Matt Slick Live- Debate with Lou Rugg on Calvinism

Okay, I'm going to explain to you guys why I've been refuting Calvinism or trying to refute Calvinism for the last 10 years.

First of all, Reformed theology teaches double predestination.

I don't believe in double predestination.

It teaches that John Calvin taught by predestination we mean the eternal decree of God,

by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with

regard to God.

And accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been

predestined to life or to death.

That's what John Calvin wrote.

I don't believe that.

I don't believe it's biblical at all.

Number two, a holy God does not author or decree sin.

That, to me, is a fundamental falsehood.

That's the second reason why I despise Calvinism.

John Calvin taught creatures are so governed by the secret counsel of God that nothing happens

but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed, which would include sin.

I don't believe that God authors or decrees sin, but Calvinists believe that.

Also, is Reformed theology correct?

Does sin have a holy purpose, as Calvinists would claim?

If Calvinists believe that sin has a holy purpose, who are they to say that sin is evil?

Maybe they should say that sin is good.

After all, God has a purpose for it.

And according to them, it must be a good purpose.

When Calvinists say that sin is evil while believing that God uses it for a good purpose, doesn't that mean that maybe the

Calvinists are ungodly?

They really should be saying that sin is good because God uses it for good.

Third reason.

Calvinism defies biblical logic and proclaims a double -minded God with a split personality.

For example, God said thou shalt not kill, but God

decreed man to kill.

Why would God decree a man to do what he commended them not to do?

This is a logical fallacy.

In Mark 3 .25, Jesus said, If a house be divided against itself, that house cannot

stand.

And Calvinists teach a God that's divided against himself.

Example number two.

In Acts 17 .30, God commands all men everywhere to repent.

But Calvinism teaches that man can't repent unless God regenerates them first.

So why is God commanding man to do something that he's unable to do?

Why do Calvinists approach a sinner, imploring them to repent, if they're unable to repent?

Why do Calvinists rebuke a sinner for sinning if God is the one who decreed them to sin in the first place?

Shouldn't they be rebuking God after all?

The sinner wouldn't have sinned unless God decreed it in the first place.

It's not the sinner's fault.

It's God's fault.

According to Calvinism, once a man is regenerated, he can't help but repent.

So why is God making it a command at all if a person can't help but repent once he's

regenerated?

Doesn't that sound silly?

Example number three.

God's justice is non -existent in Calvinism.

According to Calvinism, God decrees a man to sin, and God decrees a man to do that which is

good.

For example, God takes his non -elect, decrees them to sin, doesn't

regenerate them so they can repent, and then punishes them for the sin that he decreed that they wouldn't have committed

unless he decreed it in the first place.

God takes his elect, decrees them to do that which is good, regenerates them, and then rewards them

for the good that they wouldn't have done unless he decreed them to do it in the first place.

Both the non -elect and the elect act solely within God's decrees.

Where's the justice?

Where's the accountability?

And finally, Calvinists proclaims a God that hates his enemies.

Meanwhile, God commands us to love our enemies.

According to Calvinism, God isn't willing to do what he commands his creation to do.

To me, that's a hypocritical God.

And those are four of the main reasons why I despise Calvinism.

There are more, but those are the four main ones.

Keeping that in mind, I'm going to let Matt have at me and ask me some of those tough questions.

So Matt Slick, the mic is yours, you're up.

Lou, I'd be interested, apparently you read that, so I'd be interested in if you would be willing to send me that and then I could respond

to it.

No offense meant to you, Lou, but I don't think you understand a lot of Reformed theology.

I don't think you understand decretive will, prescriptive will, permissive will, what ordination means.

And I think you're confused, no disrespect Matt, because you don't understand how we define those things.

I think it would be a good service to you and to others if you were to send me that and then I could respond to it with some more

refined responses.

Okay, I don't know if you want to do that or not, but you can.

The address would be here.

And then maybe I can put the response up on my website, calvinistcorner .com.

I wrote some questions up and I figured it would probably be better if I were to write them up so I could paste them.

Tell you what, someone has the recordings.

We can just get somebody to transcribe it.

Good enough and then I'll just respond to it.

They'll send it to me.

No big deal.

So there are lots of questions I can ask.

And I do appreciate you finally being willing to at least address or try to address some of the difficult questions.

So let me ask you this.

I'll paste it and read it so people can hear for the recording as well.

Do you agree or deny that God makes the will, the mind, the body, etc., and puts people

in a designated place, time, and culture with particular parents?

If not, why not?

But how is God not predestining people to salvation or damnation by his sovereign

arrangement of all factors that are under his control?

Go ahead.

Well, first of all, he puts people in a designated place.

I'll get you the verse for that while you're asking me the second question.

Matt, could you come up to the mic and repeat the second portion of your question?

He said, if you agree, then how is God not predestining people?

Well, God's not predestining people to do one or the other.

God just happens to know the free will decisions that people are going to make or predestining them to

salvation or condemnation or versus salvation.

He just happens to know, because he's omniscient, all of man's free will decisions that they're going to make based

on where God placed them.

Okay, so the mic is yours.

You're up.

Lou, you're not answering the question.

He's saying that he knows.

He's saying that he simply knows what free will choices are going to make.

It's problematic because it means that God is then contingent upon the choices of

individuals.

That means he is independent.

He's non -contingent.

He is self -sufficient.

And as such, he has no dependency on anything or anyone else.

If you were to say that God knows what their free will choices are going to be, then he predestines accordingly.

Then what you're saying is God's choices are then contingent upon the so -called free will choices of man.

And that violates the doctrine of God's asceticity.

Now, the issue is that if God knows exactly what the free will choices of man are predestining them, since

he knows exactly what those free will choices will be under any circumstance that he has sovereignly

arranged.

Go ahead.

Well, he's predestining them based on their free will choices.

Oh, by the way, here's the passage, by the way, Acts 17 .26 and Acts 17 .27, that

God places all men and has made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on

all the face of the earth and has determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation that they should seek the

Lord, if happily they might feel after him and find him, that we may be not far away from every one of us.

So God places every single person on the planet close enough where they

could seek after him.

Now, as far as predestination, I believe in predestination, by the way.

I believe in predestination.

But man is predestined based on what God foreknows within his very being.

Because God doesn't need to look down the corridors of time to find out what man's going to do.

Man is predestined based on God's foreknowledge of what he knows their free will decisions are

going to be before they make them.

God knows whether I'm saved or not before I was even born.

Tracy loves Jesus.

God knows whether Tracy loves Jesus.

But God knows beforehand whether they're going to be saved or saved before they're even born.

Because he's omniscient.

But he doesn't do that because he's not predestined them.

He knows because he foreknows whether they go into free will decisions before they even

make them.

That's how God predestines.

Matt Slick, you're up.

Well, that's still problematic.

I'm glad you are moving towards orthodoxy and affirming the doctrine of predestination.

But you don't understand that if God predestines, then what

you're doing is you're saying that God's decision to save someone is based upon a quality,

ability, or choice of an individual.

Engined upon man's choices.

This means they're going to do, and then he saves them based on what they're going to do, which means independence.

Which has existed from eternity past.

You're saying that within that, he looked down the corridor of time because it had to be that.

I know you said he didn't.

But the problem is that he would have to know all things and all situations.

And even if we want to work with what you're saying, it's still problematic.

Because there are, so to speak, an infinite number of potential existences that God could have brought into

reality.

He chose the one he decided.

And therefore, whatever free will choices anyone's going to make in any situation, God has brought

into actuality by creating the universe the way he did.

So he is, therefore, predestining them.

Absolutely.

Now along those questions of the free will, I think what I'll do is ask a question

about that.

I'll type this in here.

I'll paste it in.

Hold on, a window came up.

Let me close it.

Nothing happens.

Okay, good.

Nope, another one came up.

Okay, sorry.

Sorry, a window popped up.

Why does one person's free will

move him to believe, but another person's free will does not after God's reproving

occurs?

So why does one person's free will move him to believe, but another's free will does not?

This is in the context of God's reproving.

Or knowing, foreknowing.

Doesn't God know how...

That doesn't really work for this question.

Let me rephrase this.

Why does one person's free will choose God when another does not?

Why is it...

You say they're free will choices.

Why is it that one person believes and another person does not?

If you say it's because of their free will, then you're not answering the question.

What I want to do is have you answer specifically.

What is it about one individual, as compared to another individual, that has the one

individual receive God and another one does not, when it is God

who makes their free wills?

Could you answer that?

Go ahead.

First of all, I have to go back and answer your other question.

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.

1 Peter 1 -2 answers your previous question.

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.

God elects those based on his foreknowledge.

God doesn't need to look down the corridors of time.

God knows within his very being all free will decisions that man is going to make before he makes them.

Also, Galatians 6 -5 says this, For every man shall bear his own burden.

I wanted to go back and answer your previous question that we are elect based on God's

foreknowledge.

Now, based on your other question, Why does one person's free will move him

to believe, but another person's free will does not after God's reproving occurs?

Well, we'll go back to John 16 -8, where it's the Holy Spirit who

reproves the world of sin.

So when we hear the Gospel message, it's the Holy Spirit that's convicting the sinner.

So, now, does the sinner turn at God's reproof?

As Proverbs 1 -23 teaches, where Proverbs 1 -23 says, Turn you at my reproof.

What does it mean to turn at God's reproof?

To turn at God's reproof means to repent.

We can't turn at God's reproof unless he's reproving first.

God reproves.

God commands man to turn at his reproof.

And whether that man turns at God's reproof or not is based on whether or not he chooses to fear the Lord.

Now, what's the fear of the Lord?

Proverbs 8 -13 teaches that the fear of the Lord is to hate evil, pride, and arrogancy in the evil

way, and the proud amount do I hate.

So, when God's reproving work occurs, God is enabling the individual

to choose whether to fear the Lord or not.

God is instilled in every single person a conscience.

So when God's working on our conscience, He's calling on us to repent.

Do we fear the Lord?

Do we hate evil?

Are we prideful?

If we're prideful, or we embrace evil, we're not going to turn

at God's reproof.

But if we're humble, and we hate evil, and God's giving us that choice through His reproving work, we're going to

choose to fear the Lord.

And if we choose to fear the Lord, this is what happens when a person fears the Lord.

Psalm 25, 12 -14 says this, What man is he that feareth the Lord?

Him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him, and He will show them His covenant.

Now, the covenant is Christ, because when you turn to Acts

chapter 13, verse 26, it says, Men and brethren, children of the

stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is this word of salvation sent.

So the word of salvation, Matt, is to all those who choose to fear God.

Because only the God -fearer is going to accept the gospel message, because the God -fearer hates his sin,

and is humble.

The non -God -fearer embraces his sin, and is prideful.

So the non -God -fearer is going to accept the gospel, and the God -fearer, based on the fact that he's humble,

and he hates his sin, and God's enabling them to do that through His reproving work, and the fact that man has

a conscience, that enables man to choose whether or not to repent or

turn to God's reproof.

So I hope I answered your other question.

Matt, Slick, you're up.

Well, the problem is that we're not focusing, and you're introducing all kinds of things.

You've introduced several scriptures.

And then my response will be five minutes, and your response will be ten minutes.

I specifically asked a question, which I'll paste in here.

First of all, Proverbs 8, 13, the fear of the Lord is to hate evil.

It doesn't say that people are enabled to hate evil by being reproved or by being

enlightened or anything.

It just says that the fear of the Lord is to hate evil.

Nothing in the text designates anything other than that.

As far as Proverbs 1, 23 goes, this is a personification of wisdom.

It's not a doctrinal statement about the character or ability of the saved or unsaved.

Proverbs is a collection of wisdom statements and a subsequent responsibility that people have to follow God's truth.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that a command of God automatically means that a person is able to accomplish it.

Now, you brought that up, and I want to show you that this principle that you

reject is actually scripture.

It's actually biblical.

I'll paste this in, and you can take a look at it.

See, God often requires what we cannot accomplish.

In 1 Peter 1, 16, God says to be holy because he is holy.

But a person cannot be holy in and of himself.

We see that God commands everyone everywhere to repent, Acts 17, 30, but it is God who grants repentance, 2

Timothy 2, 25.

We see that God commands people to believe in him, yet he opens their hearts to believe, as he did with Lydia in Acts 16,

14.

He grants that people believe in Philippians 1, 29.

This is why Romans 9, 16 says,.

It does not depend upon the man who wills or the man who runs, but upon God who has mercy.

The point is this, that when you say or imply that God will not

require something of someone that they're not able to do, well, yes, he does.

He absolutely does.

1 Peter 1, 16 proves that that is the case.

Be holy because I'm holy.

Nobody can be holy.

Only God is holy, but he gives us the holiness that we need through Christ, and that's by his decree,

not by our will.

So your statement is invalid.

It's not biblical, and I've shown you that.

Now, you went on to Psalm 25, and I forgot which exact verse,

but that's a psalm written by David, and he's already a believer.

There's nothing in there about being enabled in any way to come to believe in God

just by being a person who fears God.

It simply asks, who is the man who fears the Lord?

That's what it does in, I think, verse 12.

Who is the one who fears the Lord?

There's nothing in there at all that demonstrates to us or tells us in any way, shape, or form

how a person comes to fear the Lord.

However, the Bible does tell us that that is the case.

Let me find the verse, and I'll post it in here.

He tells us how we do come to fear the Lord.

And this is Jeremiah 32, 40.

And I'll make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them to

do them good, and I will put the fear of me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from me.

So we know because God is the one who puts the fear in their hearts.

Whenever you quote any verse that says, well, those who fear him, well, my question is, why do they fear him?

They fear him because God put the fear of him in them.

That's what he says he does.

That's the answer to that.

So my question, and we're going through a lot of stuff here, and this is why I want to

focus on one thing at a time.

I think you're making an assumption that is not warranted in any of the verses that you've cited.

You say or you imply that a person is unable to believe by being reproved, by

being urged, by being commanded.

And that's not what the scripture is teaching.

Oh, I just remembered foreknowledge.

Let me address that really fast.

If you do a study on the word know, K -N -O -W in the Greek is ginosko, you'll find that God only knows believers.

If you go to Romans 8 .29, for example, those whom he foreknew he also predestined.

That's proginosko.

The ones who are foreknown are also the ones predestined.

We see the pattern in scripture where God says he only knows those who are his.

That's the pattern that God has set up.

When people are elected by the foreknowledge of God, it's concomitant or it is similar to this issue of

Romans 8 .29 and 30 where God only knows those who are his.

He knows them because he's called them to himself, as Acts 13 .48 says.

We'll get to that.

So foreknowledge does not mean looking down the corridors of time or knowing ahead of time.

Because if he does not look down the corridors of time, there is no foreknowledge to be had.

See, God knows all things instantaneously and eternally.

There is no foreknowledge in that sense.

He can't foreknow ahead of time because with God there is no time.

There is no looking down the corridor, looking beyond or looking within or anything.

It's just simply all knowledge is eternally consistent and instantaneous with God from all time.

Foreknowledge doesn't mean that he looked in any way, shape, or form to see what the free will choices of people

would be.

As I said before, that would make him contingent.

It would violate that issue.

If you do a study on the word know, K -N -O -W, as it relates to salvation, you'll see he only

knows believers and those whom he foreknew.

He also predestined the foreknown ones are the predestined ones or the same group.

So, back to this question.

Can you show me any scripture?

Can you show me any scripture?

I'll paste this in.

Sorry about that.

Can you show me any scripture that says that when a person is reproved by God that he is

unable to believe?

Now, don't just assume that's the case.

Show it to me from scripture without reading into the text.

Go ahead.

First of all, there are a number of fallacies, Matt, that I need to address before I answer your question.

First of all, the fear of the Lord is a choice.

Proverbs 129.

To the unrepentant sinner for they hate and knowledge.

It doesn't say they could not choose the fear of the Lord.

It says they did not choose the fear of the Lord.

There's a big difference in words here.

The fear of the Lord is clearly a choice.

God says, turn you with my reproof.

The fear of the Lord is a choice.

That's clear.

Now, let me go to 1 Peter 1 .16.

God says to be holy as I am holy.

We can be holy as God is holy.

Do you know how?

Christ imputed righteousness.

When God sees us as Christians, He sees Christ's righteousness in

us.

He sees Christ's holiness in us.

That's how we can be holy as God is holy.

That's the only way.

Imputed righteousness.

Now, how does God put the fear of the Lord in their heart?

He teaches the fear of the Lord.

Psalm 34 .11 says this regarding the fear of the Lord.

The fear of the Lord is taught.

And a person can refuse to be taught.

That's another thing.

I wanted to address that.

Also, 2 Timothy 2 .25 teaches that God grants

repentance.

I think it's in 2 Timothy 2 .25.

Let me post the verse.

I think you caught it from the ESV, which is fine.

Read 2 Timothy 2, Matt.

That's not to everybody.

God's granting a person to repent to a person

who He has turned over to a reprobate mind.

These are people who are teaching falsely, who have turned away from the truth,

and are teaching falsely, and have gone into heresy.

God grants them repentance if these people realize what they've been doing.

But God doesn't grant everyone repentance.

God commands repentance.

A person who decides to choose and turn to follow other religions after being shown the truth,

God turns over to a reprobate mind.

If that person realizes, Oh my goodness, what have I done?

God's granting those people repentance.

God doesn't grant everyone repentance.

God commands all to repent.

And the only way you could repent is through God's reproving work.

He says, turn you at My reproof.

They choose to fear the Lord.

If they choose to fear the Lord, they're going to turn at His reproof.

Turning at His reproof means to repent.

Turning at God's reproof means to repent.

Ezekiel 33 .11 says this.

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his

way and live.

Turning from his way means to repent.

Turn ye, turn ye from your own evil ways.

That's repentance.

Okay?

Turning from a person's wicked ways is repentance.

Okay?

God commands that and God enables that through His reproving work.

Okay?

Now, I got to go.

What was your previous question, Matt?

Because you've made a lot of fallacies and I forgot what your last question was.

Can you come up to the mic and repeat it?

You're up.

Can you show me any scripture that says when a person is reproved by God, that he is also enabled

to believe?

You see, what you're doing is begging the question.

You're assuming that when someone's reproved, they're enabled to believe.

And I'm glad that you agree with me.

The good reformed theology of 1 Peter 1 .16, that God

commands what people cannot do.

We cannot be holy.

God imputes it to us.

Exactly correct.

He also grants that we believe.

2 Timothy 2 .25.

Excuse me.

Grants that we believe.

Philippians 1 .29.

Grants that we have repentance.

2 Timothy 2 .25, et cetera.

So, good reformed theology.

You're coming along.

I appreciate that.

That's the question.

Can you show me any scripture that says that when a person is reproved by God, that he is also enabled to believe?

Go ahead.

Matt, first of all, I haven't agreed with you once.

So, to say that I'm, like, coming along nicely to me is, like, it's an

insult to my intelligence.

I don't think I've agreed with you once in this whole thing.

So, let me put this up front.

Be holy as I am holy.

The only way you can be as holy as God is holy is imputed righteousness.

That's number one.

Number two, 2 Timothy 2 .25, God grants repentance to those who have God

turned over to a reprobate mind.

2 Timothy 2 is about false teachers, those who have gone into heresy.

God's not granting repentance to every single human being and enabling all to repent like you're claiming.

So, Matt, you've been off kilter for the last half an hour.

And for you to say that I'm coming along nicely and I'm agreeing with reformed theology, I think everybody in this room is

intelligent enough to realize that that certainly is not the case.

Now, can you show me any scripture that says when a person is reproved by God that he is also enabled to

believe?

Yeah, right here.

Acts 13 .26, Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you

that feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.

The gospel message is sent strictly to the God -fearer.

Why?

Because Acts 10 .34 -35 says this,

Peter said, Of a truth I believe that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation he that feareth him

and worketh righteousness is accepted with him.

God accepts the God -fearer.

And Paul is saying that the gospel message is sent only to the God -fearer.

Why?

Because only the God -fearer will accept it.

Jesus said in Mark 1 .15 this, Repent and believe the gospel.

Mark 1 .15, Repent and believe the gospel.

So what happens first?

Repentance first.

Then comes the belief.

That's the order.

Repent, then believe.

So you ask me, can I show you a verse which teaches that a person upon

fearing God or repenting could believe?

Right there, Jesus' words in Mark 1 .15.

Matt, you're up.

Oh, by the way, foreknowledge?

Look it up.

Foreknowledge means to know beforehand.

That's what foreknowledge means.

To know beforehand.

Matt, you're up.

Well, Lou, I'd recommend that you do a Bible study on the term foreknowledge and how God uses it along with the word know.

K -N -O -W, ginosko in the Greek.

And you'll see that he only foreknows the believers in that sense, in that context.

So check it out.

You should do that.

You've not shown me what I've asked.

You've begged the question.

You see, Proverbs 1 .29, they did not choose.

Of course they did not choose.

When you say they did not choose, so therefore it's a choice, it doesn't mean that they had this

inherent ability to be able to choose.

It just says they did not choose.

We know why they did not choose.

Because the unbeliever is deceitful and wicked, Jeremiah 17 .9.

He's full of evil, Mark 7 .21 -23.

He loves darkness rather than light and does evil, John 3 .19.

He does not seek for God nor does any good, Romans 3 .10 -12.

He's ungodly, Romans 5 .6.

He's dead in his sins, Ephesians 2 .1.

By nature a child of wrath, Ephesians 2 .3.

He cannot accept or understand spiritual things, 1 Corinthians 2 .14.

He's a slave of sin, Romans 6 .16 -20.

That's why they didn't choose.

For you to say Proverbs 1 .29 means that they had the ability to choose

simply because they're told to be reproved, to turn, whatever it is.

Doesn't mean that they have the inerrant ability, especially when we see scriptures that speak to the contrary.

You see, if you're going to rest everything on a single verse, and I know you don't just do that kind of a thing.

But you do tend to take one verse and put it above basically all other verses.

And that's a problem.

Because when we look at what the scriptures tell us about the unbeliever, we discover

that the unbeliever is just as I pasted right there.

He's deceitful and wicked, full of evil, and etc.

So, you've said that I've made a lot of fallacies, a lot of logical errors.

Well, I'm saying you're making a lot of them.

The problem here right now is that I can start listing out all the ones you did, and then we have a counter to counter, and

we're not going to get anywhere.

So what I'm going to do is focus on a few things, because we have to do that in order to get through some of the more

difficult questions.

Because there are a lot of questions I've got for you, and ours is not going to be long enough.

But in light of what I'm saying here, in light of what the scripture says, you must not mistakenly assume

that they did not choose the fear of the Lord because they have the free will ability to do so once enlightened.

Or once called.

Because the unbeliever is deceitful and wicked, just as I've said.

We know from Jeremiah 32 .40 that God gives it to them.

He puts it in their heart.

Why did they not choose the fear of the Lord?

Because God had not put it in their heart to fear Him.

That's what the scriptures teach.

That God puts it in the heart of people to fear Him.

Jeremiah 32 .40.

That's what He says.

So when I ask the question, or you ask the question, or anybody does in the text, why is it they did not choose the fear of the Lord?

Because God hadn't given them that.

Just as He hadn't given the people repentance in 2 Timothy 2 .25, the false teachers.

Let's go with that.

False teachers.

You're right.

He's got to give it to them.

Why?

Because it's not in their free will to do that.

Because they are by nature children of wrath.

And all unbelievers, according to scripture, are false teachers.

All unbelievers work against God.

All unbelievers are slaves of sin, Romans 6 .14 .2 .20.

All unbelievers cannot receive the things of God for their foolishness to them.

1 Corinthians 2 .14.

All unbelievers fit in that category.

God has to grant it to them.

God has to do that.

Now, so let's see if we can get a slight change of direction.

I want to ask you a question about Philippians 1 .29.

This is where it says that God grants that people believe.

Now, in the King James, it's the word given.

For to you it has been granted for Christ's sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.

King James says given.

That's a Greek word charizomai.

It is used in the following verses.

You can check them out later.

So if it is true that God enables people to believe when they're reproved or when they're enlightened, or it's just their choice,

then why is it that God has to grant that they believe if the believing that they're going to accomplish is

by their own free will?

Why does God have to grant it to them if it's really up to them?

Go ahead.

Matt, I think I addressed before that God places the fear of the Lord in a

person's heart by teaching it.

I think I said that before.

And once again, Matt, Proverbs 1 .29, I need to repeat these

things, and I don't know if you're listening to what I'm saying.

Proverbs 1 .29 says they did not choose the fear of the Lord.

It doesn't say they could not choose the fear of the Lord.

I mean, read the verse carefully.

It says they did not choose the fear of the Lord.

Fear of the Lord is a choice.

They could have chosen, but they didn't.

Turn you with my reproof.

A person, you see, you're putting words in my mouth, and then you're refuting what I'm saying.

You're saying that I'm claiming that man has the inherent ability to choose to fear God.

No, I'm not saying that at all, Matt.

Man doesn't have the inherent ability to fear God at all.

Man needs to be reproved by God in order to have that ability to fear God.

Okay?

Reproof comes first.

Turn you at my reproof.

So, Matt, I don't know if you're paying attention to what I'm saying.

And then you're coming up to the mic, and you're putting words in my mouth, and you're saying that I'm saying silly things, but I'm not.

I don't know if you're listening.

Man doesn't have the inherent ability to do anything without God doing something first.

God reproves.

Man turns at God's reproof.

Man can't turn at God's reproof unless he's being reproved.

So, Matt, you want to go back on that.

Okay?

2 Timothy 2 .25 is not for all people.

God doesn't grant repentance for everyone.

The granting of repentance is only to those who God gave over to a

reprobate mind, who have seen the truth, turned from it, And now, if they

realize what they've done, God grants those repentance.

But God doesn't grant repentance to anyone.

God commands all men everywhere to repent.

Once a person hears the gospel message, they're enabled to turn at God's reproof.

And once again, I give you Ezekiel 33 .11.

Okay?

Well, this is what God said regarding Israel in Ezekiel 33 .11.

As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.

Turning from his way is to repent.

Turn ye, turn ye from your own evil ways.

That's repentance.

For why will ye die, O house of Israel?

So a wicked man can't turn unless he's being reproved.

God reproves.

Man turns at God's reproof.

You went to Jeremiah 17 .9.

You're isolating verses, Matt.

Jeremiah 17 .9.

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.

Who can know it?

But you need to read the next verse.

You need to read the next verse.

What does the next verse say?

This is what the next verse says.

I, the Lord, search the heart.

I try the rains, even to give every man according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings.

So we need to read Jeremiah 17 .9 in light of Jeremiah 17 .10 and vice versa.

You're not doing that.

You're isolating verses.

So I need to go back on that.

You asked me before, and then you're rattling off verses.

Let's do one at a time.

So what verse do you want to tackle, Matt, one at a time?

Don't give me Romans 8 .22, Galatians 3 .18, Philippians 2 .9, like I'm overwhelmed over here.

Ask me specific, hard questions.

And you're not doing that.

You're overloading the room with issues.

Then you're putting words in my mouth.

And then you're refuting things that I didn't say.

So let's do one verse at a time, Matt.

What verse would you like for me to address first?

One at a time.

You're up.

Philippians 1 .29.

Let's look at Philippians 1 .29.

Okay.

Philippians 1 .29.

Okay.

For unto you is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer

for his sake.

Is that believing on the gospel, Matt?

Or is that just believing on the works that God is doing in their life?

Is it believing the gospel?

What's the context of Philippians 1?

Is it believing just to believe the gospel?

No, to believe in what about Jesus?

The gospel?

Or is it to believe in the works that Christ will do through them when they go out in their ministry?

What kind of belief are we talking about?

Yeah, to believe in Jesus, in him.

Yeah.

In what way?

I believe in Jesus, too.

And I'm a believer already.

Do we Christians believe in Jesus?

No, no.

What does it say, salvific, Matt?

What does it say, salvific, in Philippians 1?

I believe in Jesus.

I'm already a believer.

But I believe in Jesus.

I believe that he's going to maybe heal somebody.

Or I believe that he's going to work in me and make me a better person.

I believe in the work that he's going to do in me to help me walk in his way

and to work.

I believe in Jesus in a lot of ways.

But what does it say in Philippians 1?

It's believing in the gospel.

Let's take a look at the context of Philippians 1.

Don't isolate verses, Matt.

And that's what I think you're doing.

You're up.

He said God doesn't delight in the death of the wicked.

That's true, Ezekiel 3311.

For you and for others, you might want to research it.

1 Samuel 2 .25, God desires to put people to death.

And the word in Hebrew is the same word for taking the pleasure in Exodus 3311, to delight

and take pleasure in.

So he does do that.

But that's another theological discussion we can get into, which Reformed theology does answer very well.

I'm glad you agree with the Reformed doctrine of total depravity, that a wicked man cannot turn

when he's reproved just by the simple act of...

Let me put it this way.

I don't want to put words in your mouth.

I'm not honestly trying to do that.

I'm glad that you agree with the Reformed doctrine of total depravity, that a person is not enabled of himself

and in himself to be able to simply choose God.

You would have to assert that it was necessary as a reproving work of God upon the person that somehow enables them.

And, of course, when you go to, I think it was Jeremiah 2411, that God teaches them,

these are the people who are already believers.

They're already those who follow God.

They're Israelites.

Jeremiah 3240, God says that he gives the

fear of the Lord to them.

We know that God says he does it.

I'm going to conclude that God is the one who does it.

That's what I'm going to conclude.

Now, Philippians 129, I'm going to draw some things.

And trust me, I could tackle so many things with what you just said, but we're not going to get anywhere.

So just for the sake of brevity, we're going to go into Philippians 1.

I hope you're not saying that the people there who are granted the act of believing in

Jesus, in Christ, are not unbelievers.

Because a text says, for to you it has been granted for Christ's sake not only to believe in him.

I'm hoping you're not going to say that that's unbelievers that have been granted

to believe in Jesus and to suffer for his sake.

To suffer for his sake, we're talking about believers, those who are Christians.

Those who are suffering with the Lord, for the Lord, because of the Lord, whatever it is.

And Philippians 1 .6, I'm confident of this very thing, that he who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of

Christ Jesus.

So he's talking to the believers there.

And of course the believers, unfortunately, are having to suffer for Christ's sake.

And he wants to go and see the Philippians.

He wants to go there.

And he says in verse 27, only conduct yourself in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.

He's talking undoubtedly to believers.

Now, let me paste this in again.

Let's just focus on Philippians 1 .29 here.

The last sentence there.

If it's true that God enables people to believe by reproving them, then why does God have to grant

that they believe in him?

Go ahead.

What does it say that God's enabling them to believe?

God's enabling them to believe because a person chooses to repent.

It's all dependent on a person's choosing to repent.

But it's all dependent on a person's choosing to repent.

It's dependent on something.

Repent and believe.

That's the order, right, Matt?

Mark 1 .15, repent and believe.

A person isn't going to believe unless they repent first.

They need to repent first, then they believe.

Once they repent, they can believe.

They can't believe without repenting first.

So, a person's ability or even granting them to believe

is based on whether they choose to repent or not.

Whether they choose to turn at God's reproof.

Whether they choose to fear the Lord.

Once again, Psalm 25 .12 and 14 says this.

5, 12, and 14.

What man is he that feareth the Lord, keeping in mind that the fear of the Lord is a choice, and the fear of the Lord is to hate

evil and pride and arrogancy?

Him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

God's teaching them what they shall choose.

The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him, and he will show them his covenant.

Then they believe.

God's granting them to believe.

Once again, in Acts 13 .26, it says this.

Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is

this word of their salvation sent, and the word of salvation is the gospel.

God's granting them to believe based on their free will decision to choose at God's reproof

and to fear the Lord.

On that, you're up.

Sorry about that.

You're not answering the question.

Now, I'm going to tackle Mark 1 .15.

So, you're saying the order is that they first have to repent in order to believe.

So, a person repents before he believes the gospel?

So, if you want to say that Mark 1 .15 is an ordo salutis doctrinal statement on the order of regeneration, preceding faith,

one this or that, well, you know, they have to repent, which God grants to people,

but they can't do that because they're slaves of sin and haters of God and do no good, but yet they can repent.

And then they believe the gospel because of their repentance?

That doesn't make any sense.

Back to Philippians 1 .29, if it is true that God enables people to believe,

if it is true that God enables people to believe when they're reproved, then why does God have to grant that they believe?

They're not answering the question.

You go to other verses, which I've already addressed, Psalm 25, Proverbs 1 .29, and you say,

it's a choice.

Yeah, they chose.

They absolutely said, in Proverbs 1 .29, let me go to that quickly.

Hold on one sec.

I'm going to make sure I read it properly.

Because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord.

That's what Proverbs 1 .29 says.

You're right.

They did not choose the fear of the Lord.

I already addressed that.

The reason they did not choose the fear of the Lord is because

they're slaves of sin, haters of God, don't do any good, etc.

Why?

I'm going to paste this in.

The answer is found in Scripture.

Exegesis, not eisegesis.

Why?

Because the believer is deceitful and wicked, full of evil, loves darkness rather than light,

does evil, does not seek for God, is ungodly, child of wrath, etc., is slave of sin.

That's why they didn't choose the fear of the Lord.

The fact is that God didn't put the fear of Him in them, as He said He does

in Jeremiah 32 .40.

That's what He says He does.

This is Reformed theology right here, that God is a sovereign Lord.

I've got a question for you.

Let me see if I can write this out.

What is in one person's free will that enables him to

choose?

Hold on.

I can use my speech program.

Hold on because my hands hurt too much from typing.

What is in a person's free will that would allow him to choose

where it does not allow another person to choose when both have

their free will created by them, for them, excuse me, by God?

Well, Matt, first of all, you said that Malachi Mark 1 .15 is ridiculous.

The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand.

Repent ye and believe the gospel.

And you said, well, it's ridiculous that a person repents and then believes.

You said it was ridiculous.

It doesn't make any sense that a person repents and then believes.

So I would imagine that when John the Baptist says, Repent ye for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,

he was being silly.

What did John the Baptist say?

Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Before Jesus' ministry, repent.

Okay?

So you repent first, and then Jesus said in Mark 1 .15, Repent and believe the gospel.

So it's really not ridiculous.

The point I was making was really quite biblical.

And once again, Jeremiah 32 .40, I think you're repeating this, and I'm giving you the same answer that I gave you before.

Jeremiah 32 .40, God places the fear of the Lord in their hearts.

And how does he do that?

Psalm 34 .11, he teaches them the fear of the Lord.

And as we know, a person can refuse to be taught.

But how he places it in their heart is he teaches them, and if they want to be taught, they'll be taught.

If they don't want to be taught, they won't be taught.

It's a choice.

And once again, you keep on going back to Proverbs 1 .29.

I recommend that everybody in the room read this carefully.

It says that they did not choose the fear of the Lord.

It doesn't say they could not choose the fear of the Lord.

Very, very careful when you read this verse.

They hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord.

But God says, turn ye with my reproof.

Because I have called, and ye refused.

The word refused there, and it basically assumes the word refused assumes ability.

Okay?

I refuse to walk.

I could walk, but I refuse to walk.

A person with no legs doesn't refuse to walk.

He can't walk.

Okay?

So, read these verses carefully.

They refused, which means they could have yielded and turned to God's reproof, but they chose not to.

So, I recommend that everybody read these words.

Okay?

So, Matt, you asked a question before, and because I had to go back and redo and

reword all your answers you said that I gave, which I didn't do, you said, what is in a

person's free will that would allow him to choose where another does not choose?

Simple.

The conscience.

Everybody has a conscience.

I have a conscience.

You have a conscience.

Loves Plato has a conscience.

Rod Hill has a conscience.

God has instilled in every single one of us a conscience.

And the free will to choose to do good or choose to do

that which is evil.

And the only way a person could turn to God's reproof is to basically be

convicted by the Holy Spirit and reproved by the Holy Spirit.

Where that person chooses, based on his conscience, to yield to God's reproof and repent and

believe the gospel or embraces sin and choose to live a sinful lifestyle is based on his

free will decisions to do that.

What enables a person to do that?

His conscience.

Whatever God gives him the liberty to do one way or the other.

Okay?

If a person...

If a person...

Hold on one second.

Let me go to John chapter 3, because I think you went to verse 19.

Let me go to verse 20.

For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

But he that doeth good cometh to the light, that his deeds may be manifested, that they are wrought in

God.

So God's given everybody the ability to make their own free will decisions through the reproving work of the Holy Spirit.

And Matt, the mic is yours.

You're up.

Well, the fact that you're not able to answer the question demonstrates that your theological position is insufficient.

There are so many things worth addressing and the time constraints, and I don't want to get off topic too many times,

I've addressed the Jeremiah verses, and you say that he teaches them the fear of the Lord.

That's how he gives it to them?

That's not what the text says.

I've asked specifically about 3240.

And I could do the same thing that you do.

How does he teach them?

By giving it to them.

He could teach them the fear of the Lord, but those people are already believers.

So you teach them all that they already have.

He grants to them and he gives them the issue and the ability to be able to

have fear of him.

That's what the Bible clearly tells us.

And of course they refused.

Don't make the logical mistake.

It's a mistaken logic.

Choose this day whom you're going to serve.

That means that they automatically have the ability to make that choice.

Well, someone could make that claim, but is it logically necessary?

Just as it says they did not choose the fear of the Lord, they did not choose the way of the Lord.

That's fine.

When we say that they did not, or when the scriptures say that, you cannot logically say it necessitates that they

have the ability to be able to choose to be able to do that in order for it to be a true statement.

It's not logically necessary.

Because I've shown you from scriptures where man is, and I've pasted it before,

where man is a slave of sin, a hater of God, does no good, cannot receive spiritual things.

So when we have the New Testament light shining on that proverb, which is a wisdom statement,

not a doctrinal statement about the nature of man, but a wisdom statement, when we have the doctrinal

statements of the New Testament about man's nature, and we put it upon the Old Testament, we understand,

oh, now I know why they did not choose.

It's because they were not able to.

And God had not, according to Philippians 1 .29, granted that they believe.

He hadn't granted that they believe.

Now, you said that the reason they did not

choose...

I asked you about free will.

Why does one person's free will enable a person to choose and another one does not?

And your answer was because they have a conscience.

Well, that's not answering the question.

Because all I've got to do is say, why does one person's conscience bring a person to

choose God and another one does not, when God makes the consciences?

I began this questioning of you.

I said, do you agree or deny that God makes the will, the mind, the body, and I'm just going to insert the word conscience in there because that's part of the will,

and puts people in a designated place, time, and culture with particular parents, and that God also knows exactly what the

free will choice, according to conscience, will be of any and all people whom He has thus made and placed

in those circumstances since He's arranged it all?

I'm going to paste this original statement in.

You can just put the word conscience in.

I'm not going to write it in right now and waste time.

The conscience is part of the mind and the will.

But if you agree, then how is God not predestining?

You said God does predestine, but then you said by His foreknowledge of what they're going to do.

But that is a circle.

You see, God, according to your system here, God makes their will, makes their conscience,

puts it in them in all the circumstances and then He chooses them based on a free will choice they're going to make.

But wait a minute.

God arranged it for them to make that choice.

You can't say He did not.

You cannot say that God is not in sovereign control of all situations and all circumstances about everything.

He is.

He knows exactly what the outcome will be of all of the circumstances and all the variables

that He put in place, and He can bring a person's decision to another point,

a different decision, based on whatever God desires to put into place in that

person's life and in that person's creation that will result in something different.

God undoubtedly has that ability to do that, and He does so.

And since He does so, because He works all things after the counsel of His will, and

He puts the mind, the body, the soul, the will together, for you to say that He then looks in the

future to see...

Excuse me.

I retract that.

That He looks in the future.

I know you didn't say that.

That you say that He foreknows, we'll just leave it at that, what decisions they're going to make, and that's how He

saves them.

You've got a logical problem.

You're saying He knows ahead of time what decisions He's going to make based on what

He's arranged that they would do by all the circumstances,

the conscience, the will that He's created.

So you see, what you're doing is arguing in a circle, chasing your own tail.

Your position cannot answer the question, why does the conscience choose and another conscience does

not?

In my perspective, from my Reformed theology, which I base in Scripture, I know why.

Because God grants that people believe, Philippians 1 .29.

He grants them repentance, 2 Timothy 2 .25.

Our believing is the work of God, John 6 .28 .29.

We're born again not of our own wills, John 1 .13.

I know that God is a sovereign.

He doesn't look around to see what's going to happen.

He doesn't have a foreknowledge about what people are going to do in a particular situation.

And then He chooses them based on their choice, which makes God contingent.

That's not how it works.

I've asked you the question, and what you've done is you've gone back in circles.

You say the reason one will chooses is because of the conscience.

Then the question, why does one person's conscience choose and another does not?

Can you answer that question?

Why does one person's conscience choose to fear God and another does not?

Go ahead.

Matt, I've got to ask you a question.

I mean, you've been asking me a lot of questions.

I've got to ask you a question.

Can you put the word refuse in a sentence where a person refusing isn't able?

Because you're saying, it says, because I have called and you refused.

And you're saying, well, they could not choose the fear of the Lord.

So I'm going to ask you, can you put the word refuse in a logical sentence where the person

refusing isn't able?

Because I think these two verses are teaching that a person is able.

So I'm going to ask you to do that for the room.

Because there's 88 people in this room, 86 besides you and I, and you're saying that refusing,

they did not choose the fear of the Lord because they could not, yet it says that they refused.

So I'm going to ask you to put the word refuse in a logical sentence where the person refusing isn't able.

So we can continue.

Because I really don't think you're following a very clear point that I'm making here.

Matt, can you come up to the mic and answer that very simple question for me?

You're up.

Well, I don't think at the moment that I can put the word

refuse in a logical sentence, as you've requested, where a person refusing

isn't able.

But I'm sure I can come up with it.

At least I believe I could.

But right here, when I'm taking notes while you're speaking, I don't know if I can do

that at the moment.

I have to think about it for a little while before I can put what you call a logical sentence.

A logical sentence, I'm not sure what you mean by that because we have syllogisms, we have logical

inferences, but a logical sentence.

I think I know what you mean.

So give me some time and I'll work on one.

See if I can come up with something like that and then I'll get it to you later.

Because at the moment, I don't think I can devote enough silent mental energy

for a minute or two or three or four to come up with something.

But even if I could, excuse me, even if I could not, it does not negate the

truth of what I'm telling you out of God's word.

You see, you are making the assumption,

you are making the assumption that because God says to someone, choose,

or because God, or because someone doesn't turn at his reproof, that it

automatically means they have the ability to do that.

I have already addressed this more than once.

The principle is true that God does require that people do

what they cannot naturally do.

Matthew 5 .48 for example, Be perfect for I am perfect.

And nobody can do that.

I'm sorry.

But notice that God gives the standard of perfection, which is himself.

Be perfect because I'm perfect.

How about 1 Peter 1 .16, Be holy because I'm holy.

He gives the command to be holy.

He gives the command to be perfect.

And he gives it to the sinners who are not holy and to the imperfect

who cannot achieve perfection because by nature they are imperfect.

You see, we in Reformed circles would say that God is a standard of righteousness.

He's the one who requires perfection because he's perfect.

But it doesn't mean we're automatically able to do it.

This is why, and I'm glad you said this earlier, in reference to 1 Peter 1 .16,

that God grants them that holiness or imputes it, I think is the word you used.

I'm answering your question.

That he gives them what they cannot do on their own.

I'm making that case from Scripture and showing you that that's the case.

So when you go to Philippians 1 .29 and you want to say that when God says that they did not

turn at his reproof, means that they have to be able to do that, I've now shown you that that's

not logically necessary and I've got Scriptures to counter your argument which you've not

refuted.

So, let's get back to Philippians 1 .29.

I can do another question.

Tell you what.

Incidentally, I didn't say Mark 1 .15 was stupid.

I know you kind of misspoke on that one.

That's not what I'm saying.

How about this?

Remember, you said you were going to answer difficult questions.

So let me ask you this question.

Verse 12 is speaking of salvation, of receiving Christ.

That's what it means.

Verse 13 says that we are born, and it makes sense to say born again.

How does this verse fit into your idea that God enables people to believe in him by reproving them and

such, etc.?

Can you answer that?

Go ahead.

Matt, you've been asking me the tough questions for the last hour and 15 minutes and I asked you a simple one.

A simple question, Matt.

It really was a simple question and you said you have to ponder it and really think it over.

And there's 91 people in this room and I asked you a simple question.

I took you to Proverbs 1, 23 and Proverbs 1, 29 and I

said to you, Matt, they refused to choose the fear of the Lord.

And I asked you to put the word refuse in a sentence where the person refusing isn't able.

It should be easy for you.

That should be the easiest...

I mean, Matt, for even us to continue?

This is showing ability.

They refused.

They could have...

In other words, Matt, I'm sitting in my chair right now.

I refuse to stand up.

That means I can stand up.

I'm able to stand up, but I'm refusing to stand up.

If I have no legs, I can't refuse to stand up.

I'm unable to stand up.

So the fact of the matter is because I have called and you refused, because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord,

first of all, the word choice implies ability.

The word refuse implies ability.

So I want the 90 people in this room to know that I asked Matt a simple question

and he's unable to put the word refuse in a sentence where the person refusing isn't able.

If God's enabling the person to choose the fear of the Lord, what comes next?

Psalm 25, 12 and 14.

What man is he that feareth the Lord?

Him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

There you go.

They could choose.

The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him and he will show them his covenant.

And Matt, you made one other fallacy.

Major fallacy.

Major fallacies here, Matt.

Mark 1, 15.

Jesus says repent and believe the gospel.

And then you come up and say repent first and then believe the gospel.

That's silly.

That doesn't make any sense.

That's silly.

So it was silly and you're not addressing these things.

You're not saying, gee golly, Lou.

I made a mistake.

So when John the Baptist said repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand in Matthew 3,

2, maybe he was wrong?

He's commanding the Jews to repent before Jesus' ministry.

The Savior was coming.

The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

Repent first.

Then believe.

You're saying how Reformed theology is biblical?

Matt, you made two fallacies.

You're unable to do that.

And then you said repentance before believing is silly.

Well, it's not silly because John the Baptist commands to repent and then Jesus says repent

and believe.

So clearly it's biblical.

It's really not silly.

And then we went to Philippians 1, 29 where God grants, where God's

granting believing.

He's granting believing based on a person's choosing to repent.

Then he grants that they believe.

So the granting of believing is all based on a person's choosing to repent.

And I'm answering your questions but Matt, you're not answering my simple questions.

So once again, I'm going to repeat because we've got 5 -10 minutes left in here and I really have enjoyed this

conversation and I want to invite everybody to Matt Slick's room because Matt's going to open up a room in a

little while and go over all the answers that I didn't give.

But in the meantime, Matt, for your room's sake, can you really think hard?

Can you put the word refuse in a sentence where the person refusing isn't able?

Think on that.

That's a major issue, Matt.

Because if a person is refusing, clearly

they're able.

And that's your burden, not mine.

So Matt, I'm going to give you the mic and I'm going to give you the opportunity to ask me one more tough question.

I've enjoyed this and I hope we can do it again.

But think of a good sentence to show your crowd in your room of a good sentence where the person

refusing isn't able.

I really want to find out what that sentence is and type it for me and send it to me in PM because I'm really interested.

I haven't heard one Calvinist come up with a sentence like that where a person refusing isn't able.

A logical sentence.

So Matt, you're up.

I'll give you one more shot at it.

You're up.

And I've enjoyed this, by the way.

And I know that I'm passionate about what I believe and you're passionate about what you believe.

But for all the hard questions you've asked me in the last hour and 15 minutes, I've asked you one simple

question and you're still thinking of a good answer where I could put the word refuse in a

sentence where the person refusing isn't able.

Because Matt, if you can't do it, then maybe you can't do it.

And if you can't do it, maybe the entire tulip falls apart and withers.

Something to think about.

Matt, you're up.

Wow.

So let me ask you.

Am I not allowed to ponder how to answer the question and get back to you later on it?

I already told you that such a question that requires logic

would require that I do a bit of contemplation and a logical examination

about developing a structured sentence.

When I was debating Dan Barker, an atheist, I knew a certain

argument that he would raise.

It took me about a day to come up with a specific question and statement to

deal with something I knew he would raise.

I'd hope you'd give me the same grace to be able to allow me to do the same thing because I think your question is an interesting one

and I want to explore different avenues of thought in order to get to

that and see if it's possible.

And if I can come up with something, then great.

But you've got to be careful.

If you assert that such a statement is necessary and as you, I

think, really overshot the logical requirement to say that if I

can't do that, about finding a sentence where the word refuse means that you're not able to do it,

then TULIP falls apart.

Well, then if I do come up with something, then it would be evidence that TULIP is true according to your

logic.

But you see, I don't believe either statement is logically necessary.

I don't believe that even if I did come up with a statement that you're asking, I want you to type it out exactly

as you want me to respond to it.

Okay, if you could type it out and I'll copy it.

I'll actually honestly try and get to it later on.

But even if I do come up with something and you say, yeah, there it is, it still doesn't mean that the TULIP is true based

on something like that.

And the corollary would be the case.

It does not mean TULIP is not true based on whether or not I'm not able to do that.

So whether I am or am not able to is yet to be determined.

Now, as far as Mark 115 goes, I did already address that.

I hope you're not saying that someone's going to repent without first believing that they need to turn from their

sins.

This is not a statement on what we call in theology the ordo salutis.

Sure, we should repent.

And he's saying repent to all of those believers in God,

to the Jews in the context, as John the Baptist was referring.

It wasn't even defined until 1 Corinthians 15, 1 -4.

So you see, there are problems with your assertion around that text.

Not that it's not a great text, and I do quote that, and I do tell people they do need to repent and they need to believe the gospel.

They need to do both of them.

But if they repent, it's because God grants it to them, 2 Timothy 2 .25.

And if they believe, it's because God grants that they believe, Philippians 1 .29.

Because our believing is the work of God, John 6 .28 and 29.

And we're born again not of our own will, John 1 .13.

I've got all these scriptures that back up the position that I'm giving.

Now, I do appreciate that you've been willing to be cross -examined, and I

think it takes some guts on your part.

I will try...

I was hoping you were going to type out the exact question with the word refused in there.

I think that's important that you do that, because I don't want to misrepresent your

exact question when I tackle it later on to come up with a solution or an answer.

I think it's a valid question.

Actually, I'm kind of curious to know if I can do it.

But I don't think I can do it right now because of the circumstances, because it would require me to do just some serious thinking.

Because when you say logical, that's the thing that makes it difficult, and it makes it

challenging.

It actually makes it entertaining in a good way.

I want to actually try and tackle that, because I like that kind of stuff.

It's kind of something the atheist would say.

You're not an atheist, but I like those kind of intellectual challenges.

So please be patient with me.

I'm not able to do that right now, and I think that's a fair assessment and quality of that.

Now, let me ask you.

You said initially an hour, and I suspect you've got to get going.

Maybe you've got to go to work tomorrow.

I certainly don't have to get up at any particular time.

I'm willing to go a little bit further if you want, or if you want to call it quits now, that's fine.

I won't say you're running.

I'm not going to say you're chicken, because I don't believe that.

But now's a good time to close it.

That's fine with me.

But if you want to continue, I can ask you more stuff.

So it's up to you.

Okay, go ahead.

Well, let me just say this, Matt.

Like I said, I get an hour.

It's been an hour and 20 minutes, and I do have to work tomorrow.

I'm up at 6 o 'clock in the morning, and I'm probably going to be wound up from this discussion, and it's going to probably be until 1 o 'clock in the

morning before I finally fall asleep.

So we'll do this again.

I promise you I'll give you the opportunity to cross -examine me.

Once in a while, I'll ask you a question, too.

And I tell you something, and to everybody in this room, Matt Slick is a

Christian.

We just disagree emphatically on soteriology.

Okay?

So please, you know, I zap Matt in chat text, in private chat, and we go back and

forth, and I despise Calvinism, and Matt embraces Calvinism, so we have a difference of opinion.

Okay?

But no way saying that Matt's not saved or anything like that.

We just have a difference of opinion on a very serious topic.

A very serious topic, Calvinism.

I think Calvinism is a very serious topic.

So I'm glad we're doing this.

I want Matt to be treated with respect in my rooms.

That's why I red -dotted everybody.

Okay?

And I hope that I'm treated with respect in Matt's room.

Matt, my question to you, and we'll do this again, I'll get ahold of you maybe next week or something like that, maybe after the new year,

and we'll do this again.

And I don't mind being put through the grinder.

I really don't.

I hope everybody in this room has learned something.

But Matt, the question I have for you, first of all, two things I would like this room to ponder.

Okay?

Jesus says, Repent and believe the gospel.

Okay?

Matt says, Repentance being before believing is ridiculous and all that.

And I don't think it is.

Because John the Baptist did say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Repent and believe.

Whether it's an order to salute us or not, I think repentance comes first than believing.

Also, Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, that's repentance.

People who fear God, repent.

To you, with this word of salvation sent, I think that also implies repentance before believing.

Because the gospel message is sent to all those who fear God.

And if they fear God, they've repented already.

So I think between that, Mark 1 .15, and Matthew 3 .2, shows repenting before believing.

But Matt, my question to you is this.

Can you show, can you use the word, refuse in a sentence, where the

person refusing isn't able?

For example, the man with no legs refused to walk.

It's not a logical sentence.

Because a man with no legs cannot possibly walk.

A man who's lazy refused to walk, or refused to run.

Well, that would make sense because a man who's lazy is able to run, he just doesn't want to do

it.

So that would make sense.

You see what I'm trying to say?

Use the word, refuse, in a logical sentence, where the person refusing isn't

able.

Okay, that's my question.

It's not a complicated question, so I'm hoping that Matt, you know, ponders it, gives us some clear

thought.

Because Matt, I'm telling you something.

If the person in Proverbs 1 .29, okay, can choose the

fear of the Lord, based on God reproving work, turn you with my reproof, that

God acts, man reacts, okay, and based on a person's choosing to fear the

Lord, and not refusing to fear the Lord, God shows the covenant.

So the whole path to salvation is laid out, if that person refusing is able.

So I think that's important.

I think that's important.

Can you use the word, refuse, in a logical sentence, where a person refusing isn't able?

No, isn't able.

To do what he refuses to do.

Yeah, that's my question to Matt Slick.

And I don't think this is a major issue here.

Okay?

So God bless you all.

Matt, I enjoyed this, and once again, I hope we do this again, maybe after the first of the year.

Okay?

And you guys take it easy.

God bless.

I've got to close the room, and we'll do this again some other time.

God bless you all, and have a good night.