DocsofGraceStLouis.mp4

Hopefully, Lord willing, this evening's presentation should be on YouTube, and hence be visible to people literally all around the world. I started doing YouTube just under two years ago, January, January will be exactly two years, and during that time we've had about 1 .8 million video views, I have over 420 videos up there now.

And the amazing thing is that we are able to reach people that we just otherwise could never reach. For example, in Indonesia, places like that where I post the debates I've been doing with Muslims. It's just amazing where technology allows us to go now, and of course, even tomorrow, people will be able to sort of join with us here.

So, things have changed a good bit in ten years. I've changed a good bit in ten years. I don't think I was completely clean-shaven on the top when I came here the first time. I'd have to ask Van about that, but that has become an absolute necessity.

And Van and I were talking about how things have changed from the time we had first been.

Here.

He's been here quite some time now. I was just thinking, we just celebrated 35 years of my fellow elder at Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. 35 years in one church. Van's been here 25 years. I've been at PRVC for 20 years.

That's a real blessing to have had that kind of an opportunity for all that time. We tried this year. Oh, by the way, I should mention, he mentioned I'm going on a cruise this weekend. When someone gives you and your wife a free cruise, you try to make that happen.

My dear, my dear. I've never paid for one. This will be my 13th or 14th, but I'm always working on them. I'll be working on this one, too. Not in the sense of teaching, which I normally am doing on them, but I haven't written anything other than the blog, which in and of itself is a lot, for quite some time.

And I need to get some writing projects done. So, Lord willing, over this next week, and this assisting me as well, I finally would like to get some writing projects taken care of, because there's lots of things I want to be writing only so many hours a day.

So, that's what we'll be doing. So, I do thank you. I'm going to miss being here on a Sunday morning. It's going to be the first time I think I've not preached on a Sunday morning, and I feel badly about that, but I appreciate your allowing me to do that, and my wife does, too.

She works full time for U .S. Airways, and so getting a chance for her to get away is a good thing as well. So, thank you for that. Anyway, we tried to arrange to do what I seemingly do a lot, and that is we tried to arrange for a debate, and we tried to look for folks who would engage in a debate, and some of the brethren here can inform you that it is a whole lot harder.

Thank you, sir.

I will try not to baptize the pulpit. If they cut this big, it would be a full immersion. I did that at the Presbyterian Church. They gave me this big cup of water, and I just moved my foot once, and it just all over the place, and I just could not resist making a few baptismal jokes.

But, anyway, they found it funny. You can, too. It's all right. But, it is not easy to get people to do debates. There's lots of folks today who will ravage the Christian faith. Lots of folks who want to get on television and radio and tell us about how backwards we are, how silly it is to believe that the Bible is the word of God, and things like.

That.

When it actually comes to getting them to defend their position in a meaningful fashion in a scholarly debate, not as easy to do as you might think. Last year, I was here, and you remember I was talking a lot about a fellow named Bart Ehrman, and that's because only a matter of less than two months later, I debated Dr. Ehrman in Tampa, Florida.

Was it Tampa, Florida? It was somewhere in Florida. All of Florida looks the same to me. That's the problem with Florida. There aren't any mountains to be able to say, oh, that's Tampa, that's Miami, whatever.

Somewhere down there in Florida. How many of you have seen that debate with Bart Ehrman?

Okay.

When you see him on the evening news or NPR or wherever else it is, then you might want to get a hold of that debate. It was on the viability of the text in the Testament. But we were discussing that, and the amount of work that goes into arranging those things and the amount of money that goes into arranging those things is pretty impressive.

So we'd still like to someday arrange a debate. I mean, I would think, especially here in St. Louis, St. Charles, these areas, that especially a debate with certain individuals who deny the doctrine of the Trinity would be a wonderful thing.

And I've been open to do that for many years now. Maybe that'll work out. I would like to see that happen. The next best thing to do is what I do on my webcast, and that is I let the other side speak for itself.

I take a lot of time to download their materials, present their materials, and then respond to them. Now, it would be nice for them to have a chance to then go back and forth, but that seems to be the real problem, is that many people want to have a monologue on these issues, not a dialogue on these issues.

A number of years ago, and I won't be using any of these clips, but I did a debate, I believe it was in 2001 in Los Angeles, with a fellow by the name of George Bryson. And Mr. Bryson is pretty high up in the Calvary Chapel movement, the world's largest non-denominational.

Denomination.

And if you know anything about Calvary Chapel, you know, well, we're not a denomination. Yeah, okay, sure. And he and I debated these issues at the Anaheim Vineyard in Los Angeles. And since then, Mr. Bryson has often said that he would be willing to debate again.

However, he wants to have input as to how the debate's put together. Well, that's fine. I mean, if you want to have a discussion about whether you have 20-minute opening statements or 25-minute opening statements, or whether you have the audience questions before the closing statement, sure, no problem.

What he means by have some input is he doesn't want cross-examination. He doesn't want there to be any place where I ask him specific questions that he has to answer. And there's a reason for that. I learned a long time ago that the debate does not take place in the opening statements.

It does not take place in the rebuttals. The debate takes place. Remember what it says in Proverbs 18? A man seems to be right in his case until his neighbor comes along and examines him. That's when the wheels fall off.

That's when you contest for the consistency of the position is in the course of cross-examination. Mr. Bryson doesn't want to do that part. And I call that doing debating. So that's why we haven't had any debates since then.

And so you can see on the screen what I've done is I've gotten hold of some of the better-known individuals who would seek to respond to Reformed theology. And I have grabbed their presentations. And that way we will use them as somewhat of a springboard to at least be able to say, well, the subjects that I was addressing are the subjects that the individuals that seemingly garner the largest audiences as they speak on these subjects.

It's the very same objections that they were making. And so I want to be sort of interactionary, if that is a term. I want to relate with these. And also with you as well. I want it to be a little bit more of a classroom-type situation.

I don't have, like I would on Islam or something like that. There's just so much information I want to get to. I want to be able to just, in essence, go over here and say, okay, if someone has a particular question, all right, let's bring up Bible works.

Let's go to a specific section. Let's look at it. Let's exegete this text, whatever it might be, and really dig into these things. I would imagine many of you here already would agree with me on many of these issues.

And that's fine if you've heard me discuss them before. But there might be folks here that are struggling with these issues. You haven't really thought them all through. And as such, I want that to be of use to you as well.

The Manhattan Declaration and the Need for Religious Liberty

Now, let me just begin with a current illustration as to why these things, I think, are very, very important. And this has a wider application. How many of you have read the Manhattan Declaration, at least heard about the Manhattan Declaration?

You are sitting there going, eat the chips. The Manhattan Declaration came out about two weeks ago or so. And it was drafted by Charles Colson, Timothy George, and a particular Roman Catholic figure. The Manhattan Declaration, in essence, deals with three areas.

It deals with the subject of life, which would include the subject of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia, assisted suicide, issues of the culture of death versus a culture of life. It deals with the issue of marriage and human sexuality.

In particular, of course, the issue of the nature of marriage, the fact that it is a divine institution. It is not subject to redefinition based upon, shall we say, any type of legislative action or referendum or anything else.

Since it's a divine institution, God determines the form of marriage, not someone else. And the last thing that it deals with is it deals with the subject of religious liberty. And in essence, it says that nations have a responsibility to safeguard the free expression of religious belief.

That no one should be forced or coerced into a particular kind of religious observance. And at the same time, no one's rights to openly and publicly express a religious viewpoint should be suppressed or bridged.

And obviously, that's the one they're focusing on. So much so as to say that were any nation, including our own, to seek to suppress such religious statements, that it would be our duty as Christians to engage in civil disobedience.

Citing the example of Peter, when they were told not to preach the gospel, that's whether we should obey you or obey God. Many, many things in the document that are noteworthy. I believe all of us, more than ever before, more than any other time in the ten years that I've been coming here for certain, we have to be thinking about these things.

There are things happening in our world today at a frightening speed. Especially given it seems like there's an acceleration. It's sort of like as you're going down a hill, you go faster and faster and faster.

And as the brakes, in essence, have come off, what's going on with genetic manipulation? What's going on with experimentation upon embryos and things like that? It's truly the stuff of science fiction, but it's not science fiction anymore.

It's truly happening. And a culture with our level of technological advancement that has thrown off the restraint that comes from having a Christian worldview. A culture that is now soaked in secularism, that views us as nothing more than the random acts of the universe, the random manipulation of DNA.

Why shouldn't we keep playing with DNA if nature's been doing it? We've now learned how to do it. Why not?

There's no creator.

There's no right or wrong. There's no moral foundation upon which to say otherwise. These are things we all should be thinking about, and for that reason, the Manhattan Declaration is worthy of your reading.

However, I have not signed it, and I have explained why. Last Sunday at my own church, I spent the entire morning service on that particular subject. You can see that on my blog, on YouTube, in fact. And in fact, as I left, my cohort in crime there at the ministry, Rich Pierce, had just finished syncing up the high-quality audio with the video.

And we will be making that available for you. But the reason that I have not signed it has to do with the issue of the gospel. They only invited Trinitarians to be involved in the Manhattan Declaration.

There were no Jews, no Muslims, no Mormons. It was only Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants. And while they did not attempt to make an ecumenical statement, they did say that it is our duty to proclaim the gospel in its fullness in the body of this particular declaration.

I agree that it is, but the problem is that those three groups don't have the same gospel. And that is my concern. It's one thing to say religious people as a whole stand together. I mean, look at what the Mormons went through with Proposition 8 in California.

We can look at that and say it's terrible that there have been Mormon store owners and restaurant owners who have been targeted for having supported Proposition 8. I can say that's a terrible thing. And I stand with them against that kind of activity without saying we as Christians hold hands and saying this is a Christian response.

I can be thankful that a Mormon stands for heterosexual marriage, which is the only marriage there is. I can be thankful that the Mormon does that without saying that the Mormon, therefore, is embracing a true gospel or worshiping a true God.

We need to be able to make those types of distinctions. And from my perspective, the only power that has been given to the church to change hearts and minds is the gospel. That is the only power that we have.

It's not in our numbers. I mean, when you consider the New Testament church in the days of Paul numerically, it never would have crossed their mind that numbers could ever be the means by which they would change the world.

It was a tiny, tiny little group from a forgotten corner of the Roman Empire. That's not where our power comes from. The power comes from the only message that has been entrusted to us that can change people from being God-haters into God-lovers.

That's what the gospel is all about. And when we talk about this subject, I'm going to show you some clips here right at the beginning that Mr. Hunt is confused about. He thinks that what I, as a Calvinist or a Reformed theologian, is saying is that I'm the only person with the gospel.

That he is either lost or he's not proclaiming the gospel. We need to recognize right at the top. The reason I have, over the years, been so concerned about this issue is simply a matter of biblical consistency.

Biblical consistency. I try to apply the exact same standard in this area that I do in the Doctrine of the Trinity, the Crucifixion of Christ, the Resurrection, the Doctrine of the Church, whatever it might be.

I believe that there is an inherent necessity for us as believers to show respect to God by honoring His Word. And the way you honor His Word is by handling it aright. You don't play with the Bible like it's theological play-doh.

You do not form it into what makes you feel comfortable. You have to apply the same standards, no matter what subject you're dealing with, from the pages of Scripture. None of us as parents feel overly respected by our children when we can tell they're specifically twisting our words of instruction to them.

Well, how can we think God would be honored when we twist His Word according to our whims? Are we not, in essence, then forcing our words into His mouth and saying, it's the Word of God? And that's why one of the ten topics we've addressed over the years was the sufficiency of Scripture.

Sola Scriptura. And why we believe that as Christians we need to recognize we do have our traditions, identify what they are, and bring them to the Word of God. And never allow our traditions to become something that overrides the plain teaching of the Scriptures itself.

And that is one of the greatest dangers I've seen. And that's one of the greatest dangers with Mr. Radio on KPXQ. In the sixth chapter, he gave a response, and it was an eisegetical response. He was reading into the text something that was just nowhere there.

And I said, Dave, that's your tradition speaking. And he said something that I've, I even put it in the book, if you've read the Radiant Colonism. He said to me, James, I have no tradition. Often said since then, a man who thinks he has no traditions is the slave of error.

He cannot examine them in light of God's Word. And the danger then becomes those traditions become for him the equivalent of. And woe be to you to challenge that man's traditions. He's going to think you're challenging.

And especially when we talk about this subject, people say, well, you know, I hear a lot of debates on this. And not in the sense of formal debates. We can't get these folks to debate. But, you know, it happens in every classroom and back halls and churches all over the land.

I hear all these debates. Does anything ever get accomplished?

Yes.

But there has to be a willingness on the part of someone to allow God to be God. And as long as their dogged dedication to tradition. And so, this subject is vitally important. Because what's going on here is I'm trying to be consistent.

And when I present the gospel to a Muslim. When I present the gospel to a Muslim. You should not be able to listen to my presentation and go, oh, that's different than what he says to Catholics. Now, is there going to be a different emphasis?

Well, of course there is.

If I'm talking to a Muslim here. And then I talk to a Roman Catholic here. Knowing the differences of beliefs. Knowing the confusions that are here. I'm going to have to address particular issues. But the gospel I present should be absolutely consistent no matter who I present it to.

It should be the same gospel. And the world should be able to look at us and go, those people are really serious about what they believe. Because they don't play with it. They don't engage in sensationalism just to try to get numbers.

And is that what the world thinks when they listen to most of what's on quote unquote Christian TV today? Or do they see Joel Osteen with 16 ,000 people sitting there? And he's just smiling up a storm.

And he wants you to be financially successful. And to have pretty white teeth and grow your hair back. And that's not what the gospel is about. And the world knows it.

The world knows it.

They can detect that kind of thing. But they should also be able to detect those people who say no. We're not going to take the short cuts. We're not going to hide the things that are offensive to people.

Because there are things about the gospel that are offensive to people. Especially in our day today. Let me tell you something. Our post-modern, arrogant, secular, humanist world thinks the idea of a creator God who's glorifying himself.

Having entered into his own creation to provide salvation in a bloody sacrifice on the cross of Calvary. Is about as stupid a thing as you could ever believe. Until that heart is changed. Until conviction of sin has been brought into that heart.

You're never going to change that heart. And the only way you're going to get that person to respect you. And show respect for your religion. Is completely changing your religion. And taking everything out of it.

And they find offensive. And yet the entire teaching of the New Testament is what? It is by the very offensiveness of the cross. That God has chosen to bring his people unto himself. It is that offense that crushes that human pride.

So the reason that we discuss these issues. Is not to mock our minions or things like that. And there are Calvinists that do that and shame on them. The only reason to discuss this is quite simple. To be consistent in our handling of what the scripture says about the gospel.

And it makes a difference as to how you do ministry. Not just in the church. And it does. I know that there are churches that go, I embrace the five points folks. Those five points do not impact the worship of your church.

Then you haven't really gotten the idea yet. To be reformed is first and foremost. To recognize God as who God is in me. For God has formed for his purposes. And his holiness. And the fact that given his holiness he would have anything to do with me.

If your heart hasn't been changed. If you haven't recognized that God is really God. He is not the cause of your problems. And that you are but a vapor. That appears for a little while and then vanishes away.

Then all you've done is grab hold of some theology. But you haven't seen how it really impacts the heart and mind. I would highly suggest to anyone. But let me tell you. If you want to hear preaching in a Baptist church.

In fact I had my first opportunity to preach at Trinity in New Jersey. He wrote a little teeny pamphlet. It's a banner of truth pamphlet. I'm not sure if you've seen it. It's called the practical implications of Calvinism.

Not doing this. Both of them in debate.

They won't do it.

When I wrote The Potter's Treatment. How many of you have seen The Potter's Treatment?

I bent over.

Before I wrote that book we had had great dinners together. I remember being in Indianapolis at a King James only church. I felt really, really loved there. But it was this big apologetics thing. They let me come.

Even though there were books on the back table. Identifying me as a Satan inspired false teacher. They had to hide some of my books under tables. Or sell them to anybody. Things like that. But Dr. Geiser was there.

He told me after it was over. The reason I came was because you were here. We had had what I thought was an amiable relationship. When I started writing the book. Not only did I honestly seek to accurately represent him.

One of the reasons I was as strong in what I said. Was because I have as much respect for the man as I do.

In other words.

I expected much more from Norman Geiser. Than I expect from Dave Hunt.

I really do.

And that's a sign of respect. As strange as the world may consider that today. That is to me a sign of respect.

And so.

I am not seeking to mock these gentlemen. When I started writing. I wrote to Dr. Geiser. I wrote him a nice long letter. I still have all these letters. And I asked him basic questions.

One of them was.

Dr. Geiser.

In reading your book. I had sent him my books. Before his book came out. I tried to be of assistance. I sent him God's sovereign grace. I sent him drawn by the Father.

And.

I asked him in a letter.

I said Dr. Geiser. For example.

Why is there no exegesis of John 6 .37. In the entire view of this book.

I mean.

How many. Verses could be more relevant. Than John 6 .37. I'm sure most of you know. What the verse is. All that the Father gives me will come to me. And the one literally coming. The one who comes to me.

I will certainly not cast out.

I think.

If you're going to write an entire book. About how extreme Calvinism is wrong. It's dangerous. And needs to be refuted.

I don't know.

I think that sort of is relevant.

You might want to offer some exegesis in it. Dr. Geiser wrote back. I offered an entire exegesis in the book. Now the first edition of Chosen but Free.

That I had.

Had a very small little incomplete.

Reference.

Biblical citation index in the back.

In fact.

What I had to do.

Literally.

Was I paid people. With Amazon gift certificates. There were about four or five people. Across the United States.

What I would do.

Is I would give them an Amazon gift certificate. And I would say. And I did this. John 6 .37. And so what that person would do. For their Amazon gift certificate. Is they would take their copy of the book.

And they'd start at page one. And then page two. And then page three. And they would go through the entire book. And create for me. An exhaustive list of every page. On which that particular verse.

Was cited.

That's how I created. My own exhaustive list. To make sure that. If I said. Dr. Geiser didn't deal with this verse. Then I had the evidence. I had actually. Found it in reference. And so what I did. Is I wrote to Dr. Geiser.

I said.

Here is every citation of John 6 .37. In Chosen but Free. And I gave it to him. I think he might have cited the entire verse once. Most of the time it was only a part of the verse. Never in the answer to Jesus.

Anywhere.

And I even opened up the possibility. His book was published by Bethany House.

That was my publisher.

The same people who edited my book. The God who justifies. Edited Chosen but Free. And so I said. Was there material that was in this. That was taken out. During the editing process.

Would that explain it. You know.

Because here is everything you said. There is no exegesis here. I got back. A postcard. The postcard said. If you publish. I will respond. Ought to begin some kind of meaningful dialogue. We have tried.

Engage. Because. The single most effective way. To help the church. Work through these issues. Is to put the two people. Side by side. Put the best representatives you can there. And let them argue. Let them bring forth their best arguments.

Let it be done respectfully. Let it be done biblically. But let it be done openly. And we just haven't been able to. Michael Brown. He is a scholar. Back in 1995 at Arizona State University. Is a former Calvinist.

And he recently. In listening to that. I was very pleased to be able to announce. That I am going to be on his program. He is going to be on the dividing line. And hopefully we are going to be able to arrange a debate.

And I think it will be very. I put these up here.

Is to let them speak.

And then respond. And sometimes what they say.

Is troubling.

It is troubling because of its inaccuracy. Now if Mr. Hunt. Is so convinced. Of his traditions. And yet blind their existence. That he does not hear. And so you can correct him. Over and over again. And he will continue to repeat the same things.

In spite of the correction. Now some people say that is absolutely dishonest. Well maybe. I just don't think that at his stage. Of life and teaching. That he can even give consideration. To the possibility.

That what he has been teaching all along. Just doesn't compute.

For Dr. Geisser.

Dr. Geisser does not believe that anyone younger than himself. Can teach him anything. He as much as told me. We were going to the airport once. It was in Indianapolis. He said well I am 65 now. I can write my systematic theology.

No one can write a systematic theology. Before they are 65 and have it be worth anything. No one can know enough. Before they are 65 to write a systematic theology. I said so you wouldn't think for example.

Much of Wayne Bruder's.

Waste of paper.

And so I am convinced to this day. That Dr. Geisser has never read. Appendix. In the current edition chosen for free. Responding to present that. And my response to it. Because he doesn't believe that I can have anything worthwhile.

That so far the Lord has protected me from that. I learned things from people. The Lord keeps me from ever adopting. This results in some scary things. Let me play a. Most of you have heard this. Let me play something for you here.

When.

Dave and I first. Discussed these things. I started off with a question. Remember I was interviewing him. It wasn't supposed to be a debate. He calls it a debate. But I asked him a question about the reformers.

I pointed out that it's rather odd that he and I. Have done many debates against Roman Catholics. And we have. I guess they are the same people. Some people have been willing to debate him. Who won't debate me.

Carl Keating being one of them.

But I said I find it strange. That you and I approach this. From such completely different perspectives. And I asked him a question about the reformers. Here is. What he said. And this has become famous.

For those of you who listen to the buying line. It's part of the radio free Geneva opening. He said this. On our radio program.

Well first of all James. I'm very ignorant of the reformers.

First of all James. I just like to go with what the Bible says. I believe that was in July or August.

The next year.

Six months at the outside.

On his own radio program. Dave Hunt said the following.

I think I probably.

Know more about Calvinism. Than most of the people who call themselves.

Calvinists.

Six months. He has just got a mental acumen. That makes me look like a mental midget. I don't know but given. So much of what we will look at. It seems like. Something strange is going on here. I don't know anything about the reformers.

But six months later. I know more about Calvinism than most people. And the result is inaccuracies. Misrepresentations. And that just shouldn't be. Unfortunately Dave comes from. A ecclesiastical background.

And there really isn't a whole lot of people. Who should have done it. In fact even in this very presentation.

That we are going to see here.

I can play this portion. But he specifically talks about the fact.

That he.

Had friends. Write to him and I wrote to him. Before What Love Is This came out. And said. Don't write this book. You simply don't know what you are talking about. That would be very offensive. But if you have multiple people.

From differing backgrounds. Telling you the same thing. But there is no problem. So what is my motivation here then? I want to start with this. Consistency in the gospel. It impacts everything. Why did I mention the Manhattan Declaration?

Because I think it comes back to this. One of the reasons. That I. John MacArthur. Alistair Begg. Have said I can't sign this. Goes back to that issue. Of what the gospel is. And it's centrality. Some people who would actually agree with us on that.

Have signed it. And that raises other issues. But I hope that my reason. For not signing the Manhattan Declaration. Comes back to this. Continued effort. To be consistent to the glory of God. Not just so I can notch that.

And say I have been consistent there. But to be consistent. With the handling of the gospel. Now having spent all that time. With some of the citations. All these neat gadgets. That I've got here. Let's listen to Dave.

As he starts his objections.

To Calvinism.

He's saying this. Listen to what these Calvinists are saying. This is dangerous. Listen to what he's saying.

To the phone first.

Well.

It's been heating up. And R .C. Sproul.

In America.

I don't know if he's on the air over here. But he's on the radio every day. Pushing Calvinism. We're beginning to find out. That more and more people.

That we didn't really know were Calvinists. Are Calvinists.

They're becoming more aggressive. In pushing this doctrine. John MacArthur for example. Many people didn't know that. But if you look at his writings. And J .I. Packer. D. James Kennedy of course. Because Presbyterians are Calvinists.

What.

Used to be.

Began to. Concern us a bit.

Is.