Read my book!

Broadcasting 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 at 602 -973 -4602 or toll free across the United States.

It's 1 -877 -753 -3341. And now with today's topic, here is James White.

Read My Book and the Missing Answers from the BAM Debate

And welcome to The Dividing Line on this Tuesday afternoon. My name is James White and we are going to be talking about a number of things today. We have a lot of things to talk about, numerous various sundry issues.

I'm still not hearing my computer. I'm asking for it to be turned up, but it is not there. We're trying to bring it up. Read my book. Ah, there it is. Yes, read my book. Read my book. Read my book. I heard that over and over again during the course, the Bible Answer Man debate.

Read my book. Yes, and it was in the context of the fact that I had challenged the folks that were debating me, and it was more than one, to answer some particular biblical passages. For example... I have yet to hear an answer to Genesis 50, Acts 4, Isaiah 10, and hence I would say I continue to hold the biblical ground.

Read my book. Read my book. Genesis 50, Isaiah 10, and Acts 4. Well, as you know, if you've been looking at the blog, you know that I have now gotten hold of the book, and so we're going to be commenting on what did George Bryson say about Genesis 50, Isaiah 10, and Acts 4.

We're going to find out. But first things first, we have many things to talk about today. First and foremost, I wanted to note that we have some folks that are very much involved with the ministry, and specifically Mike Porter's wife, Shannon, is expecting a baby.

In fact, the baby was due a few days ago. My wife was instructing Mr. Porter, who we call the gobbler, to make sure to have the baby today, because today would allow... Today's the 3rd of February in 2004, so it would be 2 -3 -4.

And so evidently that may end up happening, I'm not sure, because we got word today that Shannon fell, and she has broken her arm very badly, and in fact they're going to have to have surgery on her arm.

And of course, since she's already past due, they don't want to do surgery in that situation, so they may be inducing labor. So right after the program's over, I'm going to be heading down to the hospital.

So if you'd pray for Mike and Shannon Porter, this is their first child. This is not the way a new mom wants to start off with a broken arm and her first baby all at the same time. But, of course, 20 years down the road, it will be the stuff of constant discussion and hopefully happy memories.

But right now, of course, we need to pray for her because she must be in a lot of pain, and so I cannot imagine what it would be like to have a baby and have your arm broken at the same time. That just seems like way too much.

So pray for Mike and Shannon Porter, and I'll be heading down that direction as soon as the program is over. So first things first. Secondly, lots of stuff going on. If you saw the blog, we have some material there about Dave Hunt.

Dave has been, I think, falling off into something like open theism or something. I don't know. If you look at the blog today, he's made yet another basic biblical error. It comes from not being able to deal with biblical passages in their original languages, and so he ended up making statements like he makes in his current newsletter, and that's on the blog if you want to take a look at the main page at AOMN .org.

Of course, in the process, he's taking shots at other folks, and that just sort of happens. Well, obviously, I have much more to say about Mr. Hunt and the issue of the book coming out in just a matter of weeks, the book debating Calvinism, my debate between myself and Mr. Hunt, even though Amazon .com seems to think only Mr. Hunt wrote it.

I'm not sure how you write a debate book by yourself, but, hey, that's sort of how it works. Passion movie, Mel Gibson and the passion movie. I tracked down a segment of the EWTN interview that I did not have.

This was not included on the DVD, and this is getting more important as we look at the sources of the film. The film's coming up in just a matter of weeks now. Oh, by the way, John Piper's book is out.

I've ordered mine, haven't gotten it yet. The first five chapters are available in PDF format at, I believe it's the passion book. I put the URL on my blog a while back, passion-book .com or thepassion-book .com, something along those lines.

But you can take a look at it there. I was very excited that within one or two pages of the beginning, Acts 4, verses 27 to 28 were being cited. That may mean that George Bryson and his friends don't want to distribute that book, but, you know, it's there.

But one of the key sources for the film is a book by a Roman Catholic visionary who's on her way to sainthood, Gibson carries a relic from her in his pocket, and she wrote a book called The Dolores Passion of Christ that allegedly gives the visions that she was given, which explains what Mary's role in the crucifixion was.

And people have noted in watching the film that there's all this stuff about Mary, what Mary was doing. Well, where did that come from? Well, it came from this book. And in the EWTN discussion of this subject, which didn't air, didn't get on the DVD, he talks about this.

Let's listen to what he had to say.

Where did it originate? What was the moment when you said, I want to do this story? Ten years ago, right?

Roughly. Probably more like 12 or 13 years ago, I think it was. Was there an incident at one moment? I became acquainted with certain books and things. I started reading them. And I actually managed to purchase a library for a dollar a book.

Nobody else wanted these things. So I'm like, wow, I've got this huge library. And I found a place to put them and stuff. And I was reaching up for a book one day, and I pulled it out, and the cover caught on the book next to it.

And the book next to it fell out, and that was the Emmerich book, right? Dolores Passion. And I started looking back, oh, that's interesting. Wow, hey, wow, wow. This is answering a lot of questions I've been asking.

And it was at that point I was like, you know what? That's my life. You know, that kind of stuff. It's like starting to look into things that I had a knowledge of but really hadn't explored as fully as I should have.

So I began to look at them. Read all the Gospels. Read the New Testament. Read the Old Testament. And just started to go through all that and explore that.

Well, there's Mel Gibson himself giving you the role that that particular book had in his writing of the film and his beginning of the film, so on and so forth. I think that's important to keep in mind as we consider something else that came up.

Read my book. Oh, George, just hold on a second. We'll get to you in a second. Read my book. I've got it now. It arrived. We have it. It's okay. We'll get to it a little bit later on. But I got a e-mail, and it contained an article by John Armstrong on the Passion movie.

And I was very troubled by, again, remembering John Armstrong has edited books on Roman Catholicism, one of the best books that Moody put out, had a number of different articles in it. I was very troubled by a number of the comments that were made and sources that were cited in this article from John Armstrong, who, of course, has begun promoting new perspectivism and, as a result, attacks what he calls foundationalism and talks about openness to traditions and all the rest of the stuff.

And one of the paragraphs reads, as I note above, I've read numerous critiques of the Passion of the Christ. These range from the protest the film was anti-Semitic to praises of theologians and priests, the Roman Catholic Church.

And there's a parenthesis that says, no, the pope has not formally endorsed the film, and yes, Mel Gibson is a devout Christian and a faithful Roman Catholic. Now, the John Armstrong I once knew would not have allowed a statement like that to be made without qualifying and explaining it.

We're talking here about someone who clearly believes in the Mass as a perpetuatory sacrifice, purgatory, confession, penances, the entirety of the Roman Catholic system. He's more Catholic than the pope is, as they said, a vacantist.

And so, obviously, to just simply make the statement, as a devout Christian and a faithful Roman Catholic, would be to really embrace a tremendous amount of movement from where he once was. And some of the other citations in here from Roman Catholic priests and things concerning the reflections upon the death of Christ, which is connected to the rosary and various sacramental and liturgical things like that, very, very troubling to see coming from the pen of John Armstrong, but it is somewhat indicative of this movement and what it involves and what it ends up breeding in those who buy into it.

Because certainly, one of the points that N .T. Wright himself makes is that if you understand, if you properly understand the doctrine of justification, that it should be a great ecumenical doctrine, that it's meant to bring unity to the Church and hence should never be something of which people divide.

And so, New Perspectivism breeds into, leads into ecumenism, breeds an attitude of ecumenism. And it can partly do so because of the fact that it takes away so much of the specificity of the doctrine of justification itself, the imputation, the righteousness of Christ, so on and so forth.

It, in essence, says the divisions between Rome and Protestants were really based upon a medieval misreading of the entire subject to begin with. Rome was wrong in what she had said. My headphones are going in and out.

Rome was wrong about what she had said and the Reformers, therefore, since they're responding to what Rome was saying, were likewise wrong in what they were saying. And since we've all been wrong all along, then all we have to do is embrace this perspective and we can hold hands and sing kumbaya and things like that.

Hopefully, all the rest of you are able to hear me all right because my headphones are going in and out. It's very, very strange and odd and hopefully not indicative of my microphone about to die as it has in the past or things like that.

Anyways, I will try to press on despite that particular thing. We have a number of cuts that I'd like to play today because, as I mentioned, I got hold of The Dark Side of Calvinism. I am holding it in my hand.

It, as I mentioned on the blog, is an 8 .5 x 11 velo-bound type of a production here with a black cover. Like I said, I saw this from afar. At the top it says, a biblically-based examination, evaluation, refutation of the reformed doctrine of redemption and reprobation.

Then underneath The Dark Side of Calvinism, the Calvinist caste system. On the back, you have stuff from Chuck Smith. Doug Wilson is cited, which isn't that ironic, but what he actually is cited from is from an email that was posted on the web concerning a previous book.

I think it is really questionable, shall we say, to put something that he said about George Bryson on the web that was in reference to his previous book, The Five Points of Calvinism. If you have to put that on the back of your new book, that would be like my going back and grabbing old endorsements off the King James Only controversy.

I could have pulled the one from Geisler off and put it on the Potter's Freedom. Why not? Anyway, there's some pretty wild stuff in here, as I mentioned. But obviously the big question that everybody has had all along is, So, when George Bryson kept telling you over and over again that this particular book that you weren't able to see when you were in the studio answers these questions, does it answer these questions?

And here's a couple of the places that was said. You're going to have to read the book. That was in, I think, the second or third hour, where we were talking about John Chapter 6. And so I'm asking him where Jesus said what he was saying, and we have...

That's not what Jesus said. Could you share that with me? You're going to have to read the book. I'm going to have to read the book. Well, at least on that one, there was some discussion. Massive discussion, actually, of John Chapter 6.

It is tremendously confused. Demonstrates that exegesis is not what this system really can engage in. Very, very confusing. Disconnected from the text. Jumping all over the text. You simply can't walk through John 6.

You can't start at verse 35 and follow Jesus along to verse 45 and come to any conclusions. You've got to eisegetically read stuff into it. And so, anyway, at least on this one, where he said you have to read the book where Jesus said this, at least I know what he's talking about now.

And he's wrong, completely wrong, but it doesn't really matter. At least it was there someplace. But the section that I've played before, this part, this was the key issue. I have yet to hear an answer to Genesis 50, Acts 4, Isaiah 10, and hence I would say I continue to hold the biblical ground at this point.

Read my book. Is there anything about Genesis Chapter 50 anywhere in the dark side of Calvinism? Well, of course, there is no scriptural index. There's no subject index. There's no index at all. There's 16 zillion endnotes, but there is no subject or scripture index.

And so what do you have to do? You have to look at every single page and look at every single reference. Now, some of you know that I got pretty used to doing that and some other folks helped me out in doing that in regards to Norm Geisler's book.

When we first started responding to Chosen but Free, the scripture index in the back was extremely useless. It was not the kind of scripture index that actually lists everything. And so I or others would have to go through the entirety of the book looking for specific references.

And so I would buy an Amazon gift certificate and I would send it off to primarily either Mark Ennis, who's in Channel right now, or Captain Wade, who hasn't been in Channel in a long time, Keith up in Chicago.

And they would take the book and they would just start going up and down and up and down and up and down through the pages looking for every reference in the book. In fact, my copy of the first edition of Chosen but Free still has written in the front the index of particular passages that we need to look at, everything that he said written in the front.

And that's basically what we had to do with The Dark Side of Calvinism. So I sat down and now I had mentioned to you in previous programs Wally Bolt, our brilliant Australian astronomer, Hawaiian-Australian astronomer, whatever.

Had already gone through himself and he did not find any references. He looked specifically for Genesis 50 and Acts 4. I was looking for all three from the clip that I've played for you before, including Isaiah chapter 10.

And so I started the process. And of course, in the process, I can't help but being reading since I'm looking at passages as they're going by. And I found a bunch of stuff. Some of the things we'll talk about, some of the things I've listed on the blog already.

And so we go through and we go through the entirety of the text. Is there any reference to Genesis 50? No. Wally Bolt was right. Never is Genesis 50 cited or discussed in the entirety of the book. Acts chapter 4?

No. No references to Acts chapter 4. How about Isaiah chapter 10? Any references to Isaiah chapter 10? No. Nowhere in the book is there any even recognition of the existence of Isaiah chapter 10 and its witness to compatibilism at all.

And so what was he meaning? Read my book. Read my book. I did. And it's not there. George, there is no discussion of compatibilism and the passages in your book. Read my book. Well, but it didn't answer the question.

It just didn't answer the question. So we need to put don't read my book somewhere in there, yes, to explain that particular, you know, I just don't. It disappeared.

That's not what Jesus says. You're going to have to read the book.

Okay. Well, and over and over again we were told that. And, of course, during that particular discussion, there were a number of things that we asked of Mr. Bryson. And as I was looking for those phrases, read my book, I came across a number of others that I just wanted to play for us today.

I wanted to repeat. You know, I just need to see. Here's the, here's the, you know, do you hear the, there's the book in the background. Maybe I should have recorded that and made the sound effect itself.

I'm reading the book. There it is. One of the best parts of the debate. And, see, I listened to the second and third hour when I got home because I was listening to them live on the air. But I'd sort of forgotten about it.

And as I was listening to stuff, there was some stuff that I just went, man, did that, yeah, that really did happen. Can't believe that really happened. One was when I, when I would ask Mr. Bryson, how does God know the future?

How does God? I want to remind us once again of how this answer was given.

I believe God knows everything because he's omniscient. This is his very nature to know everything. He knows everything, actually knows everything potential. So the question about does God know the future is answered.

If God is omniscient, he knows everything, everything that is and could be.

I'm sorry, but doesn't it strike anyone else as strangely as it strikes me? That the answer to the question how does God know the future is he knows the future. He's omniscient. He knows the future. That doesn't answer the question.

That is a circular response. I know God is omniscient. The question is how is God omniscient? Well, it's just by nature. That was an answer to, when I asked that question, that was an answer to the, he said, oh, oh, it was almost like, oh, oh, oh, I want to answer that.

I want to answer that. And I just, that was very interesting to me. And I found it somewhat humorous. I'm closing some of these files here so I don't get confused as to which ones I have read. Let's see.

Now this one, well, here, I'll just play it. Genesis chapter 50, Isaiah chapter 10, and Acts chapter 4 are passages I'm going to ask George to explain to me during the course of our discussion today. See, I announced right up front, that's from the first hour, the very first hour, I said, look, I am going, here's the passages.

It's not like there was not time to do some preparation. From the very start, I announced Genesis chapter 50, Isaiah chapter 10, and Acts chapter 4 are passages I'm going to ask George to explain to me during the course of our discussion today.

And I never did get that explanation, did I? All I got was, read the book. Read my book. Yeah, read my book. Not just the book. Read my book. My book. Yes, that's what we got. We didn't get anything else.

But what we would hear over and over and over again, this was the funny part, what we would hear over and over and over again, I would ask a direct question. And the response would not be relevant.

Instead, what we would get would be, that's the problem with Calvinism.

That's how every response that I would say,. So George, how about this idea of substitutionary atonement?

And the response would start, that's the problem with Calvinism.

And you'd just go on from there.

That's the problem with Calvinism.

It's always just a problem with Calvinism. And really, if you just read my book, you'd understand what the problem with Calvinism is. It's just, I mean, just listen to, I got rolling at one point, okay?

Sometimes it happens. You've all, those of you who know me, you know that sometimes I just get rolling. And this happened at one point. And this really sort of explains it. Teach, that's not what we believe.

We believe that we evangelize because God commands us to do so, and he uses means. You've said many times, if God ordains the ends, he ordains the means to the ends. The means to the ends is that we proclaim the gospel.

And I'm not saying that I experience my union with Christ and my justification from eternity. What I am saying, however, is that if substitutionary atonement is true, then the term propitiation means a removal of wrath.

You just cite 1 John 2, 2, which refers to propitiation. If it does not remove wrath, then it's not propitiation. If that man goes to hell, and Christ has propitiated God's wrath in his place, then God is unjust.

It's not an attack on the cross. And 1 Timothy 2, 4 through 5, which was cited earlier about God not wanting any to perish, and 2 Peter 3, 9, if you look at both of those in their context, you'll see that in the very next verse, Paul says that Jesus Christ intercedes.

He is the one mediator between God and men. And so I ask the question. The high priest always had to mediate for those who he offered the sacrifice for. If Christ's death was intended to save every individual, then Christ intercedes and mediates for every individual.

So are we saying that Christ is in heaven right now, interceding before the Father in behalf of every person who has already died under the wrath of God and who will be in hell forever?

The big mistake that Calvinists make, and they should know better on this, Hank, is the whole issue of, they've turned Sola Fidei into Nola Fidei.

Under the wrath of God and who will be in hell forever.

The big mistake that Calvinists make, and they should know better on this, Hank, is the whole issue of, they've turned Sola Fidei into Nola Fidei.

Has nothing to do with what I just got done saying. Let's just right off. And would he ever be called on the carpet for that? No, no, no, no, no. He can say whatever he really wants to say. At that particular point in time.

Well, now you know, we had a discussion a couple weeks ago. A number of people had contacted me, and I had been listening today, that Hank was talking to a guy, remember the guy whose brother goes to Norm Geisler's school, and this guy wanted Hank to say that we're not in the pale of orthodoxy, you know that pale where you all slosh about and throw water at each other.

And Hank had made the following statement.

Now I wasn't in this debate in any sense. I tried to moderate this debate.

So Hank was not in the debate. Well, I had a problem with that. And as I re-listened to, as I was listening to the whole thing, looking for these clips of the program today, over and over again, I kept hearing just how involved Hank was.

And so I put just a couple, just a few representative samples of Hank's non-involvement together. Because I was just, I'd be sitting there, and I was trying to do two or three things at once. I'm trying to listen, keep one ear on it.

And I kept stopping going, I've forgotten that. But wait, and it was just, just listen. Despite the accusations of dancing and various and sundry other things, I don't think that that's a fair analogy at all.

When we say they had no opportunity, Hank, I want to emphasize that we are talking about individuals who not only do not desire any such opportunity. But they're created in such a way that they cannot desire.

Is that right? But again, they are created in the image of God, and it's their sin and their fallen nature that causes them to love their sin. Just so we understand. Because if I thought it was up to me to try to convince people who were involved in some of these tremendously controlling groups that by their libertarian free will they were somehow going to choose Christ over against the control structure that's around them and that God would never violate their free will, then I wouldn't even bother going up to Salt Lake City and doing the things that I'm doing.

Is that what you would say, or do you say that it is God who changes the heart? God changes the heart.

Now, is that what you say? Or actually, are you saying this? I mean, over and over again, there was this feeding of George that the answer to the question in the form of the question was so clear, everybody heard it.

I mean, I've seen so many, we've gotten so many emails from so many people. I just don't understand why there would be any, even any question about the subject, you know? I don't know, I was just left utterly, utterly and completely befuddled at that.

And you can just hear the going back and forth. People said in the chat channel it was right. People forgot George was even a part of this debate at times. It was something else. Well, 877 -753 -3341 is the phone number.

877 -753 -3341. Read my book. Yeah, I know. Well, I tried, but it's not there. There is no discussion whatsoever of compatibilism, recognition of these passages, just simply a mocking of the idea of God's decree.

And isn't it interesting, it's exactly what ends up coming out in Dave Hunt's newsletter that was sent out today. What has happened in the world when you have Dave Hunt attacking Rick Warren in The Purpose Driven Life for quoting from the Living Bible in Psalm 139, where Psalm 139, verse 16 talks about the fact that God has ordained our days.

See, Dave Hunt is a King James only, he's not King James only, but he's King James preferred and he doesn't seem to realize that the King James blew it in Psalm 139. And therefore, you have an actuality that the Living Bible is more literal than the King James is at that point.

And the Bible does say that God has ordained our days and Dave Hunt disagrees with that. I guess Dave Hunt thinks God doesn't know when he's going to die or doesn't ordain the day that he's going to die.

Boy, all sorts of problems there. Well, it is ironic, but it is 5 .30, which I think, even though I've not been given the indication, means that we're supposed to be taking a break about now. And so hopefully we'll be able to do that and take your phone calls at 877 -753 -3341.

Let's hear what you have to say right after this.

Commercial Break: Homosexuality, Mary, and Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church

Under the guise of tolerance, modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality. Even more disturbing, some within the church attempt to revise and distort Christian teaching on this behavior.

In their book, The Same-Sex Controversy, James White and Jeff Neal write for all who want to better understand the Bible's teaching on the subject, explaining and defending the foundational Bible passages that deal with homosexuality, including Genesis, Leviticus, and Romans.

Expanding on these scriptures, they refute the revisionist arguments, including the claim that Christians today need not adhere to the law. In a straightforward and loving manner, they appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to God's plan for His people.

The Same-Sex Controversy, defending and clarifying the Bible's message about homosexuality. Get your copy in the bookstore at almin .org.

Millions of petitioners from around the world are employing Pope John Paul II to recognize the Virgin Mary as co-redeemer with Christ, elevating the topic of Roman Catholic views of Mary to national headlines and widespread discussion.

In his book, Mary, Another Redeemer, James White sidesteps hostile rhetoric and cites directly from Roman Catholic sources to explore this volatile topic. He traces how Mary of the Bible, esteemed mother of the Lord, obedient servant, and chosen vessel of God, has become the immaculately conceived, bodily assumed Queen of Heaven, viewed as co-mediator with Christ and now recognized as co-redeemer by many in the Roman Catholic Church.

Mary, Another Redeemer is fresh insight into the woman the Bible calls blessed among women and an invitation to single-minded devotion to God's truth. You can order your copy of James White's book, Mary, Another Redeemer, at almin .org.

This portion of the dividing line has been made possible by the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. The Apostle Paul spoke of the importance of solemnly testifying of the gospel of the grace of God. The proclamation of God's truth is the most important element of his worship in his church.

The elders and people of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church invite you to worship with them this coming Lord's Day. The morning Bible study begins at 9 .30 a .m. and the worship service is at 10 .45.

Evening services are at 6 .30 p .m. on Sunday and the Wednesday night prayer meeting is at 7 .00. The Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church is located at 3805 North 12th Street in Phoenix. You can call for further information at 602 -26-GRACE.

If you're unable to attend, you can still participate with your computer and real audio at prbc .org where the ministry extends around the world through the archives of sermons and Bible study lessons available 24 hours a day.

Read my book.

Pilgrim's progress is not an easy way. It's a journey to the sun day by day. It's a walk of praise.

Read my book. Welcome back. Hey, having a little fun. Hey, if you can't have a little fun, why in the world are you listening to this thing anyways? Well, you know, what can I say? I don't see that we have any phone.

No one has called in today. They just want to keep hearing this type of stuff. But I only had so much of it. I mean, we can go back and we can look at some of the things Dave Hunt had to say, but I've already put that on the blog.

You know, what can I say? Read my book. Yeah, I know. And the problem with Calvinism, so George, exactly how does God know the future? Well, the problem with Calvinism is, and if we just simply took that particular line away from Mr. Bryson, would he ever be able to start a response?

That's the question. I don't know that he could. I didn't make it. That was all the cuts I made. That was it. Obviously, you know, I can hear cackling in the other room. I will mention this, as those of you who are just waiting to call in at 877 -753 -3341 do, because I know that you want to.

On page 31, I had to at least admit, this is interesting. Let me back up here a little bit. While the caste system of Reformed theology transcends the earthly distinctions of humanity, i .e., rich, poor, black, white, Jew, Gentile, highly cultured, lowly, peasants, etc., it is an undeniable feature of Calvinism.

In fact, the eternal castes of the elect and reprobate necessarily include representatives of all temporal distinctions. I'm not sure what a temporal distinction is.

That's the problem with Calvinism. Oh, okay.

James White, while focusing on the election side of the election reprobation coin, says that, and then he quotes me, quote, God elects a specific people unto himself without reference to anything they do.

That serves you right. I don't know how that happened. Honestly, I really, really, how did that happen? I didn't do that. Somebody must have come online and I didn't even realize that, yep, yep, Thinker came online.

Thinker's back. We lost Thinker for a while. Anyways, God elects a specific people unto himself without reference to anything they do. This means the basis of God's choice of the elect is solely within himself.

His grace, mercy, his will, it is not man's actions, works, or even foreseen faith that draws God's choice. God's election is unconditional and final. Now, what's interesting is that this same section from The Potter's Freedom, Ephesians 1, Dave Hunt quotes, but he uses ellipses to remove the fact that I'm talking about election here, not reprobation, and he sort of does the let's take one quote from one page and one quote from another page and one quote from 50 pages down the road, stick them all together, and voila, you have your resultant quote, and ends up misrepresenting things there.