Reviewing Emir Caner's Sermon then Calls

From the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona, this is

The Dividing Line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us, yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence.

Our host is Dr. James White, director of Alpha Omega Ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.

This is a live program and we invite your participation. If you'd like to talk with Dr. White, call now at 602 -973 -4602, or toll -free across the

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

James White. Good afternoon, and welcome to The Dividing Line on a Thursday afternoon.

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.

Yeah, 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, in 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 going to tell you who I was talking about there.

But if you can't figure out who the lady is that 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, indeedy, getting ourselves in trouble with all sorts of folks today. Going to go back to where we were.

Before we left, we were reviewing some sermons on The Dividing Line, and some of you got the opportunity at the conference to hear

Tom Askell 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 Ymir Kanner's 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 Kanner's sermon, which he had delivered a 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 covered that on the way. So, I was elected because I selected.

Yes, indeed, we need to make a sound clip out of that one, just for the fun of it. So, we are going to 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 fit superlapsarian and infralapsarian into a hip -hop song?

I don't think so. That's probably not going to work too well. Anyway, let's go back to Ymir Kanner's sermon.

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

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. Yes, we do hear that, and what that is, is this particular version of the sermon was beamed to me from the mothership, okay?

And that's what the aliens sound like when they're 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, 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 re -sample it, I didn't save it in another form, because that sometimes happens.

Sometimes when you re -sample something, that happens. But I downloaded it as an mp3, that's how it came across, so, you know, what can

I say? The books that 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.

Now, we stopped just for a moment, by their own volition, their own rejection. Yes, they loved 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 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, has fallen on hard times because of what we're going to 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 of it this way, if the reason why someone goes to hell is because God decided not to give them 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 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. No one is saying someone goes to hell because they weren't elected, they go to hell because of their sin.

They go to hell because they are abhorrent in God's sight. And the only reason, and see, 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 an 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 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 Romans chapter nine? When he explains

God's freedom in salvation and when he makes that specific statement to Pharaoh in Romans 917, 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 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 that 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. Cantor, 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.

Cantor 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 Liberty students deserve to get a chance to hear that. But I especially want to play the portion where Tom.

Went through 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, 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 it's just so good to listen to that.

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

Cantors, 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 to get a taste and you're going to want to get that for anybody.

If you've run into anybody who has been doing the Sandy Creek, Charleston, Southern Baptist, blah, blah, blah stuff, you're going to want to get that presentation for them and make a great stocking stuffer.

You know, can you just imagine sitting there that Christmas morning thinking of all those folks you gave presents to knowing they're opening up DVDs of that presentation?

Hey, have a happy Christmas listening to 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. Now, how long did it take you to type that in comparison to how long you could have just done?

Sometimes the way you read things back and 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.

We do need the I'm sorry that, you know, all 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.

And I want those clips from the I think they would be anyway. What I was going to 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 Web site next week for free downloading, especially

Liberty students go to the front of the line for downloading of the MP3s.

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

The only thing we're going to edit out of that was was when when I referred to Tom Askew as Dr.

Kanner, Dr. Hunt. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. That was good. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

That would be a bad. You know, that's that's a soundbite. Yeah. And we don't have to go any further with that anyway.

So what were we doing here? Oh, yes, we were reviewing the emir 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 that was great.

That's all I can say You deserve pity that you should think so meanly of God whose mercy endures 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 I 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 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 harrowing discussion with Agrippa 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

Praised 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 a 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 interaction with reformed theology or Paul Do you understand redemptive love as we should and 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 and 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. Let'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 in of 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 unto 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 Askell 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 of 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 going to save you? He's going to 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 that 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 substitutes a tone 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 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 Can you honestly pray for the salvation of all of your children?

Ah 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 a

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 our minions

But they reject Calvinism and yet they'll hold to a part here and a part there He'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 They'll hold on they'll 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 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 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.

What 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 Yeah, whoo, but you shouldn't remain there.

That should be something that you grow out of Because you don't want

You recognize that when your prayers and your theology don't mix that's not glorifying to God is it

No, it isn't For if there are non elect in this world, and it is independent of our volition.

I Would submit to you that when you lay down as I do with my son every night and with my daughter every night

That if I were to believe that God elected them to hell or passed over them

Then I would have to pray God whatever your will be done Um, yeah

God whatever your will be done at least when you're a Calvinist You can believe that God's will can be done

What if you're on the other side That would mean it's God's will to save those young children, but he can't do it without your help and their approval and Exactly.

How is that glorifying to God? Exactly, how is it to take this emotional appeal the warmth of laying down with my children and Using that to turn the

Trinity Father Son and Holy Spirit into the team that tried real hard But over and over and over and over and over again

Frustrated for all eternity in their purposes. That's why emotionalism never creates good theology but ladies and gentlemen like the

Apostle Paul I Kneel by the bedside of my son and I pray that all in this room

Would know the Lord Jesus Christ What are the conclusions we can make from this very short passage?

Let me just make three number one What type of God do we serve if he demands all to repent

Acts chapter 17 and verse 30 But does not give us the ability to do so Now there's your classic strawman argument

Why do we lack the capacity to do what is pleasing to God? Because we fell in Adam and love our sin

So what he's saying is how can God command us to repent? unless he frees us from the slavery to sin that we love or How can

God command us to repent unless we can demand his grace? That's what's being said

Now has Emery Cantor ever been forced to think through that has has he ever been put in a position where all of a sudden that?

Light turned on and he saw that inconsistency. I don't know I Would like to have been an instrument in that but you know that didn't happen

But that's what's being said and we need to understand that's exactly what is being said Something God is that this says everywhere all people must repent at 1730

But he knows that we don't have the ability to do so He would be merely shadowboxing with his own creation

Perhaps Perhaps for those who are double pre -destinarian. We need to create a new Roman Road a new way to witness

Now I did like this part. We played this part in the conference Listen to what he's saying Roman Road for those of you who might not know

Is a tract that is very common amongst conservative evangelicals goes to the book of Romans You know talks about sin things like that at least it did years ago whether it does or not anymore

Maybe we need to be honest enough that if somewhere in this room who believe in double predestination that they change the tract and They begin by saying sharing.

I want to let you know that God may love you or hate you But either way, he does have a plan for your life

Or we could do it like Paul did in well like Romans. I Love it.

It's the Roman Road right and the first two and a half chapters are about What again?

God's wonderful plan for your life. No, they're about sin They're about judgment.

They're about man being incapable of doing anything That's pleasing to God and there's about no there's no

God seekers and two and a half chapters of that That's how it starts And then it goes, you know

The wages of sin is death and you know all that bad news stuff so that the good news can shine so brightly

So yeah There's one I completely agree with him That's why we don't have those tracks and we don't use those tracks.

That's why we wrote our own tracks That's why we have a track called the Christian message Well, we had a track called the

Christian message and we need to reprint a track called the Christian message Which doesn't start where emir canner is going to start?

It is going to start in the proper place and that is where where the Bible The Roman road just at the first three exits are closed.

Yeah Got it. You don't want to go off that direction. No if God Is God so loving?

If he pours out his general blessings Matthew 5 45 says the rain falls on the just and the unjust

But is God loving if he'll rain down on the lost and to save the just and the unjust

But then passes over or actively damn someone to hell I would argue with you that That God is merely fattening up his creation for the slaughter

Well, what can we say we've already pointed out the error of making predestination life and predestination to death equal things that are just mirror images of one another

We have already pointed out that dr. Kanner doesn't believe that somebody goes to hell because of their sin

They only go to hell because they're rejecting Jesus Whatever in the world that's supposed to mean and so, you know

Once your theology has as many holes in it as Swiss cheese, then you know once you get the conclusions

They're not really gonna hold together very merely is creating to Dan But ladies and gentlemen

We don't serve that type of God We serve a okay now by the way here.

We've got let me see here less than a minute Left in the sermon and it seems to me and I mentioned this in the in the conference.

It seems to me that What you got going on if and by the way if you want to comment on this we've got a few minutes left

We've got about 13 minutes left the program eight seven seven seven five three three three four one eight seven seven seven five three

Three three four one it seems to me That there's some big old clock down front

You know, it sort of reminds me a little bit of the clock at the Metropolitan Tabernacle You got 40 minutes and and and when you stand up there

That clock starts and you have 40 minutes and you don't have 45 minutes You got 40 minutes and they're on television, of course

And so I do know from my years of the church and had a big television ministry You know used to have the thing where you this little guy sits down front with headphones on and had little flip cards and five

Minutes and four minutes and that's really annoying and then you got to the clock type thing and the digital clock and all that kind Of stuff.

I don't know if there's a trap door It opens up and just swallows you from behind the pulpit of the Thomas Road Baptist Church if you go over time

But it seems to me that that would explain both the canner sermons that we've heard because it builds up gets real loud and then you say something really quietly at the end and then everybody claps and Then you know, maybe the

TV cuts out at that point or something I'm not exactly sure how that works, but I think that's what we're about to hear

God who is not only Sovereign over all but offers salvation sincerely to all

We serve a God that not only reigns over all But wishes that his redemption would come to all

Please have a God who not only will judge this entire earth, but wants to justify all who believe

When the ultimate question is given how sovereign is your God? Can I give you one answer that I think will suffice my

God is so sovereign. He gives me a choice That's the God I serve.

God bless you God bless you, too. Did you catch that God justifies all who believe yes

Yes That's the whole point, but who's gonna believe? The the gospel goes out to all yes

But that doesn't get rid of the golden chain of redemption in Romans chapter 8 does it? You want the

Roman road why don't you want to rock to walk down that one for no verb not noun and something

God does for known predestined called justified Glorified the chain you can't break it

Why not go there why not deal with that I don't know, but you you hear the you know the all the all the applause there at the end and so that was

That was what we would have run into had we had we had the opportunity to to go to Lynchburg and to do the debate and If that was what was going to be presented

I I think there would have been a pretty stark contrast between between the two sides

No, no two ways about it eight seven seven seven five three three three four one is the phone number that Adam called hi

Adam. How you doing? Yeah, it's just yes for comments in the sermon I wanted to say I'm thinking about sending it to Matt over there to try and deal with this stuff

I'm sorry. It's sending what that's all about sending you some Advil. Oh some Advil It wasn't the best sermon

I had ever heard I played the better portions It really struggled to get to the point where I started started addressing it, so I don't know what was going on there

I thought it was funny because you said you know tell you know you might want to tell people that you know

God might not love them I remember debate Greg Bonson did one time with Gordon Stein How he said that when you reject

God your entire? Thinking is messed up from the very beginning and that is an act of judgment of God in this life

And now it begins and so and I have found that when you use that type of material against really intelligent atheists

You know God loves you, and he has a plan for your life Folks like Gordon Stein and Michael Martin.

They're not overly impressed no no You know and so I think that I think that Really, this is exemplifying

What my pastor always says is the type of humanism that is creeped into modern

Christianity The idea that man is so important, and he must have whatever he demands at any point in time

Yeah, I would call it a a very strong anthropocentrism a focus upon man and a focus upon An unbiblical focus upon individuality that is part and parcel of Western civilization and Western culture

There's no question about that in my mind that that's what we're seeing there's very little God centeredness

There's very little concern about being consistent about the attributes of God Very few people have any concern whatsoever about glorifying

God in the way that they think about God and what they believe about God They don't realize that That that is a means by which we glorify

God is that we exercise our minds and our thoughts to listen to his word and to think is is

His his truth after him Based upon his revelation that he has given to us all these things and that's one of the reasons quite honestly

Why you encounter people who are leaving evangelical churches? And they're they're going for liturgical churches because they're they're they're tired of the shallowness they're tired of having the four spiritual laws microwaved each

Sunday and and reserved with a new a new side of Some nice warm puppy dog stories the pastor got off of sermon audio .com

or sermon .com and they there's got to be something more than this and Unfortunately, they end up going the wrong direction and looking for it in in some sort of traditional

Liturgical type of Sacramentalism or something like that rather than recognizing that that what's really going on is that these churches?

It's not that they've they've missed the whole truth but they have missed the emphasis that the Bible itself presents that would call us to this

God centeredness and I don't think that's a Inconsistent Arminian ism as we have in so many churches today

Can attract the the mind of man even here the Arminians themselves saying well It's Calvinism stuffs just for the intellectuals, you know

And I'm just too dumb to understand this stuff and and that what is that? Is that not the very same thing that we have in our school system where you know?

You just dumb everything down to the least common denominator You don't you don't call people to a higher standard and in the church is the same way

I've told the story before but I was actually told at a large evangelical church Shortly before I stopped teaching there.

I was teaching adults and I I specifically stated I Specifically stated to me that I should teach every single

Sunday school class as if everyone's sitting in front of me This was the first time they'd ever been in a

Bible study I could never go beyond the most basic level and that is so endemic now

It's so common now that the idea of calling people to a higher understanding a deeper understanding of Scripture It's just considered to be intellectual snobbery and and very unspiritual in the process and and it truly isn't so anyway

But yeah, I agree. I'm glad you're familiar with the Bonson debate I play that for my apologetics classes all the time.

So so good stuff. All right. Hey, thank you for your call I got another call. Let's sneak in before the end of the hour. Thanks. God bless. All right.

Let's sneak Alan in real quickly Yes, sir, Alan All right. What's up, doc?

I Don't know it just got real dark in here though. Okay. All right. I gotta say this now I have

Redeemed myself in the most Pelagian way I have Redeemed myself who ran the lights at the last conference

Rich why did you allow that to happen? I wanted to know it was it was Mike O 'Fallon that asked me to do that Okay night.

Look Mike was under a lot of stress Okay, he was under a lot of pressure and he probably didn't even recognize what he was doing

Now the Mike the the lights were programmable Yes, so Mike actually when he was scouting the place last year

They showed in the room and he actually programmed the lights right then and there and nobody in the whole place has figured out how to Change what he programmed in there.

And so he made it foolproof dum -dum -dum No, you took the wind out of my sails.

All I had to do is hit four and hit eight, but yeah Hey at least I'll give you this much credit that it never really did cross my mind that is ever going to become completely black there in that room

And we would have really bad things happening if it did and people running all over the place and hurting themselves or anything else

So I do appreciate the fact that that's it. Now. You didn't there weren't any light changes during the debate, however

No, that was a bait. I was running the bookstand We moved him clear to the other end of the hall for the debate even with the programming that was a risk

We could not take Okay, well so I did want to talk is there anything left to you

Alan to get to here Yes, the email canner sermon. I wanted to talk about that Briefly and and I'm sure it's been brought up before but they keep talking about You know if God knew that You know, nobody has the ability and and and you said millions of times did

God know when he created? well, of course if they're Orthodox, they're going to say yes, and why

Do these guys don't did it not cross their mind? Are they intellectually dishonest or you know, because when they're saying if God knew well, he knew he knew he know

You know even in Armenia he knew Yeah and that's why I say the only in my opinion the only intellectually honest

Armenian is an open theist and those who Cobble their theology together and try to hold on to Orthodoxy.

Well, well shredding parts of it just aren't successful in the attempt and That is why it's ironic to read

I'm not sure if you've if you've this sort came out during a period of time when you were a little bit on the busy side and distracted but Greg Stafford the

Jehovah's Witness has sort of shall we say proclaimed jihad on to mix our metaphors here jihad on Calvinism and prayed that Jehovah would help him to destroy

Calvinism and blah blah blah blah and Part of that jihad on Calvinism is to deny

That God has exhaustive knowledge of future events It's very much the exact same argumentation being put out there

By Pinnock and Boyd and Sanders and the other open theists and It's not that's by the way.

It's nothing anything new for the Watchtower that that has been their viewpoint all along Dwayne Mignogna years ago wrote a book called the heavenly weatherman

To describe the Jehovah's Witnesses view of God's knowledge that he's predicting future events based upon current events that it's not an actual supernatural knowledge of the future or an eternal knowledge of the future based upon his creative decree and So, you know that I think is illustrative of the fact that to to be consistent

You really cannot have a sovereign God who has a has a decree and a purpose that he's accomplishing

But I didn't know that was found orthodox or I mean orthodox Watchtower theology it is

God. Yes. I didn't know that. Yeah Yeah, Stafford is is is well within the Watchtower's parameters at that point with his presentation of that I remember meeting with a

Jehovah's Witness elder Many years ago and I made some statement just off the top of my head

I knew about the heavenly weatherman thing, but I hadn't spent a whole lot of time on it I made just some statement off the top of my head and this guy sort of went ballistic

The same way some Baptists do on the idea of God's sovereignty and I'm like what?

And you know wasn't difficult to defend it, but it was still man That's that's odd and and I wouldn't

I I would like to pursue The possibilities in the future and there are people talking about possibilities future of debating

Greg Stafford those things because I would love to have our minions Listening to a Jehovah's Witness defending their position

You know, I think that would be very good for them to realize Yeah, it might not really be a good direction to go

But in answer to your question the reason the it's not that these guys are sitting around trying to find ways around being consistent

The fact the matter is the vast majority of evangelical leaders Pigeonhole their theology.

So what they believe about God Salvation the Bible the church that it's that such that they're in separate little compartments

They never touch each other and so they never see these inconsistencies that are part and parcel of their beliefs

So that's what you're seeing when this takes place. Hey Alan Thanks for running the lights and not turning them all off at the same time.

God bless So see you. Thanks for listening to the dividing line today folks. We'll be back Lord willing next

Tuesday morning And we'll continue with the Jerry Vines sermon and I'll be right here on the dividing line.

We'll see you then. God bless Been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or write us at p .o

Box 3 7 1 0 6 Phoenix, Arizona 8 5 0 6 9. You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org

That's a o m i n dot o RG where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks