The Romans 9 Debate vs Leighton Flowers

Alpha & Omega Ministries

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

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. As we begin, we're going to have 20 minutes for each physician to be able to share their side and as they have 20 minutes after that, then we're going to have a 12 minute cross exam and then we're going to have the other side will give 20 minutes and they'll have 12 minutes to cross examine.

00:35

We'll have a short break after the break, then we're going to come back and we're going to have rebuttals and then also cross examinations again and then we'll end the evening with questions from the audience.

00:46

All right, so that's how we're going to do it. Let me introduce our speakers tonight. Our debaters tonight, we have

00:51

Leighton Flowers. He has four children. He and Laura have four children.

00:56

They live in North Garland just outside of Dallas. Leighton is a teaching pastor at First Baptist Church of Richardson.

01:03

He is an adjunct professor of theology at Dallas Baptist University and the youth evangelism director for Texas Baptist.

01:10

In his position, he also interacts with statewide leadership training camps, conferences, evangelistic rallies, global mission trips, and he's impacting thousands in Texas and also around the world.

01:23

He has earned a bachelor's degree in applied theology from Hardin -Simmons

01:28

University and a master's of divinity with biblical languages from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

01:34

As a former Calvinistic minister for over a decade of his life, he's also served on a staff at a Reformed Baptist church, so he's going to be bringing us a unique perspective tonight.

01:44

If you would like to hear more from Leighton, you can also go onto his website, Soteriology101 .com, and you can read several different things concerning commentary on Romans 9, which they're going to be talking about tonight, and also the

01:56

Potter's Promise, and so I want to encourage you to go check that out if you would like to hear more from Leighton after tonight.

02:04

Our other debater is James White. Dr. James White is the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, a

02:11

Christian apologetics organization based in Phoenix, Arizona. He is the author of more than 20 books, a professor, an accomplished debater, and an elder of the

02:20

Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. He has several books that you might be interested in, including the

02:27

King James Only controversy, The Forgotten Trinity, and he also has a book that is entitled The Potter's Freedom, which will be very apropos to what we're talking about tonight.

02:37

He's debated many leading proponents for the Roman Catholics, Islam, Jehovah Witness, Mormonism, and several others, and we're glad that both of these guys are here.

02:47

He also currently is serving as the elder of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. He has been married to Kelly for 32 years, and he has two children and one grandchild as well.

02:59

And another on the way. And another on the way, praise the Lord. All right, very good. So guys, thank you so much for being here.

03:04

We're glad that you are here. Let's start off by giving the evening to the Lord, and then we're going to get started. Heavenly Father, God, I thank you for this day, and I am so thankful for who you are and what you have done.

03:16

And God, I'm asking that you would open minds. I pray that your spirit would move and work in our lives. And God, I pray that you'd help us to hear what we need to hear.

03:24

And God, I truly ask that you help us to apply what we've learned. In Jesus' name, amen.

03:40

At this time, I want to go ahead and ask Dr. White if you would come on up and present with 22 minutes, and we can get started here.

04:02

We'll let the timekeeper get that clock set to, there we go. All right, excellent. Thank you very much.

04:09

It is a pleasure to be with you this evening. We have very little time and a great deal to discuss.

04:15

I am very thankful that Professor Flowers is here this evening, and we've pretty much filled the room up.

04:21

And hopefully you are here to open your Bibles and to listen very carefully. This is an unusual debate.

04:27

The subject is a chapter of the Bible. What does Romans 9 really teach?

04:33

What soteriological system is it supportive of? And so, you are the judges. There are no judges sitting in the front row who are going to be grading us.

04:42

You're the ones that we are here for. And so, my real desire is for you to open your

04:47

Bibles and to follow along and to think with us. The test from my perspective this evening is the test of consistency.

04:56

Who is going to present a consistent perspective? Who is able to apply the exact same method of hermeneutics and exegesis to this text that we would apply to any other text in regard to the resurrection, the deity of Christ, the trinity, the atonement, etc.,

05:12

etc.? Who is going to be consistent in their handling of the text of Scripture this evening? Now, as I open up Romans 9 with you, the exegesis that I will offer to you needs to be the same exegesis that I would give in a mosque in South Africa, in the

05:29

East London Mosque, in a meeting with atheists, a debate with Roman Catholics, or a classroom at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, though I'm only welcome in four out of those five places.

05:43

It needs to be consistent, and it needs to be something that you hold me to as you consider everything else that we believe as Christians and how we handle the

05:55

Word of God in those other areas. So I'd ask you to open your Bibles. I'm actually going to start outside of Romans 9 and Romans 8.

06:01

We have to do that. Most of you are aware of the fact that chapter and verse divisions are later additions. The final verse divisions were not added until 1551.

06:10

And we need to look a little bit before Romans 9 to get the context. And what is the context? Well, we know about the golden chain of redemption in Romans chapter 8.

06:18

We know that Paul talks about those whom God foreordained, those whom he predestined, these ones also he called, those whom he called, these he also justified, and those whom he justified, these he also glorified.

06:32

Why do I mention this? These are soteriological terms. These are terms that have to do with salvation, especially when we look at terms such as justification.

06:42

And therefore, please note the use of the term ekoleson in verse 30. He called. That term is going to be seen more than once this evening.

06:49

And what is that calling? And if the calling of verse 30 of chapter 8 is soteriological because it results in the next step is justification, and hence it does have to do with personal salvation, then will anything be presented that tells us that we have shifted subjects, that we're no longer talking about the soteriology of chapter 8?

07:11

Likewise, in verses 31 and following, we have the law court. And we have the question asked in those verses.

07:16

Who will bring a charge against whom? God's elect. Well, what's the charge have to do with? It has to do with condemnation.

07:22

Who is the one who will condemn God's elect? It's Christ Jesus who died, who was raised again. All of this is clearly in regards to salvation itself, the salvation of individuals, and the salvation of the elect as a group.

07:36

So this is the context that we have going into chapter 9. At the beginning of chapter 9,

07:41

Paul says he has grief and unceasing pain in his heart for his fellow

07:48

Israelites. He could wish to himself be separated from Christ. What's he talking about?

07:53

Well, again, he's talking about salvation. He's talking about their being brought into a relationship with their own

07:59

Messiah. And he talks about the great privileges that were theirs, and especially in verse 4, who are the

08:05

Israelites, who are the adoption of sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the law and the

08:11

Latria is the highest form of worship. It's the worship in the temple and the promises.

08:18

And then the greatest thing that they have, the greatest thing that has happened is the very son of God, God himself has entered into human flesh through the people of Israel.

08:29

And that's why Jesus is described as God over all, eternally blessed in verse 5.

08:35

This then brings us to the key of this evening's discussion. And I believe that this will be borne out by the discussion that we have.

08:43

Verses 6 and 7 determine how we must understand the rest of the discussion in chapter 9, because obviously what is going on here is the apostle

08:54

Paul has encountered objections to his teaching many, many times before.

08:59

Look at all the things you've said in chapter 8 about all that God has done. And yet,

09:04

Paul, you're a small minority of Jews. The small minority of Jews are accepting their own

09:09

Messiah. The great majority, including the leaders, are rejecting this movement. So, Paul, are you not saying that the promises of God, are you not saying that the very word of God has fallen flat on its face, has come to no effect?

09:25

And that's the exact objection he responds to. And his answer is, no, you need to understand.

09:31

They are not all Israel who are descended from Israel. And then he's going to give example, after example, after example of how

09:38

God has in His sovereign freedom guided the path of the promise and the blessing within the descendants of Israel as God has seen fit to do so.

09:52

And He has rejected some of those who are the offspring of Abraham, but He has accepted others, and it's all of His own freedom.

10:04

It has nothing to do with anything that they did. It was not, well, you know, we've got the good

10:09

Israelites over here and the bad Israelites over there, and so I rejected them, but these have been good enough.

10:16

No, that is not what Paul is talking about. He gives us example, after example, after example.

10:21

So, he starts within the very family of Abraham itself. He talks about Isaac. And he says, well, you know, it could have been

10:28

Ishmael, but no, God says, in Isaac shall your seed be called. And therefore, he says in verse 8, it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God, but the children of promise that are reckoned as true descendants of Abraham.

10:46

So, there is a principle that is laid out here. And what we're going to see all the way through the rest of the chapter is that we are going to see

10:54

God's sovereign freedom illustrated over and over and over again, drawn from examples in Israel's history to answer the objection,

11:04

Paul, why are so many Jews not believing in the message that you present? Okay?

11:10

So, with that in mind, he says in verse 9, for example, for this is the promise that this time

11:17

I will come and Sarah will have a son. And so God miraculously raised up someone that didn't even exist at the time that God said, no,

11:26

I'm not going the direction that you think I'm going to be going, Abraham. He brings someone into existence that didn't even exist at that time.

11:32

And then he brings up the example of Jacob and Esau. Not only this, but also Rebekah, when she had conceived by one man, our father

11:40

Isaac, even before the twins had done anything good or bad, in order that the purpose of God according to His choice,

11:51

His election might stand, not from works, but from the calling one.

11:57

There's that term calling. Remember, this is just directly across the page from where that term calling had been used in the description of the elect of God.

12:06

The term calling had been used in regards to those who are then justified. You have the same language being used here.

12:13

In order that, that purpose of God according to election might stand, not from works, but from the one calling, it was said to her, the greater or the older shall serve the younger, just as it's written,

12:26

Jacob I love, but Esau I hate it. Now that second citation is from Malachi 1 .2.

12:31

And many people will say, ah, see, this is about nations. This is about the Edomites and the Israelites.

12:37

The problem is, is that how Paul is using this text? Or is he using this text to reflect back upon the very words that were said to Rebekah in regards to God's freedom to choose?

12:51

It seems fairly obvious that that's exactly what he's doing. And may I suggest just in passing that what should startle a biblically trained mind in the phrase,

13:01

Jacob I love, Esau I hated, is not Esau I hated, but Jacob I love.

13:08

That's what should be startling. If you have the idea that God owes his love, that anyone, whether it be

13:17

Jacob or Esau or anyone else is owed something from God, that you don't understand the hatred that God has for sin and his holiness and his separation.

13:27

If you think that's something he's under obligation to do, then you're not going to really be able to understand what Romans 9 is all about.

13:34

Now, all through this text, we're going to have objections raised. And those objections are like guideposts.

13:41

They are helping us to understand where this text is to be taken. If you end up agreeing with the objector, that means you're arguing with Paul.

13:51

You don't want to be there. Okay? When you hear the objections, the objections will help you to understand where it is that Paul himself is going with his argument and the fact that he's heard all these objections before.

14:04

What shall we say then? There is no unrighteousness with God, is there? May it never be.

14:10

So clearly, something about what he just said indicates there is unrighteousness with God. If you take the

14:15

Malachi 1, 2 thing, read it backwards into it and say, well, this is just about Israelite, the Edomites, the Edomites are persecuting the

14:20

Israelites. That takes away the idea of unrighteousness. The point is that before the twins had done anything good or bad,

14:28

God made a decision that left one out of the line of promise. That was God's free choice to do that.

14:36

And so he raises the issue of unrighteousness. And the first counterexample he's going to offer in verse 15 is, for Moses says,

14:44

I will mercy whom I mercy and I will compassion whom I compassion. They are literally verbs in the original language.

14:52

And so he draws from Exodus 33 where again God in his freedom revealed himself to Moses in such a way that he didn't have to do this, but he chose to do this out of his own freedom, his own kingly freedom.

15:06

And he mercied whom he would mercy and he compassioned whom he would compassion. And then we have the apostolic interpretation given to us once again.

15:14

Therefore, it is not of the willing one, using the standard term to will, it is not of the one who wills, neither is the one who is running, who is engaged in activity.

15:27

But in contrast to the activities of man in his will and his activities, but the mercying

15:36

God. So whatever is being talked about has something to do with God showing mercy in contrast to the activities of man, whether it be the will of man or the running of man.

15:50

And that's the understanding that Paul gives us of the quotation from Exodus 33. And then he just piles on and now he gives us a fascinating example because now he takes us outside of the people of Israel to someone that everyone in the people of Israel knew all about, and that is to Pharaoh.

16:08

For the scriptures say to Pharaoh that for this very reason I raised you up, singular, in order that I might demonstrate in you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.

16:25

Now once again, unless the demonstration of God's power and unless the proclamation of his name in all the earth is a part of our highest priorities, we will never really understand what

16:38

Romans 9 is all about. And the fact of the matter is in our very Western culture that's not a high priority for almost any of us anymore.

16:47

And yet the point that is being made by the apostle is that, look, God can raise someone up and certainly

16:53

Pharaoh represented the entire nation of Egypt, but Pharaoh ended up being destroyed in this whole incident, did he not?

17:00

He himself was raised up, his heart was hardened. God said before Moses ever talked to him that he would harden his heart because he had a purpose.

17:09

He had a purpose to despoil the gods of Egypt, he had a purpose to bring all the plagues to pass, and so he put

17:15

Pharaoh in that position for that purpose and he was absolutely just and free to do that.

17:22

And that's exactly how the apostle then interprets those words in verse 18. Therefore, whom he wills, he mercies, and whom he wills, he forgives, and whom he wills, he hardens.

17:36

Uses the very same Greek term that's used in the Greek Septuagint of God's activity in Pharaoh in hardening his heart.

17:45

In the original language it's a direct parallel between the two. Whom he wills, notice the contrast, it's not of the man willing, but of God willing.

17:54

Whom he wills, he mercies, and whom he wills, he hardens.

18:01

Now I'd like to suggest to you, that's really the text that causes people a real problem. Because if God really has this freedom to deal with his own creation as he sees fit, then all of man's attempts to in some way insert himself into the process of salvation, even if it says 99 % of it is of God, but man has control right here.

18:29

All of those systems collide and collapse if what Paul is saying here has specific application to the actual gospel itself.

18:40

And the objection raised by Paul in verse 19 makes this very, very clear.

18:48

Therefore, you will say to me, how can he still find fault? For who is able to literally stand against his will?

18:58

His will, who can stand against his will? The argument basically is well if this is the case, then

19:03

God has no basis upon which he can judge because this is arbitrary and there has to be some external means of controlling

19:14

God's activities. Now many people, including even reformed theologians, don't view verse 20 as a full response.

19:24

I do. I believe what follows, you have a full response to the argument that was just made by the objector.

19:33

But see if you can see how that works out. Literally it is, oh man, who are you, the one answering back to God?

19:41

By putting that term man right at the beginning, I think the answer is given. You're not

19:47

God. You are his creature. He made you, he formed you, every breath of your mouth, every beat of your heart comes from his hand, and he can do with you as he pleases.

20:00

Who are you to answer back to God? And then you have the quotation from Isaiah 29, the thing formed will not say to the one who formed it, why did you make me like this?

20:10

The fact of the matter is we don't like viewing ourselves as pots having been made by the hand of the potter.

20:17

We don't like that. We rebel against that. We chafe against that.

20:23

But that certainly is the biblical perspective. And then the question is asked in verse 21, does not the potter have the exousion, the authority, the power, out of the same lump of clay to make some vessels for honor and some for dishonor?

20:47

Does not the potter, when he places that lump, is there anyone who can force him to make something from that clay that he does not desire to do so?

20:57

Does he not have the freedom to say, I'm going to make something beautiful for the king's palace. And then he puts some more of the exact same clay on, and he makes a chamber pot.

21:09

He makes something that is for dishonorable use. What does he mean by that?

21:16

What could that possibly mean? What is the application? Well, he goes on.

21:22

What if God, though willing to make known his wrath, to demonstrate his wrath and to make known his power, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared beforehand for destruction in order that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory?

21:45

Notice, this follows directly on the illustration he just gave us. It follows directly on the illustration.

21:52

The illustration was the potter, and so you have vessels of dishonor, that is, they're prepared for destruction, and then you have vessels of mercy that are prepared for honor.

22:04

And so Paul presents the idea. What if God put up with great patience those vessels that he created for dishonor, and it has a purpose, in order that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory?

22:23

Have you heard that language before? Remember in Ephesians chapter 1, the fundamental question, why,

22:29

God? Why one person and not another? Why the way of salvation that you've chosen? The biggest answer to all that is to the praise of his glorious grace.

22:41

And here you have the very same idea. He's done this in order that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, and who are they?

22:53

Who are they? Even upon we, the called.

22:58

Wow, there it is again. We saw at the end of chapter 8, who will bring a charge against God's elect?

23:05

He calls, here it is again, those whom he calls, from whom? Who is the church made up from?

23:12

Jews, and also from among the Gentiles. And then he goes to Old Testament passages that demonstrate that this was always

23:19

God's purpose. And notice especially that he says in verse 27, even if the number of the sons of Israel had been of the sand, the sea, who was it who would be saved?

23:33

The term is from Sotero, Soteriology. So there you have the term, and who is it that's saved?

23:42

The remnant. The remnant. So many times, even the prophets, the prophets thought he was the only one left, and God said, no, no.

23:51

I've reserved for myself 7 ,000 who have not bowed the knee to Baal. See, God had been free through all of that.

23:59

And even as he goes on to talk about the use of means, and calling his elect unto himself, and the hardening of the people of Israel in chapter 11, even then in chapter 11, what does he say in verse 5?

24:11

There even remains right now a remnant according to grace. A remnant according to grace.

24:18

And so what do we see? We see a perfect harmony, continuation, the same terms, the same emphasis.

24:26

In chapter 8, you had God's sovereignty and salvation. In chapter 9, you have God's sovereignty and salvation.

24:32

And now you have it being illustrated, and you have it being illustrated in response to those who raised the objections that Paul had encountered over and over and over again in his public ministry already at this point in time when he wrote this letter.

24:49

Now why is it important for us to be here this evening? I believe that everything in this book was given to us by the

24:58

Spirit of God. And therefore, it is necessary for us to know what he has given to us if we want to be proper servants of Jesus Christ.

25:08

Romans chapter 9 is there. It may bother some people. Some people may skip it.

25:15

Some people may say it's unnecessarily divisive. I say it is theanoustos, revelation from God.

25:23

And therefore, we as the followers of Christ must hear it, must seek to understand it, and must believe it, and make application of it.

25:32

Thank you for being here this evening. God bless. All right. At this time, we're going to have

25:38

Professor Flowers, who will cross -examine for 12 minutes. Well, first of all,

25:47

I do want to thank Heath, Dr. Marion, thank you for hosting us, the Oaks, Jason and the crew in the back.

25:54

They got here several hours early to get things set up. Thank you all for everything that you all have done. You all give the

25:59

Oaks a hand and thank them for everything. And also,

26:06

Dr. White, welcome to the promised land that we call Texas. And a

26:11

Calvinistic friend told me— Calvinism has a lot of traffic, that's all I can say. I had a

26:18

Calvinistic friend tell me just this morning, he said, you know, this debate of yours, it proves determinism is true.

26:24

I said, what do you mean? He said, no one would freely choose to debate Romans 9 with Dr. White. And I understand that now, going through this preparation process.

26:34

But I do appreciate you doing this. And I do think this is an important discussion. I do not think

26:39

Romans 9 or Ephesians 1 or John 6 or any of these passages should be skipped. I think that's been part of the problem.

26:47

I think that's one of the reasons that we have misunderstanding and disagreement within the church is because it has been so neglected for so long.

26:56

And the reason that we do this, I hope we both know, is to glorify God. And I think we both agree with that.

27:02

It's not about winning points or making the other look bad, which I know would be very easy for you to do to me.

27:08

This is my first theological debate. But I honestly—and I haven't felt that from you at all in this discussion since—

27:14

We haven't started yet. We haven't got started. Give him time. Give him time. We haven't warmed up yet.

27:22

But the reason that there is cross -examination and questions is to bring clarity to each other's viewpoints.

27:29

And that's my ultimate goal as a professor, as a teacher at heart. I want you to understand Calvinism rightly, and I want you to understand my perspective rightly.

27:39

And you're like, what's your title? What do you call yourself? That's part of the problem. We don't have a title, really.

27:44

Southern Baptist, traditionalist. They don't like traditionalists, that's for sure. And there's a lot of different titles out there.

27:51

And so I'm a non -Calvinistic Southern Baptist. I don't know how else to say that any better.

27:57

But just a few questions with regard to what you were talking about. First of all, you believe—Paul is teaching that Jacob was chosen for salvation over Esau, Isaac over Ishmael.

28:08

And so I want to ask about Abraham's six additional sons that came after Isaac, and I'm trying to understand if you believe they were repubates for the same reason that Ishmael and Esau were repubates, that God predetermined them to go to hell before they were born, also because they obviously weren't chosen to carry the promise.

28:26

And so what I'm getting to with this question is, what

28:31

I want to understand is, do you acknowledge in any way the difference between those descendants chosen to bring the word, like Isaac, and those who may or may not believe that word, like the other brothers, for example?

28:43

Well, I need to correct the assumption of the question, which was right there at the beginning, which I tried to correct in the opening statement.

28:50

To believe that this text is relevant to individual salvation is not to say that it does not have relevance to other aspects of God's dealings with the people of Israel.

29:00

And therefore, the issue of, say, the sons of Keturah or whoever else you might have in mind at that particular point in time is not even raised here because that's not the point.

29:11

The point, to illustrate on Paul's part, is determined by what's in verses 6 and 7.

29:18

Why is it that Israel is rejecting her Messiah? And the answer to that is, that has always happened in the past.

29:26

God has always had his purpose in freely choosing. Because those individuals are not even brought up, there is no discussion of what their eternal state was, and there is nothing in what

29:37

I said that assigns the meaning of eternal salvation solely to the promises.

29:43

So if the promise is not brought to you, that means that you're eternally lost.

29:48

So Paul doesn't even raise those objections. I don't know if anyone had ever raised them to him, but he does not even raise those objections in this text, and I would say it goes outside the realm of Romans 9 and what it's trying to communicate.

30:02

For example, Lot, we know he was declared righteous by Peter. We know that he was saved, but he wasn't chosen for the lineage.

30:10

He wasn't chosen, matter of fact, he was a lot like Esau in that his descendants end up rising up against Israel and attacking them.

30:18

They were cursed, but Lot was saved. He wasn't chosen for the promise, much like Esau. And so what

30:23

I'm trying to get to is why do you assume that Esau was chosen for reprobation when Lot, for example, who meets the same criteria, he wasn't chosen to carry the promise.

30:33

He wasn't the lineage, but he obviously was still saved. Well, again, as I mentioned, the text's point is to demonstrate that before the twins had done anything good or bad,

30:47

God had a specific purpose. Lot was not involved with that. He would not have been involved with that one way or the other, at least as far as lineage is concerned.

30:56

But the point is that even when there was a natural choice should have been

31:05

Esau. He's the oldest. God had the freedom to overturn even the standard tradition of how the promise was to be passed on.

31:15

And in regards to Jacob and Esau, obviously did much more to demonstrate the reality of his freedom to choose than he did with anyone else.

31:25

And again, it seems like you're making the connection that, well, the promise is only about salvation.

31:35

That's not the point. The point, again, and I think we need to emphasize this, the point in looking at Romans 9 is

31:45

God's freedom in the fact that he has chosen to take the gospel to the

31:51

Gentiles and that there has been a hardening of the people of Israel and that this is not inconsistent with what he has done down through the history of the people of Israel.

32:00

It sounds like you're starting from a human perspective and arguing upward from there.

32:07

I'm trying to say that this text starts from God and that we have to reason down from there.

32:14

And I don't think that the two perspectives actually end up lining up, which may be why we're here this evening.

32:20

I think you and I both agree that verse 6 is key to understanding the entire discourse. I think we both agree that God has blessed

32:27

Israel by entrusting the very word of God to come through them. I think that's a distinction in what I'm trying to draw between his choice of one brother over the other.

32:35

The nation is selected for this noble purpose of bringing the world, the Messiah and his message.

32:41

Yet for the most part, Israel is standing in direct opposition to their own Messiah and his gospel message, which does obviously lead one to ask, has

32:49

God's word failed? And I think you and I would agree that the reason the Israelites are standing in opposition to the gospel and rejecting their own

32:57

Messiah is because God is actively hardening them. Like the verb you said, it's active hardening.

33:03

We both agree with that. He is, as Paul says, sending them a spirit of stupor. Just as Jesus spoke to them in parables to prevent them from understanding and believing.

33:12

So what I want you to explain is what you feel is the difference between our views on this particular point because I think we both affirm that God's active hardening of the unbelieving

33:23

Israelites, but you seem to think that's hardening from birth. It's a natural condition from birth, whereas I obviously believe it's a judicial act of one who is freely rebelled.

33:32

It's a judicial act of Israel specifically at this time in order to accomplish a greater redemptive purpose.

33:38

Yet you seem to assume, correct me, you seem to assume it's a natural condition from birth, this hardening, this inability to hear, see, understand and turn to God.

33:48

Well that's because that's the prophet's perspective on fallen man. We have a heart of stone, not a heart of flesh.

33:57

The picture that is drawn is of a valley of dry bones. The psalmist makes it very clear that we have gone astray from our mother's breast.

34:06

We were born altogether in iniquity and sin. We can no more do good than the leopard can change its spots.

34:12

So this is the consistent testimony. It certainly is how the Book of Romans began. There is no God seeker.

34:18

There is no fear of God before their eyes. This is simply the biblical teaching on the fallenness of man.

34:25

And where I would say that we disagree with one another, again because of our starting presuppositions, is in this text.

34:34

It's not an issue of, yes, there is a judicial act of hardening that God does in regards to making sure that the gospel goes out to the

34:44

Gentiles, He's chosen the Gentiles. Even the issue of, for example, Paul says that they will hear from a people of strange tongues.

34:54

And he makes the application that this is to make them jealous, so on and so forth. But one of the things I hear you saying and sort of putting into your presentation here, especially even in the first five verses, was this idea of Israel's being called to be the mechanism of proclaiming the message of the

35:14

Messiah. And I have a real problem with that, because the whole point of the final verses at the end of chapter 9 is that it had always been

35:24

God's intention to take the message to the Gentiles. It had always been

35:30

God's intention that, you know, verse 25, I will call those who are not my people, my people.

35:37

Those who are called lo -ami become ami. So all through the Gospels, you have these prophecies that this is what

35:44

God's intention was from the beginning. And it sounds to me like you're saying, well, God's intention was this, and now

35:50

He's changed that, and I don't see that that is actually a sound position to begin from.

35:57

R .C. Spurl Sr. wrote, double predestination or equal ultimacy is the view that God works in the same way and in the same manner with respect to the elect and to the repubate.

36:06

In the case of the elect, regeneration is the monergistic work of God. In the case of the repubate, sin and degradation are a monergistic work of God.

36:13

This clearly makes God the author of sin. Such a view is indeed monstrous assault on the integrity of God.

36:18

It's not the reformed view of predestination. It's a form of hyper -Calvinism, a radical form of superlapsarianism.

36:24

Yet you, along with several other scholars, have argued, quote, the Bible is clear that just as God chooses some for mercy and salvation,

36:31

He chooses others for judicial hardening and repubation. When He loved Jacob before he was born,

36:37

He also hated Esau at the exact same time. Does your teaching on God's active work of mercying, as you call it, and then hardening, in verse 18, how does that not meet the radical form of superlapsarianism as defined by Spurl?

36:54

What is the difference? And be specific if you can. Well, two things. I thought we were focusing on Romans 9, but we can leave that if you need to at this point.

37:02

Secondly, I can guarantee you something, knowing R .C. Spurl personally, he's on my side of this debate tonight.

37:09

And I think you've misunderstood, and I have, I don't know how many times, I have corrected the concept of equal ultimacy.

37:18

I have spoken against it. Any of you who've listened to my programs know that I speak against equal ultimacy, which is the idea that the action of predestination unto life is identical to the action of reprobation unto death.

37:32

There is obviously a massive difference between the extension of divine power and mercy, even seeing the incarnation that is necessary for the salvation of God's elect.

37:42

Massive difference between that and the allowing of an individual to continue in the condemnation that is theirs as fallen sons and daughters of Adam.

37:53

There is no necessity of the extension of divine power to cause that to happen, and in fact, I would say that God restrained that evil that would flow from their heart if it were not for God's sovereign decree that they are only to do certain things.

38:07

So, I think you've misunderstood Dr. Spurl at that point. At this time, we're going to go ahead and ask

38:15

Professor Flowers if he would go ahead and make your positive presentation of Romans chapter 9.

38:21

You have 22 minutes. First of all,

38:32

I want to just say that I agree with Dr. White on many of the things he just now taught. I agree with much of the things that he teaches and that he does on his dividing line program.

38:43

I very much support his ministry and hold him in high esteem, as I do with many of my

38:51

Calvinistic friends. There is no ill will to those who disagree with me on this subject, and I hope everyone understands that we can be brothers and love one another even though we do disagree over this point in doctrine.

39:03

I also agree with Dr. White on the point that this chapter is so theological. It is about salvation.

39:11

It involves individuals. It's not just about nations. It involves Jacob and Esau.

39:17

It involves their being chosen. It involves Moses. It involves

39:22

Pharaoh. All individuals. Many times, my view is totally and completely dismissed and washed aside as not being applicable because we don't involve individuals, and that's just not a clear view of our presentation.

39:36

Salvation by faith, not by works. That's the focus in Romans chapter 9.

39:42

It's by grace, not law. Paul's contrast in Romans 9 is not monergism versus synergism.

39:50

I believe those are man -made terms used to reframe this debate. Throughout the entire letter,

39:55

Paul has contrasted the salvation of those who pursue righteousness by works through law versus those who pursue righteousness by grace through faith, which in general is a contrast between the

40:07

Jews and the Gentiles. This is why Paul summarizes this chapter in verse 30 and following by contrasting the

40:15

Gentiles who are attaining righteousness versus the Israelites who are not. And why?

40:21

Why isn't Israel attaining righteousness? Is it because God doesn't really love them? God hasn't chosen them. God has destined them from hell before birth.

40:29

Is that why? Not what the Scripture says. Verse 32 tells us exactly why they are not attaining righteousness.

40:37

Quote, because they did not pursue it by faith, but though it were by works,

40:44

God clearly desires all Israel in every single Israelite, including the hardened ones to be saved.

40:50

And I want to prove that point. At the beginning of Romans 9, Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, expresses a self -sacrificial love for the hardened, unbelieving

40:59

Jews, which sounds a lot like Jesus to me. One who is willing to sacrifice himself to give himself up for all his enemies.

41:08

Is Paul more self -sacrificial than the Lord who inspires him to write these words? I don't think so.

41:14

In the very next chapter, Paul states plainly in verse 1, my prayer to God for Israel is for their salvation.

41:21

And then he ends the chapter quoting from Isaiah, from the very lips of God himself all day long.

41:27

I have stretched out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people. It looks like a father holding out his hands to a child.

41:35

That's the image that we have from Paul. Paul also quotes from Hosea in the context in Romans chapter 9.

41:42

And if you look at Hosea in that context, Hosea says it even more plainly. He says, even as the

41:48

Lord loves the sons of Israel, though they turn to other gods, love and turn.

41:55

And Jesus even weeps over Israel because they have become blinded. So their unbelief is clearly not because God doesn't love them or want his elect nation to be saved.

42:06

This is the nation, according to verses 4 and 5, that has been entrusted with the very words of God. The Messiah and his message were ordained to come through Israel.

42:16

They are chosen and elected for that noble cause, for that noble purpose. So why did

42:22

Israel reject their own Messiah? Why did they stand in opposition to his word? I believe the reason most of Israel has rejected their own

42:30

Messiah is because God has hardened them in their rebellion. He has blinded them from recognizing their own

42:38

Messiah. And he does so not because he doesn't love them or he doesn't desire for their salvation.

42:45

He is hardening them for the exact opposite reason. He is hardening them in love.

42:51

And I want to prove that point tonight. Paul explains in chapter 11 that he has sent Israel a spirit of stupor.

42:57

He has given them over to their calloused, self -righteous hearts. And he has pushed them out almost like a parent would push out a rebellious teenager.

43:09

He has pushed Israel out. He has cut them off. This is a doctrine that is called judicial hardening, and it is a woefully misunderstood doctrine in Western Christianity today.

43:19

And if there was one doctrine that led me to recant Calvinism, this is it. So I want to unpack it. You see this lump of clay, which is actually

43:26

Plato I stole from my seven -year -old. It's going to represent the lump of clay we see in Romans 9.

43:35

According to the Calvinists, this lump of clay represents all of humanity, all of which is born hellbound due to the fall in Adam.

43:42

In essence, what Calvinists teach is that all people are born judicially hardened, unable to see, hear, understand, and turn to God.

43:49

Now, they're not as evil, Calvinists will say, as they could be, but they are definitely as unable, corpse -like dead, dead like Lazarus.

43:56

Not dead like the prodigal son, like Jesus says, but dead like Lazarus in the tomb dead. According to Calvinists, they are in this condition ultimately because God so decreed it.

44:05

As Calvin himself put it, some are predestined to eternal life, others to eternal damnation, doomed from the womb, banished from birth.

44:13

So even if God makes a genuine appeal to this lump of clay, come to me, I love you, come, be saved, repent, and believe, they cannot willingly respond.

44:22

They can't. So God, what He does is He selects a group from this lump, and He gives them a new heart.

44:27

He saves them irresistibly out of pure grace, nothing that they've earned or done to deserve this, and He saved them from this hopeless condition, which ultimately was decreed and ordained for them by God, by the way.

44:39

And why does God ordain it this way? For His own glory. He wants to glorify Himself, to show these elect ones how good they have it in comparison to the ones who are damned to eternity in hell.

44:49

And even if some of these are their parents, or their children, or their loved ones, these people can't question

44:55

God. Who are you to question me? I can do and make you whatever I want. If I want to damn them to hell before they're even born, that's my decision.

45:02

I can do what I want. You don't question me. You worship me because, look, at least you're not one of them. You need to worship me.

45:08

You see, as much as I love my Calvinistic brethren, I believe this is a complete misreading of Paul's intention in this passage.

45:16

So what do I believe? This lump of clay, in our perspective, represents hardened Israel at this time.

45:23

Not all of humanity. So let's back up and consider this question. What was

45:29

Jesus attempting to accomplish in the first three years of His public ministry?

45:34

Was He attempting to be a great evangelist and just have thousands to come to Him? Was He attempting to have a

45:41

Damascus Road experience for every single Israelite? He could have. He's the Son of God. He could have done it that way. But it seems He does just the opposite.

45:47

Jesus would heal someone and then He would say to them, see that you don't tell anyone about this. If you recall,

45:53

Jesus spoke in parables. Why? Why would you need to speak in parables? To prevent the Pharisees from understanding and believing.

46:00

He's cutting them off. He's blinding them. Jesus clearly did not want some people to turn and be forgiven. At least not yet.

46:07

This is part of God's active work in judicially hardening Israel. Calvinists believe everyone, not just Israel at this time, but every single individual is born judicially hardened and they remain hardened their entire life without ever hope of salvation.

46:22

Why? Because God salvificly hated them since before creation. And that's just the way He ordained it.

46:27

So don't question Him. But we believe Israel over the years, like clay, can grow hardened if it's left out.

46:37

They've become calloused by their own choosing, despite God's enduring holding out

46:43

His hands, despite His patience and His love for them. And only now at this time, this crucial time in human history, is

46:50

He judicially hardening them and giving them over to the rebellion to accomplish redemption through them.

46:56

Why would Jesus need to blind people if they are already born totally, completely blind?

47:02

Why send a spirit to a corpse? A spirit of stupor to a dead man? Seems redundant, doesn't it?

47:09

You see, men are born sinners. Yes, they are not born judicially hardened.

47:16

They are not born unable to respond to the loving call of their Father. At this time in history,

47:25

Israel has grown calloused against the revelation of God. Paul teaches us this very clearly in Acts chapter 28.

47:33

He says this. This is a didactic text, by the way, out of Acts. Paul witnessed to them from morning until evening explaining about the kingdom of God from the law of Moses and from the prophets.

47:44

He tried to persuade them about Jesus. Talk about a long invitation. Here's a long one. All day long. Some were convinced by what he said, but others, they wouldn't believe.

47:53

So what's Paul conclude? He must not love them. He must not have selected them. Now, what's he conclude? He says, for this people's heart has become calloused.

48:00

They hardly hear with their ears. They have closed their eyes. What does it say? Otherwise, they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears and understand.

48:09

And they would turn and I would heal them. Therefore, I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the

48:17

Gentiles and they will listen. Notice it says their hearts have become calloused, not that they were born calloused.

48:24

Babies are not born with calluses on their hands and they're certainly not born with calluses on their hearts. Calluses grow over time with tension, with rebellion.

48:34

And what might a person be able to do if they're not calloused? The text tells us plainly they might see, hear, understand and turn.

48:41

This is an explicit teaching of man's natural abilities prior to becoming calloused. So in direct contrast to the condition of the

48:49

Jews who have grown calloused, Paul says the message will go to the Gentiles and they will listen.

48:56

Now, why might they listen? Why might they hear? They're still sinful people, aren't they? Yes, they're having orgies.

49:02

They're horrible, sinful people. Yes, but they're not judicially hardened by God. This is what

49:07

Paul is talking about in Romans 9 through 11 with the cutting off of the Jews and the grafting in of the

49:13

Gentiles. This is the special revelation of God. First went to the Jews. And what happened? They grew calloused to it, generally speaking.

49:19

So God has cut them off and now it's being sent to the Gentiles who are being grafted in.

49:26

So God has given Israel over to the calloused hearts and he has blinded them in their rebellion so they cannot recognize their own

49:33

Messiah. So doesn't that prove God's word has failed as verse 6 says? No, but why not?

49:40

Because God's hardening, his shutting off of Israel is actually fulfilling his word.

49:45

It's not causing it to fail. God has a sovereign purpose in fulfilling his word through hardened

49:51

Israel. It is as Paul concludes at the end of 11 .32,

49:58

it says, for God has shut up all in disobedience. Why? So that he may show mercy to all.

50:04

This is God's plan to show mercy to all people. Now, how does he do that? Well, by hardening Israel, he's ensured the crucifixion and the engrafting of the

50:12

Gentiles. And notice that individually hardened Israelites might still be saved and grafted back in, according to Romans chapter 11, all of which goes to show what point

50:21

God's word hasn't failed. But it goes further than that. At this time in history,

50:27

God hasn't hardened every Israelite. He has reserved for himself a remnant, as Dr. White pointed out, a remnant to do what?

50:33

Just to be irresistibly saved? No, to fulfill his promise by bringing the word to the world.

50:39

Listen, not every descendant of Israel has chosen to do what God elected Israel to do, or as Paul put it, for they are not all

50:46

Israel who are descended from Israel. Not every individual Israelite is chosen to carry out the purpose for which

50:52

God elected the nation of Israel. Not every Israelite is chosen to be a prophet, a priest, a king, or in the lineage of Christ.

51:00

Not all of them are chosen to be apostles, to carry the word and have the authority. You see, not every Israelite is chosen to fulfill the promise that God originally made to Abraham.

51:09

And what was that promise? To bless all the families of the earth through his seed. You see, there's a false perception at this day and time of the

51:17

Israelites. What's that false perception? One, they assumed that they were born the authorities of God's word.

51:23

We speak God's word. And they also assume that they're born children of God. By being a child of Abraham, that makes me a child of God.

51:30

I'm guaranteed salvation. And Paul's response to that way of thinking is to say, no, no, not every

51:35

Israelite is chosen to be an authority to carry the word of God. Not everyone's elected for that purpose. In verse 7, nor are they all children because they are

51:43

Abraham's descendants. You see, Calvinists take these two verses to mean that only some of Abraham's descendants are born elected to be effectually saved.

51:52

No, Paul's saying no descendant is going to be effectually saved on the basis that they are descendant.

51:58

You are not irresistibly saved because of who your granddaddy is. You are saved based not on your nationality, but on grace through faith.

52:07

It's always been that way. See, it is all about faith versus works.

52:14

Those who are striving to earn righteousness versus those who trust in the promise of God and His imputed righteousness, which is exactly why

52:22

Paul goes on to give a history lesson using Ishmael in contrast with Isaac and Esau in contrast with Jacob.

52:30

Now, let's just stop for a second and talk about Ishmael and Esau. Is Paul literally meaning to say that God hated

52:36

Ishmael and Esau since before the creation of the world and they have no hope of salvation whatsoever? No, I think if you read the

52:42

Old Testament accounts, you'll see that Abraham's prayer to bless Ishmael and take care of Ishmael was granted in Genesis 17.

52:49

And regarding Esau, God specifically told Israel, look at the screen, it says Deuteronomy 23 7, do not despise an

52:55

Edomite for they are your brother. God's not a hypocrite. He's not going to tell them not to hate him if he hates him himself.

53:00

Remember what God's original promise was to Abraham. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse those who curse you.

53:07

That's a conditional promise. I will bless those who bless you and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.

53:14

So God promised to bless Abraham. Now, let me ask you, does that mean God is going to condemn seven of Abraham's son and most of his grandsons and not choose them to carry the seed?

53:25

Because that's not a blessing. You got to look at the promise. He says he will bless those who bless you.

53:33

Couldn't Ishmael and others, the other brothers who are not chosen to carry the lineage, couldn't they still believe and support that promise and thus be saved because they bless the lineage?

53:44

They bless the promise. Here's the point. And this is the part of the cross -examination I was trying to get to.

53:50

The distinction must be made between those chosen by God to bring his word and those chosen to be saved as a result of believing that word.

53:59

Do you see the distinction between those two things? So what does Paul mean in verse 13 when he quotes from Malachi, Jacob, I loved and Esau, I hated.

54:08

As Dr. White has pointed out, this is 1500 years between verses 12 and verse 13.

54:14

And it's after Jacob and Esau are of course long dead. And it's in response to the Edomites after they have attacked

54:20

Israel. So in response to their cursing of Israel, Edom's cursing of Israel, the promise says

54:25

I will curse those who curse you. So what's Paul's point? Being the seed of Isaac does not ensure your salvation, especially if you stand in opposition to the very word of God, as did your own brothers, the

54:36

Edomites. Verse 14 asks the question, is God just to condemn a direct descendant of Isaac to hell?

54:43

Ask the Edomites. They stood in opposition to God fulfilling of his promise.

54:49

And look what happened to them. Paul is saying, if you curse those direct descendants of Isaac for opposing

54:55

God's word, why would it be unjust for him to condemn you for opposing God's word?

55:01

Paul is reminding his readers that direct descendants standing in opposition to God's word, it's nothing new.

55:06

It's been happening for years. There's no reason to think God's word is failed because descendants are opposing him.

55:13

Paul goes on to quote from God's exchange with Moses in Exodus 32 and 33, I'll have mercy on whom

55:19

I have mercy. This is where Israel has obviously just built the golden calf. They deserve to be wiped out immediately for their rebellion against God.

55:27

But in response to Moses's intercession, God relents and he shows them mercy. So why would

55:32

Paul refer to this story, which they would have been very familiar with? Paul is saying by way of a history lesson, if God chooses to show mercy to some unfaithful

55:41

Israelites and harden other unfaithful Israelites in order to fulfill his promise to bring the word to the world, then who are you to question him?

55:49

Verse 16. So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

55:57

What is it referring to in verse 16? Same thing he introduced in verse 6. That's why verse 6,

56:03

I agree with Dr. White, is key. He's referring to God's word not failing because God's word doesn't depend upon the man who wills and the man who runs.

56:12

God's promised to bless all the families of the earth by his word. That cannot fail. It's not dependent upon the faithfulness of the

56:19

Israelites. He will show mercy to the unfaithful Israel by patiently enduring them in the rebellion in order to fulfill his promise like he did in the golden calf incident.

56:29

And he will harden them in the rebellion in order to fulfill that same promise like he's doing now in the first century.

56:36

Paul uses the example of Pharaoh in verse 17 and 18 to make his point. Just as God hardened

56:42

Pharaoh in his rebellion to accomplish the first Passover, catch this, so too he hardens

56:47

Israel in their rebellion in order to accomplish the real Passover. God is accomplishing a redemptive purpose through hardening

56:56

Israel. Now, what would one of these calloused Jews say in response to this?

57:02

If you were one of those Jews that was being cut off and calloused, well, Paul tells us exactly what a

57:08

Jew would say to that. Romans 3 .5, he brings the diatribe up earlier in the book of Romans. But if our righteousness brings out

57:15

God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? That's an

57:21

Israelite talking. Does that sound familiar? It sounds exactly like verse 19. The Paul's objector is not an

57:28

Arminian. Paul's objector represents an Israelite who has grown calloused and is being judicially hardened in that condition.

57:37

It does not represent someone born, decreed by God to be totally unable to willingly respond to God's own appeals to be reconciled.

57:46

There is absolutely nothing in Scripture which teaches that man is born unable to respond to God's gracious truth.

57:55

That is why he holds us responsible, able to respond. We are able to respond to the truth of God that is revealed.

58:04

That's why he holds us responsible to that Word. Romans 1 clearly teaches that no man has any excuse.

58:11

Yet if Calvinism is true, then unbelievers have the best excuse known to man. God made me like this.

58:17

I couldn't have done otherwise. I hated God. Why? He first hated me. I rejected

58:22

God. Why? He first rejected me. God made me like this and I was not able to do anything about it.

58:28

I was not able to have faith. Why? He didn't grant me the faith to have. We give mankind an excuse and unbelievers an excuse by adopting the systematic.

58:37

I believe we need to be able to say the simplicity of the Gospel. Repent and live as Ezekiel 18 says.

58:44

Come to me all who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me for I am gentle and humble in heart and you will find rest for your souls for my yoke is easy and my burden is light.

58:58

Thank you. All right at this time

59:10

Dr. White you have 12 minutes to go ahead and cross examine. Thank you. Professor Flowers, you indicated you used the phrase the noble cause a number of times.

59:24

In fact in your podcast on Romans 9 you used it 24 times in just the first podcast.

59:33

Could you show us the noble cause in Romans 9? Yes. If you look at the two lumps of clay he makes some for noble purposes and some for common.

59:47

It's a noble purpose that he's made Israel for. And what is the noble cause?

59:53

To bring the word to the world, bring the Messiah and his message, to bring redemption. Okay and you said that the clay represents temporarily hardened

01:00:04

Israel? Yes, I believe he's not representing all of mankind whenever he's talking about the the lump of clay.

01:00:15

I think he is talking about specifically Israel at that time because that's what the very original question is.

01:00:22

That's what we're talking about from the very beginning. He starts off by introducing the question which is, you know,

01:00:29

I would cut myself off. I would be accursed for these people. He's loving them and willing to be accursed for them because they are the people who have been entrusted with the promise.

01:00:38

They've been entrusted with the prophets. They've been entrusted with the very words of God. And if the very people who are entrusted with the very words of God aren't believing it, they're standing in opposition to it, it would seem it's failed.

01:00:48

And so that's the question. And so Israel seems as if they failed because they're opposing

01:00:54

God's word. And what I think Paul is saying is no, it's a part of God's plan to harden

01:00:59

Israel at this time so as to accomplish redemption through them. So the lump of clay he's referring to is hardened

01:01:05

Israel, that they have been calloused in their hardness. Now, I'll just point out, I think

01:01:11

John Stott as well as Leon Morris, both Calvinistic commentators, both agree that God never hardens anyone who hasn't hardened themselves first.

01:01:20

And that's why I referred to Acts 28 because they have grown judicially hardened over time. I mean, they've grown hardened, calloused themselves over time and God is giving them over or blinding them in their condition, sending them a spirit of stupor, as the text says, so as to prevent them from recognizing their

01:01:35

Messiah. Why? Because if they recognize their Messiah, they're not going to crucify him.

01:01:41

If they had the Peter experience in Acts chapter two, when two thousand of them come forward and get saved, they're not going to crucify him.

01:01:48

And so I think that's real important to understand that we have to understand that what Jesus was accomplishing by hardening and cutting off Israel was to make sure the crucifixion came to pass and the engrafting of the

01:01:58

Gentiles, because Jews were so biased in that day, they were not going to allow for, go ahead, I'm sorry, you're obviously not happy with me continuing.

01:02:05

Well, I'd like to get to a few questions. Well, yeah,

01:02:11

I'll be honest with you. Go ahead. I think we need to get more than one question and get back to Romans nine. So if the clay is temporarily hardened

01:02:21

Israel, then how does it then conclude in verses 22 through 24 by saying that part of that clay, which is formed for honorable use, is those who are called of the

01:02:37

Jews and the Gentiles? How do you get the

01:02:43

Gentiles? The Gentiles are just being introduced in verse 24. And so he's saying, so also not only us who are being called, but the very purpose that he's doing all of this is to bring redemption to the entire world.

01:02:54

So he's including now from verse 24 down, he's showing that this is the purpose is to bring redemption to all nations.

01:03:02

It's almost like I like I like to use the comparison of Jonah because Jonah is called to go to Nineveh and Jonah, in a sense, could represent

01:03:09

Israel. And so if Jonah represents Israel and Jonah doesn't want to go, he is he's running from God, kind of like Israel.

01:03:17

They're not they're not obeying. They're not cooperating. And what he's saying is that doesn't matter.

01:03:23

God can accomplish through an unfaithful person, even Jonah, to bring the message to the Ninevites, which represent the

01:03:29

Gentiles. And so that's what's happening here. He's he's using unfaithful people to accomplish his promise to take them to all to take the word to all nations.

01:03:39

So what he's saying is God's word hasn't failed because he can even use unfaithful Israelites, this hardened lump of clay.

01:03:44

He can recraft and mold some of them for common use to crucify him, for example. He can recraft some of them to be apostles if that's what he so chooses.

01:03:51

But he is going to bring his word because he always fulfills his promise. So the vessels of mercy, mercy here only has to do.

01:03:59

Mercy here is not satirological. It is functional as to who gets to be used to be an instrument of bringing the message of Christ.

01:04:08

Well, like I said, I think it's both because how could it be both? Well, I can explain that.

01:04:14

I think that remember, there's there's two assumptions of the Israelite in that day. One, we've been entrusted with the words of God.

01:04:22

We're the authorities. And then two, we're automatically children of God if we're children of Abraham. And so Paul is saying, no, neither one of those is true because, one, not all of you have been chosen to carry the word.

01:04:34

Not all of you have been given the authority to carry God's word. And two, just because you are a child of Abraham doesn't make you a child of God.

01:04:42

You're not saved because of your nationality. You're saved by grace through faith. And so he's undercutting both of those viewpoints by saying, by going through this and showing there's other descendants.

01:04:51

Edom is another descendant. He's a direct descendant of Isaac himself, and he's not saved. And so he proves his point by pointing out

01:04:57

Edomites. And so it is very soteriological. I think soteriology is all throughout

01:05:03

Romans 9, Romans 8 to 10 and 11 as well. And he's trying to prove why his word has not failed.

01:05:10

It goes throughout. That's why I agree with you. Verse six is absolutely key to understanding the rest of this text. You said in your presentation that, this is your words, that God has elected or that He has chosen that people be saved by believing that word.

01:05:35

Do you believe that God chooses who will believe, or is God's choice that it's just that salvation will be by faith?

01:05:43

The second. So God doesn't choose who will believe.

01:05:49

The object of His choosing is the method, not the individual. No, the individual is still chosen because the individual who believes, just like the prodigal, when the prodigal son comes home, the father chooses to show him mercy.

01:06:05

The father doesn't owe him that. That's a monergistic work of the father. The father could cast him out or punish him or stone him even in that day for what he did.

01:06:12

It's a monergistic work of the father to decide to take that son back in. So it's a very personal relationship between those two people.

01:06:19

When he's coming home, he chooses to show him mercy. So that's one of the reasons I think our view is a much more personal view of election than your view, because your view has

01:06:28

God choosing people without any regard to their personhood or their knowledge of anything good or bad to do. Whereas my view,

01:06:35

He knows exactly what they've done. They're coming out of their pigsty. He knows exactly who they are, and He's choosing to show them mercy in the midst of their shame and filth.

01:06:43

But He's choosing to do so because they have humbled themselves. Well, yeah,

01:06:51

I would say yes. Yeah, the Bible does say, humble yourself and you will be exalted. So they have the ability to do that.

01:06:56

I think there's a lot of passages in scripture which teach very clearly that humility or humbling yourself is a part of our responsibility as children of God.

01:07:06

For example, as children of God. Well, well, oh, OK, well, as people,

01:07:12

I misspoke there. James 4 .10, humble yourself before the Lord and He will lift you up.

01:07:17

Second Kings 22 .19 is a great passage because it says, because your heart was responsive and because you humbled yourself before the

01:07:25

Lord, when you heard what I have spoken against this place and its people, that they would become cursed and laid waste.

01:07:32

And because you tore your robes and wept in my presence, I have also heard you, declares the Lord. OK, Professor Flowers, do you believe that the presentation that we just listened to here models for us the kind of interpretation and exegesis that we utilize to demonstrate the doctrine of the

01:07:57

Trinity, the deity of Christ, the resurrection, justification by grace through faith, the necessity of the atonement?

01:08:06

Do you believe that this kind of exegesis which you just gave us is the same kind of exegesis that you would use to demonstrate those truths from Scripture?

01:08:21

I would think that the book that I'm writing, the blog that I've written, the podcast,

01:08:27

I go into a lot more deeper exegesis. This is a 20 minute presentation for the beginning of the day. But what

01:08:35

I heard was a presentation on a group of topics that then eventually got to some of the verses in chapter 9.

01:08:46

But it was not an exegesis of chapter 9. You did not walk through it. You created a system and then went in and said, so that's why this says this and that says that.

01:08:57

What I'm asking is, do you believe that that's the same methodology that we are forced to use to demonstrate to the

01:09:06

Muslim the deity of Christ, to demonstrate to the Muslim the necessity of the cross or make it any other situation we're dealing with someone outside the faith.

01:09:19

Do you really believe that it parallels the method of exegesis that we utilize to demonstrate those other things?

01:09:28

No. I think that it was a debate presentation and I think there's a time and a place for all things.

01:09:34

I think there's a time and a place for sitting down and writing a commentary which goes line by line through every single point without a lot of emotion.

01:09:42

These good people, one of them, brother drove from Arkansas. He had to be a Calvinist. No non -Calvinist would drive that far for this.

01:09:49

These people have driven a long way and so I'm trying to give them an understanding in the shortest amount of time of the full view of what we hold to and this is the best way

01:09:59

I knew to do that. As a matter of fact, I released a podcast today that goes line by line through Romans chapter 9 verse by verse in an exegetical format which lasted an hour and 45 minutes because it takes that kind of time to do an exegesis of the passage.

01:10:14

In the last minute here, according to the bio that was read, you were an elder in a

01:10:20

Reformed Baptist church? No, I was a minister. A minister, not an elder.

01:10:25

Well, it's not elder -led. It was a Congregational -led church. You could have been a Reformed Baptist then, but my question is this.

01:10:31

It was part of the Founders Conference of the Baptist Convention. Oh, okay. It wasn't a 1689 church. Yes, sir.

01:10:37

Here's the question. You say that we believe all are judicially hardened. Could you show me anywhere where I or any other

01:10:45

Reformed Baptist or anyone else has not made the necessary distinction between being dead in sin and judicially hardened?

01:10:53

Well, I'm basing it upon your interpretation of what is called total inability or total depravity where you speak of man's corpse -like inability to respond to God in his appeals to be reconciled.

01:11:06

Second Corinthians chapter 5, for example, very clearly has Christ in us making his appeal be reconciled to God, and the

01:11:14

Calvinist believes that mankind is born in a condition that they cannot willingly respond to that appeal, and thus that sounds a lot to me like judicial hardening.

01:11:24

Judicial hardening is the inability to see, hear, understand, and turn so as to be forgiven, and that sounds just like total inability.

01:11:31

So my contention is that Calvinists do not make a distinction between total inability and judicial hardening, at least one that's worth a distinction, worth a difference.

01:11:40

All right. Thank you, men. At this time, I'm going to go ahead and call a time out. We're going to have a short break, and it will give you a chance to stretch your legs, get the blood flowing and moving, and the restroom's out to the side, also out down the hall down this side.

01:11:53

If you would be so kind, if you would like to write your questions, there's going to be note cards right here in the middle.

01:11:59

Go get your note cards, write it down. I'm going to ask that you make sure you give the speakers just a minute to break and not just hound them with your questions right now, okay?

01:12:07

Thank you. So here's what we're going to do now. We're going to begin with rebuttals, and we're going to go 12 minutes with a rebuttal, then 10 -minute cross -exam, and at this point, here's what

01:12:16

I'm going to ask. I'm going to ask that, men, if we could keep our responses short so that way we can get more questions in and do your best if you can do that and help us out.

01:12:24

So this time, Professor Flowers, would you go ahead with your 12 -minute rebuttal. As reflected in Dr.

01:12:38

White's opening, when most people hear today, especially, the word election, it seems like they automatically think it means

01:12:45

God's choice to irresistibly save some individuals. I give it to the Calvinists today.

01:12:51

I think they've done a really good job convincing this generation that's what biblical election is all about.

01:12:56

An individual chosen before creation for effectual salvation. Yet, this individualized interpretation of election, according to even well -respected

01:13:05

Calvinistic historians like Lorraine Botner, teach that this wasn't clearly taught until Augustine, who doesn't even teach this view of election until the 5th century.

01:13:17

In other words, the way many people understand election today is not the way it was understood throughout

01:13:23

Old Testament times, the New Testament times, or any time until a former

01:13:28

Gnostic Manichean philosopher from Africa, who did not know Greek, came along 300 years after the time of Christ to systematize it for us.

01:13:38

The earliest church fathers, men like Irenaeus or Ignatius, who Ignatius was actually taught by the

01:13:44

Apostle John himself, and we have some of their writings, they never taught an individualistic

01:13:50

Calvinistic view of election. In fact, they repudiated this kind of interpretation in much of their writings.

01:13:57

For instance, I want us to look at one early church father, the Clement of Rome. We're talking about a letter written to Rome, and he was likely in Rome, and it would have been very familiar with this letter.

01:14:07

Clement is actually referenced in Philippians chapter 4, verse 3. We're told that the Apostle Peter himself likely commissioned

01:14:14

Clement, and he followed Peter probably sometime as a bishop there in Rome. So it would be good to know what a first century person of the first church and early church father thought on this subject.

01:14:24

Well, we don't have to guess. We have a lot of his writings. I picked a short quote just for time's sake. He wrote this. It is therefore in the power of everyone, since man has been made possessed of free will, whether he shall hear us to life or hear the demons to destruction.

01:14:40

You see, very few students, in my experience, are even aware of how the church understood the nature of man or the doctrine of election for the first 400 years of the church's existence.

01:14:50

In our modern culture, it tends to oversimplify things if you haven't noticed. Many of us talk about election as if it's only one choice that God's made.

01:15:01

The choice of one individual or a group of individuals before the foundation of the earth to be effectually saved.

01:15:08

But the truth is, God has made several choices in bringing about his redemptive plan.

01:15:15

I'd like to illustrate these three distinct choices of God by looking at the parable of the wedding banquet in Matthew 22.

01:15:21

This is the parable that Jesus concludes with the often quoted statement, many are called, but few are chosen. And most of you are very familiar with it.

01:15:28

This is where the king, whose son is getting married, he gathers his servants together from his own kingdom to pass out the invitations to the wedding.

01:15:36

Now this is choice number one. God picks who? He picks individuals from his own nation to do what?

01:15:42

To carry his message. Now remember, our side, we don't believe God determines everything, but we do believe

01:15:48

God determines some things. And God has clearly determined for his word to be delivered through Israel.

01:15:56

His promises do not fail. This choice is what the first century church most likely thought about when they heard the word election.

01:16:04

That's why they nicknamed the Jewish people the elect of God. Why? Because they were entrusted with the very oracles of God, as Romans chapter three teaches us.

01:16:11

That is choice number one. Now look at choice number two. The king chooses to send his invitations to who?

01:16:17

First, he sends them to his own people. And we know how that turns out. What happens? They torture and kill many of their servants, the prophets, the apostles.

01:16:25

They're flogging them, just like what's happening to Paul in this day, which might provoke someone to ask what question?

01:16:30

Has God's word failed? If his own people are rejecting the word, it must have failed. That's the question in verse six.

01:16:38

But God's plan doesn't stop there. His choices don't stop there. It's not election singular.

01:16:45

The king chooses to send the message to those outside his kingdom, to the highways, to the byways, to the good and bad alike, the

01:16:52

Scripture says to whosoever will come, because the king is free to show mercy to whoever he wants to show mercy.

01:16:59

Many are called whosoever will may come. God chooses to invite first the Jew and then the

01:17:06

Gentile. They can't come to the banquet unless they've been invited. You can't come to a party unless you have an invitation.

01:17:11

So what does he do? He sends the invitation in order to enable all to come. That's choice number one.

01:17:18

And that's choice number two, both of which, yes, have unconditional aspects to him. He doesn't choose one servant over the other servant to be the messenger because one's more moral than the other one, just like the two brothers.

01:17:27

He's not choosing one brother over the other because one's more moral than the other. There's an unconditional aspect to this.

01:17:32

But we haven't even got to the choice about salvation, which is choice number three in God's plan of redemption.

01:17:38

Look what he says. Only those clothed in the right wedding garments were chosen by the king to enter into the wedding banquet to be able to stay for the banquet.

01:17:47

They were cast out if they didn't have on the right clothing. This choice is clearly conditional.

01:17:53

One must be clothed in the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith, not in their own righteousness, not in their own works, not in their own nationalities, as the

01:18:03

Jews of that day assumed was theirs. You see, here is God's choice of the individuals who will be allowed entrance into his kingdom.

01:18:11

Many are invited, but few are chosen to enter in and they are chosen based upon whether they are clothed in the righteousness of Christ through what through faith.

01:18:22

See, it's my contention that Calvinist, though well intending, and I do mean that they have confounded these three very distinct divine choices by treating them as if they are all one in the same choice.

01:18:33

And that's why you often hear a Calvinist, for example, compare our individual salvation to the calling of Paul, or they will quote passages like John 15, 16.

01:18:41

You did not choose me, but I chose you. And they will use that obviously is being spoken to the messengers being chosen from Israel.

01:18:49

And they will use that as a proof text for God. This is how God saves and chooses those who are going to hear that message.

01:18:55

You see, Calvinists point to God's choice of his servants to bring the word as proof for their doctrine about God's choice of those who believe that word.

01:19:05

So what does this have to do with Romans nine? Everything. Why? Because Romans nine covers all three of these divine choices, and Calvinists are just seeing one choice while they're reading it.

01:19:18

That's why they have they have the Calvinistic lenses on and they can only see divine election as defined by the choice of an individual for salvation before the world began.

01:19:25

They're not seeing all the choices involved here in verse four and five. It's about God's choice of Israel to bring the word to the world.

01:19:32

That's what they've been entrusted. They've been entrusted with the very words of God. Verse six is about God's choice to send his message first to the

01:19:38

Israelites who reject it in their hardened condition, as we've just talked about, thus causing one to wonder, has

01:19:44

God's word failed? The very people entrusted with the word of God are rejecting it. And then much of the rest of this chapter and the following two chapters really are about God's choice to save whoever pursues righteousness as if it were by faith rather than works, regardless of what nation they're from.

01:20:00

Some descendants of Abraham are cursed. They're hated for standing in opposition to the word of God, i .e.

01:20:07

Edomites. Other descendants of Abraham are used even in their rebellion.

01:20:13

And despite their rebellion, he shows them mercy even when they don't deserve to be shown mercy, just like the

01:20:18

Israelites after the golden calf event, which is also referenced. And still others are persuaded by external means, blinding lights, big fish, whatever

01:20:28

God has to do to persuade his messengers. Why? Because his promise does not fail. He will accomplish his purpose.

01:20:35

And they are all, every single one I've mentioned, are descendants of who? Abraham. And God is fully just to do whatever he wishes to fulfill his promise and bring his word through this hardened lump of clay that's hellbound already because they're self -righteous and they think they're the authority.

01:20:52

They think they know it all. And he's taking this hardened lump of clay and recrafting it and remaking it and remolding it.

01:20:58

Why? For redemption. For glory. Some people think my view of judicial hardening, from my side, they even think my view is too

01:21:06

Calvinistic. I got two or three tweets from my last blog on this. And they think that I go too far, even in my view of judicial hardening.

01:21:14

But look at it this way. When a patrol officer sets up a speed trap and he hides his presence from speeders so that they will continue to speed, is he causing them to speed?

01:21:23

Of course not. His purpose is good. He wants to make the road safe by slowing speeders down, and he hides himself.

01:21:32

And this is the best way to catch speeders in order to teach them this lesson. He doesn't have two contradictory wills.

01:21:38

One that wants people to speed, and then another one that doesn't want them to speed. He only has one pure righteous will, if he's a good police officer, obviously.

01:21:45

And that is to make the road safe by slowing speeders down. And this is the plan that he has chosen that is best to accomplish that one singular redemptive purpose.

01:21:56

So also, God's the same way. He has one single will. It's a redemptive plan, and it never contradicts what he expresses out loud.

01:22:04

It's not his prescriptive will over here saying one thing, and then over here doing something else. We can't trust a

01:22:10

God who says one thing, and then secretly is doing something else. You see, some Calvinists teach that God externally expresses one desire, like,

01:22:18

I love you. I want you to come and to repent. But secretly, he's preventing them. He's blinding them.

01:22:24

He's hardening them from birth, and they can't repent. And he's judicially blinding them until they're dead.

01:22:30

They never have a hope. But that's not what's happening in this context. And that's why the objector is not the

01:22:36

Arminian. Calvinists will say, we don't know God's secret will and why he wants to save some and not others.

01:22:43

I disagree. Scripture tells us plainly who God wants to save. Why doesn't

01:22:48

God want to save some? Quote, because they did not pursue righteousness by faith, but though as if it were by works.

01:22:57

Tells us why. Calvinists tell us we can't know why God opposes some people and not others. But Peter says plainly,

01:23:03

God opposes the proud, but shows favor to the humble. Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand that he may lift you up in due time.

01:23:14

There is no secret about those who God desires to save, and there is no debate over whether or not he alone does the saving.

01:23:23

But the Calvinists will object by saying, oh, so you think you've earned your salvation by being more humble than someone else.

01:23:30

As I just referenced, we don't believe God gives grace because humility earns it. He gives grace because he's gracious.

01:23:38

Asking for forgiveness doesn't earn being forgiven. Look at it this way.

01:23:44

Do you think the prodigal son earned the reception he got from his father because he decided to return home in his humiliation?

01:23:50

No, he deserved punishment upon his return, not reward. He got grace. And that was the father's choice.

01:23:57

The father alone made that choice. Romans 9 is Paul's teaching on salvation pursued by faith versus salvation pursued by works, both of which the

01:24:08

Calvinist assumes wrongly that are impossible for men to attain. Why do they assume this?

01:24:14

Because again, they believe men are born judicially hardened, dead, enslaved, enemies. And I agree that mankind is born in a sense dead, but dead like the prodigal son, not dead like Lazarus.

01:24:25

There's never any link in Scripture to Lazarus in soteriology. That's something Calvinists read into that text.

01:24:31

Are we enslaved? Are we sinners enslaved? Yes. But is God's provision of the gospel sufficient?

01:24:39

Truth will set you free. One could choose to trade that truth in for lies, but that's not

01:24:44

God's fault. It's not because God has not given them enough. Excuse me, Professor. I'm sorry. It is time.

01:24:51

Thank you. All right. At this time, I'm going to go ahead and set the time for Dr.

01:24:58

White to cross examine for 10 minutes. One, two, three.

01:25:07

All right, there we go. Professor Flowers, I need to go back to where we finished in the last examination.

01:25:20

What if your understanding of what, quote unquote, Calvinists believe about judicial hardening is false?

01:25:30

Would that not completely undercut everything you've presented this evening? If it's not a distinction without a difference, no.

01:25:37

And that's what my contention is, is that Calvinists try to make a distinction between what they think is judicial hardening.

01:25:43

For example, they say things like, well, they're not as evil as they could be. They're not as bad as they could be. You know,

01:25:48

God restrains them. And I've never understood that concept, because if God determines all things that come to pass, what's he restraining except his own determinations?

01:25:58

And so what I think is happening is that Calvinists is making an assertion that, yes, there's a difference between judicial hardening and total inability, but there's a distinction without a difference, because I have not heard any

01:26:09

Calvinist say that mankind is born able to see, hear, understand, and turn, and so as to be healed.

01:26:15

Instead, they say the condition of a man is unable to be able to see, hear, understand, unless they're given a new heart and new eyes.

01:26:21

So you now do recognize that we do specifically recognize the difference between being born dead in sin and the specific act of God of judicial hardening, which obviously has something to do with God as judge bringing a particular hardening for a particular purpose.

01:26:39

We do make, you just simply don't understand it. Right, and I look forward during your presentation to make it clear to the audience what that distinction is between someone who is judicially hardened by God, their ability to respond to God's revelation, as opposed to the natural -born man, because I have yet to find any distinction worth a difference from any

01:26:58

Calvinistic scholars with regard to judicial hardening. Professor Flowers, you said that Clement, you quoted from Clement of Rome, yes?

01:27:07

Yes, sir. And you said we have a lot of his writings. Did you list them? List them all?

01:27:17

Isn't the fact that we have one epistle of Clement to the

01:27:22

Corinthians, and the rest are pseudo -Clementians? Thus, although we are born neither good nor bad, we become one or the other, and having formed habits, we are with difficulty drawn from them.

01:27:33

Yeah, that's the quote, but you said we have lots of his writings. I've got five more. Do you want me to read them?

01:27:38

No. Okay. Where are they from, sir? Clement. Okay, so we have one epistle.

01:27:45

Did he exegete Romans 9, that epistle? No. Not that I know of. We've got quotes that support his view of free will.

01:27:53

We've got quotes that denounce the concept of individualistic Calvinistic type of interpretations.

01:27:58

As you interpret it? Among Irenaeus and others. As you interpret it? Well, obviously, yes. Okay, all right. You said that Calvinists...

01:28:07

But Dr. White, not only as I interpret it, as Lorraine Botner interprets it, Stan Storms interprets it, I could list other

01:28:13

Calvinists who admit that Augustine is the first one to clearly teach the Calvinistic doctrine. So you can show me where they've interpreted

01:28:19

Clement's epistle to the Romans, to the Corinthians in that? No, what I'm saying is that I have quotes from other

01:28:24

Calvinists who admit that Augustine is the first one to clearly... Which would be different than the application you're making.

01:28:29

They wouldn't agree with the application you're making, right? No, no. They would probably try to say that, well,

01:28:36

Sam Storms, for example, argues in Progressive Revelation that we have learned more since that time and that we're continually learning.

01:28:43

At least the podcast, the Unplugged podcast, those guys talking, that's what they... Have you read all of Clement's?

01:28:49

I'm sorry? Have you read all of Clement's? Um, no, I've not. Okay. Would you be surprised to discover he speaks often of the elect?

01:28:57

Well, so does the Bible. That doesn't mean, obviously... He must have understood it in your way. Well, how do you interpret then the passage that I just wrote, the one that says everyone has free will?

01:29:07

How do you interpret that? You can ask me that question when it's your turn to ask questions. You said that Calvinists confused the call of Paul with the call to salvation.

01:29:19

As a former Calvinist, could you provide some examples of this from R .C.

01:29:26

Sproul, myself, since I'm the one you're debating this evening. Can you show anyone where I have ever made that confusion?

01:29:34

I don't have any quotes available, but I can provide some quotes where I think pointing to Paul and the

01:29:39

Massachusetts experience and the effectual nature of his calling is used quite often by Calvinists, and I would be glad to provide those on my podcast at a later time or on my blog if you'd like me to put those.

01:29:48

Okay, that's not what I was asking. Very clearly, I have distinguished between Paul's call to be an apostle and the fact that he was set apart from his mother's womb and recognized that the one demands the other, but we recognize the difference.

01:30:06

You say we're conflating them. Is that your argument? Yes, I believe you. You think that God is, in some ways, saving men in the same way that he saves and calls out his apostles because he has a remnant to accomplish his purpose through Israel, and his promise will not fail.

01:30:26

So, for example, in Jonah's situation, God could have just used irresistible means to make him want to go, but he uses a big fish.

01:30:34

He could have just irresistibly made Paul want to believe and do what he wanted him to do, but he uses a blinding light, and I think we all agree he uses means, but in my perspective,

01:30:44

I think that means actually accomplish what the scriptures say that they accomplish. In other words, means are unto faith.

01:30:50

But he could have failed. Paul could have said no, yes? Able but not willing. Calvin sees that term all the time.

01:30:57

He's able, but he wasn't willing. But he could have. He was able but not willing. Okay, so if he had, then

01:31:05

God would have found someone else other than Paul. Well, I'm not denying God's foreknowledge.

01:31:10

I'm not denying God's abilities to know what his plans are. So, if God knew, then he couldn't have, right?

01:31:17

I'm sorry? If God knew, then he couldn't have. Or God's foreknowledge could have been invalidated, right?

01:31:23

Well, God foreknows the free choice. He doesn't foreknow his determination, and that's the distinction philosophically that I really don't want to go down that road.

01:31:30

I can understand that. I'll let William Lane Craig take that one. He won't do it either.

01:31:39

You said that you can't trust a

01:31:44

God who has two wills. God said, thou shalt not murder, right? Correct. Is that the will of God?

01:31:51

Yes. In Acts 4, 27 and 28, was the early church wrong to pray and to confess that what

01:32:01

Herod and Pontius Pilate and the Jews and the Romans did, God's hand and purpose predestined to occur, which was specifically the murder of the only innocent man who has ever lived?

01:32:15

Yeah, I wrote a blog article on this. The three main texts that Calvinists often refer to, Genesis chapter 50, the selling of the brothers, obviously

01:32:24

Israel being hardened as Pharaoh was a big one, and then again, the crucifixion of Christ.

01:32:31

And as I've reminded in my podcast in other places, we do believe God determines some things. God does step into human history, and very similar to what maybe even compatiblistic arguments are in how

01:32:43

God works these things out through judicial hardening, that he brings about his purpose. So he blinds the

01:32:48

Israelites in order to do what? To ensure the crucifixion. And so, yes, God does determine some things, but it's for redemptive purpose.

01:32:54

Like the cop hiding himself, it's for the redemptive plan. It's not to condemn them because they too could be saved.

01:33:01

It's not a condemning from birth to death. Was Herod condemned for his actions in the death of Christ?

01:33:08

I would assume so. Pontius Pilate? I would assume so, yes. Was it eternally God's intention for the cross to take place?

01:33:16

Well, I think the word intention gets misapplied because when we say intention, you talk about God having the intention of the evil happening, where I talk about God's redemptive intention in the evil happening.

01:33:29

And so there's a distinction, Michael Brown, and you go around about this too, where God is redeeming an evil for good, and he's taking their evil intention and turning it around.

01:33:41

He's redeeming that evil intention for a good thing. And in his meticulous providence, he's able to do that.

01:33:47

But in his sovereign abilities, he's able to do that. But that doesn't mean, from my perspective, that we deny human responsibility in the ability to respond and make real choices within time.

01:33:59

Let me try it again. Was it God's intention from eternity that the Son of God become incarnate and die upon Calvin's tree?

01:34:07

I don't think you answered that question. Well, I was defining the word intention. If you'd like to use, was it his will?

01:34:14

Was it the choice of the triune God? Use whatever term you wish. But did

01:34:20

God intend in eternity past for the second person of the Trinity to enter into flesh and die upon Calvary's tree?

01:34:27

And that's what I was attempting to answer in saying that proof that God uses determinative, if you want to call them that, determinative means to bring about the redemption of all mankind does not prove that God also uses deterministic means to bring about all the sins that need redeeming.

01:34:43

That's my argument, is that sometimes people look at Calvary and they say, well, God used determinative means to bring about Calvary, so he must have brought about all the sin that was being redeemed at Calvary.

01:34:53

And that to me is a gross overstatement of what the cross is. The cross is called by Calvinists the worst evil of all time, but the

01:35:00

Bible never calls it evil. The Bible calls it redemption. God is giving up his own life. He's stepping in.

01:35:05

He's self -sacrificial giving himself, much like Paul expresses at the beginning of this chapter, willing to sacrifice himself for the sake of his brethren.

01:35:14

That is time. At this time, it's going to be time for Dr. White to come up and give your 12 -minute rebuttal.

01:35:23

So you can go ahead and get started. I am, of course, in a quandary at this point.

01:35:34

The debate was to be on the exegesis of Romans chapter 9 and what soteriological system it presented.

01:35:44

It is difficult for me to rebut something that was not presented. What we had was a presentation on the subject of total inability and some other related subjects, and then a couple of texts in Romans 9 were then looked at in light of the conclusions that were drawn from other material.

01:36:05

And so you do not have two examples of exegesis of Romans 9 to look at.

01:36:13

And basically, Professor Flowers said, well, it's only 20 minutes. I know, we both had the same amount of time.

01:36:19

And unfortunately, if it comes to asking the question, what does Romans 9 say?

01:36:25

Who walked through the text? Who provided a verse -by -verse following of the argument from the preceding context in the end of Romans chapter 9?

01:36:36

I think it's rather obvious only one side did that. One side has not offered that this evening. So there's not much to rebut.

01:36:43

And in fact, my quandary is, on a debate level, to now allow the topic to be, in essence, hijacked from Romans 9 to the subject of total inability, would be inappropriate for me.

01:36:58

And besides that, I would have made a completely different presentation. But let me at least look at a few of the statements in regards to Romans 9.

01:37:06

And since almost all, I would say 98 percent of Professor Flowers' rebuttal had nothing to do with Romans 9.

01:37:15

It was on parables and all the rest of these things. I think at least that portion of the debate is rather settled, and we'll have to just move on to something that goes on from that point.

01:37:28

I have a serious problem with the phrase, the noble cause.

01:37:34

It is something that Professor Flowers has adopted, and he uses it very, very frequently, but he has not given us a solid foundation from the text of Scripture as to what this noble cause is.

01:37:45

Certainly there is a role that Israel was to play in bringing about the Messiah and in proclaiming

01:37:51

God's truth, but to establish a phrase and then use it as an overarching exegetical key,

01:38:00

I think should cause most of us to be a little bit concerned as to what's going on there.

01:38:06

Professor Flowers is simply wrong in not recognizing the difference between judicial hardening and being born as the fallen son and daughter of Adam.

01:38:15

We do make that distinction. He may not have ever understood, as a quote -unquote Calvinist, I'm sorry, I do not believe that Professor Flowers has ever understood the system that he is criticizing.

01:38:25

The number of errors in understanding are so many I could not get to all of them, and it would be difficult to understand exactly how he could say the things that he did if he's ever had a proper understanding as someone who is a convert from it.

01:38:40

Now, if you just want to say, well, I was enamored with it for a while or something like that, that's fine, but the problem here is that when we take the arguments to Romans chapter 9, you end up with an overthrow of the fundamental conclusion that is given to us.

01:38:54

What did we see in Romans chapter 9 in verse 23?

01:39:00

In order to make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he called.

01:39:11

We were told that the clay is just Israel. It's just temporarily hardened

01:39:16

Israel. I'm sorry, the vessels of mercy are all the elect of God, including you and I today.

01:39:23

To come to that conclusion undercuts everything that the apostle Paul has had to say, and the only reason you come to that conclusion is you bring other concepts to bear upon Romans 9 that Paul never brings up at all.

01:39:39

And so one of the questions I asked Professor Flowers was, do you really believe that the methodology that you just used in your opening statement is the methodology that we use to defend the deity of Christ?

01:39:51

And he didn't seem to understand the question I was asking. He said, well, I only had a certain amount of time. That's not what I was asking.

01:39:58

I see a fundamental difference in the exegetical methodology that I presented to you in Romans 9 and that Professor Flowers presented, but I could then walk through a number of other passages using the exact same methodology and demonstrate the deity of Christ, the doctrine of the trinity, the necessity of the atonement, the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

01:40:19

This is the methodology we use to demonstrate the rest of the truth of the Bible. That is not how we demonstrate.

01:40:28

Trust me, I could not take the presentation that Professor Flowers gave us into a mosque in South Africa and pretend to be defending the deity of Christ.

01:40:37

Now, why is that important? Because, my friends, what did I say from the beginning? The way that you will be able to determine this debate, and you are the judges, is not by whose tie is prettier.

01:40:56

It's not by who's better looking. Okay, that one was easy. It's not by who's taller.

01:41:01

You're Texans. What do you expect? It's by who handles the text consistently with everything else we do when we handle the word of God and teaching the rest of God's truth, and that's what the issue here is.

01:41:18

Now, there are so many things that have been said regarding Reformed theology.

01:41:24

Shots across the bow and all sorts of things that, obviously, I had not even made a reference to.

01:41:30

I had not argued for because I was exegeting Romans 9. Professor Flowers wants to talk about a specific type of teaching that he thinks is extremely important, and I understand that.

01:41:44

Some of the problems that I have, though, is the misunderstanding that Professor Flowers has of what we understand, and here's the—I guess

01:41:54

I'll just focus in upon this. I believe and I proclaim to Roman Catholics, to Mormons, to Jehovah's Witnesses, to Muslims, to atheists, whoever it is

01:42:06

I have the opportunity of presenting the gospel to, I believe that there is one true and almighty God, and I believe he's the creator of all things, and I believe that he works all things after the counsel of his will, that he has absolute perfect knowledge of all future events because he's the creator of all things, and I do not believe that he is under the control of anything outside of himself.

01:42:28

I do not believe that God has to back up and go, well, I wanted to do it this way, but now I'm going to have to do it some other way. He accomplishes his will perfectly.

01:42:36

I do believe that he has a sovereign decree that he is working out. That's what we're told in Ephesians 1, that's what we're told in Psalm 135 .6.

01:42:44

Even the pagan king Nebuchadnezzar knew that God was in control of all things that happened, not just some things that he chooses to be in control of, but even

01:42:53

Nebuchadnezzar knew no man can raise his hand to God and say, why have you done this, or stop

01:42:59

God from accomplishing his purpose? This is the universal testimony of the entirety of Scripture itself, and that is the background of our understanding of the statement that God has chosen to save a particular people in Christ Jesus, and that the triune

01:43:16

God is glorifying himself in that way. Now, that God knows all things, not because he looked down the corridors of time and learned things, not because he decided to create and then all of a sudden, oh, now

01:43:31

I see what's going to happen, now I see what's going to go on, not because of any of that. He created all things, he is sovereign over all things, and that is why all things resound the praise of his glorious grace.

01:43:47

That's the vitally important thing. I honestly believe that Professor Flowers and I fundamentally have a different view when it comes to God's relationship to creation, and obviously from my perspective,

01:44:00

I believe that you start with God, you start with his nature, and then you reason down from what

01:44:07

God is real about himself to his creatures. And I believe what Professor Flowers does is he starts with man and reasons up from there,

01:44:15

God could not do these things because we have these particular understandings, and that leads to fundamentally different perspectives.

01:44:25

Unfortunately, I have no earthly idea what the time is because you're flashing a camera at me. It is time.

01:44:31

All right, thank you very much. Thank you so much. Am I to understand that your iPad died? My iPad just died completely.

01:44:37

May I provide to you an iPad that you can use? Sure, that would be very helpful. All right,

01:44:55

I apologize to every one of you and to Dr. White. All right, thank you so much.

01:45:02

Okay, at this time, we're going to have a cross -examination by Professor Flowers, and you will have 10 minutes.

01:45:12

Dr. White, you critique a lot of my methods, but you didn't answer the arguments that I was really hoping that you would get to, and presumably since I covered so little of Romans 9, when actually

01:45:21

I think I went through almost all of the text, all the way up to verse 23 at least, it seems to me that you would have at least made the argument against the distinction between judicial hardening and total inability, because that seemed to be a really sticking point for us, and I was hoping that you would make a presentation to give us a clear distinction between the way

01:45:41

Calvinists view the nature of man's ability between their judicial hardened nature and a total disabled or total inability.

01:45:49

Well, if we want to move into that area of discussion, that's fine. I do. Okay, good.

01:45:56

The Bible teaches very plainly in Romans chapter 8, those who are according to flesh cannot do what is pleasing to God. I fundamentally believe that that is consistent with the biblical teaching from the

01:46:05

Psalter that we are born as sinners, we are born as enemies of God, we are dead in our trespasses and sins, we have hearts of stone.

01:46:13

So we're born hardened. We have hearts of stone. So we're born judicially hardened. Now, you know, if I did this, you would have complained, but let me just move on from that.

01:46:23

I'm just trying to find a distinction. There is a difference, sir, as you should have known as a Calvinist, between the judicial hardening upon a people, upon a nation, for example, to harden a king so that his nation can be destroyed.

01:46:40

Because certainly, man, Pharaoh could have really saved his life if he had just simply let the people go.

01:46:48

Got out of purpose, he hardens them. There is judicial hardening that is not the same thing as simply being a fallen son or daughter of Adam.

01:46:55

And when you say we have certain capacities, sir, as a Calvinist, you should have known, of course we do.

01:47:01

We have all sorts of capacities, but they are all determined by the fact that we are enemies of God and slaves to sin.

01:47:08

And Jesus Christ taught that unless the Son sets you free, you will never be free.

01:47:15

And so there needs to be a divine action to set us free as slave does not choose to become free.

01:47:23

Even he may humble himself as much as he wants, but unless the Son sets you free, you will remain in slavery.

01:47:31

And so we do recognize the difference between the two. And it's not a distinction without a difference unless you're simply saying, well, you're saying that everyone has an inability to do what is good before God.

01:47:45

Yes, that's exactly what we are saying, but that's not the same thing as judicial hardening. There are a lot of people who claim to be former

01:47:52

Arminians who still ask questions because, not because they might not know the answer to it, but because they are pushing on a point they know is weak.

01:47:58

And so that's the reason for cross -examination. In a previous debate, you were asked about why God hardened men's hearts and why

01:48:05

Jesus needed to use parables in order to prevent the Pharisees from coming to faith and being healed if total inability is true.

01:48:12

For example, Mark 4, the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke to them in parables, and he answered, to you it has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but to those on the outside, they get everything in parables so that while seeing, they may not perceive, but while hearing, they may not hear, otherwise they might turn and be forgiven.

01:48:27

Your answer was, in part, he was preventing a false conversion. But what in this text, specifically from this text, when it says they might turn and be forgiven, what in that text leads you to believe he's speaking of a false conversion instead of preventing an actual conversion?

01:48:42

And what debate was this? With Stephen Gray. Oh, I see. So that was just part of my response.

01:48:48

That wasn't the whole response. Well, the gist of it was that you were preventing a, you were saying that they were preventing a...

01:48:53

The gist that you heard was that. Obviously, yeah, yeah, again, obviously the assumption that I'm making is based upon the text of scripture

01:49:03

I just gave to you, which I've not heard any responses to thus far, and that is that we are dead in sin and that Romans chapter 8 says, those according to flesh cannot do what is pleasing to God, that faith and repentance is pleasing to God.

01:49:16

These are hypothetical situations that Jesus is presenting to us in regards to why it is that he is graciously giving the truth of the kingdom of God to his disciples, but not to those who are listening, who have all the background in the

01:49:31

Bible, they're familiar with the teachings of scripture, and yet it is not, and you actually, amazingly enough, agree with this, it is not

01:49:40

God's intention to have these large crowds truly coming to understand the truth, because I don't necessarily agree with you about why.

01:49:52

I think it has to do with the Messiah issue. It's the same reason why Jesus said to the people who confessed to him as Messiah, what does he say to them?

01:49:59

Don't tell anyone. Why? Because the result is they have a false understanding of what the Messiah is.

01:50:05

And so actually, the text says that they might turn and be forgiven, so that's not a false... Well, if someone turns, they will be forgiven.

01:50:12

It was not God's intention to do that with them. He's preventing that from happening. For them, he is, yeah. Right, and who's them?

01:50:18

Israel. Again, you're taking a general idea that this is all of Israel.

01:50:26

It could be specific individuals. I mean, there was a time when these individuals... Well, sure, he had his apostles and those he entrusted.

01:50:32

He was entrusting some to himself. He had his apostles, and he was drawing to himself, and he was teaching them, but he was keeping the other ones at a distance.

01:50:38

Only to them, they were entrusted with these teachings. He was blinding the rest purposefully for redemption. Well, when you say entrust of these teachings,

01:50:46

I'm not sure what you mean by that, because you tend to attach that to some kind of apostolic calling or something along those lines.

01:50:53

I don't think he's making a differentiation along those lines at this point. Well, as he begins the chapter, he wishes he could take the place of this fellow countryman, which to me sounds a lot like what

01:51:02

Jesus did when he went to the cross. But if Calvinism is true, five -point Calvinism anyway, then

01:51:07

Jesus didn't really want to take the place of the hardened Jews, and Paul did. Likewise, Paul quotes from Moses in Exodus narrative, where he too stands as one willing to sacrifice himself for the unfaithful

01:51:17

Israelites. How is it that Paul and Moses, who are mere men, express more mercy and self -sacrificial love towards people than Jesus, who's inspiring them to write these words?

01:51:26

It's a tremendous misunderstanding of not only Calvinism, but the text itself. And once again, you simply are in error to think that Paul is in any way expressing anything here other than, see, you're assuming what you should know we do not assume.

01:51:43

We do not know the identity of the elect, sir. We do not know the identity of the elect.

01:51:49

And so we cannot operate upon the foundation of knowing who the elect are and who the elect are not.

01:51:56

And therefore, we as followers of Jesus Christ have passion to speak his truth to all people, as did the apostle

01:52:05

Paul, to come to the idea, as you snuck it into your pre -prepared question there, but it was a false assertion, that Jesus didn't want to substitute himself for the hardened

01:52:19

Jews. So in other words, the false assumption you're inserting there is that for Jesus to be truly, truly loving, grace has to be given to everyone equally.

01:52:31

And that's what denies the fundamental teaching of scripture in regards to grace. So just because Jesus enters, just because Jesus goes to the cross in the place of the ones that his father has chosen, and that the spirit is going to regenerate, so there's perfect harmony in the work of the

01:52:50

Trinity, in the redemption of a particular people, is not a foundation for you to then sneak that in and say, oh, but grace has to be given to everyone.

01:52:59

For grace to be grace, it must be free. It cannot be demanded. And the assumption of your question was that grace can be demanded.

01:53:06

That's where the problem lies. In tonight's discussion and in previous discussions over Romans 9, with other opponents,

01:53:13

I've noticed this because I've been listening to all of those, I've noticed that you don't really attempt to even challenge or refute the

01:53:19

Old Testament text or the interpretations, but instead you regularly appeal to what you call the apostolic interpretation of Paul in Romans 9 alone.

01:53:27

And by that, you seem to suggest that it doesn't matter what the Old Testament context or meaning was, that the only thing that really matters is how the apostle interprets it in his day.

01:53:35

So my question is twofold. One, how is it that not begging the question to assume without strong evidence that the apostle is actually interpreting the

01:53:43

Old Testament text differently than the original context demands? And two, don't you think it weakens

01:53:48

Paul's case to suggest that he has to use eisegesis of the Old Testament in order to prop up his new soteriological views?

01:53:54

The falsehood of the statement began right at the beginning when you said, I don't try to refute the Old Testament text.

01:54:00

You're exactly right. I happen to think the Old Testament and I will follow after his footstep.

01:54:07

I do believe that we as Christians must follow the apostolic interpretation of these texts. And so far,

01:54:12

Professor Flowers, you have not even attempted to refute the eisegesis I've provided of the apostolic interpretation of these texts.

01:54:21

You've presented some other perspective, but you have not dealt with the apostolic interpretation that was provided, whereby you can walk through Romans 9 and you can allow each step to build upon the other and you can walk all the way through.

01:54:35

I didn't have to jump to Romans 11. I didn't have to jump out of Romans 9. I could walk all the way through.

01:54:41

You did not do that. Speaking of that, you have to switch your hermeneutic from the individualized approach in Romans 9 and it has to change to a corporate approach by the time you get to 11.

01:54:51

Otherwise, you have those who are grafted in, back in, and those who are stumbling, haven't stumbled beyond recovery, verse 11.

01:54:58

Those who have been cut off might be grafted back in, it says, if they leave their unbelief. And the reason they were cut off in the first place was because of unbelief, not because of something they did before they were ever born.

01:55:08

So how do you explain that transition? Okay, I reject. Everyone heard me clearly state, and maybe you just didn't hear it.

01:55:14

Everyone heard me clearly state that the presence of individual election does not in any way, shape, or form deny that there are not corporate aspects.

01:55:22

And Paul does, after chapter 10, shift to a discussion of specific, he says.

01:55:28

So the individuals who stumbled weren't able to recover? All right, that is time.

01:55:35

Thank you. All right, very good. Okay, Min, great job. Here's what we're going to do now. We're going to now move to closing remarks.

01:55:42

You will have 10 minutes each. And at this time, we're going to start with Dr. White and your closing remarks.

01:56:05

Well, once again, I want to thank everyone for coming out this evening. My intention was very clearly to have two thorough, robust interpretations of the text of Romans 9 presented to you so that you could compare them with one another and make a decision based upon the consistency of the handling of the

01:56:28

Word of God. I do not believe that's what we have gotten. I don't know how you would make that comparison.

01:56:34

And that is disappointing to me, but it is not surprising to me. It is not surprising to me because just as in so many other texts of Scripture, whether it's

01:56:44

John chapter 6 or John chapter 10 or chapter 17, the only way to get around the complete freedom of God in salvation is to impose some kind of external stricture upon the context of what is being said.

01:57:02

And fundamentally, why would this happen? Well, what you're listening to this evening is the difference between starting with a theocentric view of the

01:57:13

Scripture that what the gospel is about is about God. It's not about us.

01:57:19

Oh yes, we are central to the story. God in His grace and mercy has certainly provided for us a tremendous future in Christ, in the presence of the

01:57:29

Father. That's a tremendous thing, but the gospel is about what the triune God has done to glorify

01:57:36

Himself. And if you begin with God's unchanging nature, if you begin with Him as Creator, if you begin in recognizing the importance of the perfection of His knowledge, that God does not have to learn things, that God is not up in heaven responding to man as He forces him to do things, but that God is the sovereign

01:58:00

King of all the ages, and that in fact the reality of time, the meaningfulness of time, is established by God's decree and demonstrated by the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

01:58:12

Once you see that, then you see the glory of what God is doing. You see the glory of the harmony of the

01:58:20

Father, Son, and Spirit in the salvation of God's people, and you see the intimate personal character of that salvation.

01:58:29

Professor Flowers said that his view of election is much more personal than mine. I can't even begin to understand this, because what

01:58:36

I'm saying, and what I believe the Bible clearly teaches, is that before eternity itself,

01:58:43

God set His love upon His elect people, and He chose them not because they were better than someone else, not because they were greater than someone else, but He chose them in full knowledge of what they would be.

01:58:56

There wasn't any question about this. I'm not sure how Professor Flowers can even begin to explain how

01:59:04

God could know that we were going to exist if in reality He doesn't have a sovereign decree, and creatures have this contra -causal freedom, and they might have chosen not to do something that would have resulted in you.

01:59:18

It really is difficult for me to see how He can escape open theism and all the traps of open theism at this point, because He's not willing to affirm the things that need to be affirmed in regards to the foundation for God's knowledge.

01:59:32

And this is very difficult for me, because I debate open theists. I don't know how

01:59:37

Professor Flowers could do that. I don't know how He would be able to withstand their argumentation, because He will not affirm those things that provide the necessary foundation.

01:59:48

But the problem is, affirming those things then becomes the foundation of recognizing God's freedom and salvation, and the necessity of the intimately personal nature of the decree of election.

02:00:01

That's why Paul can say in Ephesians chapter 1, he can talk about salvation, and the direct object of all those things

02:00:08

God does, including the selection, the choosing, is personal. It's us.

02:00:14

That's what's amazing. God knew your heart. God knew your sin, and despite that, still chose to save you.

02:00:28

Not because you're better than anyone else. You want something that absolutely cuts the ground out from underneath all boasting.

02:00:34

God knew, and yet He still chose you. God knew from eternity past, but the only way

02:00:41

He could do that is if you would truly come into existence, that His decree would actually be accomplished.

02:00:49

And so I begin with that central affirmation of who God is. I do not begin with philosophical constructs concerning contra -causal relationships and the capacity of man to be able to do something other than this or the other thing.

02:01:04

I believe very clearly that the Bible does teach the compatible nature of God's sovereign decree and man's responsibility, and I've heard nothing from Professor Flowers that causes me to think other than that.

02:01:19

But that's not what this debate was about tonight. We could go to Genesis 50, we could go to Isaiah 10, we can go to Acts chapter 4.

02:01:26

I think the texts are very, very clear and very, very plain. But yes, both of us come to the text with a particular background.

02:01:36

We come with a particular understanding. Which one allows you to walk from Romans chapter 8?

02:01:44

To walk from that clear statement, those whom He foreknew. That's a verb. It's not had foreknowledge of.

02:01:50

Those whom He foreknew all the way down through glorified who can walk through that consistently?

02:02:01

Those that He predestined. He calls them. What kind of a calling is that?

02:02:08

We recognize there is the universal call of the gospel. We are involved with that.

02:02:13

When I stand at a mosque, I'm not sitting there looking at the audience trying to figure out who the elect are. I don't know.

02:02:20

I get to call all of them and I can say to anyone, to anyone who will repent and believe in Jesus Christ, you will find

02:02:27

Him to be a perfect Savior. And I can say that to anyone. Because I don't know who the elect are and God does not hold me accountable for knowing.

02:02:40

This calling, this calling results in justification. So this is the effectual calling.

02:02:47

This is the calling that specifically results in being justified.

02:02:52

Is that not what individual salvation is? Or is this a group that is being justified? Do we now have some kind of group justification?

02:03:01

Is that what we got in the previous portions of Romans? Certainly not. Certainly not.

02:03:07

And so who can start there? Follow the chain through. Who can then look at verses 31 and following where plainly you have the very view of atonement that Professor Flowers just very strongly disagreed with.

02:03:20

But you have Jesus interceding for a specific people and their salvation is certain because He intercedes for them and He fails not once in His intercession because His sacrifice is perfect on behalf of those for whom

02:03:33

He made it. Who can then walk from that into chapter 9, look at the question and say they are not all of Israel who are of Israel and not have to go, oh that's something about the privilege of being used in the noble cause.

02:03:50

Where did the noble cause all of a sudden come from? Where was the noble cause in the golden chain?

02:03:55

Where was the noble cause in the courtroom? No, it's come from outside and that's exactly what eisegesis is.

02:04:04

It is reading into the text something that is not there and when people do it it's because they have a commitment to something other than allowing the text to speak for itself.

02:04:15

Now that can come from tradition, that can come from all sorts of different sources, but as believers when we see it we should be the first ones to point to it and say that would seem to indicate that you are allowing tradition to override the reading of the text.

02:04:35

Now unfortunately rather than really focusing in upon each of the phrases and talking about what it means, maybe the difference between prepared beforehand for dishonor and honor and doing the things that would be most useful in Romans 9, we ended up going everywhere but there and I was concerned that that might happen.

02:04:56

But don't let that dissuade you this evening from doing what you need to do.

02:05:02

I've got 90 seconds, let me try to encourage you to do something. Before you go to bed tonight, review

02:05:09

Romans chapters 8 and 9 and try to set aside any of the traditions you might have, any of the feelings you might have from the debate.

02:05:21

Well I liked one side, I didn't like the other side or anything like that. Set that aside.

02:05:26

Maybe a Calvinist stepped on your toe out in the lobby and try to set all that stuff aside as well. And just allow the

02:05:35

Word of God to be the Word of God and ask yourself this one question.

02:05:42

Is this text saying something that I in my humanity would find to be offensive and therefore

02:05:52

I'm looking for a reason to read it in some other way? Because the fact matter is folks, outside of the sovereign work of God's Spirit in our hearts, every one of us rebels against hearing,

02:06:06

I will have mercy upon who I have mercy, I will harden who I will harden. Only when

02:06:12

God's Spirit reveals that God is God and we are not to us, will we embrace that message with true joy and happiness.

02:06:22

Thank you for being here this evening. Very good, thank you.

02:06:28

I'm going to now ask Professor Flowers if you would come and give your closing remarks and you will also have 10 minutes.

02:06:40

As many of you know, I have a lot of respect for many Calvinists who listen to my podcasts. You've heard me speak kindly of John Piper and his influence in my formative years in my ministry.

02:06:50

I believe men like Piper and MacArthur, Sproul and including Dr. White and others have brought into the mainstream biblical doctrines that rarely get the attention they deserve.

02:06:59

The glory of God, the sovereignty of God, the doctrine of salvation. Are there more important topics than these, really?

02:07:05

And I'm genuinely grateful to these Calvinistic brothers for calling the church to a higher view and understanding of God and his glory.

02:07:13

I remember back in the day John Piper opened his conference on Calvinism with a quote from A .W. Tozer about the idolatry of believing something lesser about God than he truly is.

02:07:22

The quote went like this, it is my opinion that the Christian conception of God current in these middle years of the 20th century is so decadent as to be utterly beneath the dignity of the most high

02:07:31

God. Low views of God destroy the gospel for all who hold them. Piper was introducing the doctrine of Calvinism by calling the church to hold to a higher view of God.

02:07:41

But ironically, the man he's quoting from, Tozer, has an even higher view of God than I believe

02:07:46

Piper holds to. Let me explain why I say that. Today in the SBC, Calvinism is most certainly resurging.

02:07:53

Why? I believe it's because Calvinism offers an alternative to our church's shallow, seeker sensitive, namby -pamby, easy believism, chicken soup for the soul, pop psychology that's trying to be passed off as real church.

02:08:06

And in a culture like that, a young, restless theology guy like myself at the age of 19, we latch on to preachers like Piper and Dr.

02:08:14

White who are passionate and serious and deep and they don't beat around the bush to avoid the difficult text of Scripture.

02:08:20

I admire men like that. Calvinism holds, yes, to a higher view of God than the

02:08:26

Joel Osteens of our world. So I admire my Calvinistic brethren for doing a great job calling people away from that kind of worldview.

02:08:34

But now I am under the firm conviction that there is an even higher view of God than what is offered by mainstream

02:08:39

Calvinism's soteriology today. In stalwarts of the faith, men like A .W.

02:08:45

Tozer taught a sound, theologically robust, deep doctrine of God's glory and his salvation.

02:08:52

Tozer wrote, for example, God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice.

02:08:57

The eternal decree decided not which choice man should make, but that he should be free to make it. And if in that absolute freedom

02:09:04

God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay his hand or say, why dost thou?

02:09:10

Man's will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon his creatures.

02:09:17

He would be afraid to do so. Notice what Tozer is saying. He is arguing that a

02:09:23

God less than sovereign would not be able to handle a world with true, free, moral creatures.

02:09:29

A God less than sovereign would need to determine everything because he would be too afraid to allow for autonomous free will.

02:09:36

Tozer was calling our namby -pamby, seeker -sensitive generation to a view of God's glory that is far higher than the deterministic worldview of Piper's Calvinism.

02:09:47

Many Calvinists think of all non -Calvinists as being theologically ignorant, doctrinally inept.

02:09:55

I remember one Calvinist telling me, Layton, your view of God's just too low. I'm sorry, I just respectfully disagree.

02:10:01

If you're walking through a park and you happen upon a man playing both sides of the chessboard all by himself, and you walk up to him and say, why are you playing both sides?

02:10:08

He says, the only way I can figure out how to ensure my victory. And you come along, another man who is beating one person after another, chess masters coming from all over the world to take on this man playing chess, and he beats them 10 steps ahead, 20 steps ahead.

02:10:22

Which one are you going to go home bragging about? You see, the idea of a creator who has to play both sides of the chessboard by determining not only his own actions, but the actions of his enemies in order to ensure his victory seems to me to be a very low view of our creator.

02:10:36

But that's exactly the point Tozer is making in this quote. There is a higher, more robust, deeper, sounder, biblical soteriology than what is being offered by mainstream

02:10:45

Calvinism today. But it has been buried by a culture attracted to simple bumper sticker,

02:10:51

Twitter friendly, bite sized systematics with easy to explain points attached to memorable acrostics. Ultimately, we must allow the

02:10:58

Scripture to guide us to right understanding of doctrine. And I know Calvinists genuinely, I know they do.

02:11:04

They genuinely feel they're defending the teaching of Scripture. And I know they are well intending. But in my opinion,

02:11:10

I think they have put on the Calvinistic lenses in the world view before fully vetting the scholarly, robust theological teachings of men like Tozer, the stalwarts of the faith in the

02:11:20

Southern Baptist Convention and others. I've heard some who think not only my view of God's too low, but my view of man is just too high.

02:11:29

But again, I respectfully disagree. After all, you tell me which view of man is lower the man who hates

02:11:35

God because he's born hated by God salvificly, or the man who hates a God who genuinely loves and provides everything he needs for his salvation.

02:11:44

The only thing more devastating than a lost soul is a lost soul that was born with no one looking for her.

02:11:51

Born unloved by her maker, born rejected, born hated victim of God's eternal decree.

02:11:57

People born reprobates decreed for hell in the Calvinistic system are to be pitied, not judged.

02:12:02

I feel sorry for the reprobate in the system. I can't think of a better excuse in the world for unbelief than I was born unable to willingly do otherwise.

02:12:12

God never granted me faith. We cannot give mankind that excuse.

02:12:18

Others feel our view is just not logically consistent. You just appeal too much to mystery. Don't be fooled.

02:12:24

Both sides appeal to mystery. John MacArthur was asked if God literally determines all things, then how can he blame us for sinning?

02:12:29

His answer was, quote, I don't know the answer to that. And I don't know of anyone who knows the answer to that. John Calvin admits ignorance on this question.

02:12:36

John Piper admits ignorance on this question. The question is, which mystery does the Bible afford?

02:12:43

And which mystery is really worthy of being defended? Austin Fisher, the author of The Young Restless and No Longer Reformed, he recently wrote these words.

02:12:52

He said, it seems the primary concern for Calvinists is making sure humans can't boast in salvation, whereas the primary concern for freewill theism is a recognizably good

02:13:02

God. The mystery I hold to is due to the tension created by the clear biblical teachings of God's goodness.

02:13:11

His holiness, His eyes are too pure to look on evil, Habakkuk 113 says, much less deterministically bring it to pass or to tempt anyone to evil,

02:13:20

James 113. His trustworthiness is at stake here. I can believe his expressed or his prescriptive expressions and his desires without wondering if he secretly really wants exactly the opposite of what he's telling me outwardly.

02:13:34

I can trust him. His righteousness, which is reflected best in the nature of Christ Himself, one who was loving his enemies, not hating them from birth.

02:13:44

You see, I'm concerned that some systematic doctrines drive people away from getting to know our God because it over emphasizes a characteristic that is not clearly seen or emphasized by Christ Himself.

02:13:57

Christ taught us to love our enemies, to be self -sacrificial, to put others first.

02:14:05

It's those qualities that make Christ Himself so abundantly glorious.

02:14:11

Dr. White says this debate is about being man -centered or God -centered. And to some degree, I agree with him.

02:14:17

And I admit that my doctrine is, in some ways, it's man -centered. I'll admit it.

02:14:23

The man I've centered my doctrine on is Christ. The God -man named Jesus is the best reflection of God, of God in which we center our understanding of who

02:14:33

He is. After all, He is the Word, capital W, which is not failed according to Romans 9, verse 6.

02:14:41

A Christ -centered theology highlights God's mercy and His self -sacrificial love for His enemies, not

02:14:46

His meticulous control over His enemies in order to suck as much self -glorification out of them as possible. Listen, God is not most glorified at the expense of His creation.

02:14:56

He is most glorified at the expense of Himself for the sake of His creation, which is proven at Calvary.

02:15:04

God is glorified most in the cross, the resurrection, and the gospel proclamation sent to every man, woman, boy, and girl.

02:15:13

I can say without qualification, your God loves you. He demonstrates that self -sacrificial love for you by sending

02:15:23

His Son to die in your place. Repent, therefore, and live. He holds out

02:15:29

His hands of mercy to each and every one in the sound of my voice, and I know that without a doubt.

02:15:36

The Word of God very clearly teaches that if anyone whosoever calls on the name of the

02:15:42

Lord will be saved. He says, for this commandment I have given to you, it's not too difficult for you.

02:15:48

It's not out of your reach, but the Word is very near you and in your mouth and in your heart that you may observe it.

02:15:55

That's an explicit teaching of the ability of man, the responsibility. You may observe it. That is the

02:16:01

Word of faith which we are preaching that if you confess with your mouth, Jesus is Lord. If you believe in your heart,

02:16:08

God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Dr. White spent a lot of time critiquing my method, yet I went back through my opening statement and I touched on verses 1 through 19 for sure.

02:16:19

My illustration with the clay was verses 20 through 23. I touched on Hosea and the quote from Hosea about him loving despite them turning to other gods, and I definitely touched on 30 through 32.

02:16:30

I started with that, and yet I don't remember Dr. White's touching on 30 through 32, and so I reject the concept that I didn't go through these passages.

02:16:39

I know he might not have liked the way I did it, but instead of critiquing my argument, he spent most of his time, it seems to me, critiquing my methodology.

02:16:47

Thank you for being here tonight. I sincerely appreciate those, especially who drove so far to be here and appreciate your attention.

02:16:54

All right, thank you. At this time, we're going to take a two -minute break. I'm going to get the cards ready to go for the questions and answers.

02:17:00

Stretch your legs, and then we'll get started in just a minute. Many of you have responded with a lot of questions.

02:17:06

We're going to do our best to get after it. Here's what's going to happen. We're going to address the questions to whoever the card was written to.

02:17:13

I'm going to go back and forth. We'll start off. Whoever it's addressed to, they will take two minutes to answer, and then we'll give the other side a one -minute also response, and so you can hear a little bit of what they would like to say.

02:17:25

We're going to keep it right at that two -minute, one -minute, so that maybe we can get a few more questions in at this time. All right, thank you so much.

02:17:31

At this time, I'm going to go ahead and start with Dr. White. I do want to apologize to you.

02:17:37

I was brought to my attention. I cut you a few minutes short on your presentation, and so I wanted to apologize with the iPad dying.

02:17:51

There we go. All right. I just need to know how much Leighton gave you. I'll try to give you a little more.

02:17:57

All right. Yeah, right. No doubt. I appreciate it. You're both Cowboys fans, right? Is that the whole point?

02:18:03

I'll take you to coffee later. All right. I did have several people ask Dr. White why you were not wearing your bow tie.

02:18:10

Yeah, yeah. I was wearing that. Yes. All right.

02:18:17

I would like to go ahead and start with - That doesn't count as one of the questions? No, that does not count as a question.

02:18:23

All right. Fine. That would be easy. All right. We're going to go with a two -minute. You're going to get two minutes to respond to this, and the two minutes is going to start just after I read this.

02:18:34

We had several regarding predestination, and the question is regarding some of them are asking how do you evangelize, and then also is it double predestination?

02:18:43

Could you respond to those two in two minutes? Well, you'd have to define.

02:18:50

For example, I absolutely have a problem with what

02:18:56

Layton Flowers said in regards to making double predestination the same as equal ultimacy. They are not the same thing.

02:19:02

There must have been a context to whatever R .C. was saying, because I know R .C. Sproul personally, and he's on my side in this debate. Double predestination is simply that God both has the positive decree of salvation as well as the negative decree of reparation.

02:19:14

They're not the same thing, as I explained. Secondly, how do you evangelize? Well, we are commanded to evangelize, and as I just explained toward the end of my statement, we do not know who the elect are, and so we are told to proclaim the gospel to every creature.

02:19:36

We are told to command all men everywhere to repent, and in fact, I would say to you that it absolutely empowers preaching to have the freedom to preach the whole gospel, trusting that Christ's sheep will hear

02:19:49

Christ's voice and that God will save by His power. Folks, look at what the church is doing today.

02:19:56

Look at all of the programs and all of the silly ways they're trying to trick people into being disciples of Jesus, and what's behind that?

02:20:05

A man -centered gospel, that you have to convince people to do something that they're not willing to do on their own.

02:20:10

The reality is, the biblical teaching is, the gospel is a powerful command, and when that gospel is accompanied by the work of the

02:20:18

Holy Spirit of God in the heart of God's people, He raises them to spiritual life. He grants them faith and repentance.

02:20:24

He draws them to Himself, and that's why they persevere in the faith, and that gives you the opportunity to do what

02:20:29

I do, and that is proclaim the gospel in lots of places and simply be able to trust that God, by His Spirit, will accomplish what

02:20:37

He wants to accomplish in that situation, and it's a wonderful thing. Layton, you have one minute to respond.

02:20:51

First of all, I want to apologize. I was trying to say that in regard to double predestination, this is what

02:20:57

R .C. Sproul said, and then that's when I started my quote, so I apologize if that was misleading.

02:21:03

So he didn't say double predestination? He said equal ultimacy. Correct. He was saying the distortion of double predestination looks like this.

02:21:11

Oh, exactly. So my misunderstanding there, so I wanted to correct that. I think the question with regard to double predestination really has to do, again, the distinction without a difference.

02:21:23

It's kind of like the judicial hardening thing. It's like Calvinists have really good words to say things to describe their different views, but I don't see a real distinction worth the difference between the equal ultimacy that R .C.

02:21:34

Sproul described and what you say when you believe in, for example, double predestination.

02:21:40

Your view of double predestination doesn't seem to be any real difference between the two. All right, time.

02:21:48

Professor Flowers, we have several questions. I think if I take a minute, you get another minute, don't you?

02:21:54

I don't know. Let's get to as many as we can. Okay, we'll just go ahead and jump right into the next one.

02:22:00

Professor Flowers, there are several questions regarding sin, original sin.

02:22:06

Can you define is sin inherited or original sin out of Romans 9 or how would you see this?

02:22:12

Yes, the Baptist faith message teaches that we are sin stained or that we are born with a sin nature, that we are inclined towards sin and that we do need a savior.

02:22:24

Even John Piper deals with this with regard to infants, for example, who die in the womb or they die when they're young, specifically with regard to Romans chapter 1 with men being without excuse or without the ability to answer for their choices.

02:22:42

Even John Piper takes the view that if they can't naturally have the ability to respond, then God won't hold them responsible in that way.

02:22:49

Therefore, he believes that infants who die will be saved. He's dealing with the same issue that we all deal with, what

02:22:54

Augustine was dealing with. That's what Pelagius and Augustine were mostly debating over was the infant baptism issue and Augustine obviously did believe in infant baptism and the need for it in order to wash away this concept of original guilt, really, that you're born in a sense guilty for Adam's sin.

02:23:12

There's so many passages in scripture, Ezekiel, I think of, and several others that talk about us not being guilty because of the sin of our father.

02:23:19

I think even just a natural understanding, we wouldn't think, okay, if my dad went out and killed somebody,

02:23:25

I'm going to go to jail for it. I mean, again, it's a common understanding way of seeing this. However, the federal headship concept that is taught within scripture does in a sense talk about how when

02:23:38

Adam represented us in the garden, we do fall in the sense that all of us receive that sin nature and thus are fallen in Adam and thus need a savior.

02:23:49

But that does not mean that it's not equal to being unable to respond to a father who calls us and appeals for us to be reconciled from that fall.

02:23:59

And so it's one thing to say I'm fallen. It's another thing to say I'm fallen and I can't even recognize that I'm fallen, nor can

02:24:05

I respond to a father who lovingly calls me out of that fall. And so that's the distinction,

02:24:12

I think, between the Calvinists and my view is the total inability aspect of the total depravity. All right.

02:24:17

Thank you. And Dr. White, one minute. It is not a matter of not being able to recognize that you're fallen.

02:24:23

The biblical teaching is that you love being fallen and that you cannot cease loving being fallen. So again, that's,

02:24:30

I think, a problem. Romans chapter 5 makes it very, very clear that Adam is our federal head. It explains why death exists for all men, including infants.

02:24:39

And if you reject the idea that, as Professor Flowers just said, well, you know, my daddy did something,

02:24:45

I'm going to jail. He's used that illustration a number of times. I just have to go, do you remember Achen?

02:24:51

Do you remember what happened at Jericho? Do you remember what happened at Ai? Who was punished for Achen's sin?

02:24:58

Was it just Achen? Anybody remember? It was his whole family. His wife and his kids and his doggies and his kitties.

02:25:06

And so if you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with the fact that that's how

02:25:11

God deals with his people. That's how God dealt with his people in that situation. And that's clearly what

02:25:16

Romans 5 is teaching in regards to original sin. Very good. Thank you. Dr.

02:25:25

White, if man is totally depraved, why does God go to the trouble of redeeming him?

02:25:34

Well, we have to define what totally depraved means. I think we've had some real misidentifications. Totally depraved does not mean that you do not respond to God.

02:25:41

We believe that we respond to God. We just respond consistently according to our nature. We are the enemies of God. And therefore, for example,

02:25:48

Romans chapter 1 says that we are katakanton. We are suppressing the knowledge of God. There's all sorts of different ways of doing that.

02:25:54

Some people do that religiously. Some people do that through drugs. Some people do that through riches, sex, et cetera, et cetera.

02:26:00

But the point is we're acting consistently according to our nature. And as Jesus said in John chapter 8, anyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.

02:26:12

And so you just simply have to answer the question, does the Bible mean what it means or does it not?

02:26:18

If you can say that a heart of stone can voluntarily humble itself so as to be taken out, then

02:26:24

I don't know what the Bible is talking about. And I don't know why Paul said those who are going to flesh cannot do what is pleasing to God.

02:26:30

I don't know any of that. But when you say, if man's totally praved, why would God redeem him? Because that's how

02:26:37

God glorifies himself. I mean, all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.

02:26:44

The wonder of grace is not that it's given to the humble and to those who separate themselves from the crowd by doing what's right.

02:26:53

The wonder of grace is that it's given to people like you and me. I mean, even as believers, think of your own heart even this day, and yet God has extended his grace to you even this day.

02:27:07

God shows himself to be powerful in the salvation of a people that on any other basis are completely unsavable.

02:27:16

So why would he save us? What does Ephesians 1 say? All to the praise of his glorious grace.

02:27:24

That's the fundamental answer to a lot of questions, and it's a good answer. Thank you.

02:27:31

Professor Flowers, you have one minute. Humble people are no more worthy of being saved than unconditionally elected people.

02:27:40

Scripture clearly teaches us the Lord sustains the humble but cast down the wicked to the ground, Psalm 147, 6.

02:27:46

He mocks proud mockers but shows favor to the humble and depressed, Proverbs 3, 34. Seek the

02:27:51

Lord all you humble of the land. You do what he commands. Seek righteousness, seek humility. Perhaps, perhaps you will be sheltered on the day of the

02:28:00

Lord's anger. Matthew 18, 4. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

02:28:06

Matthew 5, 3. Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

02:28:15

Luke 1, 52. He has brought down the rulers from their thrones. He has lifted up the humble. I could go on and on.

02:28:20

There's three pages of verses like this. Humility does not earn righteousness. God gives grace to the humble because he's gracious and he chooses to do so out of grace, period.

02:28:30

It's not notorious. Thank you. Professor Flowers, there's several questions regarding calling and the different types of calling.

02:28:39

Those calling to bring call, to bring the word, calling to salvation that you were talking about tonight.

02:28:45

Can you define the calling specifically again out of Romans 8, 9, specifically 9?

02:28:51

Sure. Again, I think the way you illustrate it is you look at, for example, the parable that I referred to in Matthew 22, and it illustrates the different calls of God for the different purposes of God.

02:29:05

He calls some to be his messengers and notice all the apostles are from Israel. He calls them from Israel for a reason because Israel was chosen for that purpose.

02:29:14

That's the promise of God that he made in Genesis 12, 3, that I will bless all the families of the earth through your seed.

02:29:21

And so he has called a people from Israel to take the message to the rest of the world.

02:29:27

That's a part of his calling to deliver his message. That's that first divine calling that I spoke of in my rebuttal.

02:29:34

The second is that it again, it's another unconditional choice that he takes it first to the Jew, but then he sends it to the

02:29:39

Gentile. The Jews reject it in a sense, for the most part, they reject their own messengers.

02:29:45

And so it goes to everybody. And the text specifically says, take it to both those who are good and bad.

02:29:51

So it's an unconditional choice to send it to everyone. In other words, don't just go to the rich or don't just go to the moral people.

02:29:58

Don't just go to these people, go to whoever. And notice he's also calling Paul, for example, he calls out

02:30:03

Paul, not because, for example, Gamaliel or some other Jew at that time or Pharisee was more moral or less moral.

02:30:09

He doesn't call out his messengers because of their morality. He's calling them so that the purpose of God's election will stand.

02:30:16

In other words, in order for his promise to be fulfilled in electing Israel, to make sure his message is delivered because he doesn't break his promise.

02:30:23

And so he's going to make sure that happens through Israelites. And so that's the calling he's talking about to get the word to the world.

02:30:31

Now, whoever gets that message, the Ninevites get it from Jonah, who's in a sense, compelled to go through normative means.

02:30:38

Big fish, blinding light for Paul, normative means convince the messengers to go. Convincing the messengers to go through normative means does not prove that those who hear the message, some of them have been elected to get irresistible means to make them believe that message.

02:30:53

And I think that's where Calvinists make the mistake. Right. Dr. White. I thought that the question was asked, could you explain what calling is in Romans 9?

02:31:02

I didn't hear anything about Romans 9. So let me just, once again, point out to folks, Romans 8, 30, those whom he called, these he also justified.

02:31:10

The calling, therefore, is the effective call of God unto salvation itself. Then that calling is seen in the elect of God in verse 33 of chapter 8.

02:31:20

And then when you trace that through chapter 9, the conclusion then becomes even we whom he called, not only from amongst

02:31:29

Jews, but also among Gentiles, never has Professor Flowers shown us where that salvific calling to salvation and justification somehow gets shifted so that it's no longer the consistent reading.

02:31:41

Once we get to chapter 9, verse 24, it remains consistent. That doesn't mean that there's not a group of people, all the rest of these things, but if we're looking at Romans 9, it would help to actually go to Romans 9 to see what it says about that particular issue.

02:31:57

All right, thank you. Dr. White, Romans 9, we had several who talked through this being not a very encouraging passage.

02:32:11

One specifically asked about their friend who breaks their heart, who's walked away from the faith. Can you just shortly maybe say how

02:32:18

Romans 9 would be encouraging to people? Well, again, it's encouraging to people who have

02:32:26

God's priorities. It's encouraging to people who have God's priorities. It's not encouraging to people who have human priorities.

02:32:34

Remember what I said. Look at what is said. In order that I may make known the riches of my glory upon vessels of mercy.

02:32:47

God has a purpose in revealing to us who he is. And the priorities that are laid out in Romans 9 is

02:32:54

God demonstrates his power and he makes his wrath known. Let's be honest, if we asked evangelicals today, how many of you on your list of priorities is the making known of God's power and the demonstration of his wrath, does it ever appear on your radar at all, let alone it's in the top 10?

02:33:17

Let's be honest, we never even think about it. And my suggestion is until we have the biblical mindset that Paul demands that we have, which he provides to us by his

02:33:29

Old Testament citation, and until our heart beats for the demonstration of God's glory, and folks,

02:33:36

God's wrath is a part of God's glory. Because if you look at the cross and if you don't see the wrath of God against sin at the cross, you're not really seeing the love of God there either.

02:33:50

You see a very truncated, very shallow view of the cross if you don't see the reality of God's wrath, the necessary wrath that is his against sin.

02:34:03

And so the point is, if we have that mindset that what Romans 9 tells us is

02:34:08

God will accomplish the means by which he has said he will glorify himself, the triune

02:34:14

God, and that is our confidence. All right, thank you. Professor Flowers, one minute.

02:34:20

I think Romans 9 through 11 is very encouraging because it's an example of God cutting off people who are already hell bound.

02:34:28

They're heading for hell because they're self -righteous. They're going that way. And just like a parent who has a rebellious child, sometimes you give them that advice.

02:34:34

You can't enable them anymore. You've got to cut them off. It's almost like what Paul gives an illustration of is pushing out that rebellious believer.

02:34:42

Why? So as they may save their soul. What's he talking about? I'm pushing them out so as that they might be provoked to envy.

02:34:48

They might see the Gentiles coming to faith. They see that prostitutes life change. And now she's a mother of kids and she's a faithful wife and she's changing.

02:34:58

And these hardened Jews seeing this, they're provoked where otherwise if he got just left them alone, they were hell bound because they were in their hardened condition.

02:35:06

But by hardening them, he's actually showing them grace. He's hardening them for the purpose of bringing them redemption.

02:35:14

That's the encouragement here in this passage. It's all about God's grace from the very first three verses to the very end.

02:35:20

It's about his grace. Thank you, Professor Flowers. We have several regarding your statement about faith and works and also how that the question is between how did

02:35:35

Romans nine with Pharaoh? Did he actually was there not faith before or whatever?

02:35:41

So we're going to I'm going to kind of combine them. And here's your question. Does election proceed birth or is it faith through works?

02:35:53

God has elected certain individuals to carry out his promise like we talked about with Paul.

02:35:59

There is a sense in which God has obviously elected the nation of Israel unconditionally, but he has elected the plan for bringing redemption so that whosoever believes will be saved.

02:36:10

So in the parable, again, those who show up clothed in the righteousness of Christ again, many are called.

02:36:16

You were chosen. Who are the ones who are chosen? The ones who show up in faith. And so his election is to elect a people to bring the message so that whosoever it's a provisional atonement.

02:36:27

He's providing this to the entire world. That's why it's good news. It's because it's given to all mankind for all to respond either in faith or in disbelief.

02:36:38

They can trade. They can choose to trade the truth in for lies, and they're held responsible for that. Why? Because they're actually able to respond.

02:36:45

If they're born unable to respond, there's no real basis on which to hold somebody truly response able.

02:36:52

The very ability to respond in Romans one, for example, is what shows us our accountability or our culpability for the sins and our choices that we make.

02:37:03

And so I think the Calvinist undermines that by teaching that mankind, most of mankind is born in this condition that they can't respond to God at all.

02:37:11

That even when he sends a gracious appeal, a gospel appeal that says, come to me, they can't willingly come.

02:37:18

And so you're giving them the perfect excuse. You're giving, you're taking away ultimately their responsibility for that.

02:37:25

And I think that that's really important to understand because the election has to do with God's plan for bringing redemption to the world and also his choice of those who come in faith.

02:37:35

Those who, again, like I said before, humble themselves. All right, time. Dr. White, the direct statement of scripture,

02:37:42

Ephesians chapter one, verse four, just as he chose us in him before the foundation world, the direct object of choosing is not

02:37:49

Jesus. It is us. We are chosen in him, but we are the direct object of that choosing.

02:37:56

So that's what the choosing and selection is. It is completely untrue that we are giving anyone an excuse.

02:38:06

Jesus himself said, if you sin, you're the slave of sin.

02:38:11

Was Jesus giving somebody an excuse? Oh, well, you know, I'm just slave to sin so I can just do whatever I want to do. You think

02:38:17

God's going to accept that? We're not giving anyone an excuse at all. I really honestly believe that that is a red herring in a canard that needs to be dropped if this discussion is going to move forward.

02:38:28

That is an appeal to emotion. It is a misrepresentation of the other side. It's been made many times this evening. I've tried to overlook it.

02:38:34

It was just made again, and I'm going to point it out. It's a canard. Let's drop it. All right, thank you.

02:38:41

Dr. White, did Jesus die for the sin of everyone or just the chosen? Two minutes.

02:38:48

What did the death of Jesus Christ accomplish? What is the purpose of the atonement? I am absolutely unashamed to say that the death of Jesus Christ accomplishes exactly what

02:39:00

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit intended it to accomplish, and I do not believe that Jesus Christ has ever failed to save anyone that he has desired to save.

02:39:11

He is a perfect Savior. Hebrews chapter 7 says, because he ever lives to make intercession for them, he is able to save them to the uttermost.

02:39:21

Now, if the idea is, well, you first have to humble yourself, you have to first do this, and then

02:39:26

Christ has made you savable, that's not what the argument of the book of Hebrews is. The argument of the book of Hebrews is, by one sacrifice, he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

02:39:37

That is the work of Jesus Christ. And there is perfect unity between the decree of God the

02:39:43

Father to save a specific people, the Son dies to redeem that people, the Spirit comes and applies that work and saves that people, and it's all to his glory.

02:39:53

I do not believe that there is any meaningful way of defending the idea that the atonement of Jesus Christ simply makes men savable.

02:40:03

There is all the world indifference, my friends, my brothers and sisters, in saying that Jesus Christ saves and saying that Jesus Christ makes savable.

02:40:14

Those are not the same statements, and I do not believe the one glorifies

02:40:20

God. Jesus Christ is a perfect Savior because he ever lives to make intercession.

02:40:26

Ask yourself a question, is Jesus Christ interceding in heaven today for those who are lost?

02:40:31

Did he fail? If so, why? That's the question. Thank you.

02:40:37

Professor Flowers, one minute. He not only makes them all savable, he certainly saves anyone who believes.

02:40:44

First John 2 .2, he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins and not only for ours, but also for the sins of the whole world.

02:40:52

First Timothy 4 .10, we have put our hope in the living God who is the Savior of all men and especially of those who believe.

02:41:01

But I think that the point here that needs to be made is what kind of atonement is made.

02:41:06

I believe in what's called a provisional atonement, which is best illustrated with the serpent that's lifted on the pole, which Jesus refers to in John 3.

02:41:13

The serpent lifted on the pole. If you look to it as a snake -bitten Jew, if you look to the serpent lifted on the pole, you would be healed.

02:41:20

That's a provisional atonement. So nobody could die from snake venom and say, oh, I died only from snake venom if I refuse to look at the snake on the pole.

02:41:28

If you refuse to look at the snake on the pole in faith, then you're dying not only of snake venom, but you're also dying because you refuse to take advantage of the provision that's provided for them to have healing from that venom.

02:41:42

Thank you, Professor Flowers. There's several questions regarding humbling and your understanding of humbling.

02:41:51

And the question would be, how would you talk to humbling when somebody is actually a

02:41:57

Gentile, hardening, Pharaoh being hardened? So how would they be able to humble themselves?

02:42:03

And explain the humbling process that you're saying they're able to humble themselves when they were hardened.

02:42:09

Can you talk about that? Yeah, godly sorrow brings repentance. And so when God's word is preached, when

02:42:15

God's word is spoken, the law, what's the law for? It's a tutor. It's a schoolmaster. And what's its purpose?

02:42:21

Is its purpose to save? No, we know it's not its purpose to save. What is its purpose? To reveal our need for Christ.

02:42:28

To reveal the fact that we can't earn our own righteousness. That's its purpose. And Calvinists are trying to say, at least

02:42:34

I think by implication of total inability, that the law can't do that.

02:42:39

The law can't even reveal your need. It can't even make you realize you need it. Not unless you get a regenerated heart by irresistible means.

02:42:47

But the law was sent for the purpose and the gospel along with it is sent for the purpose to help you to realize you're fallen.

02:42:54

And then secondly, God wants you to be saved. He wants you to repent and to come to him. And so humility comes from recognition of our sin.

02:43:02

It comes from the pigsty of our lives. It comes from that time when we get to the end of our rope and we say, I can't do this anymore.

02:43:07

I can't, I can't live this life anymore. And you can choose to pull yourself out by the bootstraps and find another job.

02:43:14

And I'm not going to go home and beg my daddy for a job. I'm going to make my way out of this pigsty. And you can harden your heart.

02:43:20

And Hebrews chapter 3 warns you, don't allow your heart to grow hardened. Because if you think you can do it in the flesh and you think you can do it yourself, your heart will grow more and more calloused.

02:43:28

And eventually you won't even hear the revelation of God anymore. You won't hear his laws anymore. You won't hear the gospel anymore because your heart has grown calloused to it.

02:43:37

That's what he's talking about here. So the humility that comes, and that's why I think Jesus even says about a child, he pulls up a child.

02:43:44

He says, you have to become like this to enter the kingdom of heaven. What's the difference if a child is totally depraved from birth, just like anybody else is, total inability.

02:43:51

Why point to a child? A child is humble. They're not hardened in their rebellion yet.

02:43:57

They're still willing to respond and to listen and to hear the word. And so when someone is hardened, it takes a lot more to get through to them.

02:44:05

I think we could all experience that. And that's, that's the concept of, I think, humbling yourself to admit that you are a sinner.

02:44:11

All right. Time. Dr. White, one minute. I think I just heard someone say that children are humble.

02:44:20

Comparatively. Comparatively. Okay. I'm just going to let that one stay at its own reputation and move on from there.

02:44:31

Romans chapter eight has been quoted a number of times. Those who are in the flesh are not able to please

02:44:37

God. They are not able to submit themselves to the law of God. Something has to happen first.

02:44:44

The son has to set you free. This is the difference between this, folks, this was the issue of the reformation.

02:44:52

I'm on Luther's side. He's on Erasmus' side. That's all there is to it. This was the issue of the reformation.

02:44:59

This is, this fundamentally impacts how you will proclaim the gospel and how you will present it to people.

02:45:06

That's why this is some discussion that we need to be, we need to be having. No question about it. All right, men, it is coming time to close.

02:45:13

I would like to add one last kind of closing statement for you, both of you, if you want to kind of wrap up.

02:45:19

But here's what I would ask as we kind of wrap up is how do we walk out of here? Obviously we're on different sides.

02:45:25

We have some different thoughts, different philosophies. It even impacts the way we minister. How do we walk out of here?

02:45:30

Are we still partners in the gospel or is there some way to help tie this together?

02:45:36

Because I'll be real honest, I'm a pastor and so you're in the church here. I'm sitting here going, uh -oh, we've got to be able to work together because I have people on different sides even in this church.

02:45:46

And so the question becomes how do we actually walk out of here to working together? Is there a way to do this?

02:45:52

So can you at least tie this together, your closing remarks, and just kind of do that? We'll give you two minutes each.

02:45:58

How do we work together? So Dr. White, would you start? We cannot sweep these things under a rug because it does fundamentally impact how we present the gospel.

02:46:17

I am an elder in the church. I have been a hospital chaplain.

02:46:23

This impacts how I did my work as a chaplain. It impacts how I do my work as an apologist.

02:46:30

And what it means then is that we, instead of viewing this as a divisive issue that needs to be put in the corner, need to address it and I think address it even more deeply than we did this evening.

02:46:47

Now, Professor Flowers will agree. He started off his statement by saying we can't sweep these things under the floor, under the carpet.

02:46:56

We cannot ignore them. We cannot come up with political answers to these things. We do have to continue the conversation and, for example, on the issue of the atonement or things like that.

02:47:11

Every single generation has had to face these issues and the only people that didn't face these issues suffered greatly when they ignored it.

02:47:20

The gospel and the interest in the gospel and the zeal for the gospel died in those generations. And so, if you're asking, well, can we just set these things aside and call them, you know, adiaphora, the non -essentials?

02:47:36

No, I think it's been very clear. This does touch on the very nature of the gospel and that means the dialogue needs to continue and in what way?

02:47:45

With a firm commitment to lay our traditions on the table and be willing to examine them fully on the basis of scripture and to abandon them when they are seen to be unscriptural.

02:47:57

There's no other way forward for people who truly believe the Bible to be the word of God. Professor Flowers, two minutes.

02:48:06

My best friend in the world is Calvinistic. I've got family members in my inner family who are also

02:48:13

Calvinistic and, yeah, we have heated debates and go back and forth, back and forth, and we enjoy each other but we walk away brothers and we love each other.

02:48:21

We do ministry together, we do evangelism events together, and I think we can work together as brothers in Christ.

02:48:27

Now, I agree with what he's saying that we need to address these. As a matter of fact, I think the reason the rise of Calvinism, personally, is because our side isn't addressing it.

02:48:36

They're skipping over Romans 9 and not talking about these things and that's why I think it's resurging. And so,

02:48:41

I think it needs to be addressed. I think people in the pulpit need to address these hard doctrines. They need to understand what predestination means.

02:48:47

You need to understand what election means. You don't just sweep it under the rug, I don't believe in election. Well, if you believe Paul, you've got to believe in election.

02:48:53

If you believe Paul, you've got to believe in predestination. If you're a Bible -believing person, you've got to believe these views. And so, we can't continue with namby -pamby easy -believism and just, hey, let's all get along and come together and just pat each other on the back.

02:49:05

Dig deep and go deeper. And I think Dr. White, when I walked in, because he's pushed me in these last several months in preparation as iron -sharpening -iron to go into the word a lot deeper than I would have otherwise.

02:49:17

That's what iron -sharpening -iron is. Even from the Calvinistic perspective, there's a reason God must have ordained for Arminians to exist.

02:49:24

Why? Maybe to sharpen some of you Calvinists. You see what I'm saying? We need to sharpen each other, to love each other, to push each other.

02:49:32

There has to be a reason us non -Calvinists are here and maybe that's it. Just to make you think a little bit harder, to push you a little bit deeper.

02:49:40

You know, and that's what we need to be about. I want to close by saying this. I just asked Keith a little bit ago if we could do this.

02:49:46

Another way that we can support each other is by helping each other's ministries. And if you can promise that you will not use money against the non -Calvinist and use it in your

02:49:57

Islamic work, if you can promise to do that, I would like for us to take an offering for Alpha Omega Ministries tonight.

02:50:03

And I would like for you to do that as a freewill offering. You know, so I just put that in there.

02:50:13

Well, I very much appreciate that and anyone who'd like to help us to reach out to Muslims in South Africa this coming

02:50:22

October, that would be wonderful. But I really don't think it would be appropriate to do that as a part of this debate. I think you can go to AOMN .org.

02:50:29

You can find Soteriology 101 as well. But I think it would be inappropriate to ask you to do that in this context.

02:50:38

That's up to Dr. Marion. He's got a offering bucket in the back we already set up because I wanted to be able to support your ministry.

02:50:45

And you guys, he did not ask for a thing. He didn't ask to sell anything. He just wanted to talk to the scripture.

02:50:52

I'm just the world's worst marketer. Don't give me any more credit than that. Everybody knows that.

02:50:58

Honestly, when we talked, when he brought up the debate, I honestly thought there was gonna be fees and all these things. He's been great to work with.

02:51:06

And I appreciate his ministry and love him very much. And I want to support him however we can. And so if you want to give, you know where to give.

02:51:13

And there's also an offering bucket in the back if you want to do that. You can put it in the box that you were getting the cards off of for the questions.

02:51:20

If you enjoyed tonight, let's give these men a hand. I am thankful that you came out.

02:51:38

These men have done a great job. They have done a lot of preparation to get here. And I am so thankful for their willingness to study and to dive hard into the text.

02:51:47

I also want to thank you again to the Oaks for the staff for them being willing to help out. Also to Red Grace Media.

02:51:55

Red Grace Media is also the one who helped put this on and helped arrange the debate tonight.

02:52:00

And I want to say thank you to them for being willing to all the behind the scenes work for all that they have done.

02:52:07

I want to say thank you. And I'm going to ask the president, right? The pastor? You're the president of Red Grace?

02:52:15

You've been promoted. You're something, right? Okay. You're in charge of it. Yeah. Come on. Would you come up here and dismiss us on a word of prayer?

02:52:22

Would you please do that? Well, that's the easy part. You want to elect me for president.

02:52:29

That's great. Let's pray together. Father, thank you so much for this time.

02:52:34

And Father, just thank you for both of these men, just their efforts and their energy and the resources they poured into this.

02:52:44

I thank you for Professor Layton Flowers for his gracious attitude towards us in doing this debate.

02:52:51

I thank you for Dr. White and all that you're doing through him. Father, for Dr. White going into a mosque here in South Africa, we want to all collectively lift him up to you right now.

02:53:03

Despite where we're at on this issue tonight, we know where we're at on Islam. So Father, we want to lift up Dr.

02:53:09

White and pray that you'd give him not only traveling mercies, but mercy to do what he has to do abroad.

02:53:15

And so thank you for this wonderful night. Thank you for the Oaks Church and for our moderator tonight.