George Bryson and John 6:37-45

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

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

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

Weather, Travel, and Upcoming Debates in Australia

And good morning. Welcome to the dividing line Tuesday morning the hot part of the year here in Phoenix, Arizona. Really toasty outside when the lows don't make it into the 80s in the morning you know, it's gonna be a warm one and.

That's when I went to bed last night. It was 100 .4 degrees and so that's just that's why we don't have daylight savings time here. It's because it would only be worse. We'd go to bed and it would still be light in 110.

So we decided a long time ago forget that forget it ain't doing that exciting stuff now that Australia is getting closer and closer about a month out from that and Starting to see the outlines of what we're going to be doing possibility right now of three different debates in Australia over the course of again about eight days in country you lose a day going out gain one coming back, but you know, you've got those two travel days in there, but basically between the 16th and the 24th the first half of that being in Sydney the second half being in Brisbane and so Looks like the possibility of two debates in Sydney the first on Islam the second on Roman Catholicism and then an Islamic debate in Brisbane and if that doesn't pan out the possibility of a Armenian debate In in Brisbane, so that's sort of the backup plan To the Muslim debate I'd rather have the Muslim debate, but we will see what the Lord has in store there.

I'm hoping those can get verified very quickly because obviously time is passing by and the more time I can have to be listening to My opponents if I can find anything to listen to The better so I tried to order a Cassette tape.

Yes. I think I could find a cassette player someplace but the Catholic apologetics ministry in Sydney Only offers cassette tapes and you just go well. They're probably rather tridentine in their theology because they're still back around the time of the Council of Trent technologically speaking.

But they won't ship outside the United States. So I'm gonna have to get somebody in in country to get that for me and do something amazing called mp3 it and Load it up for me. So I So anyway, it's it could be could be interesting and But I'm really excited about it.

It's got some great opportunities there to be down under and of course looking at the lows this morning I was I put both Sydney and Brisbane and in a weather thing on my BlackBerry and This morning the lows were like, you know 50 or something like that.

So it's winter down there. So To take 10 days out of August in Phoenix and switch it over to winter that's That's wise very very very wise. That would be very good. So anyways before we get back to some of our Reformed issues, I guess we'll try to get through some phone calls real quick here and talk with kit in El Paso.

Hi kit.

Hi, I understand what you're talking about with the heat.

Yes, and yes you do no no toys about it.

You know I've been listening for a long time and I do want to hear about the reform stuff because when I listen to you and Dave Hunt I seem to agree with both of you. So that probably means I messed up.

I would tend to agree with that analysis.

But what I called about today and I hope you don't see this as as a jab at you because it's not. But I'm concerned about how you pronounce the divine name because it seems like you're Replacing the hay the first hay in the divine name.

During. Why you do that? If you're doing that on purpose to mispronounce it like the Orthodox rabbis would do if I asked them how to pronounce it. I.

Have no idea what you're talking about. Yahweh. What's how would you pronounce it?

Well, you you usually go Yahweh when. No, I don't. Way. That's actually how the Samaritans pronounced it but.

Well, I don't think we have any recordings of exactly how anybody back then pronounced it, but I always say Yahweh. That's a that's a sound. It's not a sound. Oh, I didn't say.

You're you're not familiar with with if you go to an Orthodox rabbi and.

Sir how an Orthodox rabbi today pronounces it is utterly irrelevant as to how it was pronounced 2 ,000 years ago. That's the same kind of error that people make when they assume that the modern Passover ceremony is Seder ceremony has something to do with what was actually going on 2 ,000 years ago.

It doesn't it's sort of like when Dave Hunt Says that the first 14 chapters of Acts are written in Hebrew and things like that. There's a lot of silliness and evangelicalism out there that doesn't pass any kind of scholarly muster and one of the things that we have to be careful of Is thinking that we can somehow figure out with absolute certainty pronunciations of languages that were spoken 2 ,000 years ago sometimes if there's a discussion in contemporary literature of pronunciation issues great, but most of the time there isn't and so You know, I'm not gonna Get all been out of shape if someone pronounces Yahweh a little bit differently than I do.

I'm just pronouncing Yod. Hey, wow. Hey, that's how I would read it in the Hebrew text. That's the way I was taught to pronounce it. There are Hebrew teachers that pronounce it. You know, if you learned Hebrew down in Texas, you'd have a whole lot of different pronunciations down there.

Just as I have heard in Greek, you know, I mean, it's like There are only a few things in Greek pronunciation that drive me insane because you have or asked me in pronunciation you have modern pronunciation.

We have some ideas of specifics of pronunciation in the Koine period. But we don't know exactly on certain issues and there were dialects the only thing that drives me crazy is when I hear someone say logos or Logos or something like that where they're pronouncing the same vowel in two different ways in one word.

Then I then I go crazy but as long as you say logos, which is how I would pronounce it some people say logos well as long as you're consistent and Somebody else can understand what you're saying that's what matters, but I don't think that the pronunciation is something that is is overly relevant at that point because we're talking 2 ,000 years ago and the languages change and and Pronunciations change and until we can get mp3s of what was being said back then.

I don't think it really really matters a whole lot.

Okay. Well, I just want to say I'm not been out of shape about it. I just thought you were purposely mispronouncing it rabbis. If you push them teach you to do it, they will purposely teach you a wrong pronunciation.

Well, the modern rabbis won't even say the word punishable by death to pronounce it at all.

They don't even say they don't even say Yahweh. They say they say either Adonai or Hashem the name they won't even pronounce Yahweh. So I have no idea why I would purposefully mispronounce something, but I was wondering if that's what you were doing.

I'm not getting. Not in any way shape or form. Anyways, thanks. Thanks. Call. Yeah. All right. Have a good one. Okay, but I know god Let me do all right. Let's talk with Bob in Chicago. Hi, Bob.

Hebrew and Greek Textual Tools

Good morning, dr. White. How are you? Oh pretty good yourself. Oh warm. Okay. Well, I'm in Chicago. So we're a little bit cooler. Yeah. Got a question. I bought the Novium Testamentum Greece and I did not pronounce that, right?

Novum Testamentum. Grecki, I would imagine. Are you talking about the Greek Testament?

Yes, that's right. And um, and I've been listening to some of your debates and speeches and you mentioned a Hebrew Diglot, I guess I'm wondering if that's the same kind of format where it has it in the English along with the textual note.

Okay, so you bought the the na -27 Any New English translation diaglot that we that we offer. Yeah, I'm not familiar with a similar Hebrew version. I've not seen that there are. There's a brand new Hebrews Readers edition of the Old Testament that I think Zondervan I think was under been put out.

That's real nice reading, but there's no ink. It gives you English meanings, but you have to be able to read Hebrew actually to truly use it. So I I. Well, there's a. Well, there's a Hebrew version of the Old Testament obviously the Bibli Hebraic astute cartencia, but whether BH whether BHS has been put together with An English translation in a diglot.

I don't own one there. There might be but I'm not familiar. There might be an NIV version or something. I really don't know. I don't know. I don't possess one. I don't own one.

I didn't buy this and I could read it. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I've not seen one.

I'm sure there might be some out there what I found Really useful about the diglot the na -27 NET is the textual notes and things like that if there was something similar to that for the Old Testament Then yeah, that would be useful.

What would be more useful from my perspective would be a Greek septuagint and New Testament. Or either Greek septuagint English diglot or in septuagint Greek New Testament bound together because The vast majority of citations in a New Testament are from the septuagint not from the Hebrew text.

And so that's where the textual variants are the most important so that would be really useful, but you can you can do that on your screen using Bible works or logos or Accordance or whatever so but it is nice to have them in one volume to.

Southern Baptist Discernment and Unorthodox Media Voices

All right, I see if the phone lines are keeping hopping today, but let's jump into something else I want to deal with for a while here and See if there's a nice place to. Oh Good old good old Jim's on the line, huh?

What does Jim want to talk about? I just I put him on hold there. Let's just this just I don't see it on hold, but on hold did. Come on, put it on hold now. There you go. Do it. All right, Jim Kieferdorf.

Hi, Jim. Dr. White. How are you? I'm doing pretty well Good to hear from you. I just had to get rich going in there, you know. It can be a little slow sometimes in the morning programs, you know, it's sure it's hard.

So, hey, I have no idea what you're calling about. But I figure we'll just throw you on and let you say your thing because you're always out there doing the Lord's work, so.

Okay, you got me off guard there, but I just wanted to call and Just give rich a little update of what is going on at a Southern Baptist Church in.

Maryland, okay. Let me get a little background. Let me correct me if I'm wrong but in essence you have personally become a major thorn in the side of certain individuals who are Non-trinitarian and heretical in their views of God and yet they run around and and want to sort of hide that from the various Orthodox churches in which they sing or otherwise do things and also make their living and so you've been.

You've been informing churches of the beliefs of these folks and End up really seeing some rather intriguing responses from both sides. Sadly, I would imagine Is that sort of the background of what we're talking about here.

That that is correct.

Many of the programs let's take for instance Armstrong programs. They've had 40 prohibition. One of them even airs in Arizona. Oh in the Phoenix station Christian station. His name is Ronald Dart. Oh, yeah.

He has a program called born to win and he has been oh. What happened? Click him again. Trinitarian, okay, and his basic theology is of Armstrong. You're not born again in this life. There is no physical resurrection for the Christians.

His teachings on hell is identical to Jehovah's Witnesses.

He doesn't believe Jesus died on a cross and on and on it goes. Dr. White. Yeah, but but you're talking you're talking Christian radio networks. They don't care about theology.

Well, there's many radio stations. Dr. White does have a doctrinal statement. And when you have people on yeah, when you have people on that opposes your doctrinal statement. It's an oxymoron to have them on your radio program.

Yeah, I hate to be the.

Realist and the skeptic here, but I know the situation in a lot. Not all. Not all but in a lot of Christian radio and. You know how you define orthodoxy and Christian radio today? My. An invoice marked paid.

That is the mark of orthodoxy in Christian radio today for most stations.

Yes, we can't take that for everybody though. And I know you know that because I know I shouldn't there was one group I'll even tell you who they are. I don't have a problem. American Family Radio. What do you allow?

Mr. Dark to air? Orthodoxy. There's a group that takes a stand on the Word of God, right? Well, there you go.

But they're they're not the big boys, they're not the ones with the. The huge stations in the major markets that you know, that's that's where a lot of that's coming from. I you know, it's it's just a sad reality that we deal with.

So you had a specific situation you want to mention.

Yes, I was calling rich just to let him know but then he put me on the air. Let's talk about it. I'm concerned about a gentleman and I'll just give you just a little background. I don't want to go into real deeply yet.

Is that I was researching sprinted groups of the way? International. Mm-hmm. And one of their largest website is Courtright dot org and it'll tell you all over the world. You can find people in Africa, China South Asia you name it.

Well long story short. I had an email back from a gentleman Who says that he's the pastor of a Baptist Church in Maryland? And I found his name on Two and when I emailed him I asked him do you teach and believe in a deity of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of? the Trinity.

He wrote back and Asked me why I'm asking these questions. He basically rebuked me if you will which is common to attack the messenger. So I emailed him back and said the reason I'm concerned is that I found your name on two websites That deny the deity of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and that's the last time I heard from him.

Hmm. Now, let me give an update, please. I just sent a fax to dr. Albert Moller. Dr. Moller is on the board to Salem Communications and Salem owns Zulan publishing. One of these cult groups on this web page has a gentleman who wrote a book Denying the deity of Christ Denying the doctrine of Trinity and his book was published by Zulan.

Now this pastor in Maryland is also on his website. I think it's pretty clear Dr. White that this guy who's pastoring a Southern Baptist Church is not holding to the historic Christian faith or the Baptist Faith and mission that would be almost like me meeting you at the grocery store and saying hey, dr White you believe in the deity price of the Trinity.

Well, um. Well, what why are you attacking me?

So I did not know that Salem owns Zulan press that they are they are part of Zulan. That is correct.

And matter of fact, they'll. Salem owns christianity .com and. When I was on that website two years ago Looking at some things with people and looking for information on Jesus I noticed a Way splinter group on that web page right in front of campus crusade.

Mm-hmm. I thought well, this is quite bizarre. Yeah, I called to Salem and the girl was very nice and she dropped the next day. Hmm. And it boils down to dr White it discernment. Oh.

There's no question about that and unfortunately since so much of everything you're talking about the quote-unquote Christian media and radio stations are utterly disconnected from Sound local churches and then let's face it Here's where theology matters again.

Who do you contact in regards to a quote-unquote Southern Baptist pastor Who is unorthodox in his theology and yet because of The the fact that there are not there's not a plurality of elders in the vast majority of those churches.

There's no Authority structure to go to to say hey, you've got a problem here. And you're left you're left with a real difficulty so well, we appreciate. Appreciate that Jim. Sorry that I threw you on the air there.

I guess you weren't expecting that but Rich started typing the name and I said, well, let's hey before I I don't want to break up what my topic is here. So let's go ahead of if you know and throw them on there.

So Congratulations, you got thrown on. Thank you so much for your ministry all these year with corresponding. Yes, indeed. I appreciate it. Thank you, sir. Okay. All right. God bless you. Bye now. Yeah, it has been many years I don't remember when we first heard from from Jim Kieferdorf, but it's been way way way way way way way back there.

Probably longer than either here. I would like What's that I can't hear you you 15 years about 15 years. I've been hearing from Jim. Okay 15 years. Well, there you go. No, that's great. All right, let's let's get to to this.

George Bryson on John 6:37-45

I was I saw an apologetics website www .alwaysbeready .com. Nice name that includes in its links a section on Calvinism and so as I look to the site, it seemed to be very heavily oriented toward the largest non-denominational denomination.

That is Calvary Chapel. So I was hardly shocked to see that there are basically two sources of its information on Calvinism. Guess what they are yes, Norman Geisler and George Bryson. So given how thoroughly both of those sources have been reviewed here on the dividing line.

You would think an apologetic site would have some kind of material interacting with such criticism, but alas as normal. Nothing was listed. So once again, we see the vast difference between the proponents of reform theology and those who promote a synergistic man-centered system.

One side is open to dialogue debate comparison interaction the other side. Well, just plain isn't and by the way, by the way, I did forget announcement really quickly on Thursday I'll mention as the end of program to Lord willing haven't gotten verification of this but on Thursday, hopefully I will have a special guest Sam Schmoon from Chicago.

And we are going to be discussing Zainab bint, Josh. I'm watching my studio audience and so far I have completely blank stares coming back at me. Zainab bint, Josh Zainab was one of the wives of Muhammad the divorced wife of his adopted son Zaid and The whole story of how that took place resulted in the destruction of adoption in Islamic society.

There are certain ayah in in surah 33 that were quote-unquote revealed in regards to Muhammad's marriage to Zainab and I think it's extremely important. It's it's one of the few places We've got some historical knowledge of the backgrounds of the Quran and it certainly makes a person think twice before they believe that the Quran was written in Arabic from eternity past and Was simply quoted out to Muhammad in light of what happens with Zainab bint, Josh.

So hopefully Lord willing on Thursday haven't confirmed this yet. The Lord willing a Sam will be joining me on Thursday and we will be discussing Zainab bint, Josh. So I can tell you About that, but I wish you would be because it's it's an important an important subject indeed.

So anyway Back to the subject of George Bryson when I saw George's materials being referenced there in The always be ready comm website I I was reminded of the fact that just last week I saw a series on A certain website.

Let's see. What was that website. Biblical thought. Calm calm. In the blog there was some comments on George Bryson cross-examined by James White on John 644 and the comment thread and George ended up there and and this has happened a few times over the past few years George seems to feel That he has come up with the answer to the questions that I asked him during the cross-examination Period that has become rather famous on YouTube.

One of my most often viewed videos on YouTube is the cross-examination of George Bryson now interestingly enough Somewhere in here. He says I wonder why he doesn't show his own cross-examination. We make the whole thing available.

It's amazing when you when you provide one section if you don't provide all sections somehow you're hiding something even though You make it available. The neighbor I can watch the whole thing. It makes you know, really no sense whatsoever but let's let's listen to.

Let's just get the context here for those who haven't seen it. It is available to watch on On my youtube page, which by the way as of yesterday And now has over 1 .5 million video views 1 .5 million heading for two.

There you go. There are of course single videos on YouTube that have that but hey, it is a reformed apologetics website. Okay, so there is a sort of niche group there, but let's let's listen to The cross-examination with George so we've got some background upon which to read his his comments here.

Mr. Bryson, I would like to ask you in light of what I just said concerning John chapter 6 verse 44 All the father gives me will come to me and the one who I'm sorry No one is able to come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up the last day.

Is it your position? That the one who's raised up at the last day in John 6 44 is different than the one who's drawn.

It is my position that there are two things required. You must come to him that's one and To come to him. You must be drawn. It's my position that scripture clearly John 6 44 and all of that context. So you're talking a lot about the need to look at things in context if you take all of that.

In connection, there are two things that happen one You have to see and another you have to believe if you go on earlier in that very chapter. But the point here is that you cannot come you are not able to come unless he draws you.

But being able to come and actually coming to him in faith are not exactly the same thing. He enables you to come and if you come to him and are drawn and you can't come to him unless you're drawn Then he will raise you up, but he doesn't raise people up unless they come to him.

But the ability to come he gives but making you able to come doesn't make you come. Okay.

Verse 44 says No one could come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day. Are you saying those two hymns are different people?

No, I'm saying those two people there that one person does two things. One He comes to him, but he comes to him only because he is able to do so. We're gonna get that in verse 44 44 two things. No one can come to me.

Come to me. That's that's the one thing. The other thing he says is that that person who comes to him Has to be enabled by the father drawing him. No one can unless he's enabled so he has to come to him and he has to be drawn.

But if if he is drawn and doesn't come to him Then in fact, he will not be raised up at the last day. Just as it earlier says he must see and believe. So there is so you believe that that the hymn.

The two hymns here are different because you just said you can be drawn no and not raised up No.

I'm capable as one person of doing more than one thing and God is capable of doing something while I'm doing something. And what he does here is Enable me to come. What I do is come. I come in faith as a matter of fact.

Let me just say that even Calvin suggested that coming is a metaphor for believing.

There's no question about that. But where does the word enable appear in verse 44 can come?

And in fact, I remember in your book you point this out. No one is no one is able to come that's right.

But but it does not say he is enabled says. Unless the father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up in the last day the drawing.

Results in being. That is not what it says. It says that no one can come to me and almost all Calvinist commentaries say the can is enabling. It is not inevitable that you will come. It's an enabling.

Could you could you name one that? Confuses ability with enabling. Ability and enablement is the same you mentioned my own book. I never said anything about. Enablement has the ability ability and enablement unless you have a different Definition.

When somebody is able to do something or if somebody's been able to do something they are now able to do it.

Okay, you said that between these two hymns you have to come who comes to Christ according to John 637.

Oh, well only those who are enabled come to him and those that the father has given to him.

Okay, all I Didn't understand that. And according to verse 37 all the father gives me will come to me Who who is given by the father to the son those who believe?

Not unbelievers, but believers. Would you agree with that? So.

God gives both those that he foresees will believe to the son.

Well, of course he foresees everything but I'm not saying he gives him the son because he foresees the the fact that God God enables people to do something, but they still must do it.

He enables us to believe but we still must believe. Didn't you just say that coming is a metaphor for believer? Exactly, and isn't the giving of the father here. What results in their coming to Christ?

No, that is not coming to Christ is.

Putting your faith in him. I.

Understand that but but just on a simple grammatical level. Which action in verse 37 comes first. The giving of the father to the son or the coming to Christ.

Well, I don't think there is a chronological order. I think there's two things that are true. Only those only those that the father gives to the son come to the father. But only those who believe does the father give to the son now the other choice.

The other option is to say that he gives unbelievers to the son. And if you want to say that I'm happy with that.

I'm just I'm just. You don't believe that there is any a lot of temporal priority here between the father giving and people coming all. The father gives you will come to me. That's right. All that I give ten dollars to will buy books at stand reason.

Yeah, which action comes first?

Well what I'm saying here, and I think it speaks for itself that those who he enables to come do come those who believe in him. He gives to the son if you want to say the opposite that he gives Unbelievers to the son.

You can say it, but all the questioning on this isn't going to change that.

You had Said earlier that the Calvinist position is is that Christ's blood is worthless to all but the elect. Okay, that was at that point my decision was I had made that as clear as as he was going to allow it to be clear and That in essence anybody who could even begin to figure out what in the world he was saying and then given that he Would not see with the obvious fact that the giving of the father results in coming to the son.

And that at one point he'd say coming and believing in the same thing and then later he clearly Distinguishes between them and uses them different ways. It was it was obvious. What was what was going on there, so.

There was the conversation. Evidently this has been posted so many times so many places that George has decided that he's he's come up with an answer for that, and we will look at that in a moment. We're gonna skip our break today and one of the calls that we have on the line is is about the Website that I mentioned earlier, so we'll go ahead and sneak it in here before we go back to George.

And let's talk with Robert up in Detroit. Hi Robert. How are you?

I'm pretty good, so you're familiar with the always be ready calm website. Yes, sir Charlie Campbell's ministry. He's the Champion apologist for the. Well anyways I used to go to church with him before his ministry took off.

He was a past and which is which is what which is where Calvary Chapel in Vista, California Vista. Okay, yes, sir. And well when I Came across your ministry when I was a good Calvary Chapel light and any time I heard a reformed argument I just quoted John 316 and I don't start thinking critically and I mentioned him to you because his ministry I said are you he's a Calvinist and His response is everything everywhere you come from.

Yeah, and so I thought you might find that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, oh, I realize there's a lot of folks. And I've seen this at debates. I I remember when I debated Hams Abdul Malik we had these three little Catholic ladies sitting right down front and I found it odd that they would come to my debate when Just a few days either earlier or after I forget which one it was.

I'd be debating a Roman Catholic Apologist and they'd be sitting down front, but rooting for the guy, but they recognize that well our guys aren't doing this with Muslims, so and Generally what you'd be saying we would agree with and I think a lot of times even when I say things They wouldn't agree with they just sort of reinterpret it in there through their own grid at that point as you just said look past those things and generally don't see how Holistic my theology at least I try to have my theology to be and.

And hence miss a lot of the emphasis that I'm actually that I'm actually making but yeah I had seen that name on the website and You know I had looked it has an announcement for this this big huge Apologetics conference in Southern, California in November with Geisler and Ron Rhodes.

And I think Ergon Kanner is going to be there. And yeah, I think William Lane Craig and and all the big boys, but you notice I don't get invitations. Yeah. No, I would love to have debates with a number of them, but.

Yeah, no, it doesn't. I don't get invitations even to come do debates. It's a shame. I don't know why yeah.

If you look if he's got your favor wanting. Oh, yeah, but free and all that good stuff. Resources for reform theology and. Only change I've seen is that he added Ergon Kanner's why I'm predestined not to be a hyper Calvinist.

And that really improves the less.

All right, I appreciate the information. Yeah, throwing Ergon Kanner on there really really helps a lot. Anyway, let's let's look at what George is saying in response to that that video. Now, let's see if we can figure out because Figuring out where George's come from on that figure out where anybody's coming from when they try to deal with John sex.

When they don't believe it. They just don't believe it that they believe their traditions more strong than they believe the text I mentioned last week when I did the debate with Roger Forster when you hear it on unbelievable probably next weekend, I would assume You're gonna hear again John six could come up and they're just gonna jump all over the place.

They're gonna leap out of John six. They're gonna read it backwards. They're gonna do all the kinds of circus antique X is a Jesus that you have to do to get around John six. You just can't walk through this thing point by point and have it teach where what you want it to teach.

So That's just that's just the way that that works. So let's let's look at here at at what? George had to had to say he says a Person must be drawn which is what God does for us and he must believe which is what God enables us to do for ourselves.

So my question would be does God enable all men to believe equally. Is this some kind of prevenient grace position? Where does where does George derive this especially from John chapter 6? I I don't see anything in John chapter 6 that Makes any reference to this.

In fact, Jesus has just said but you do not believe you are unbelievers. Here's why all that the Father gives me will come to me. Which is the exact opposite point that is this being made by? George Bryson.

He says Calvinist and non-Calvinists agree that there are many who do not and will never believe in Jesus Christ. Okay. Well, there are non-Calvinists or universalists who wouldn't agree with that, but we'll leave that aside.

Calvinists and non-Calvinists agree that those who never believe will forever be lost. Again, leaving off the universalist true Calvinism says however, here's the question that the reprobate do not believe and will not believe because they cannot believe.

Now that's close, but not quite. It is not because they cannot believe it is because they do not belong to God which results in Due to their fallen state and slavery to sin their inability. Now George may not like that.