Calvinism vs Arminianism, Part 2

Debate Format and Speaker Introductions

Yes, good afternoon again and for those of you who are familiar with Steve Gregg you are fans of the show frequent listeners. Just bear with me as I offer his brief bio. For the listeners that come via Dr. James White's ministry or for anyone who's new to the show today Steve Gregg is of course the host of the narrow path.

He is the author of revelation for views. Steve is a lifelong Bible teacher. Perhaps the thing he's known most for knows the word very well, and he's also a frequent teacher worldwide with the mission agency youth with a mission or why wham.

And Teacher in local churches as well in the Bay Area today. He'll be joined by dr. James white. He is the director of Alpha and Omega ministries that is an apologetics oriented ministry. Dr White is the author of the Potter's freedom a book where he critiques dr. Norman Geisler's view of the topic today.

He also is known for relative to this topic today his book with Dave Hunt, which is debating Calvinism. Five points two views. Dr. White is also an elder of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. He's a professor at Golden Gate Theological Seminary and a frequent debater both with those within Roman Catholicism Mormonism and Most recently if you follow his ministry, you'll notice he's debating an awful lot of Muslim apologists and quite well I might add so we welcome dr. James white as well.

Along with Steve the presenters can either make a positive case for their view or They can interview the opponent and have a little bit of an interchange. Sort of a cross-examination if they like all right.

Well dr. White you're first.

John 6 and the Father’s Giving of a People to the Son

As I mentioned yesterday the primary reason that I am reformed believe you It's not for trying to build large ministries or make lots of money because I can assure you Certain things to do that are death upon a ministry or to address Roman Catholicism would be a Calvinist.

So there must be a reason why I am committed to the understanding That God is sovereign in the matter of salvation and that he saves perfectly into his own glory. And he does so based upon eternal decree and as I mentioned yesterday.

My reasoning for that is because I believe that we must apply the same Hermeneutic the same methodology of interpretation all across the spectrum. I cannot use one form of interpretation defending the deity of Christ defending the resurrection or justification by faith.

Then something else just because it steps on my toes when it comes to issues like free will or something along these lines. And so for me I start with biblical exegesis. And then I create a philosophical system based upon what I believe the consistent teaching of the Word of God is.

I do not start With philosophy. I start with the fact that God has revealed his word and that mankind is commanded in fact To think his thoughts after him to give to his revelation Primacy in all things and so because of that there are certain texts of scripture that I believe very clearly very forcefully in Context if we use a consistent hermeneutic that we would use to defend any of the other great doctrines of the faith.

Teach the doctrines of grace as a Calvinist or want to call them one that is most popular in the sense of Very well known and I think that communicates very strongly to people is Jesus his own presentation of these truths in the synagogue in Capernaum.

And so I would like to look at what Jesus said in that context and hopefully Not just this one, but look at a few other texts as well. Over the course of this hour to begin laying that biblical foundation.

For the doctrines of grace and in John chapter 6 we have the story of Jesus feeding the 5 ,000 the next day. People come searching for him. These are actually got seeking after Jesus. They find him in the synagogue in Capernaum, and they begin to question him and we are told Something very very important that needs to be understood beginning of verse 35 of John chapter 6 Jesus said to them.

I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me shall not hunger and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. Now these are people seeking after Jesus and yet he says they are unbelievers and the rest of this text is an explanation Of why there are believers and unbelievers and in fact the entire rest of this chapter ends up leading us to Only 12 followers of Jesus one of them the devil the other 11 are confused.

And they're the ones who continue to follow after Jesus and so Jesus is explaining The unbelief of these men and why anyone has true faith. He says in verse 37 all that the father gives me will come to me and whoever comes to me I will never cast out now.

Please notice that to come to Christ is obviously to believe in Christ. How is it that a person comes to believe in Christ because the father gives that person to Christ. There is no question that in the original language in any translation.

However, you want to put it the giving of the father in verse 37 precedes and determines the coming to Christ. All that the father gives me will come to me and so if I want to say well That's because the father foresaw that they would come or or they were particularly good or they were better than somebody else.

That has to be explained from the context. You have to determine how that comes from the context how Jesus's own words lead you to that that can't just be stuck in there because what the text says is That the father gives a certain people the son and as a result they come.

Then the rest of verse 37 says. And whoever comes to me the one coming to me. I will never cast out. Why will he never cast out one who comes to him? Because The explanation is given to us the next two verses.

For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. So the son has come down of heaven to do the father's will. What are the father's will for him? And this is the will of him who sent me that I should lose nothing of all that He has given me but raise it up on the last day.

So here is to me one of the greatest statements of what Distinguishes a truly biblical Soteriology a truly biblical view of salvation from the many sub biblical views that are very popular today. And that is do we believe that Jesus can be a perfect Savior?

Does Jesus ever fail to save someone that is the father's will for him to say? Can Jesus save perfectly without the cooperation of mankind. Does Jesus try to save anyone? But since they they refuse to cooperate or they only cooperate for a while.

Whatever it might be he fails in that task. The text is very very very clear. He has come down of heaven to do the will of the father and what is the will of the father? That he should lose nothing of all that he has given me.

But raised up on the last day and be raised up in the last day is to receive eternal life and clear the forgiveness of Sin. For this is the will of my father's. Everyone who looks on the son and believes in him should have eternal life.

And I will raise them up the last day. Who are those who will look upon the son? Who are those who will believe upon the son into eternal life those given by the father to the son? Many people try to go to verse 40 reverse it read it back in the verse 37 as if verse 40 came before verse 37.

That is not the methodology of the hermeneutic that we use in any other interpretation. Well, then there's grumbling about what he has said and A rejection of who Jesus is and how can he say he came down of heaven and Jesus answered them verse 43.

Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written the prophets. They will all be taught by God. Everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me.

What does Jesus say? No one is able to come to me unless the father who sent me draws him. No one has that capacity. No one has that ability. Everyone must experience this drawing. Well, what is this drawing?

Well, he who is drawn is the one who is raised up if you're going to say that you can be drawn. But resist that drawing then you have to explain why it is then verse 44. You introduce a distinction between the one who is drawn and the one who is raised up when there is no distinction in the original Language at all and why in verse 45 that drawing is described as being taught by God.

Hearing from God drawing from the prophets. This is what God does all that he gives to the Son. He draws to the Son and the Son perfectly saves them and raises them up in the last day. Now you may note there is nothing so far in John chapter 6 about synergism.

There is nothing about how man can derail the attempts of the Father and the Son to bring about salvation. There is nothing here telling us that while God the Father is going to try and Jesus the Son is going to try and the Holy Spirit could come and try.

That it's up to man to finally make this whole thing work instead. The focus is upon the perfection of the work of Jesus Christ all to the glory of God. And so here we have in Jesus's own words this clear statement.

How do we understand all that the Father gives me will come to me if we believe in some sort of libertarian free will where man? Has the ability to Reject the work of the Spirit of God. How do we understand that no one has the ability to come unto Jesus Christ unless this special drawing takes place?

These are the questions we must ask of this text and of any text that addresses these that hopefully today. We'll also get a chance to look at Romans 8 Ephesians 1 some of the other texts that are so important in this very vital discussion.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Dr. Wine. Thank you for keeping to the time so well as you always do Steve. Now Your turn to either make a presentation of a related or different topic or respond to dr. White Steve.

John 6, Synergism, and God’s Desire to Save

Yeah, well, I guess I'll go ahead and respond to that since it's on everybody's mind. I do have other things I want to present but let's let's talk about John 6 a little bit. Dr. White says nothing in John 6.

There's nothing there about synergism now many of our listeners may not know what synergism means. Synergism means working together. The Calvinist believes in monergism, which means there's only one person working in salvation and that's God.

And they say that Arminians believe in synergism, which means two people working or working together. God working and man working. That's not exactly what any Arminian I know believes. We don't believe that man works, but we do believe that man has to believe and believing is not work.

So it's really synergism is a misnomer. But certainly dr. White raises a good question is it possible for God to want to save somebody and. And for them not to come for God to be frustrated in this effort.

I believe the Bible teaches in many places that is in fact true. God said to Cain that if he would do well that he could be accepted as Able was that sounds like God was offering him a genuine opportunity and that God would have liked him to do it.

And he warned him if you don't do well sin is at the door and you must conquer it. God expressed his will to Cain that Cain would be saved that Cain would do well. But the man didn't. The man is a son of the devil and and you know ended up lost so it didn't work out for Cain.

Jesus said that he wanted to draw Jerusalem's children to him and Jerusalem would not allow this to happen. Apparently and so it was looks like some people weren't saved that God wanted to save. So what do we do with John 6.

Dr. White in responding to some of my comments on an earlier occasion Said that you can't bring in you know. Verses from other passages that aren't in the context to explain them and yet at the beginning of his presentation today.

He said we want to use the same hermeneutical principles. We use say for proving the Trinity or the deity of Christ. Well when we prove the Trinity we certainly bring in verses. From other places to qualify verses that we see if we see a verse that says there's only one God.

We don't know there's a Trinity from that verse alone. We have to bring in verses to say that Jesus is God and that the Father is God and so forth we of course. That's how we do theology. That's how hermeneutics is done.

You don't just take Passage in isolation and ignore the other relevant passages that talk about the same thing and when Jesus said no one Can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him. And when he said no one will come to me, or he says everyone that the father gives to me will certainly come to me.

Jesus is certainly talking about some group of people that he said would come to him. They are described as those that the father has drawn. And they're described as the ones that the father gives him now who are the ones that the father gives him.

Well if we go to another passage It's not really a different context because it's still in the gospel John uses the same language. No one but John records this kind of language from Jesus, but in John 17 6 Jesus said I have manifested your name to the men whom you have given me out of the world.

Okay, that's the same group the ones that the father has given him and Jesus says they were yours and You gave them to me and they have kept your word. So here he says that there are people that were already God's people we have to assume.

These are the believing remnant in Israel. These are the people who already believed in God. These are the ones who already were hearing Moses and the prophets and God they were God's people and Jesus said they were yours and you gave them to me.

This is not talking about him taking the devil's people and give them to Jesus. It's taking God's people. God's who are already, you know worshipers of God already disposed to him. It agrees with what Jesus said just a chapter before the one that dr. White's using in John chapter 5 Jesus said to the Pharisees in verse 44.

How can you believe who receive honor from one another but don't seek the honor that comes from God alone? Do you think that I shall accuse you to the father? There is one who accuses you Moses in whom you trust for if you believed Moses You would believe me for he wrote about me in other words.

If you were one of those of the remnant of Israel who did believe in Moses. Well, then you would believe in me too because believing in Jesus requires exactly the same kind of openness to God's will. That is involved in coming to Christ.

And so really the people that God gave to Jesus are the people that were already God's people. They were already the people that were worshiping God and Therefore they do not represent a case of God taking the devil's people who are unbelievers and Transforming them into believers.

That's not what Jesus describes there. And so of course God draws to Jesus the people that were already worshipers of God. They were already in God's camp. They were already his worshipers. We see the same thing in the 16th chapter of Acts in Lystra where it says of Lydia that God opened her heart to pay heed to what Paul said.

Well, okay, there's a case of God drawing someone to Christ. He opened her heart, but we're told in that very same verse just a you know A sentence earlier that Lydia was a worshiper of God already. She was already a Jewish worshiper of God.

She was part of the believing remnant of Israel already and because she was She was already God's person. And of course, it's natural for I mean I could say anyone who loves me will love my children and that'd be a universal statement and It would be true if people love me as they should.

They will of course for my sake love my children, too. And Jesus can say anyone who loves my father will love me if you've listened to Moses and the prophets. Well, then you'll come to me too. You'll hear me also.

So the ones that the father gave to Jesus Jesus himself tells us they are the ones that already were believers in the father. They were already the ones who heard Moses and the prophets and even the passage that says that no one can come to me unless The father draws him is Followed by this verse 45 in John 6 Where it says it is written in the prophets and they shall all be taught of God.

Jesus says therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the father Comes to me now has heard and learned from the father's past tense comes to me as present tense. So he's saying those who have already heard from God those who've already Listened to God those are the ones who do come to me.

The Arminian wouldn't really have any problem with that at all. I don't think I can't imagine why that'd be a problem to anybody who takes my position. Certainly I could predict that anyone who's already worshiping the God of Israel.

That God when his son came would point his son out to them would reveal to them. This is the Messiah. Just like he did Simeon in the temple. Simeon was a Worshipper of God when Jesus was brought to the temple God revealed him.

This is the Messiah and Simeon embraced him. That's true of the whole Jewish remnant in Jesus day, and that would be my understanding of these passages. They do not prove a Calvinist position at all. They fit very well with an Arminian position.

It seems to me.

Ephesians 1 and the Corporate Meaning of Election

Thank You Steve. Dr. White your chance now to respond in kind or Present on another topic. The next eight minutes are yours.

Thank you. I would like to respond to that because I would just invite folks. I gave a positive presentation that worked verse-by-verse through the text. And I didn't get that in in Steve's response instead I saw a number of different subjects and in the text addressed without actually walking through the text.

Demonstrating how it's consistent a positive way with one's position in essence what we were just told for example. We're just told the will and John 645 Everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me both of those Actions are describing the drawing of the father.

Why is that have to why is the father have to draw somebody if these people have already chosen to be God fears? The idea these are the God fears completely ignores the context the fact that these these people who are coming to Jesus Searching after Jesus are going to walk away.

They are going to reject him. He is explaining the unbelief of these individuals. He is contrasting them with somebody else and yet to read into John 6 the idea that well These are people have already chosen God.

John 17 6 that was written was mentioned is about the Apostles and the rest of the of that Text he then talks about those who will believe because of their message. So clearly this is not some remnant of Israel.

Texas. It's not some Context that can be taken out of the soteriological discussion is being presented to us Cain Matthew 23 none of these had really anything to do with with the subject of John chapter 6 at all and The presentation that is made by the Lord Jesus there.

It doesn't explain why it is that there has to be this drawing why God had to open? Why God have to open Lydia's heart. Well because she was a God fear those are people who attended the synagogue. But who had not been converted Judaism.

She still need to hear the gospel. She still need to have her heart opened for that to take place. And the fact is God opened her heart and she believed we don't have any evidence of God opening somebody else's heart then failing To cause them to come under salvation.

So I really do not believe that the order that Jesus himself presents the context in which he presented John chapter 6 has been Responded to at all and I would to repeat in light of Steve Gregg's denial of the eternal security believer in the full offense.

To answer the question in verse 39 is it possible for the son to lose? One of those who is truly one of his sheep can Jesus ever say to one of those who's lost. I never knew you given the fact that to truly be one of the sheep involved that intimate close communication between Jesus and those that are his.

But then time is so so short in in the time that we have let me just read into our hearing and an attempt very briefly to Further explicate this doctrine from Paul's letter to the Ephesians. When he says the beginning blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing and have new places.

Please follow the pronouns and please follow the verbs notice who is active and who is the recipient of the actions? And in what the context is we are blessed in Christ with every spiritual blessing. It is we who are blessed.

It's not Christ is blessed. But it's only those who are in him verse 2 even as he the father chose us. We are the direct object of the verb there in him that is in Christ. Christ is not the one who is elected here.

We are the ones who are elected here in Christ when before the foundation of the world. For what purpose that we should be holy and blameless before him? Can we be holy and blameless without this having to do with salvation.

Is this only about the benefits of salvation? No, we have to be able to be saved to be holy and blameless before him in love. He the father predestined us the elect direct object of the verb for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ.

According to what. According to foreseen merit. According to our being better than someone else because we are more spiritually sensitive. We are willing to believe repent, whatever it might be. No according to the purpose of his will.

For what purpose. To the praise of his glorious grace with which he has blessed us in. The beloved the beloved one that is in Jesus Christ in him that is in Christ. We have redemption through his blood.

Only those who are in him have redemption through his blood. Notice the connection there of his blood to redemption the forgiveness of our trespasses. According to what standard the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us in all wisdom and insight.

Making known to us the mystery of his will. According to his purpose which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time to unite all things in him. Things in heaven and things on earth in him that is in Christ.

We have obtained an inheritance. Having been predestined According to the purpose of him who works all things According to the counsel of his will please notice this description of God that he is the one who works all things According to the counsel of his will.

And what has just what's the context of that the summing up of all of creation? To limit the activity of his. Doing all things according to counsel as well is to ignore the preceding verse. Which is talking about God's purpose of wrapping everything up in Jesus Christ so that the elect receive the grace and mercy of God.

Those who are not received justice. No one ever receives injustice. No one ever receives what they do not want the elect do not want God. They reject God and his purposes. The but they don't elect the elect because they're changed by the work of the Spirit of God.

Which then comes out in verse 14 of the Holy Spirit is the guarantee of our inheritance, etc, etc. Their hearts are changed. They are made into God lovers. They receive from God that which he desires to give to them.

And so we have two texts two different authors both referring to eternal decisions. Remember that when Jesus speaks of the will of the Father and his coming into the world. Clearly, this is the eternal covenant of redemption that that is reflected here in his words and the will of the Father for him.

Is that something that came up with during time? This is something God has determined when he created he was going to glorify himself in this way and here Paul is bringing out the same things in Ephesians chapter 1 reminding the church that it has been God's eternal purpose.

To redeem a particular people in Christ Jesus and so often the question is asked of me. Well, well, why me and not someone else is this not arbitrary on God's part? Please notice the answer to that question may or may not satisfy someone but the Bible does answer the question the purpose is according to the purpose of his will verse 5 and The result is to the praise of his glorious grace.

Now if that grace is insufficient without my addition to it if that grace is constantly failing if that grace is just a partial a Reason for why I will stand before the Father in heaven and worship for eternity then.

Should there not be other objects of of praise if my will is is Really the determining factor in all these things, but in the final analysis. It's not just well You know the whole plan of salvation is according to God's grace and therefore.

That's why his glorious grace is praise. He didn't have to save anybody, but he made available. I think that is is a real sub a biblical reading of what is found here in the text itself. That point us back to eternity and to the future eternity and who is active in all this what is the purpose of it?

It is God who is active it is God who is the one who's bringing about the glorification of his own grace in eternity and That I believe is a summary of a biblical concept of God's role in salvation.

Thank You dr. White. If you're just joining us you're listening to the narrow path radio broadcast hosted by Steve Gregg. Steve is one of the debaters today in a five day series of debates. We are now on day two.

Representing the Calvinist view is dr. James White of Alpha and Omega ministries and representing the non Calvinist view is Your normal host Steve Gregg. Steve now will take up his second section of eight minutes where he can either Present as he would like or respond to dr. White.

So Steve.

Romans 8 and the Golden Chain of Redemption

Thank you. I would like to get around to presenting here at some point because yesterday Dr. White said he would like to hear me give a positive presentation of my two main points. Which I of course am prepared to do but I want to again respond here to some of the points that dr White has made.

I Would just say that anyone who wishes to listen to the recording of this can decide whether I addressed the issue in John chapter 6 or not. James White was concerned that I didn't go through verse by verse and and follow the thought there I don't need to he already did that.

We are not disagreeing about anything in the passage except who are the ones that the father gave to Jesus and I already demonstrated. That Jesus himself said the ones that the father gave to him are The ones that were already gods.

If my stating that and pointing that in Scripture isn't sufficient to convince anybody I don't have anything to gain by convincing people. But I do think that it's quite obvious when you compare scripture scripture.

And once we've decided that and no other changes have to be made to the the treatment of the passage in John chapter 6. We just now know who he's talking about. So that's not a problem. James said that the issue of Cain and the issue of Jerusalem and Jesus wanting to draw them and not coming and so forth.

He said that's not relevant to the subject of John 6. This is what I've heard James White do in many debates as long as you know, he can't answer something very adequately. Says it's not relevant to the passage.

In fact, I think it's very relevant if we're asking the question and this is the question James did ask me. Is it possible for God to want somebody be saved and for them not to be saved? Those are in fact examples that answer that question is quite relevant indeed now going to Ephesians chapter 1.

He said he wants us to pay very close attention to the pronouns here. Well, we can do that and in Ephesians chapter 1 verses 1 through 12 there's a lot of us and wheeze and so forth and I I think it's good to pay attention to those but of course.

When he gets to verse 13 Paul then changes the pronouns. Maybe we should notice that too verse 13 says in him you also Trusted after you heard the word of truth. Well, that's no longer we and us. It's you to you as well as we which raises questions of well Who is the you and who is the we it would seem of course clear that the Ephesians at least Gentile?

Christians are the you too. He's writing to Gentiles. It would seem primarily. He does call them Gentiles in chapter 2 says you were Gentiles. You were alienated from the Commonwealth of Israel. So we'll say he's writing to Gentiles there.

The you are the Gentiles then who are the we? Well It's hard to say isn't it? But it's someone other than the Gentiles. Perhaps it's the Jews. Yeah, they were the first to experience all the blessings that Paul mentions there and then he says now you to you Gentiles are now Included as well.

There are some people I'm not necessarily one of them, but I guess I could consider the possibility some people think that the we are Paul and his companion apostles and that he's talking about the Apostles having been specially chosen By God for for these blessings and now of course the Gentiles get to come into the picture as well.

I don't really worry about whether the we refers to the Jews or to the Apostles specifically. But I do think that whatever it refers to It tells us that God has a purpose and that the salvation of people in Christ is a fulfillment of that purpose.

Now he does not of course tell us whether the individuals who are saved Were purposed individually or whether the church as a whole is what we're talking about because after all he is using a plural pronoun we or us he doesn't say I.

He could of course if he wanted to make that point because he would mean that an individual and he has an individual were chosen. But he says us and we I take us and we to be a reference to all who are in Christ.

Whoever they may be. It's a corporate Reference. It's what Paul does throughout Ephesians and in the whole passage that dr. White read. There's a great emphasis on in Christ in Christ in Christ. In fact, he read the statement in verse 4 which is just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world and Dr. White said it's not Christ who's chosen.

It's we are chosen in him. Well that I think is misunderstanding what in him means later on in chapter 2 and verse 6 Paul says God raised us up together and made us to sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

Are we going to say it's not Christ Jesus who's raised up and sitting in the heavenly places because it says we are in him. You see what Paul is saying is that we are incorporated into Christ and what is true of him?

Is imputed to be true of us as well because we are of his flesh and of his bones. We are part of him that's what it means to be in Christ and so Christ is raised up and seated in the heavenly places and We are in him in that position to not because we literally are there.

I'm not. I'm not really in the heavenly places. I'm right here someday. I may be caught up to meet him in the air. But right now I'm still here on earth both feet firmly planted. But as far as God's reckoning is concerned what is true of Christ is also true of me.

My position is reckoned to be the same as that of Christ. And so in him I am where he is. Likewise in all the statements about in him. It's really Christ. That is the one that has all these blessings.

It's Christ the one who has all the privileges and we have them in so far as we are in him. And so when Paul says that God chose us in him of course, what he's saying is that Christ is the chosen one and in him we also are chosen and So we are chosen in him that that would mean that.

Because he is chosen we are counted as chosen also, but it does not tell us if I was chosen to be in him. That's the question. Paul does not say that we were chosen to be in him. That would be a very different kind of statement.

You see Paul is telling us we are in him those of us who are Christians are in Christ. And he's telling us what the privileges are of those of us who have that position. We are in Christ and as such we have such position of privilege.

It would be interesting if Paul had said God chose us as Individuals to be in Christ that would actually make the very point that dr. White would like for Paul to make. Unfortunately Paul I don't think makes that point here and I don't think he makes it elsewhere either.

So Ephesians 1 and John chapter 6 don't really present any challenges that I can see to my personal Understanding of soteriology and of how God saves. I understand these are favorite proof texts of Calvinism.

But once they're looked at through a non-Calvinist lens. There's nothing about them that forces us to see them in a Calvinist way. And I don't have that prior commitment, so I just look at them and see what they do say.

Thank You Steve dr. White. I would like to respond to what was just said. I don't think it's Calvinistic presuppositions. That means that the phrase kathos Exilexata Hamas means he chose us. The direct object of the verb is up.

It is not the phrase that falls after that and out. Oh, it is us who are chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world and please note unto which unto. What were we chosen unto holiness and blamelessness.