WEF’s Utopia, Live Not By Lies, the Slick v. Shamoun Debate

Well greetings welcome to the dividing line it is a the first cool day of the fall in Phoenix, Arizona Well, no yesterday was but the first cool day with a dividing line.

So yes, I'm excited to be here And I'm excited when the highs do not reach 70 degrees in Phoenix after in the first 290 days of 2020 the high temperature is 100 degrees or above for 145 of those days

Half of them Since New Year's Day. Yes. So yeah, it's gonna warm back up a little bit

But it's not gonna make it back to 90 and so hey, it's dry as a bone and you know 85 and dry is is gorgeous.

And so we're happy. Hey just a Not a programming note, but just I only found it

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere if I hadn't been looking at another debate where we're talking about in a moment

I wouldn't have known about this but coming up in two hours from now on the gospel truth

YouTube page Doug Wilson is gonna be debating. Dr. Kurt Jaros does

God decree all evil and So I brought my I brought my earphones.

We're not gonna go two hours but I'm gonna get fired up on the phone and listen to it while driving home and Well, then take that long get home

But it should be very very very interesting I'm looking forward to hearing that because that is a key issue the issue of the sovereignty of God who determines the shape of time

That really when you think about that really ends up determining what you believe about everything else if you believe that That God does not have a decree

Then You're the best you can have is a vague General outline of history that's gonna go a lot of different ways depending upon human autonomy and things like that all the way into process theology open theism all those other messes that are out there and But that is the tendency of man that I would say to you the default

View of The world that's going to come from man is Going to be a man -centered world where a man determines these things human autonomy

It is a act of grace that causes a man to recognize

That he is neither autonomous. He did not he is not Thomas He did not bring his himself into existence and that there is something far greater than simply the bumbling result of the human species that is being accomplished in this world and that really is the issue and obviously

I think the biblical answer that is very very plain, but The prejudice and the bias of the human experience often results in people

Refusing to accept that biblical reality despite It's a very clear statements of scripture

On the subject, you know the one who works all things have to counsel as well sort of sort of straightforward

But there's always a way folks. There is always a way around anything

If your heart is not truly dedicated to being subjected Fully to the truth of God.

There's always a way around anything you want to defend Anything you can you can find a way to do it and so All right.

So on the program today a lot of things I Guess I'll go ahead and do this.

I wasn't gonna do this, but Someone posted again. It's one of those tweets before the program things.

They weren't aiming at me. So it that's not the issue, but It just hit because I guess this wasn't all that long ago but someone known to a number of people in the

Internets by the name of Kyle James Howard has has tweeted yet once again and I just want to look at this as a

Overarching can anything not be blamed on this example He says when we think about sexual abuse and racial trauma

We never think about all the black boys who had older uncles or cousins Perpetuate and ready for this now if you're if you're a if you're a black boy

What then are your older uncles and cousins What Because he used the term black boys.

So what what is a black boys older uncles or cousins? they are black, right, okay, so When we think about sexual abuse or age trauma, we never think about all the black boys who had older uncles or cousins perpetuate white supremacy's young buck dynamic

By pressuring them to have sex usually with older women as soon as they hit puberty so Evidently there is a young buck dynamic in the black community and I Don't think

I did I play it? I don't know if I played it, but I made reference to a program about what five four or five months ago

Where a black woman was interviewing had in the audience these all these young black men less than 30 years of age one of which had

What was it? 26 children by 18 different women. I think something like that All of them had multiple multiple multiple children by multiple multiple multiple women and They were talking about this as being a part of black culture

But who knew? It was actually due to white supremacy Because that's what it says.

They they're perpetuating white supremacy's young buck dynamic What can't be blamed on white supremacy now?

What isn't blamed on whites everything? I've seen climate change blamed on white supremacy every economic issue climate change war and Even the young buck dynamic in the black community.

It's all white supremacy So can we just stop using the phrase white supremacy and just call it the devil?

How about that? Because the word doesn't the phrase doesn't mean anything anymore.

You're just talking about evil Which is why it makes you wonder there are these groups a lot of black

Hebrew Israelites and Of course Farrakhan and his entire group

What has their thing been all along whites or demons? white or demons

So it's coming full circle. The woke people are just getting to the same place They just went, you know through a different way to get there

And you do realize that what Kyle James Howard? Says there means that that black people the way he's praising black people have

Absolutely, no will or capacity for self -governance at all at all

They're just victims. They're just victims. They're the oppressed and so they're just victims

It's all there is to it. No responsibility It's done. It's astonishing to me that people can so Dive headfirst in this kind of thing that they don't realize what they're actually end up saying when they get done.

It's It's amazing but there's good old Kyle James Howard at it again a video is making the rounds that I first saw yesterday and Um That's not the one

I wanted I wanted that one right there and It is astonishing now, this is from the

World Economic Forum. You need to understand the World Economic Forum has been around for quite some time the

World Economic Forum Has been primarily ignored by most people as Pinheaded Leftist Scholars and Theorists and you know, they get together at Davos and do their thing and Yeah, really?

Well, actually they are the biggest they're the largest enemies you've ever had They they are behind what is happening to you now if you have lost your job

If you've lost your business if you've lost your freedom the

World Economic Forum Wanted all of that to happen was waiting for a trigger waiting for something to use

To bring all that about because they want you dependent upon the government. They want you living in a one -room apartment

Without the ability to travel eating vegan With basically no future and no purpose in your life and And not getting married and not having children so that the overall population can be drastically reduced over time

That's what the World Economic Forum is about that's that's who they are and People didn't take them overly seriously until now when they are actually starting to accomplish their goals

They put out a video With nice little music in the background and making everybody look happy and smiley

But I want you to think about what they're saying These are eight predictions for the world in 2030

But this isn't just simply a matter of predictions. This is where we see trends going.

This is what they want This is what they're working toward This is this is what the

Great Reset is all about and they're they're they're throwing that out there I've mentioned a friend of mine.

Michael Fallon was telling me about the Great Reset years ago And it sounded crazy Because there were so many things that had to happen

So much had so much had to happen to make any of this make any sense, why would anyone voluntarily

Give up their national sovereignty. I You and your ancestors your families have worked to build this nation and Even people in small really poor struggling nations still have a tremendous amount of pride in their nation.

I mean, that's what isn't that what the Olympics are all about? I mean you're you're cheering for oh, we canceled them, didn't we?

We did We did didn't have to but we did we canceled them Because no because these people do not want you

Looking up the number of gold medals that your country has won because they don't want I remember it was only what two years ago

When I started hearing nationalist being used as a negative pejorative term

I Remember I remember when Bruce Jenner was Bruce Jenner and we were so proud of The decathlon wins and Mark Spitz.

Oh, wow, you know and and the miracle The the

US hockey team back when we were still putting amateurs up against all the professionals from the

Eastern Bloc countries Our amateurs won the gold in hockey remember Miracle on ice.

Yeah, and so That kind of thing You know the dream team, you know when we finally started using our professionals and wiped their bales off the planet you know but you see that that fosters nationalism and borders and These people don't want that They want a global Socialist technocracy or a small number of global elites live in The level of luxury you would not even be able to remember.

What was the UM? What was that movie? With the were all the elites lived up on a space station and then all the other bad

Pete all the bad people lived on earth and just died horrible deaths and and Stuff like that.

Um, what was the name of that one? Anyway, saw it again recently. Oh, that's Where these people are?

In what they're in what they're gonna be doing as With all of socialism what you what you do is is you spread poverty equally?

That's what that socialism does is you spread the poverty out equally? but when you get people to vote into it, of course you advertise it differently and I Did a really long ride yesterday because it finally cooled off and I've been waiting to do this ride for About a hundred two mile ride out to Bartlett Lakenbeck I've been waiting to do it literally for months and finally got a chance to do it.

And so one of the things I listened to Was Rod Dreher's book live not by lies Live not by lies, which is a quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyn right before he was kicked out of Russia This was a part of his final message to the

Russian people live not by lies Which was a a reference to the fact that under communism

You had to learn to live by lying Everybody knew that Pravda which means the truth

Pravda the the news agency Everything it said was a lie. Everybody knew it.

You could basically read it in Pravda and go Oh the opposite of that is true Everybody knew it.

That's where we are now That's what CNN is that's what the MSNBC is and That's what this when when when they started to promote this stuff amongst these nations the promise of all the young intellectuals was equality and workers of the world unite and everyone's gonna have all their needs met and The result was everyone shared the same level of poverty

It's not a joke that you could everybody under the Soviet Union had plenty of money there's just nothing to buy and So if you want a car you ordered a car and you'd get the car about two and a half years later and it was a hunk of junk, but But you didn't have to worry about paying for it because there's plenty of money.

This wasn't anything to buy Because socialism doesn't work As they say you you vote your way in on The basis of lies and then you shoot your way out on the basis of the truth

That's how it's been and for quite some time I've been noticing a lot of folks who lived under the communist scheme.

They have to be older folks now Well, not super older but older. They're in the older generation have been saying

What we're seeing in the United States we've seen before people losing their jobs

Totalitarian thought being punished for your how you think about things how you speak about things

If you actually want to say what you really need to say you sort of have to lower your voice We all know right now

We could have the plug pulled on us at any point in time by all the big tech corporations it's just it's just a matter of time before when it's gonna happen and They've been saying we saw this before this is how it happened last time

And we had I had someone on on Twitter just a few weeks ago saying hey, I watched this happen in South America It's happening here.

No one listens to him because the media is fully complicit with all of it live not by lies

Live not by lies Well, here's the lies from the World Economic Forum These are not just predictions.

These are these are what they want you to desire and look very carefully at them

Because then then you go how are they ever gonna get people to do this stuff and Then you see what's happened with kovat then you see what's happened with a virus as a ninety nine point nine five percent survival rate in anybody under 70 and How it's been used how it's been politicized how it's been turned into the great panic of 2020

Because once you panic people you can control people and you can talk them into doing anything to keep their safety

Once they're panicked and no longer are interested in the truth So here is it's only a minute and a half long eight predictions the world in 2030 from the

World Economic Forum Okay, so there you go,

I mean in 90 seconds there you have global socialism from the World Economic Forum you you want on anything

Anything you need you'll rent from somebody else So all the all the rosy stuff about, you know, you might be getting ready to go to Mars or something like that So this is this is obviously single -payer health care

All done by the government which we all know means in the real world today

Many people die because they can't get life -saving surgeries because there's too much of a delay and issues like that So, so there you go, you'll you'll be a vegan

No personal autonomy, no personal liberty, no personal freedoms Everyone has to think the same way act the same way and you'll just all be serves to the government and That's the

World Economic Forum and that's what all the rich elites want for you it's called the

Great Reset folks the Great Reset and they they literally are that close to accomplishing it because Already 50 million people have voted in the

United States And so all the stuff that's come out about Hunter Biden and Chinese money and all the rest of that stuff those 50 million people have already voted

And and how many of them and you know, probably close to 25 million of those have voted for a man who is non -compensamentous

Who who literally doesn't know what day it is doesn't know where he is doesn't know where he's going He doesn't know what office he's running for he doesn't know who he's running against Hey George, yeah, it's astonishing.

These are all facts. This is reality and then and I saw just today one of the people that I follow on on Twitter put together a whole list of people who in response to the

Establishment of Justice Barrett on the Supreme Court We're talking about burning the

Constitution packing the court destroying the nation, you know if those people are

American citizens that used to be called being a traitor that was called treason and Was extremely dangerous and could like get you executed.

But now it's standard fare on Twitter That's that's situation. We're facing.

So So there's the there's WF World Economic Forum now, I mentioned that I Went on a long ride yesterday.

I did two things on that ride I listened to a debate that we're gonna talk about at the end of the program well halfway through the program or pretty soon or whenever and Then I also began listening to Rod Dreher's book.

I don't know three car three quarters 80 % of the way through it something along those lines and So It like I said, it's from a

Solzhenitsyn quote live not by lies I Would highly recommend it to you

Rod Dreher's theology is Eastern Orthodox. And so there are I think some gaping holes especially when it comes to anthropology

And to a rather broad ecumenism that again is one of the issues that I've been

I've seen this coming for a long time as far as as we are being pushed into a smaller and smaller social space

The fact that the vast majority of people don't know why they're not another perspective is going to be problematic gonna be very very problematic the the specifics of what we believe and why we believe it will be

Swept under the rug By and large and the problem is that leads to fundamentally different answers to the big questions the big world view questions if you believe that man is creating the image of God and that man is suppressing the knowledge of God and That man's heart is a factory of idols that's gonna change everything if you if you believe that man if you if you're like a provisionist and Believe that man has the capacity in and of himself without the intervention of divine grace

To do what is good and right in God's sight to have faith and repent and all of these things

That's gonna give you a completely different outcome when it comes to looking at issues such as government law these are fundamental issues and As I was saying earlier

It's very obvious to me that Whether you have a God -centered theology or a man -centered theology and that people ask too simplistic.

No There is a way of identifying that if you believe that God is accomplishing his will in this world

That he has formed the fabric of time Then to be consistent you have to have a

God -centered theology If you do not believe that you can only have a man -centered theology

You you can't have a God -centered theology because God's waiting on mankind to see what mankind's gonna do

So or he gave over the final result to mankind, however you work it there there is a way to determine those two things and I submit to you that it is the it is it is the tendency of humankind to exalt humankind's capacity to give to ourselves freedom and capacity and ability

We'll get a little more of that and it's important to the debate that I listened to in in a moment but so So why would

I suggest a book by a because I I criticized Rod Dreher's Benedict option Which came out a couple years ago, which obviously is related but obviously he's a very good thinker and I Remember before I did the debate with John Dominic Rawson Before the cruise many years ago, we did a class and During the debate

Shabir mentioned some of the books that I mentioned that I had recommended the class as if by recommending the book

That meant I believed everything that was in the book and I'm like, no This is a class you put on a graduate level class or really it should be almost a level class

You're going to put things in your bibliography or expose students to things that are not necessarily

Representative of where you're coming from just simply that's what the educational process is about unless you're a fundamentalist

And then you only have them read fundamentalist books and so This would be a situation where I'm going look you're gonna be challenged by some of the things

He says sometimes you're tracking along going. Yeah. Yeah. Oh boy. I hadn't thought about that and all sudden there will be this

And sir, so it skips sort of like on an old record, you know, and you're like why that happened?

and if you think about oh, it's because he's Not an evangelical. He doesn't have the same, you know foundations and certain things as as so we've been going along pretty well then it

Or sometimes I chew off to the side or something like that That's the experience you'll have in in reading

Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox and and all sorts of things like that But there's still he still put a lot of work into it and it was

Basically One it what what he's saying is what we're seeing coming is a soft totalitarianism a totalitarianism not so much enforced by government decree as By the society itself as seen in the large tech companies and corporations

In the book he mentioned that many of those larger corporations like Apple And Google and Facebook Have more money on hand than many of the nations in the world

Well, actually most nations the world have no money at all when you think about it but their their their economic capacity and power is greater than entire countries or entire groups of countries and They are the mechanism that is being used to enforce a societal

Totalitarianism, it's a soft totalitarianism. It's not the Russians rolling into town with tanks and It's not establishing a puppet government, which is what happened in Eastern Europe after World War two

Instead it it actually flows from the consent of the no longer governed but ruled again, you vote your way in and it is a bowing to new societal goods that That then demand that they and they alone be seen as good so that any other perspective is now considered to be evil and is not to be spoken of and shall not appear on social platforms and cannot have access to the internet and if your organization believes those things and that's called hate mongering and and if you associate with people like that you can lose your job and and All of that type of totalitarianism was present under Soviet style

Totalitarianism and is present today in China, but it is interesting to compare and contrast

The Chinese model today with what took place before because this is this is for me the key

At least key to how I've been thinking about it and that is Dreier spends a lot of time talking about Soviet dissidents and and people in Czechoslovakia in places like that that resisted

The communist regime and how they resisted because part of the book is about well, how will we resist when this happens?

But the problem is looking back. Yes. I think it's good to look back. It's good to know what they went through It's good to know how they resisted but the one thing they weren't facing was technology and The Massive government control of every aspect of the life of every citizen of China is what we are looking at coming in the

United States the the The the infrastructure is already in place

The ability to have the cameras The tracking devices the listening devices in your homes, which many people have voluntarily placed in their homes

And You know all all for making our life easier, of course

But all that kind of stuff that is The part of the soft totalitarianism that ends up becoming

Hard totalitarianism. I don't see personally how soft totalitarianism can avoid becoming the hard totalitarianism of the

Chinese Communist Party, but what has changed and To me is this this was a an important insight not so much that he stayed but in listening to him speaking

Made me think about this what the what the Chinese have done that is even more insidious is they learned from the mistakes of the

Soviets and They came to understand that an unhappy Unfed Unsatisfied populace is eventually going to throw you out

You're eventually going to run out of people to run the machinery and They'll they'll eventually throw you out.

So what you need to do is need to have enough economic power going on To allow the people to fulfill their fleshly desires for food luxuries video games sex um

Keep people Satiated physically satiated keep them busy

If they're starving that makes for martyrs you don't want martyrs you don't want that guy

Standing in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square, which has already been wiped out of the memory of the

Chinese people Almost no young Chinese person has any knowledge whatsoever of Tiananmen.

Don't even know what happened That's only whispered about by very small number of people

So what's interesting is Western decades, this is how

This is how you can abuse capitalism and then use communism

Marxism and in both Satisfy the simple desires of man in you can abuse capitalism by through greed and the promotion of immorality the destruction of the family, etc, etc

Undercut the society or under Chinese style communism You satiate these desires

You provide the food you provide the the games and that keeps people docile

So that they do not rebel Against the fact that they have no freedom and they have no future and they have no transcendent value at all

Life is just living. It's just it's just Rinse and repeat until you die and then you're gone because that's all they have to offer

That's all they have to offer. And so you just have to say satiate people for as long as possible and And it is that Chinese style of communism of totalitarianism that is coming and coming quickly and We have seen over the past What?

Seven eight months how easily it can happen How easily can happen? We we just in years past.

I just could not see What would cause the American people to voluntarily become wards of the state to voluntarily become snitches on Their neighbors and yet now we know what it is

Terrify them make them afraid Risk tell them that their lives are at risk.

Even when all the numbers say the dives are not at risk And People will give up They have no idea what

Patrick Henry was talking about And if you really honest they would say Patrick Henry was a nut Give me liberty give me death.

No right now. The American side is saying give me safe Imprisonment rather than death.

That's what that's what America is saying Every one of you driving down the car alone and driving down the road alone your car with a mask on is saying give me

Imprisonment rather than death. I am afraid I am scared

And If the people that now live in this country had lived in this country in the early 1770s, there would be no country

Because there would have been no Revolutionary War. There would have been no Constitution That's just the way it is.

I Sad it's sad, but it's true. So that kind of Chinese totalitarianism is

Depending on what happens next week and in the days afterwards as People are

You know because Pennsylvania has I think four days to keep producing ballots

Keep sending them in till you get what you need and everybody says that's the one state right now that's that's the balance state and so they

They were given the ability to they'll know exactly how many votes they need and I I have

This much confidence. I'll be honest with you. I mean, I've never seen What we saw here

Saturday in Phoenix Never seen how long was that line?

I I've heard I heard even longer but We had a parade of vehicles flying

Trump flags That literally circled our valley and for some of you who don't realize Our valley is huge This the we're talking 50 60 mile

I I heard a hundred miles so I had heard 40 miles a week before Yeah, it's like 45 miles before is over 100 miles this week of vehicles flying

Trump flags Driving the freeways because you can you can start in the Northwest Valley in Phoenix at 65 miles per hour an hour and a half

Later, you're still in the valley in the south east corner of Phoenix It's just that huge. It's just that big

I've never seen any of this, but I still have very low confidence in the

Accuracy of the vote count. I'll just be honest with you. I'm just just telling you straight Mail -in stuff.

I it was back in March. I was saying Oh gracious they're gonna try to make this a mail -in election and they succeeded and The Supreme Court helped him to do it as did

Justice Roberts, by the way I do not believe there's a 6 -3 conservative court at all now

There's a 5 -4 mainly conservative court Roberts is no there's no conservative.

He never was never will be and Seemingly the longer those people are on the court the more they swing left.

So there you go So anyhow Back to a point many many points ago a lot of people who lived under this stuff have seen this before they see the lies

They've tried to warn us. We're not listening and So I still think that this would be a book that's well worth your reading a lot of the quotations were really good

It certainly provides you with some history that a lot of people do not know at all today They have no idea the cost and the suffering of people under Marxism if people knew

Simple common sense would keep them from doing the things they're doing but they don't know and so there is no common sense and So this is what we are facing in in our society today and so it was

Historic last night You saw some political theater last night because because ACB and there are people saying you're not supposed to call her

ACB because that's stealing from Judge Ginsburg's legacy, you know, cuz she was

You know, they used her initials, too And I just and I someone on some famous person on Twitter was saying that and I just responded.

No No, not make me But you saw some political theater last night because She was not sworn in last night.

That was today and that was from with Justice Roberts That was faux

But there was a reason for it there was a big reason for it and that was

Clarence Thomas and Who tried to ravage

Clarence Thomas in his In in his

Senate confirmation hearings Joe Biden Who was also the person who went after and destroyed

Robert Bork? Well, Kenny and Biden did both but they were both involved with it and so that was pure political theater pure political theater

To do that, but it was certainly historic and memorable and we will see what

Literally the next 90 days is going to mean as to whether there will still be what is left of a constitutional republic

In the United States or whether the last major because I'll be honest with you if Kamala Harris Because Joe Biden's not even there if Kamala Harris is

President United States in January of 2021 the last barrier to the

Great Reset falls and so it starts and so just get used to Socialism being a war of the state

Limited dietary choices constant masking anywhere And limited religious choices you you walk outside the door of your home and Maybe even inside your home.

You'll have to have a mask on doesn't matter what you do where you go That's we but and and when it happens and a bunch of you are going this is terrible

The rest of us gonna be sitting going we tried to tell you We tried to tell you

But you weren't listening Well, we thought you were scaremongering us.

No, we were just trying to tell you the truth. That's just all there is to it so There you go

Wow so dadadadadada, okay

Dadadadadada Distracted by the stuff there. I'm not gonna be looking that direction. Okay so the other thing that I listened to was

Again Especially over the past year and it started sort of a little bit before that but it has been given great impetus now especially over the past year there has been this explosion as As explosion in debating

These are rarely debates that have been prepared for For lengthy periods of time very often.

They do not involve people who are actually experts in the field at all They Just generally are timed opening and closing statements and then a free -for -all in between Is is what

I'm seeing in in most situations and So you get two people and they go online for a few hours and they do a thing

And and so now this is just happening like every single day And like I said, that's the Jarrus Wilson thing coming up in less than an hour and a half

Online virtual We just moved a bunch of equipment into the new studio

Be working on stuff I think you said tomorrow So who knows when that's gonna happen, though, obviously my desire is

Not to have that thing being used every night But when it is used for it to be

High quality stuff that will be worthwhile ten years down the road. I Think that's really the the goal in in that type of situation.

But anyway So I listened to a debate I had not heard of I think as I was going to bed, was it

Friday night? Something like that Someone texted me a link to it.

I thought it was a link to a thing. I clicked on it and then I saw it was still ongoing Between Matt Slick of CARM, CARM .org

and Sam Shamoon and It was on The subject it was supposed to be

Supposed to be is limited atonement biblical

That got touched upon a little bit but not much now

I appreciated it both sides tried to start off in a

Ironic manner Matt Slick's always very ironic in that way It didn't stay that way let's put it that way

I think I got through an hour and 45 minutes before the constant talking over and Going over the same question for the 20th time just I okay, that's enough

I I stopped the bike and and Switched that's when I switched to Dreher's work actually, but I listened to Certainly enough of it to know what was what was going on with it

And so I appreciated Matt's presentation. I appreciate that. I guess before The debate started

Sam actually posted his notes But I I think That a mistake that Matt made was that he then primarily his opening statement was primarily focused upon answering

Sam's notes. Well that that ended up really limiting the

Conversation And to just a to basically Colossians 1

Colossians 2 and and just a few other texts sort of thrown in in passing but over and over and over again the same text came up and So there was no overarching presentation whatsoever or even almost reference to the place that particular redemption plays in The whole

Action of father -son Holy Spirit and redeeming a particular people unto himself Some of you may recall well, you know a lot of people a lot of you are new listeners man is getting dry

Whoo, man, it is dried out My lips are chapping and everything else terrible. I wonder if post -tenebrous

Lux Bible butter would work on lips About to find out

Anyway, I've told the story before 20 years ago, maybe 21 years ago now

I first went to st. Charles. I'm going to st. Charles again. By the way, it will be there. I may be driving

I may drive this time. It's a two -day trip But I may drive this time Because I'm driving from there

Back down to prior afterwards, so I'm gonna have to rent a vehicle Anyways, so it seems like you know get a lot of reading done that way but listening obviously

But the first time I went to prior to St. Charles Or was the second time yeah

I think it was second time because the first time I was on a local radio station and I think think the second time there was this

Anti -Calvinist guy and his name is has escaped me I could probably bring it bring it to mind if I thought about for a few few moments

It wasn't trying to talk at the same time But there was this guy who was fairly well known for teaching against every aspect of the five points for Calvinism, I think he was local and he put forward a

Challenge for me to debate him on This radio station that I had been on when

I was there for the first time to speak I think the first time I went there was in June and then ever since then it's been the first weekend

December This will be the 20th year That I've been there 20 years.

We've done this now very patient people here that are desperate people. I'm not sure which anyway

And He wanted to debate Eternal security. Well, you know, that's not my favorite terminology at all

I certainly do not believe in eternal security in the Non -reformed understanding of one saved all was saved got your ticket punched do go do whatever you want, etc, etc the reformed understanding is that Christ will infallibly save those given to him by the

Father and That means that saving faith will endure so the perseverance Preservation or perseverance of the

Saints preservation would be the divine side perseverance would be how we would see it in life but it's the result of the fact that the

Father has given to people to the Son and it's his will that the Son lose none of them and He won't lose any of them.

So this it's it's really the fundamental issue is is can Jesus save perfectly and Only Calvinist believe that Jesus can save perfectly

Only Calvinist believe that Oh stop being so angry and just listen to what I'm saying there is a difference between saying that Jesus can make salvation available and Jesus can save perfectly.

Those are not the same statements and If you are any kind of synergist any

Kind of synergist at all a simple synergist There's only a one thing you have to do or a complex synergist

There's a whole bunch of stuff you have to do through a sacramental system if you're any kind of synergist you can not believe that Jesus is

A perfect Savior because to be a Savior is not simply to make something hypothetically possible It's to actually accomplish it

And so when the Father's will of the Son is he's lose none of those given to him only Calvinist believe he does that Just a fact

Because even I know what you're thinking. I know your system. I do listen you're thinking no, no, no, no

Jesus saves those the Father gives because the Father looks in the future and sees who's gonna believe in him It still depend upon their belief

Jesus there is no human being on the planet that Jesus can save perfectly that their free will is

Not the deciding factor whether we can do it or not Because you're a synergist. That's the whole point

So anyway This is that's that's

That's what this guy wanted to debate His name just you know how that how a name can sort of float, right?

Right past you because the name the guy's name just is that close?

So there's like three brain cells left in my brain that are right now working together to try to bring that guy's name up And they're gonna be at it for days until they die or something because you know after 40

You've got brain cells dying right left and center. So it's just it's that I Remember, I remember my health teacher

Biology teacher in sixth grade told us that and I've just never I just figured man

I was gonna shoot myself after 40 He told me how many tens of thousands of brain cells gonna start dying.

I was like, oh wonderful And now I'm I've been there for a long long time now, so it gives me a really good excuse.

So Anyway, so this guy He wanted to bait the eternal security and I'm like well

All right, you know, I'll lay the foundation in in in the in in meaningful theology and then he writes in says oh and You cannot mention any of the other five points of Calvinism Huh?

No No Yeah, uh -huh Yep Yeah, you're right.

You you're right, but Mark Carpenter's the other guy See now you're doing now

You've got three brain cells working on it to between the two of us six brain cells might get there So yeah, you remember what

I'm talking about it. I he'd be on the blog because I did I did write articles In response to it

So anyway Yeah, and in a few moments all of a sudden in the middle of a sentence you'll hear something coming from the other side of the of the wall and that'll be when rich finds the

What? Dan corner. Thank you very much. See Saw it coming. Yep, Dan corner guy named guys named with Dan corner.

I think he's still around the fact that's what I was looking for is I I thought that I had a One of the crazy anti Calvinism books from But maybe not.

I don't know. Maybe he never got around to writing. But anyways Dan corner. He did not want me To to even what?

What's on Amazon the book his book is called the believers conditional security eternal security refuted

Okay, so it's actually on Amazon. Well, there's a lot of stuff on Amazon now.

Anyways, I'm not sure how much it's gonna be there in the future okay, so I Of course said not gonna do it because The perseverance of the

Saints the preservation of Saints is a truth based upon Preceding doctrinal realities so if I can't talk about the sovereignty of God if I can't talk about man's deadness and sin if I can't talk about the

Perfection of the sacrifice of Christ if I can't talk about the Spirit's ability to raise to spiritual life

Those that he chooses to do so based upon the electing grace of the Father if I can't talk about all of that then

There there's no reason to believe in the perseverance of the Saints it is based upon and that's why when you hear you know when we've talked about provisionism we've we've

We hear people saying well, you know you try to fend Particular redemption and and you're basing it upon other theological.

Yeah, that's because Christian theology isn't made up of atomized Separate doctrines that just exist over here all by themselves without a connection to everything else.

That's that's true and the problem with the debate that I listened to is that a

Particular redemption was never defined as It relates to any of the other great doctrines of the faith

The Necessity of Particular redemption in light of the harmony of the

Father and the Son As always some of the objections to particular redemption were actually objections to the unconditional electing grace of God and underlying all of it underlying all of it if you if you listened to that debate at least to the part that was worth listening to in the first hour or so if You listened to that debate presuppositionally

You recognize that what was being debated but not discussed? Was is there is

God? Working his purpose in this world according to his sovereign decree Sam Schoen mentioned the decree a few times not positively any longer.

He doesn't believe in that anymore But he did mention it But that's what that's what was being debated that's what was behind everything and the reason that You ended up with this talking over and talking past constantly

Later on was the foundational issues had not been resolved at all and That's why that's why eventually you just stop and just okay, that's that you know

We've been going around the same gum stump here for the past 20 minutes and nothing's being accomplished. Let's let's move on to something else now

What was fascinating Was there there was? One thing that was interesting is everybody who sent me the link

Who clearly had been listening at the time or listen shortly thereafter Everybody said the same thing.

Did you hear Sam Schoen say? that Jesus's atonement was applied to Satan and So that was that was the issue that was

I think caught most people's attention and You must understand why

Sam Schoen said that and so I want to At least talk a little bit about that and we're gonna look at Colossians and Ephesians and spend some time in the scripture from this point forward which

I think is Is a good thing to do? especially in these days where Everything else is going on.

I don't want to look at that. Okay, um Here's the argument from Sam Schoen and he's been using this argument for a couple years now

Ever since he decided he wasn't reformed anymore. And let me just say

I don't I Don't know where Sam is right now as far as I can tell He seems to be a mixture of a

Syrian Catholic provisionist TR onlyist

It's I don't know if he attends a church, I don't know if he's under the authority of Elders bishops priests.

I don't know. I have no earthly idea. I don't know. He lives in the valley here now But he's gone off to do his own thing

I think That's what I think that was one of the problems With the debate is it is that I try it's not always possible, but I try

To make sure that when we're doing a debate the position of Both sides is clearly known beforehand

So that there can be a standard of consistency to which a person is held I Think I think it's really important Otherwise the other side can just Bend and weave and what is that airbender thing or something, you know matrix, you know

Like the agent and you shoot and can't hit anything because they're really not there because there's no one position

They don't have to defend anything and I Think that's a that's a real real problem and especially in apologetics just in general just in general

I'm gonna say something here and this is about all apologetics Let me give you a tip you want to know who to listen to in the field of apologetics ask a simple question is this person in Regular attendance in good standing with a sound

New Testament Church if They are simply out on their own if they're just doing their own thing if they're making stuff up as they go along if there's no

Confession that defines where they are. They shouldn't be doing apologetics

There is no office of apologist in the New Testament To be able to refute those who contradict is something that is said to be one of the qualifications of being an elder in the church

It doesn't mean you have to be an elder to do apologetics but Elders should have capacity in the field.

But the point is it's done in the church and I have consistently said for a long time

That There are a number of people online who do apologetics

Who as far as I know? only Rarely darken the door of a church

Some are literally still under discipline from churches Themselves and Large number of them do not

Have any role of leadership whatsoever in a local church. They're not a part of the body there are few activities more detrimental spiritually more likely to exacerbate

Sinful errors in a person's life than being involved with apologetics Not you go.

It sounds like you're scaring people away. No, just being a realist Just trying to be a realist

There aren't many organizations That have been doing apologetics as long as we have we're coming up on 40 years and So I've got a few

Miles on the treads and I've seen people come and go And I've seen ministries come and go and I've seen entire ministries hang lefts and rights and face plants and just Explode and just all sorts of things and one of the consistencies

Was a tenuous distant connection to the church Take that for what's worth but I Stand by the assertion.

And so if you want to know who to listen to what? Do they preach? Doesn't mean you have to be a preacher to be an apologist

But are they involved in the church Do they have that balancing?

reality of Ministry to the body of Christ in the local church.

Don't don't give me the universal church stuff It's really easy to say you love the brethren as long as you never have to meet with them

As long as you never have to visit them in the hospital or deal with the family issues or or all the rest that kind of stuff

That's that's real easy that's real easy to do so just something to be said there

Hopefully some wisdom from someone's been around for a while That you can take in and put away.

All right, here's the argument What Sam says is look you look at Colossus chapter 1 and you have in verses 15 and following Jesus as the creator of all things and That this the extent of his creative action is unlimited in Colossians chapter 1 and since all things visible invisible

Heaven earth thrones dominions rulers or authorities all things been created through him for him He is before all things and him all things all together.

He has also had the body the church He is the beginning the firstborn from the dead so that he himself will come to have first place and everything

For his father's good pleasure for all the fullness of dwell in him and through him first Colossians 120 here's the issue through him to reconcile all things to himself having made peace the blood of his cross

Through him I say whether things on earth or things in heaven and so his argument is if the all things

If the the top on top of Of 16 and 17 is

Entire the the entire created order and That's only a few verses earlier then verse 20

Through him to reconcile all things to himself therefore if the

Of Rulers and authorities Dominions heaven and earth of verse 16 includes

Satan then through him to reconcile all things to himself verse 20 includes Satan and so the assertion was

But Satan will never be saved why? Because Satan will not believe so you have and I don't know whether Sam has thought this through But you have the absolute centrality of creaturely autonomy including even

Satan himself now there There are a lot of issues here a lot of issues here just on the surface just on the surface

Satan is not only creature of God, but his role in His Sovereign decree has already been laid out just as clearly as Judas's has been laid out and so There is no reason to talk about Satanic autonomy or to even assume satanic autonomy

Let alone to think that Satan could Repent and believe in Jesus the atonement

Involved the incarnation of Christ Jesus takes on a perfect human nature in the hypostatic

Union so that Through that representative nature

We can be united with him in his death Satan does not have a human nature and therefore he cannot be united with Christ and therefore there is no atonement made for him

Therefore the whole teaching is from a Pauline perspective absurd because Sam has missed something fairly obvious in the text because of his

Monomaniacal that is not a negative term. That is a descriptive term monomaniacal means you focus upon one thing to the exclusion of everything around it a monomaniacal emphasis upon the

Continuation of the context from 16 17 into into 20 not realizing that there has already been an expansion in the context that we'll look at in a moment but the point is that What one of things disappointed me about the whole debate?

Basic definitional issues were never mentioned. Well, okay Take that back may have been mentioned after all the food fighting that I gave up on After all the talking over and hearing half a sentence and no moderator stepping in to do anything about it

Okay Maybe after all that all the basic definitions came out But the chances aren't really good because now you're getting into audience questions.

And once you get an audience questions the normally the entire topic the debate is now been lost and you just go off into whatever and Spend the rest of your time talking about stuff that you weren't supposed to be talking about anyway

Lots of fundamental issues were never defined. For example, what does reconcile mean?

Does reconcile always mean the same thing? What does it mean to reconcile

Ta Panta all things? What does it mean to reconcile someone through faith?

What does it mean is there a difference in reconciling the creation and Reconciling people in Christ Why is

Catalaso the Greek term? Why is that used of? the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile to God why are

Why why were the Corinthians? Told to be reconciled to God all of that is extremely important because reconciliation is a broad subject

It was assumed to have one meaning and one application in whatever context it was placed in the debate

And that's why the debate was on that level worthless Because if you don't even define what reconcile is and don't recognize

No, there was no recognition for example About the fact that Ephesians Colossians are parallel texts that there are entire parallel sections between the two of them written concurrently,

I think That In Colossians 4 16

Paul is referring to Ephesians when he says read the epistle coming from Laodicea I think that was the the epistle to the

Ephesians which was To be passed around the churches in the Lycans River Valley So they have

Overlap That gives us further information about what

Catalaso Apokataloso the whole range of terms regarding reconciliation

The different meanings that has because we know in Paul Sanctification has a both positional and experiential element.

Why wouldn't reconciliation have both? Why can't reconciliation have governmental and covenantal aspects to it

Why is it only soteriological? Why is it only redemptive? Sam just assumed full redemptive.

So Colossians 1 20 redemptive just cram it in there. And so Satan has been reconciled and so he's not alone in this

This has happened in church history There there are theologians today who believe that Reconciliation has been accomplished by Christ But that it's all just theoretical.

It's all just theoretical and so there are those who

Fail to make the proper distinctions their covenantal distinct distinctions

There are distinctions in regards to God's overarching rulership of all that's created as Well as his redemptive purse purpose in redeeming a particular people in Christ Jesus So there are aspects

For example when we talk about the resurrection of Christ did not the resurrection of Christ have cosmic implications

Yeah, of course When the Creator enters into his own creation Gives his life and then rises from the dead that has implications for the entire cosmos and Paul mentioned them in act 17 remember

It's preaching on Mars Hill. And when he says God's gonna judge all men

By whom the one he rose and he raised from the dead So There is a

There is a rightness That has been introduced

Into the universe by the work of Christ that includes

The propriety of him being Judge who would be a better judge

Than the one who entered into human flesh lived a perfect life in perfect obedience to father and then gave himself as the perfect sacrifice for sin

That's kind of judge. I want huh? I mean you can't make the argument.

Well, God can't judge He doesn't know what it's like to be human being right? so Jesus is perfectly fit to be judge and So you can say that part that That one aspect of the purpose of the incarnation

The purpose of the resurrection is found in what in the justification of God that God's judgment at the final day will be just and Paul talked about this.

This is what theodicy is the justification of God. Let God be just and every man a liar right but is that the only reason and And Does that one reason then

Overpower all others or is there is is there not the central? reason being the union of the elect

With the incarnate Son so that his death becomes their death his resurrection their resurrection

The the great exchange their sin imputed to him his righteousness imputed to them But that requires a real atonement not a theoretical atonement and That was one of the things that again didn't come up may have come up after the hour and 45 -minute mark or something

In a later question. I don't know but it didn't in what came up before and one of the

One of the Phrases that Sam Shamoon used more than once.

I was gonna grab the book forgot to but one of the phrase the he used comes from the book by Murray Redemption accomplished and applied and so over and over again

Sam said to Matt Even you as a

Calvinist recognize the difference between the Accomplishment of Redemption or the accomplishment of atonement of the accomplishment of reconciliation and the application and he tried to make the argument that if we were to be consistent in Believing that the elect for example died with Christ in reality that that would mean we could not be born as sons and daughters of wrath and And here's where there was a just a fundamental either misunderstanding or misrepresentation by Sam Shamoon in Regards to what it what we mean when we use the phraseology redemption accomplished and applied certainly if he has ever read

That fine work on the order Saludis Then he would know that when we speak of redemption

Accomplished we actually mean that it has infallibly Been accomplished in Christ Because the union of the elect with Christ is a perfect reality in the mind of God There is no question that every one of those who died with Christ will come into existence now that could not be said if There is not a divine decree

If you do not have a divine decree if you do not Believe that the very fabric of time is the result of the good will and good purposes of God You don't have any basis for even a certainty you're stuck with a passive observation of God of future events

That's all God knows what's got in the future because he passively observes it not because he's decreed it and If man has human autonomy man can always change his mind and that would mean that if one person if one person in history

Could do what God's knowledge Does not know Then all the future all the future could be changed and the entire identity elect would have to be changed as a result one person

I could come up with a Thousand different scenarios where the actions of one person would result in a completely different future.

There's no question about this So when we say that a redemption accomplished and applied it was accomplished with certainty

Which is why it can be said in Ephesians that we have been seated with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus But that's from the eternal perspective.

That's God's perspective Now that is the perspective that conditions time, but it's not how we experience it

We couldn't know that we are time -bound creatures and so when we talk about redemption accomplished and applied the application takes place in time and So we are born in Adam that is a true relationship that we have and Just because it is absolutely certain in the decree of God that he is going to bring about our

Regeneration our forgiveness our He is going to grant to us faith and repentance all of those things are going to become a reality when

God decrees that it happens to bring about his own honor and glory and To then use that to bring other people into relationship with him at the time that he has

Decreed that that's going to take place in the way is decreed That's going to take place just because that's part of God's decree does not mean that it's real real that it's fake that it's that it's

Sci -fi that whatever it is That doesn't make it Unreal it just means it's temporal and has to be manifested in time.

And when you try to say that The temporal is the only reality

Then you're denying you If you're gonna be consistent, you're gonna have to say that God is limited to time as well you're gonna have to make him a temporal being as well and Time then becomes something that actually exists outside of God and rules over God There are then there are people that there are people that go there lots of people that go there and they all end up fundamentally denying foundational

Christian truths So when we speak of redemption accomplished and applied the

False distinction the Sam Shimon attempted to introduce Where You can have redemption accomplished so redemption has been accomplished for Satan redemption has been accomplished for all things all principalities and powers

But it's only theoretical Application is dependent upon mankind you see

Redemption accomplished and applied it's accomplished by God and applied by God in the way God chooses to do so in time it's accomplished in Jesus Christ and in him perfectly and That's what makes it personal because once you have

Once you transfer the autonomous authority to man, then what is accomplished is the

Possibility the theoretical possibility of a certain people who may choose to be in Christ But it becomes impersonal the elect become impersonal depend upon their

Personal faith and of course the problem then becomes well How does God know what an autonomous creature is going to do and the open theist says he can't

That's why I said over and over again. It's the open theist. That is the consistent synergist and the others are

Just know the Bible doesn't teach that they just don't want to believe what comes out from that What what is required of that?

I haven't even gotten into Colossians yet. Haven't a lot of background material to get into but Let me just wrap that that part up the idea

That the atonement that the giving of a perfect human life

Voluntarily by the Sun Could bring about redemption for non humans.

I remember redemption. I'm not saying That the principalities and powers are not impacted by bound by In all of the sacrifice of Christ, but what was missing was a recognition of the difference of the cosmic purposes of God Which are clearly bound up in theodicy the demonstration of his justice

There is a demonstration of God's wisdom and justice That is seen in the salvation of a specific people in and through the work of Jesus Christ no question about but that is not the same thing as The redemptive question, which was the question of the debate?

Because when you're talking about particular redemption whether you want to accept this or not We're the ones that defined the term, right?

Particular redemption is the assertion that there is a perfect harmony between the identity of the elect flowing from the unconditional election of God the

Father and the work of the Sun in Their behalf so as to bear their sin so as to be their perfect Savior.

So that's all Soteriological that's all redemptive When you ask what was the redemptive intention of the

Sun on the cross it is specific and personal and It did not and could not include

Satan who was not obviously given by the Father to the Son who is not a human being and therefore no

Corresponding Atonement has been made for him. So there was a

Hopefully completely unintentional Real error promulgated there in regard to either the nature of the incarnation or The role of the incarnation in atonement as To what atonement is but that seemingly flowed from Sam Shimon's insistence

To look at verse 20 as being coextensive with As far as its scope verses 16 to 17 and a failure to even have a discussion of what

Apocataloxai means in Colossians 120 it didn't even come up.

So let's let's consider that so we read it We have the

Extensiveness, oh you what you wanted to try to put it up. Yeah, everybody's got their

Bible out We recognize the extensiveness of the creative act of the

Sun in Colossians 1 why What's the background issue?

Well, it's a form of angel worship and proto Gnosticism and So in talking about Christ, let's go back to you.

You you have Paul's prayer the Church Colossi Strength of all power according to his glorious might

Taking it all steadfast as patience giving. Thanks the father who has qualified us

This is addressed to Christians who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the

Saints in light So as with all the others you have the emphasis upon The Divine initiative divine accomplishment.

We were giving thanks to the father He has Qualified us.

We didn't qualify ourselves. We qualified he qualified us to share in the inheritance of the

Saints in light How did he do that? How were we? Qualified to share in this cosmic inheritance for he rescued us

From the domain of darkness he did that and transferred us

To the kingdom of his beloved Son in whom we have redemption the forgiveness of sins now as we've seen in Romans 8

So we see here all of these things elsewhere when talking about The nature of the gospel avoiding

Judaism everything else. What does Paul emphasize? This is by faith not by works of law

But as he does in Romans 8 here in Colossians chapter 1 God does all these things

How do we have redemption? Well faith, but it's not mentioned here because it's a divine act and Faith the gift of faith given to the elect of God will have that faith

That pleases the father. This is the mechanism that we see that we experience

But none of that changes the overarching reality that we're giving thanks to the father because he's done all these things

This is God's work. He's the one that rescued us from the domain of darkness. We didn't flick our

BIC and Find our way out Autonomously the

BIC of faith. Oh I found my way. No, he rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us the kingdom of his beloved

Son That's a divine act That's the same divine power that is in reference in John chapter 6 when

Jesus recognizes the father has the right to give a certain people to the son and As a result, they will follow him.

They will come to him God centeredness versus man centeredness. It's Can't can't escape it

Transferred us the king of his beloved Son in whom we have redemption the forgiveness of sins in him so the centrality of Christ here.

We are in the kingdom of his beloved Son. That's the kingdom of light. That's where the Saints are. It's all of God Now that's a certainly a highly exalted view of who

Jesus is so He is the image of the invisible God the firstborn of all creation the one having preeminence over all of creation

For by him all things create both in the heavens and under the visible and invisible the thrones diminished rules authorities all things being through him and for him

Yes, there is clearly an anti proto Gnostic polemic here Because there seems to be people who are being taught in Colossae we're being tempted by teachers in Colossae to get into this sort of this mixture of Jewish and Proto Gnostic early

Gnostic ideas of the worship of angels and the Uses the play Roma and eons and things that will eventually become very complicated in the fully developed

Gnostic myth that we've talked about many times before he is before all things and in him all things hold together

So here is the creator himself So that's why he is the one kingdom of light kingdom of light his kingdom

But he is also Verse 18 and he is also the head of the body so now you have a

Another aspect of the context just didn't come up in the hour and 45 minutes.

I listen to This didn't come up because this is a transitionary statement

He is also head of the body the church

Now Does the church exist in the created realm, of course but is the church a separate category

Then all created things whether in heaven and earth visible invisible principalities of ours principle

Yes, the church is the work of Christ by grace through his spirit so we've made a shift

This is the introduction of something new he is also head of the body the church

He is the RK now that RK is then connected with prototype ozectone necron and I think if Sam wasn't so intent on Going the direction he's going

Maybe in looking at this this might have caused him to stop and go. Well, wait a minute. Well, wait a minute Protodocus here has a different range of meaning than protodocus just a few verses before Protodocus in verse 15 protodocus posses tits at Oz of all creation

Does not have the same meaning as protodocus ozectone necron does it? No different meaning different range so he is the firstborn from the dead and So there's the protoss element of Protodocus which is protoss and tic -tac -tic -toe in creation

Has to do with origin source here there is Because the resurrection takes place in time.

There's a temporal there's more more of a temporal aspect than there would be any other so we have shifted into Now a redemptive context because the church only comes into existence in that context, right?

I mean, these are just There there was more than once that Sam was pressing

Matt and saying Um Context context you got text text text not traditions of men

Okay, I'm just being in the text being in the text if you're gonna be in the text a transition has taken place and It is beginning verse 18

He is the head of the body the church who is also the

RK the protodocus ozectone necron In order that he might come to have preeminence

First place protuon primacy in all things now that let me

I'm obviously not get done with this today, but oh Yeah, yeah.

Yeah that that doesn't deal with any of this up Won't get down with this today Probably should have realized that when you listen to something for that long while writing and think about you're gonna end up having too much say

Primacy in all things is Should cause someone to stop and go

Huh I've heard something vaguely familiar to that somewhere else

Yeah, let's before we get to 120. Let's see what the connection here is the book of Ephesians I Told you it's the parallel.

It's a parallel text. Is There anything in Ephesians that might? Shed some light on this

Yeah Ephesians 1 8 in all wisdom and insight he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his kind Intention which he purposed in him that is in Jesus with a view to Administration suitable the fullness of times that is the summing up of all things in Christ Do you want the

Ephesians letter? Interpretation of first thing and all things the summing up of all things in Christ.

Why because what's the next line in Ephesians 1 10? things in heaven and things on the earth

What what you really should do if you want to dig into these texts is

And most Bible programs can do this now Put Ephesians and Colossians in parallel columns

Just like we do when we do synoptic studies Put Matthew Mark and Luke in parallel columns throw

John in when he decides to join the party, which is fairly rare but put them in parallel columns and it's like Shining a light

Because you go. Oh, okay. Here's this part here. Uh -huh. Uh -huh because remember these are set out at the same time

The same thought patterns are running through the Apostles mind as he's writing these things But he's using different words to express them.

Oh, that's helpful Yeah with a view to administration suitable to the fullness of the times that is the summing up of all things in Christ things in heaven and things on the earth in Him also we have obtained an inheritance.

Oh Inheritance of the Saints in light Colossians 1 Ephesians 1 also we have obtained an inheritance

What? having been predestined According to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will the same

Apostle who talks about Inheritances and summing up all things in Christ roots it and grounds it in The one reality that I fear

Sam Shimon doesn't believe in anymore According to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will everything that started in Ephesians chapter 1 has been about the elect of God chosen by the

Father by his will his purpose his intention and That's what was missing in the whole debate

That was the presupposition that was being debated without being mentioned

Because like I said, I'm not going to even try to defend particular redemption apart from the full or revelation of Well, why did

Christ die? Who was Christ? What did the Lord do? The Father and the Son intend to do in his death.

These are central These are what this is what makes the doctrine of particular redemption.

And so there you have a Parallel passage so we go back to Colossians chapter 1 then you you have this idea

Right there. It was the father's good pleasure Expressed in what who's the father the one who works all things after the counsel of his will

The one who is summing up all things in Christ So it's the father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in him now

Obviously that could be specifically in Colossians a Anti Gnostic polemic

Because he is utilizing one of the key Gnostic buzzwords play

Roma That could be why it's there and the emphasis is

G is can't just be one of the eons He can't be an emanation because It's the father's good pleasure for all the play

Roma which was all those eons Remember we were doing the Wilson stuff all the eons. Remember there was one eon

Sophia who contemplates the main God separate from her partner and that creates

Yaldabaoth or in some forms Yahweh and You know, so that play

Roma thing same term is used here. That's why people see an interplay taking place.

So maybe There's some of that there But the point is it's the father's good pleasure that all the play play

Roma dwell in him in Colossians 119 so have we seen?

Are we agreed now in verse 18 and 19? that we have moved away from merely viewing creation as Top on top and we're now talking about What the father and the son do in time in the formation of the ecclesia

So now there is redemptive aspects that have been introduced

That you have to now explain and I never heard Sam do this why you would backwards read 120

Into 16 and 17 without dealing with the differentiation that has taken place in 18 and 19

This is one of the reasons why I believe two things the primary skillset

That a young man looking to go into apologetics should possess is exegesis

Biblical languages Hermeneutics should you know church history, you know,

I know you think you know what I say about that But the primary skillset should be exegesis.

You should know the biblical languages do all apologists do it vast majority

Don't I don't know why I've How many times I complained about this I have over and over and over again so first primary skill set secondly

You need to be in a church where the Word of God if you're not the one bringing the

Word of God Then you need to be in a church where it is being modeled to you by elders

Where you learn? to handle the Word of God with balance that is not forced upon you by your interaction with false teachers

Did you hear that you see the great danger and temptation

I know I have to fight it The great danger and temptation is to be so focused upon false teaching and how to demonstrate the errors of false teaching and thinking that you need to come up with Almost any scriptural text an argument against false teaching that that becomes your hermeneutic

When you have to preach through all of the Word of God How many times have

I explained that there are all sorts of arguments out there? Against Mormonism against Jehovah's Witnesses against Islam that I don't use and I don't use them

Because I'm a preacher of the Word of God In other words, I recognize that those arguments require a form of eisegesis or hermeneutics improper hermeneutics

That I won't be using when I teach through the entirety of the scripture not just those texts that are apologetically relevant and You're forced to do that if you have a full or ministry

That's why I believe apologetics should be a subset of and under the authority of and in the practice of the church and Once it leaves the church and takes on a life unto itself

It will always become imbalanced will always become imbalanced It's just it's just gonna happen.

We ain't done because we still haven't gotten to verse 20 and And We still need to get all the way to Colossians 2 14 because that became one of the central aspects that kept feeding back

Matt was on 2 14 and Sam would keep trying to drag him back and say it can't mean that because of this back here

So we haven't even gotten there, but you might say why just keep going. Well There are a number of you going just stop already

Um To be honest with you. I'll be I'll be straight up. I need to be able to blog this and I want to listen to the

Jaros Wilson debate that starts in 15 minutes There's some that's gonna be really really interesting

I Have criticized dr. Jaros on the blog and on the dividing line in years past. So I've got a little something there

I want to hear it I want to be able to comment on it and This is only the first program of the week for crying out loud so we got time to continue on and if they could go for three hours and Keep repeating the same subject over and over again

Then I can go ahead and take a break and pick it up next time around Where I'm not repeating the same subject over and over and over again.

I hope that you all have heard that I'm not

I appreciated Matt Slick's presentation I wouldn't have used

Sam's notes as my outline, but I appreciated it. I love

Matt Matt Please don't think I'm trying to pick on you. I'm not and Most of you know,

I'll just mention this Sam and I have gone back and forth for years and only a few months ago thought

I thought everything was Hunky -dory again before kovat hit I wanted to get together have lunch dinner and something's happened again and It's because he's promoting stuff that he knows we would

Like this and he's always posting stuff from James snap and stuff taking shots at me right left and center it's happened for years and The man knows the man knows that I have bent over backwards

I Have there are certain people within 10 feet of me right now think

I'm nuts as to how many times I've bent over backwards And I've refused to get angry and I've continued to pray

So call me a call me a foolish person I've tried

But I have been I think Pre -eminently fair in what

I have said today even in disagreement and in I think refutation and I will seek to continue to model that in the future as well, so remember 14 minutes from now

YouTube channel Just if if you can't find that if you can't fight put

Jaros and Wilson and that doesn't come up put in shamoon and and Matt slick

Then go to that channel and then it'll be there that's one way around it that I found that was easier to find it, but Douglas Wilson Kurt Jaros and Theodicy Live debate coming up here in a little while.

I'm looking forward to listening to that Lord Willen will be back on Thursday For another probably fairly long edition of the dividing line.