're they're not out there. Just dialing away and trying. That's a shame anyway, let's go ahead in the I Folks when I Say someone is wrong.

When I say James Aiken, for example, let's use somebody else. It's not involved with this Who has a really good blog by the way, and it's very interesting all sorts of stuff about science fiction thing.

It's very very interesting. I like reading Jimmy Aiken's blog. I think his theology is horrible, but I like reading his blog and When I say he's wrong about something which I've done a number of times the one major difference between myself and all these folks is is I Prove it and I document it and I lay it out and I'm consistent.

I Don't understand folks who? You know, I've just been reviewing a book demonstrates exegetical errors and They don't seem to recognize that that means that they would need to have to prove their case as Long as you serve Rome, you don't have to serve your you don't have to prove your case.

You can just throw it out there and And even when a I mean, this was sort of funny. When when Dave Armstrong that has meltdown I'm not talking to these people anymore. Because I was just plotting through his text citing him inaccurately that no one can show where I cut anything out I was just citing him accurately and Demonstrating that he claims to provide exegesis, but he doesn't provide exegesis and what he does say is wrong.

And I'm just going through all this stuff and when he first Put up his article about I'm not talking to these people anymore. There were only two entries on his blog and it stayed that way for quite some time is most of the day as far as I can recall and so when I commented on it, I mentioned in passing that Everything else had disappeared.

It was all stuff. It was gone. Well later he found out that he had accidentally like half, you know deleted the entirety of his blog. Maybe he's had something to do with 2005 2004. I don't know. All I know is his fault.

I had nothing to do with it. He actually comes back and asks how dumb or stupid I forget which one of the two terms he used of me I could be to think he would have deleted his blog. Well, it wasn't there and so is it evidence of my dishonesty that I said he had taken everything off of his of his blog when it was just a It was just a programming error and that's all my fault.

I'm dumb and stupid because he'd leave his blog. I Don't know. Sometimes I listen to stuff and I just I just go Wow. What are these these folks doing all day? Wait, wait, let's get to these of this phone call so we can cover most of it because the second call I don't really have any comments on but let's listen to the caller.

Romans 9, Romans 5:1, and the Question of Free Will

My question was concerning what the Bible says about the doctrine of the five-part Calvinism more specifically Romans 9 and. What it's asserting is I caught a part of your broadcast when you address this.

But I want to see if you could elaborate on that a little bit more. Sure.

What I've said is that the theme of Romans 9 is very very important because the Calvinist thinks the question being answered is Why do some believe. In other words? Why did the Gentiles believe and why do some like the Jews not believe?

There's there's there's a reason for that that's explained very very clearly by dr. John Piper in a book called the justification of God it was a doctoral dissertation and he points out for us that after the introduction of Romans chapter 9 He Discusses his his deep love for his his people.

He has great sorrow and ceasing grief in his heart He says in verse 3 for I could wish that I myself were accursed separated from God for the sake of my brother and my kinsmen according to the flesh who are the Israelites to whom belong the adoption of sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving the law and the temple service and the Promises whose are the fathers and from whom is the Christ according the flesh who is overall God blessed forever Amen and so It's interesting just in passing Dave Hunt likes to say that Calvinists are inconsistent in Looking at this passage because we shouldn't Paul if he was a Calvinist and we're speaking in acronym Acronistically, of course, but if Paul believe what Calvinist believe then he would not have cared about his brother that's the that's the Essence of Dave Hunt's argument at that point as if we somehow know who the elect are and as if we somehow ignore Paul's own statement, he endures all things for the sake of the elect and so anyway right after saying this as We enter into the the primary argument of Romans 9 Paul gives us an introduction.

It says but it is not as Though the Word of God has failed for they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel and so right as he begins his argument He says look at all this stuff that's been given to the Jews the the covenants and the promises and the Word of God and all these things.

But you need to realize it's not as though the Word of God has failed because obviously that was one of the Greatest arguments it was being used against him Paul look that all that stuff in Romans 8 sounds wonderful.

It really does but there's one little problem and the little problem is That the Jews don't believe The Jews as a people. Yeah. Okay, you're Jewish and you know, the Apostles are generally Jewish and some but you can't say that the Jews as a whole believe and So What about that Paul and Paul says well, it's not as though the Word of God has failed Because you see they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel.

There has always been Particularity in God's dealing there has always been the External and the internal there's nothing new here and he's going to be proving that through numerous citations that His own opponents could not possibly argue against That's what's going on right at the beginning of Romans chapter 9 and that's what Dr. Piper has has demonstrated and I would refer you for further details To his rather extensive study of this particular passage.

But if you read Romans 9 that way you come up with determinism and we can't have that.

If we start with there is no eternal decree of God that determines actions in time that we can't have that. Well. Are we saying that that if we follow the context of Romans 9 6 and following that the result is determinism?

Well, that means the context is teaching that that would seem to be what follows but obviously that's not what's being intended.

There's a different question that this is actually asking. The real question and that's what we should focus on is why are some Experiencing judgment and damnation while others are experiencing salvation and blessing and that.

Okay, but is that what Romans 9 6 is about. Is that why Paul introduces the idea of particularity even within the Jewish? Nation and community. There's no question that there are some who are experiencing or will experience final judgment and are experiencing judgment now.

And there's some who are experiencing salvation and he does answer that question. It's because of the free grace of God and Listen very very very carefully when we get to and and this is the Primary passage that I think was prompting the person's question.

That is does not the Potter have a right verse 21 does not the Potter have a right over the clay to make in the same Lump one vessel for honorable use another for common use. What if God although willing to demonstrate his wrath and To make his power known Endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

And he did so to make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory. The problem is is that if language means anything? Vessels that are prepared by a Potter.

It's the Potter that determines the vessel and it's Form function and use not the vessel itself and all of man's religions say no. The vessels determined whether they are going to be vessels of honor or dishonor by what they do.

Now that's turning the text on its head and to do that. You really need to put out a lot of effort to do so. Listen and see if maybe that's what ends up happening. It's the question that's being asked in other words.

Why are some Jews experiencing judgment and damnation? They're God's chosen people. Why are some Gentiles experiencing salvation and blessing. And the answer given by Paul? Is that the saved? produced salvation.

Because they pursued the salvation of God by faith and not by works.

Okay, now listen carefully to that. The the the reason that some are getting saved because they pursued salvation by faith and not by works. Well, of course salvation is Obtained by faith and not by works.

There's no question about that but are we really saying that the reason that one person is saved is because they pursued salvation. Another person did not pursue salvation. The Final well that that is what's being said the final determiner in salvation is always man in a non-reformed system and.

So it's whether man will pursue what's a whether man will respond to the light whether man Will do what needs to be done to either make himself a vessel of honor or a vessel of wrath. The exact backwards opposite of what the text is saying Forced upon you by what.

By the philosophical embracing of the absolute necessity of The concept of libertarian free will which is exactly what is going on with Norman Geisler's book. It's exactly what's going on with all of these Sources that we've reviewed in the past as well.

That's now the text says but that's what happens when you start with libertarian free will.

So the point at the end of this chapter that you're asking about is Paul is saying the same stone that causes Zion or Israel to stumble is the source of security or sanctuary for those who believe.

Okay. That's quite true. But once again the issue immediately comes up and that is the stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. Isn't that what God intended it to be. It is this is where we get into the passages about you know, Isaiah 6 and.

This is where we need to look at the Old Testament. We're gonna be told here that the Calvinist don't look at the Old Testament that we don't we don't see what the Old Testament is actually saying and and as a result then We were missing the the Old Testament backgrounds.

But you look at Isaiah chapter 6 and the message of judgment was that not part and parcel of the entire.

Statements being made there and what he does is he takes two texts from the Old Testament Isaiah chapter 8 and Isaiah chapter 28 and makes a point. The point is that the Lord is either the cornerstone of our life or he's the Capstone over which we fall.

So I I'm saying that when you read this chapter. Rather than reading this chapter with a particular set of glasses on ie a particular theological construct.

Which only seems to be applied to Calvinist? Rather than seeing that libertarian free will is a theological construct. And in fact, it's a it's a philosophical construct masquerading as a theological construct and it functions in the exact same way and Hence we have to be open about that do we not.