Reviewing Emir Caner's Sermon then Calls

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

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

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 973 460 to or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 877 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James white.

Reviewing Emir Caner’s Sermon on Revelation 20 and Divine Justice

And good afternoon, welcome to the dividing line on Thursday afternoon and I. I just finished a Carpentry project. I now have a set of shelves right next to me. So all my books are now within range.

I.

Just realized half of them still have plastic on them. And those are not the ones I read anyway, but yeah, the soul scripture one has plastic. There's pulpit crimes I just ran and got pulpit crimes I forced rich to open up a box and give me a copy of pulpit crimes case anybody had a question about that.

You don't want someone calling up and saying hey, what'd you who are you talking about here? Well, I'm not gonna tell you who I was talking about there. But if you can't figure out who the lady is. They can talk faster than a chipmunk on speed then you haven't been watching that one channel between 20 and 22 very often.

Anyway. Yes, indeed II getting getting ourselves in trouble with all sorts of folks today. Gonna go back to where we were. We before we left were reviewing some sermons on on the dividing line and some of you Got the opportunity at the conference to hear Tom Askew and myself we put a picture up of Tom and I and Tom looked considerably more dapper than I looked and I got some complaints about that from certain people who will remain nameless.

But we played some segments of the emir canners sermon at the Thomas Road Baptist Church on the 15th which would have been the night before the debate was supposed to take place and Then we also played clips from Ergen canners sermon.

Which he had delivered number of months earlier why he is predestined not to be a hyper Calvinist and it also seems probable why he is predestined to never understand what a hyper Calvinist actually is and That wasn't a part of his sermon, but we we covered that on on the way so I Was elected because I selected yes indeed.

That's we need to have make a sound clip out of that one just just for the fun of it. So we're gonna do that and then go back to the vines sermon. And sort of been hip-hopping back and forth between those particular things.

Yes. Calvinistic hip-hop. Can you can you fit super elapsarian and infralapsarian into a hip-hop song. I don't think so that's probably not Gonna not gonna work too. Well anyway Let's go back to emir canners sermon.

You may recall. I'm gonna actually back it up here a little bit. It's been so long. Let's Let's let's back it up here about 30 seconds to a minute or so see see if we can get it running start here.

Revelation 20, the Book of Life, and the Judgment of Sin

Perfect justice is demonstrated in the last book of the scripture in Revelation chapter 20 in verses 11 through 15.

In this passage it speaks of the book. Yeah, we do hear that and what that is is this was this. Particular version. The sermon was beamed to me from the mothership. Okay, and that's what the aliens. Talking in the background they left the microphone open so everybody quit complaining.

I don't know what that is honestly. I download this directly from the Liberty site, so.

I.

Hello, thank you. That's from the Liberty mothership, right?

That's the Liberty mothership because obviously I'm not supposed to be playing it. I didn't resample it. I didn't save it another form because that sometimes happens sometimes when you resample something that happens.

But it I download it as mp3. That's how it came across so you know.

What can I set are open and the book which is open the books are our works? Demonstrated that God is just in his punishment for he punishes us for our sin and yet the book Singular is open and those who are not found in the Lamb's Book of Life were sent to hell by their own volition by their own rejection.

If now we stop just for a moment by their own volition their own rejection. Yes, they. They love their sin. They chose to sin, and they did so without being forced to do so. Does that mean that every single person there rejected Christ.

Well of course not? What about the Amalekites. What about everyone who lived prior to the incarnation? What about the millions who have lived and died without hearing the name of Christ since the incarnation itself.

They are judged for what they're judged? For their sin. And I'm very concerned that the doctrine of sin has.

Has.

Fallen on hard times. We know that it has. Certainly there are many many people who don't really give a whole lot of concern to the doctrine but certainly the idea of sin, which is what brings condemnation is.

It's fallen on hard times because of what we're gonna hear here.

The reason one goes to hell is because God doesn't elect him then we have a problem with Revelation chapter 20. Think it this way if the reason why Someone goes to hell is because God decided not to give him loving election Then Revelation 20 is a problem passage because God is not judging the one standing before him God would actually be judging himself.

But there is an accountable decision which needs to be made Whether you accept or reject the Lord Jesus Christ now.

I.

Didn't hear any wild applause or amening there because I'm not sure that anyone had a clue what he had just said. Because quite honestly, it just doesn't make much sense God would be judging himself if the reason a person goes to hell is because God did not elect them.

Who says that. It shows such a such an incredibly shallow understanding of what even what the argument is. It's one thing to disagree with the argument, but please at least understand what it is. The no one is saying someone goes to hell because they weren't elected.

They go to hell because of their sin they're they go to hell because they are. They're abhorrent in God's sight and. The only reason and see this this comes from this error of making predestination unto life identical to This allegation of predestination unto death and making the two the same thing.

They're not the same thing everyone gets justice in. Deserving to be separated from God.

But.

Only those who receive grace Receive life. No one deserves that that cannot be demanded by anyone and yet. That is the whole substance of the argument that is being made. If God could save them then he should have saved them Etc, etc, etc, and you see how once you've made the misstep at one point you just continue Tripping over yourself falling down the hill on the others.

Those who would believe in a double Predestination say otherwise though. They argue that not only God elects some to heaven But God actively wants people to go to hell that it is elective Decision to send them to a burning fire and he will get glory from it.

Now immediately.

We have to ask dr. Kanner Do you believe that God? Acted in such a way as to create a universe in which he was not going to be glorified. Will he be glorified in the salvation of sinners. Is? God glorified in the justice in in when his Holiness is vindicated in his just punishment of sinners.

Is God glorified that or not.

And.

Did God know when he created? That he was going to punish sinners and Did God choose when he created that? He would not be glorified in the vindication of his justice and his holiness. I Mean, I don't see how else We can understand what dr. Kanner just said other than God is not glorified when his justice is demonstrated.

But isn't that the exact opposite of what we read in Scripture? Isn't that the exact opposite of? What the Apostle Paul presented to us in in Romans chapter 9 when he explains God's freedom in salvation and When he makes that specific statement to Pharaoh in Romans 9 17 for the scripture says to Pharaoh for this very purpose I raised you up to do what to demonstrate my power in you and that my name might be Proclaimed throughout the whole earth.

Well, how was God's power? Demonstrated in Pharaoh. How was his name proclaimed throughout the whole earth? What did that have to do with Pharaoh it had to do with the destruction of the Egyptians? The death of the firstborn the destruction of his army in the Red Sea The the plagues coming against the various gods of Egypt.

These were all Demonstrations of God's power and God felt it was important enough to demonstrate his power and his holiness and his justice the fact He's the only true God now that may not be very high on our priority list, but that's What took place here and that's how Paul?

Interprets the raising up of Pharaoh for he says in verse 18. So then he has mercy on whom he desires literally it's he mercies Whom he desires and he hardens whom he desires direct parallels to one another whether you like it or not.

It's there and The purpose that is said is stated is the demonstration of his power. So are we to understand dr Kanner that God is not glorified when justice is done. Is there is God not going to be glorified in that day when?

Everything is set aright when all the injustice that has taken place in this creation is set aright I think God's going to be glorified in that. And I think if you were to Separate these things out from the traditions that dr Kanner is attempting to defend here in regards to Arminianism and a rejection of Calvinism I think in a more sober moment that he would he would have to agree that God is in fact.

Glorified.

When his justice takes place.

Now.

Once again, you have this this attempt on his part to make a parallel. That they are equal things that while you have grace being extended in an undeserved Fashion for the salvation of the elect that there is the same.

Undeserved.

Condemnation of Those who are passed over and that's where it is erroneous. That's where it is a complete straw man that is where it is quite simply a lie and Should not be repeated by someone Who seeks to at least honor the truth?

It's my opinion about that. I don't think I can say it any better than the Calvinist himself. Charles Spurgeon, I quote. Do you believe that God created man and arbitrarily? Sovereignly, it is the same thing Created that man with no other intention than of damning him Made him and yet for no other reason than that of destroying him forever.

Well, if you can believe it, I.

Pity you and of course that is from the Material that I cited on my website and that Ergin Cantor cited on his website after the debate was supposed to take place and of course it comes from Spurgeon's rejection of hyper-Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism and I loved Tom Askel's presentation on this.

He discussed this and by the way, man. Oh. That's what I should have not that you would have had the time to do it. But I wish we could have put. We need to pull up One particular portion of Tom Askel's presentation and when he and I and what we're going to do eventually is we're going to Take that presentation that Tom and I did and we're going to make that available for anybody to download.

Especially the Liberty students because I think the Liberty students deserve to get a chance to hear that but I especially want to play the portion where Tom Went through and and just blew out of the water and did it so quickly and so easily.

The constant Drumbeat on the part of people. Well, there's these two streams say, you know, and you got Charleston. You got Sandy Creek say and and he goes through and what he does is he reads the statement of faith?

The.

Documentation from churches founded by the Sandy Creekers, which is supposed to be the evangelical Armenian non-Calvinist. Blah blah blah blah. And I just.

Loved.

Particular redemption. Unconditional election. I mean everything that these people mock and hate and derive right there in the statements of faith. These churches were started out of the Sandy Creek Association.

It's just is just so good To listen to that and and and I could hear people who are familiar with what you hear people saying about this stuff. Just just chuckling in the audience going man the canners What what on earth would they have said in response to this kind of stuff?

Maybe that's why they decided to change the rules the last moment but anyway, we need to play at least a portion of that so people get a Get a taste and you're gonna want to get That for anybody if you've run into anybody who has been doing the Sandy Creek Charleston Southern Baptist blah blah stuff.

You're gonna want to get that presentation for them and Make a great stocking stuffer, you know.

Can you just.

Imagine sitting there. That's Christmas morning thinking of all those folks who gave presents to knowing they're opening up DVDs of That presentation. Hey, have a happy Christmas. Listening to how what you've been telling me all along actually isn't.

Isn't that you just think that you have all of the facts? I should have that up on the site as a free mp3 next week that portion. There you go. And now how long did it take you to type that in comparison to how long you could have just you know, then.

Sometimes. Way you read things back. Presentation. Man, it's everything you know. What I need to do is I need to get a clip of spong saying You just think you have all the facts or I'm sorry. That just sounds so judgmental to me.

I'm sorry that you know, I want that clip where he gets up in the rebuttal and he says, you know I don't. I don't believe in rebutting opinions.

Yes.

And then he goes on about how you know. Some people think they have all the facts and all they have no it says we're all entitled to our opinions. But we're not entitled to the facts. That's right. I want those clips.

I think they would be anyway.

What I was gonna say was and I think it had been announced at the conference was that particular portion. Where you had you and Tom basically did that address? I should be able to have the sound clips of that up on the website next week for free downloading especially Liberty students go to the front of the line right for downloading of the mp3s.

We would just love to see that all of blanketed through. Every iPod at Liberty prior just before Thanksgiving or just in time for everybody to go everybody to go home and implant.

The only thing we're gonna need to edit out of that was was when when I referred to Tom Askew as dr. Cantor.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, that would be a bad, you know, that's that's a soundbite yeah.

We don't have to go any farther with that anyway, so what were we doing here? Oh, yes. We were reviewing the email candidate. I loved. Like I said, we. I'll try to play that next week the. Just that portion where he went through there the two source of those great.

That's all I can say. You deserve pity that you should think so meanly of God whose mercy endureth forever. My friends we serve a God who is not only just he's loving He's not only all sovereign.

He is also all loving. What does that mean? I?

Mean.

No one's gonna argue that but what does that mean? He is just and that means his justice will always be fulfilled. Does does God's lovingness. Does his does his love? mean that any other aspect of His character can be compromised.

That's what I'd like to know. Can any other aspect of God's character be compromised on the basis of his love? Can God be unholy so that he can be loving. Can God's justice be abandoned and destroyed.

Because he is being loving. That's what many people seem to be suggesting. Is that God's Love overrides every other characteristic. Certainly. Dave Hunt seems to suggest that. But I would suggest to you that it is God's love That led him to such extraordinary means as to bring about the incarnation and the joining of a people to Christ and their redemption their salvation to Demonstrate both his love and his holiness.

No one gets injustice yet. God's attributes of mercy and love and grace are are illustrated demonstrated to the world as is his wrath and His justice and his holiness. It's all demonstrated. You don't have to have an either-or.

Situation.

That would be the way that you allow all of Scripture to speak.

We are held to account by our decision to accept or reject the Lord Jesus Christ. And we noted by the last verse in the passage where there's not only an accountable decision. There is a universal passion in verse 29.

Paul answers after this this heroin. Discussion with the grip. And he says. And Paul said. I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me today Might become both almost and altogether such as I am.

Except without these change now note in passing by the way Paul the good Baptist that he was. Praise that people don't have to go through the religious persecution that he went through. He prayed for religious liberty and said all That you wouldn't have to have the change I would.

But he doesn't center his discussion upon religious liberty. He centers that discussion adverse upon redemptive love. And Paul cries out and says. I wish that all of you all of you in this room today I wish all of you would accept the Lord Jesus Christ and his resurrection power and the fellowship of his suffering all of you.

Paul do you not know what you wrote in the book of Romans? Somehow do you know that everyone there is elect.

Now once again You have another straw man presentation here. We do not know the identity of the elect and therefore we preach the gospel to all men. We call all men everywhere to repent. It is not a prerequisite to know who is and who is not of the elect.

We know that God holds men accountable for their actions and That he is under no obligation to free them from the tyranny of sin, which they love. Just simply to allow for some concept of libertarian free will etc. Etc.

But once again, we have the straw men that are being presented rather than the an accurate inter inter action with reformed theology or Paul.

Do you understand redemptive love as we should but also all that here? I want you to consider the ramifications of this one statement by Paul. I wish that all who are in this room today Would accept let me ask you a few questions of how you witness and pray.

Now here come the questions. This was a part. I wanted to get to we we responded to all of these In the conference, but I'm gonna go through them here because we did start it on the program and not everyone's Obviously was at the conference or is gonna be able to necessarily you certainly will have the freedom.

The free will in fact to listen to the conference and to download the conference and to order the conference and and to to give the conference to your friends and neighbors and elders and and to people driving by on the street.

Just buy so many you can toss them in people's cars as they go by. No, you'll have the opportunity to do that. Yes, I know. I'm aware that we know that only that portion will be free. We're not talking about the entirety of the whole thing.

We understand that there's gonna be that huge cost of you know, mp3s and downloads and stuff like that. But I'm gonna keep going so you don't have a chance to turn on that microphone here at all.

So the the the the free will will be limited.

Yes, there will be a limitation on the free part of the free will. Yes.

Yes me and Tom. Yes, that's the portion and perhaps you would wish to write these down. Number one, do you believe that the person you are witnessing to has the ability to repent?

Number two, okay. It's take number one. Do you believe that the person you're witnessing to has the ability to.

Repent.

Now evidently what that means is to to follow the reasoning here is. Do you believe that the person you're witnessing to? Is exempt from all the biblical teaching that no man is able to come unto me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

That no man has the Ability and of himself do what is pleasing to God. Romans chapter 8 that men are not truly dead in sin. All these other issues. Do you reject the Bible's teaching on man's slavery to sin to reject John chapter 8?

Where Jesus makes it very plain that he who commits sin is the slave of sin. And so evidently what you need to start with is in a completely unbiblical Anthropology now the reason being that evidently from his mindset you cannot call anyone to repent if While calling them to repent you are trusting the Holy Spirit of God Will work in the lives of the elect to bring them to salvation.

You can't trust God to do that. You have to have that ability to know who the elect are or Everybody has to have that ability into themselves. There can't be this other option where you proclaim the gospel to everybody and trust God With your proclamation to do as he sees fit in drawing his people into himself, which of course might you know fit?

The whole biblical thing there that we've got going.

Do you believe that the person you are sharing Christ with that in that you are actually sharing the good news? For I would submit to you That if you are a double Predestinarian if you believe God elects someone to hell that you're not sharing any good news with the non elect.

You're only sharing their damnation. Which is the opposite of evangelism?

Now think about that one for a second. It's pretty difficult to escape the conclusion that in essence what emir kanner? just said Was and and that's another portion that I think the folks at Liberty are gonna find.

Very interesting is that Tom Askew read some some statements from the abstract of principles which emir kanner would have had to have signed When he was a professor at Southeastern. Which affirmed the very things that right now he is denying.

So did he believe him once and now he doesn't believe him or did he sign something that did not actually represent? What he believed at the time that would be the question that would be asked in that context.

But what was what was you know just presented to us about double Predestinarians only they don't have the good news. It's hard to avoid the conclusion That if you proclaim God's wrath against sin and his judgment against sinners, you're not evangelized.

And.

As we point out in the conference the Apostle Paul Spent the first two and a half chapters of his gospel written to the church at Rome Dwelling on the bad news talking about wrath and judgment and sin and The need for a Savior before he ever got to the Savior part.

So it sounds to me personally like what Dr. Kanner is saying is is to evangelize is to skip over the sin part and just go straight to the Savior part which would mean that Paul was wrong and how he did it in Romans or That we have a new way of evangelizing today that somehow is an improvement upon what the Apostle Did in the Apostolic Age, which I I know he would never say.

But that's what happens when you elevate your traditions and you attempt to actually attack Biblical theology is you end up making a mess of the biblical part? Which is what we just what we just heard.

We do have good news, but for good news to be good news. There has to be a backdrop that makes it good and The reason the good news about a perfect Savior is good is because there is something called sin.

There's something called justice there's something called the law alienation from God and from his promises and from the people of God and there is a There the good news is is that God has not left us unto ourselves.

Jesus Christ is Lord. He has entered into his own creation and he has done something about About God's glory in Redeeming a people unto himself and he's done that perfectly and so we have good news. But it it is a fully orbed Good news, it takes into consideration all that the New Testament teaches not just a small portion number three.

Can you honestly tell a person that Christ died for them? For those who say Christ only died for the elect that when you witness. May I just ask that you be honest and tell them Christ might not have died for you.

Can you honestly tell the person you're witnessing to that they should choose Christ? Or do you believe somehow that faith is put inside of a person so he can respond because if that's the case. Would you at least be honest enough to tell them if God's gonna save you?

He's gonna put faith inside of you and only then can you respond.

Now here you have actually two issues and I'll try to keep them Separate from one another as they as they should be. The first is I I missed the portion Where drawing from Paul before Agrippa Paul says to Agrippa Christ died for you and because he died for you therefore you should do the following things and I would like to see from the Bible where the Apostles ever preached that way to people who Remained in their sin and rebellion against Christ.

Where is that found? I just I'd like to see it. You may think it's true But that's the problem with a lot of traditions. People think they're true. And then when you go and exactly where do you find that in the Bible?

The results are normally somewhat difficult to follow. So exactly.

What?

What scripture passage you're going to take us to there? Where I have to believe that Christ substitutionarily bore the sins of John Smith to whom I'm speaking. To be able to command them to repent. Interestingly enough.

He's going to say that the Christ bears the sins of everyone who will believe and I can say that you bet. Anyone who will truly believe in Christ. Christ bore their sins that the point is who's truly going to believe.

Who has who is is granted that gift? So exactly what is the logical necessity? Unless you're going to assume that part of evangelistic preaching is a guilt trip. For making Jesus a failure. Now think about that because I really think this is a part of where he's coming from and a lot of these people are coming From.

I know it was a part of some churches. I've been a part of in the past is a guilt trip. For making Jesus a failure you owe Jesus something because he's done so much for you. No you owe Jesus something because he made you.

You already owed Jesus something from eternity past because he's your creator. So where's this the idea is well since Jesus died for you. Then you're a big meanie if you don't do what he tells you to do.

No, you are condemned justly for not doing what God commands you to do for Christ commands to do because he made you. Not because up until the cross God just hadn't done enough to put you on a guilt trip.

That seems to be what's what's coming into? Expression here in emir Cantor's in your cameras words. Well, I I have to know that Christ substituted atone for this person's sins to be able to command them to repent.

You don't have to know that. Why do you have to do that? That's the that's just the continuing of the idea. I have to know who the elect are. I have to know all these things before I can make these proclamations.

No, you call men everywhere to repent. You don't need all this other extra information, but then he addresses the issue of faith and Evidently faith has to be something that everyone is capable of exercising outside of being freed from slavery to sin.

Or there is no such thing as faith at all and certainly There are a lot of people who hold that viewpoint. Why I should have to explain that when again my command is for men everywhere to repent and believe.

I Mean if someone asks me and I've had we've had people come into channel. Who were familiar with Reformed Theology and reject Reformed Theology and they would come in they would say well. You know, I just must be predestined not to believe and our response has always been the same.

That's gonna be a pretty weak argument standing before God because God knows your heart and God knows that you love your sin and That kind of mocking response the fact that he must be able to free you.

For you to be able to be broken from that love of your sin and to have that heart of stone taken out and the heart Of flesh put in it's gonna be a pretty weak excuse to stand before him and say well. You just didn't do that for me.

Yeah, I've continued to love my sins. So what? I'm not really gonna go over overly well. In that particular context. So once again, it's the assumptions that underlie. What is being said that? That explain why?

We don't really have any biblical language being used here. It's all very much tradition.

Prayer, Children, and the Charge of Anthropocentrism

Can you honestly pray for the salvation of all of your children?

The children it's all about the children. And once again when you when it comes to this this point this part I I have a little difficulty being overly Patient because I've raised my children and.

I.

Know other people who have also raised their children within a reformed context. And it's just another one of these examples where the folks who oppose us generally Don't even take the time to think through what they're saying about us and don't think that we ever sit around thinking about these things.

Evidently, he thinks I can't pray for the salvation of my children. Why he would think that is difficult to say evidently would probably be from some Misunderstanding of what prayer is all about. I do not come to God did not come to God my Children made professions of faith, but I Did not come to God and say God you owe my children something because I'm a Christian God because I've I've served you therefore you owe something to my children my children.

I know that that's not true and my prayers are not to God to try to make God better than he is. Try to convince him to be more loving than he is. I Give my children to God gave my children to God prayed that he would indeed have mercy upon them.

But I'm not trying to change God. I'm not going to charge him with injustice if he does not extend mercy them because they don't deserve it. I Didn't either. None of us do. But exactly how is it that that emir canner thinks he's doing anything?

Better or more biblical than what I'm doing for once again. I just simply have to ask the question Why is he praying? Why is he praying for his children. Isn't God already giving a hundred and ten percent anyways hasn't God already done everything he can possibly do.

So why is he praying about it? What more can God do than he's already done? Truly it is when we pray that our theology comes out. And these inconsistent folks who are not full-blown Arminians. But they reject Calvinism and yet they'll hold to a part here and a part there.

It'll grab hold of substitutionary atonement don't even realize it's reformed and they'll grab hold of that and they'll grab hold of perseverance the Saints. So they'll hold on don't cobble this mess together.

They call theology and Then get all mad when you challenge them on its inconsistency.

They.

They think that somehow.

They're they're.

Escaping the conundrums that they're trying to present the reformed person and they're not. They're just giving a mishmash answer that that cannot be examined beyond its most basic level without turning into the contradictory mess that it actually is and so their prayers will end up tending toward a Proper theology.

Even if their theology proper which they teach can't support it. Remember when we prayed up for a played Eric and Cantor's sermon and Jerry Falwell get up after Eric and Cantor's blasting Calvinism. When he stood on his hands on a stump at the end of his sermon and I've still tried to picture what that would look like and I just have not been able to figure it out and Jerry Falwell gets up there and gives the invitation.

What does he do? How does he pray?

God.

Don't let anyone leave this room who isn't right with you. Well, just what's he supposed to do about it? I mean you just told everybody that he can't do anything about that. Didn't you? Yeah, you did.

But. Your prayers and your theology ain't they don't they don't match up. They don't match up. And by the way that doesn't honor God. Hello. I mean, I'm glad that your prayers are better than your theology.