January 18, 2005

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 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white.

And good morning, and good morning, and I can't hear anything am I. I don't even know if I'm on at the moment. Somebody was playing with stuff and so now we don't have any idea what the world's going on and I can hear myself now.

Wow, that's that's really weird. Hi, I Was told I was getting a new microphone and I didn't get in my phone. But now the old microphone doesn't want to work because I can't hear it and and it's you know, it's you know.

You get these professionals and they just you know, they just think because they're all cool. They just know how to do everything but anyway, eight seven seven seven five three three three four one have a couple of different topics to get to today and Yeah, I sound like he was in a box, yeah, I don't don't ask me what.

I don't touch it man I see it out there. I don't touch it. You know, I'm there's other people that touch it and they they like touching it and adjusting things and stuff like that, so anyhow, but we already have some callers online and so I think I'll just start with this first clip first and we'll go to our callers and then.

Is there any particular reason why we need music now? I Guess the the discussion it's your PC. Oh, I see. All right. Well there now now the PC should be Should be not talking anymore. At least we hope so.

Matthew 16, Matthew 18, and the Keys of the Kingdom

Well, we're having lots of fun this morning, you know. Let's go to the first clip anyways, I've been noticing something interestingly Lately. Someone's going back over the old Catholic answers programs and they are outlying the calls.

And so I take time look at them see, you know, everyone's in a blue moon. Somebody will throw something out there that is of great interest and it just so happened. That one of the phone calls that appeared In the current description of I think they're back in July of last year Catholic is program was a little bit relevant somewhat relevant To the current series that I think just finished up on the blog on Mark Bonacore and his Comments on Isaiah chapter 22 and Matthew 16 and so on and so forth and Oh Coaches got a lacerated spleen.

How in the world do you lacerate your spleen? That's terrible. Sorry about that big guy I hope you're feeling better. And in fact today another one of our channel regulars Richard Brassellus is having surgery.

So we need to be thinking about him as well boy, we just go they go to very odd and strange Thoughts as we go along. No way. Well, you're watching somebody comes and channel It's been in for a while and says yeah, I got a lacerated spleen.

How do you do that? You got to run into something. Ow. Four units of blood internally. Okay. All right. Hmm. I think we'll move on from here. Anyways How did it do that man alive there that the the gremlins are in the stuff again I was Do that I clicked in one window and it did something in another window and you know, I don't know I don't know how that works, you know, that's not supposed to work that way anyway I'm not exactly sure where we are on the blog at the moment because I've been trying to sort of work forward I know that I have come.

I think there might be another Bonacore response later today if I'm recalling correctly and So anyway, I just happened to notice that there was a call on Catholic answers back in July about Matthew 16 and about the the singular or plural What you'll see here in a moment Discussion in Matthew chapter 16 and you know, I realized if you're not really in drama Catholicism, maybe reading stuff about Irenaeus and about you know Cassin and All these various people and and you sort of like boy How about something, you know about?

Today or something really, you know, John Cassian is not exactly the first person. I'll be reading about today. So anyway, I understand that but here's an example of we're having a solid understanding here.

And obviously some of you do have Roman Catholic families. You want to be very prepared about this stuff and you're going no, no, no. The more detail the better but to this call I think sort of reflects type conversation that might take place and I just wanna make some comments on it.

I.

Had my daughter and family visiting me and my son-in-law asked me a question. We were discussing the Bible. He his comment to me was That the Lord promised to Peter I will give you the keys to the kingdom.

His questions regarding the Greek word you Soi he said he is plural. So his question is to me was What was the keys being given those and not just to Peter?

Okay. If that's what he said what he said was wrong. The word soy is the dative Singular form of the pronoun you in Greek, so he's clearly saying I give to you Singular talking to Peter the keys to the kingdom and in that passage when he goes on to say And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

He continues to use singular pronouns in talking to Peter. So in Matthew 16 He's using singulars all the way through. Now in Matthew 18 We have another passage where he says something similar. But a little different in that passage.

He is talking to the disciples as a group and he uses any and he uses a plural pronoun. The Difference though or a difference between these passages is that in the Peter one? He says I give you the keys to the kingdom and then he goes on to give the binding and loosing promise.

But in the Matthew 18 passage where he's talking to all of them He does not say I give to y 'all the keys to the kingdom. He only says that to Peter what he does do is he goes on to say and whatever Y 'all bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever y 'all loose on earth will be loosed in heaven He does say that to them.

So it would seem he's given them a measure of the same authority. He gave to Peter but not the fullness of it as represented by the fact. He doesn't say I give to y 'all the keys I say and and this is very clear in Greek I mean in English, it's more ambiguous because because standardized English only wants to use you for both singular and plural.

But in Greek, there's a very and in Hebrew and Aramaic There's a very clear distinction between you and y 'all and in Matthew 16 It's you all the way through and Matthew 18. It's y 'all but it doesn't have the keys part.

I say Well, thank you very much.

Well now there's nothing that I disagree with and what was just said it is singular and The stuff in Matthew 18 Everything there was accurate and that was James Aitken Jimmy Aitken responding to the call all of that is accurate Right down to the the Texas style y 'all accent.

That's that mr. Aitken brings to the Greek language. All of that was accurate, but it's what I would think would need to be addressed or maybe You know, maybe the caller didn't hear the family member Properly raising the issue or whatever.

I don't know but when we're talking about the issue of Peter and the keys at Matthew chapter 16 the thing you have to keep in mind is While Jesus only says to Peter he uses the the singular at that point I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven while that is all quite true.

The Little thing that I don't hear a lot of discussion of is the fact that it is will Give it is future tense. It does not say I am giving What whatever else you do with the the passage? However, you want to make Peter Singularly different than the other Apostles which in modern Roman Catholic theology you have to do to establish a a Supremacy of the position of Peter as as the greatest of the Apostles the Prince of the Apostles the one to whom the the Keys are given in a special way.

Then you have to explain somehow if you're going to really deal with this issue and deal with it in such a way as to be Compelling to those who know what the subjects are you need to explain when this took place.

It's not in Matthew 16. That's where the big focus is. But this is a promise of a future event and Where does this happen? Well, the only you know, I've gotten I don't know how many different answers as to when this happens Rome has not Defined it in an infallible fashion to my knowledge.

And so all you get speculation even though it's normally couched in claims of absolute certainty, but you you get speculation one way or the other and When did it happen? Well it Happened before the resurrection or it happened Before the Ascension or you get all this stuff, but it's not it's never put into a Form of saying well such-and-such a council said this so you get speculation if you don't have to worry about Rome.

And you don't have to worry about substantiating Rome's claims. There seems to be a very obvious Fulfillment of Matthew 16 in Matthew 18 Where all of the Apostles as a group as mr Akin pointed out all the Apostles are given this power of binding and loosing and it has been well said if Binding and loosing is locking and unlocking.

Well, whether you use the specific keys terminology or not. You're still talking about the same authority, aren't you? I mean Are we really going to say? That when it said I will give to you the keys to King of Heaven whatever you bind to the duck.

That there's no connection between those two that I give you the keys to King of Heaven and on a completely different subject. Whatever you buy. No, obviously. Whatever the key is referring to is related to binding and loosing and In Matthew 18, it's all of the Apostles not a promise of some future thing it's all of the Apostles who received this authority and.

So you either have to you know, I only see two two options here. You either have to see Matthew 18 for what it is. And that is the fulfillment. I think it is of Matthew 16 if you didn't have a papacy would anyone argue about this?

I'm not honestly if we were just looking at the text of the Gospel of Matthew and We didn't have all the historical baggage about the development of the Roman Catholic papacy over time. Would anyone looking at the Gospel of Matthew come up with the idea that Matthew 18 is not the fulfillment of the promise of Matthew? 16.

I don't believe so. I don't believe so. I think very clearly. That's what it is. The only other option that they can say is we don't it's not recorded for us this great huge vitally important thing. That's foundational to the to the infallible authority of the Roman Sea Was not important enough to record in any of the Gospels or in Acts.

It's not important enough to be referred to in any of the epistles. It just happened, but we don't know when or how or so on and so forth. Those are The options as I see them, and I really think that that needs to be Addressed if you're going to make a compelling argument now.

There's there's different kinds of arguments you can make. You can go ahead and make arguments that are only meant to satiate the people who are already your followers or People who are looking at becoming your followers, but who are not going to look very closely.

Or you can have a standard of truth wherein you believe you need to truly address the most compelling arguments against your position even if that means your responses may not be as attractive to people as They would be otherwise that look this is something we've addressed many many times.

When I've written books on Mormonism, you know what it's not my kind of books on Mormonism itself. It's the books on Mormonism that that have conspiracy theories and and that appeal to the the lowest common denominator.

Those are the ones that do quite well if you spend 70 80 90 pages Documenting exactly what Mormons believe on the doctrine of God and Covering every base and being fair and explaining various levels of Authority in statements in the church and so on so forth.

Yeah, that's that is not the way to To make it to the top of the bestseller charts just it's just not that's not what people are looking for and I know that. That's that's why You know, we don't worry about trying to get the world's largest the world's largest audience.

World's largest constituency. Because it's not gonna happen. That's just that's just all there is to it. So Anyhow, I just I just found it interesting that the response was completely true. Everything that I heard there was true about the Greek and about the whole nine yards.

But what would need to actually be addressed in regards to giving the keys Jesus when did it happen? When did it happen? It's not Matthew 16. It needs to be needs to be put out there in the open. It didn't happen in Matthew 16.

So when did it happen and if you go looking for the obvious fulfillment, it ends up being Matthew 18, but Peter isn't singled out there you don't have the Prince of the Apostle stuff and that's what causes causes folks a problem, so just a little little discussion of a question as it was asked and what would happen if you had the equivalent of Hannity and Combs white and Aiken.

Well, there's let you figure out who would be who on that one. I don't think you'd appreciate that big because Jimmy Aiken's a very conservative fellow too, and so he would he pre we would not want to be the Part of that one.

Anyhow, eight seven seven seven five three three three four one will continue with the review of the sermon by pastor herb Rivas on the subject of Calvinism. But first we want to travel off to Valley Forge Pennsylvania and talk with Jeff.

Hi Jeff. Dr. White. How are you? I'm doing well. How are you good?

I think I'm the first caller two years in a row. First caller two years in a row. First caller 2004 and I think I'm the first color.

Well, you know, I I'm not good at keeping up with those. Yeah. Well, you know the New Jersey Pennsylvania. I lived there. I lived in Pennsylvania. I lived in Harrisburg for Waxman-Kanksburg Camp Hill for six years.

So It's it's New Jersey. I have a problem. Hey, I've driven across from Staten Island in New Jersey and I have to close the vents, okay.

What can I say, you know, I haven't read to do that, too. I live in the godly part of the state. Oh.

You live with the remnants, okay. Yeah.

Um, I Was listening to the radio show you were on. With Chuck Krismeier the one with Calvin dash ism. Or yeah, I forget that it was the debate with Dave hunt. Yeah. Oh, okay. Yes, in fact, I'm gonna be back on that program the 31st, right?

Yes. He described it on his website is Calvin dash ism. Yeah, okay. Wanted to get your thoughts. What I'm trying to. What I'm thinking is going on with a Lot of them is they view the final judgment as kind of the in terms of whether or not you believe As opposed to in general, right?

Oh, yeah. Yeah, that's true. So the problem is is when they view it as just about whether or not you you know have this one ticket or something. Is that? When we come along and say, you know expand our views there.

They're viewing it through that lens and I think that's where that host was kind of freaking out. Well, yeah, let's face it.

I could I could understand Even from my own background Given the fact that there is not a lot of that. I didn't have a lot of the vocabulary in my youth. I mean, I did not have the the the Strong emotional dislike of Of the system.

I never even heard of the system within the within the context which I grew up but but I I did believe in in The security believer in election and things like that. But I can understand if I if I came from a lot of their backgrounds how just running smack into it not Slowly being introduced to certain concepts and building upon the sovereignty of God just running.

You know. If you run past the sovereignty of God and the total power of man the holiness of God's way right into for example Limited atonement. I can see why there isn't a real Major hurdle that needs to get over of bias and quite simply prejudice.

That explains a lot of the language you end up hearing being used. You know, it's it's it's quite honestly for many of them. They use cultic language of what we believe. There's there's no question about that and I understand.

Why if you if you've never even pondered these things before and you're used to every Sunday Hearing your pastor from the day of your conversion to to the present time doing the invitation and putting it all on you and explaining election as if God's voted for you and the devil's vote against you and now you've got the tie-breaking vote and I heard that one, too I can understand why it's like whoa, that is so freaky wrong that I could never possibly Believe that and what about this and what about that?

I understand that and that's why you you try. Anyways, and I fail very frequently, but you try to be very very patient and say hey, let's you know. Could we could we really think about this? Could we go to the Word of God?

Could we read John 6 together and you know do things like that, but I understand Why they would feel that way and my hope obviously is over time. Let's say this next program goes. Well, we do another program.

My hope over time is you get enough, you know information out there. That people start going well, you know, I never thought about that and wow, you know. And then they start reading their Bibles and they go.

Wow, that sounds like what that guy on the radio was saying, you know. So I try to take the sort of the optimistic Calvinist viewpoint at that point and say you know. What if you just get God's Word into people's hearing?

And get it to where they're not automatically Discounting on the base of their tradition. It's amazing. What the Word of God can do in people's lives. It really is.

Well, yeah, and I was just thinking that was a major stumbling block because I'm not sure how they handle the judgment according to work sort of.

Passages, but then yeah, I don't know that those two would have done it together because remember the host ended up being Farther on the other side than Dave Hunt. He was clearly disappointed that Dave Hunt believed in any form of eternal security or perseverance the Saints or anything at all, of course Dave Hunt's view is Is a very shallow view because he follows Bob Wilkin and the the Gracie Evangelical Theological Society stuff of Anti-lordship and and so on so forth.

So his view is I think extremely inconsistent, but still you could just hear in his voice this sort of like, huh? I've got to Calvinist. And when you make Dave on the Calvinist, let me tell you something.

Saying a lot. Okay, all righty, thanks Jeff. All right. All right. God bless. Bye. Eight seven seven seven five three three three four one is a phone number that You know Jason in the United Kingdom called Jason's up very late again and Jason's moved.

Hello Jason. Hi, how you doing? I'm fine. It's not that late tonight. It's only 23 minutes past six. Oh, that's right because it's the morning program. But you know, I heard you call into the narrow mind.

Yes. It's a nice surprise to hear you calling after me. Yes. I wasn't expecting that. Oh, yes I was like, oh, so Jason you must not have a lot of British programs to call. No, I could we ask for a tithe on your phone bill.

Goodness gracious. Anyways, I'm sorry. What's up? You're at least you're right on topic today. What's up? Yeah, well I used to be an Armenian and really yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. There are millions in England.

Is that where Spurgeon reached? So many Armenians in England. Oh, oh my isn't that where Spurgeon preached though? Yes, but I don't think many people probably heard of Spurgeon over here now. Oh, that's a very sad statement, you know.

Mm-hmm. Anyway, so you used to be an Armenian. I did and I used to Actually make an argument out of Ephesians chapter 1. Would you believe? And I was wondering if I could put that argument to you sure our minion Jace calling tonight and No, oh in the sovereignty of God what what happened there?

He dropped oh that's times up. Yep. Give us a call back Jason. We'll finish with your Ephesians chapter 1. He got cut off. See he's even channel. Someone's saying get another quarter. Poor guy. Give us a call back.

We'll see if we can't get you back on somehow. Oh, he's he's asking if he can if he can private message me his argument. He saw his phone bill this month, too, didn't he? Yes, go ahead Jason, but I'll go ahead with Herb Revis and we'll try to get to your your question.

Yes, we as we get along anyhow. Poor guy, yes, the phone bill had definitely become too much. It's by that first minute. That's so. It needs put other 20 pounds in the phone, yes indeed, that's a that's a shame.

Anyhow we do appreciate our foreign callers. Especially when they speak that wonderful English accent. We've been looking at and so I guess I heard from someone that you know a Slight complaint that we haven't finished the page Patterson series.

It's a much longer series. Yeah, I don't I don't want to fill the dividing line with just nothing but just playing the one thing we will get back to that I still have the Information written down as to where I was last and So Oh pence not pounds, well, it could be very expensive.

Anyway, oh what on earth? Someone needs to let a certain person in channel know about about Knicks and not stealing somebody else's. Okay, just Just so that that person knows To do today well, there's there's Jason's question and I'll have to read it in British though.

So it's it's authentic Ephesians 1 for says that God chose us in him him. It does not say that God chose us and then put us in him in God's foresight. We were already in him when he chose us. Um See at this point I would I would be asking On the basis of that foresight.

He predestined us to the adoption as sons. Okay, well This term foresight I Don't see that in Ephesians 1 for it says even as he chose us in him Before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and bleh and without blemish before him in love now the the problem here is of course that It seems that this is just another form of the foreknowledge argument which we've addressed many many times in the past and and that is that the verbal form does not mean looking in the future and Seeing events or seeing actions.

Furthermore when it says he chose us in him the the in him is The sphere or the realm of the choice all of in fact, I addressed this I just realized it's not post on the blog yet I write stuff and then I tell the software to post it at particular times in the future so that I can work on other things and and that's the sort of how it works out and I will be addressing this in A blog article between now and Thursday anyway in Regards to union with Christ one of the issues in the conversation and it is a conversation that has been taking place between Myself and dr. Eric Svensson on the issue of the extent intention subject of the Atonement is in reference to the concept of substitution Substitutionary atonement and hence the concept of union with Christ.

When is that union with Christ. Are we united with Christ only in time or are we united with Christ? In eternity so that his death is our death and Yet we does that does that not then something it would be argued by some mean that you have to believe that all of those Soteriological work of the Trinity is fulfilled in eternity and and there's really nothing to be done in time and I address those issues in the blog article, but the point is that this choice takes place only in Christ it is only in him and The text is not addressing the issue of how one becomes united to Christ in Time that obviously is the work of the Holy Spirit that does so but the point is not that that the discussion is Choosing us and then we get in him by some other means the point is his choice of us.

And we are the object of the word choice there not Christ. It's very easy for people to try to go around Ephesians 1 they say Christ is the elect one and then we get in him. And therefore we become left in that way.

That's not what Ephesians 1 says the direct object of the verb is us not Christ. Christ is the sphere the realm in which we are chosen. We are chosen in him. There is no Part of the gospel it takes place outside of Christ.

So that's what the text referring to it's not referring to anything beyond that so as best I can understand a very briefly written form of that question as how I would have responded to that so With that I do not hear any music or know if we are going to be taking a break or not.

I haven't been told that I do not for know it. But we have more calls so Do do do do do do do do do. I'm just waiting to find out Do do do do do do and I do humming when I'm waiting to find out. Holly what.

Yeah, okay still waiting for the important stuff here, and that's to do do do do. Do do do do do do do. So I'll just yell it to me since you can't seem to type. We're taking a break. Thank you there we go.

All righty folks we right back right after this.

The Trinity is a basic teaching of the Christian faith. It defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us. James White's book the Forgotten Trinity is a concise understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters.

It refutes cultic distortions of God as well as showing how a grasp of the significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a Christian and. Amid today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit the Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the Trinity.

Dr.. John MacArthur senior pastor of Grace Community Church says James White's lucid presentation will help lay person and pastor alike. Highly recommended. You can order the Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at a omen org.

Answering those who claim that only the King James Version is the Word of God James White in his book the King James only controversy examines allegations that modern translators conspired to corrupt scripture and lead believers away from true Christian faith in a readable and responsible style.

Author James White traces the development of Bible translations old and new and Investigates the differences between new versions and the authorized version of 1611. You can order your copy of James White's book the King James only controversy by going to our website at www .a.

Omen org. The history of the Christian Church pivots on the doctrine of justification by faith. Once the core of the Reformation the church today often ignores or misunderstands this foundational doctrine.

In his book the God who justifies theologian James White calls believers to a fresh appreciation of Understanding of and dedication to the great doctrine of justification and then provides an exegesis of the key scripture texts on this theme.

Justification is the heart of the gospel in today's culture where tolerance is the new absolute James White proclaims with passion the truth and centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith. Dr.. Jay Adams says I lost sleep over this book.

I simply couldn't put it down. James White writes the way an exegetically and theologically oriented pastor appreciates. This is no book for casual reading. There is solid meat throughout an outstanding contribution in every sense of the words.

The God who justifies by dr. James White. Get your copy today at a omen org. Back the dividing line.

We are getting lots of phone calls there. I guess we haven't been taking a lot Recently so maybe we've just been building up out there all this all this stuff. So let's let's go on down to Rio Rico, Arizona and talk with Jim.

Hi Jim. Hi, how you doing doctor?

About the promise did not cause he did a lot from your interaction on that. What are what are people? Actually trying to God being in trolling not causing it yet. I would try to get God off the hook. What do you think.

Well evidently?

That's that's a way. I can understand that is if if we're speaking about someone who has the ability to Cause either cause something to happen or to not allow something to happen if if he if they're confessing that he has the ability to keep it from happening and Yet did not and then just simply say well.

He didn't cause it. He didn't actually actively put out some kind of energy to cause the the tectonic plates to move but he knew it was going to happen, but I didn't stop it from happening because this is just way the way a Cursed world works and so on so forth.

Yeah at that point it becomes a semantics game which To me doesn't have a whole lot of meaning to it. And I I don't think a lot of folks have thought through what the result of that would be if you're going to say well He knew it was coming He could have stopped it He didn't cause it But he allowed it to happen then the big question I want to to ask is all right if all you're saying is he didn't have to put out power to make it happen because of The way the world's made Earthquakes will happen.

That's one thing. But the key question that I would ask of anyone who would make that kind of a statement is Is there a purpose? In the decree of God for what took place in the tsunami and Any type of quote-unquote natural disaster whether it be a fire a flood an earthquake a tornado a hurricane all of these things is The person willing to confess that for example Christians die in these things if they do so Will they say that the date of a Christian's death? Has been fixed by God that I don't think you can get around in Psalm 139 You can't get around the book of Job if if that's the case Then these things have to have been under the sovereignty of God.

And they have to have a purpose in the sovereignty of God well that means that God Has to put out some sort of positive Energy to make them happen or they are just simply a part of the creation that is a part that is Result of his sovereign decree.

I don't think has any meaningful moral element to it as far as trying to escape God's sovereignty and the purposes therein so Most the time that's not the issue most the time the issue is that makes it a whole lot easier If someone's lost someone or someone's you know one of these great tragedies you're you're generally just trying to help God get off the line at that point and Not have to answer for his actions and so on and so forth that's at least as I have Heard people addressing this that's the normal reason why they're doing that I.

Couldn't I don't know.

Evidently in many of these systems the idea is that that somehow God has in essence wound up a particular mechanism and Partly so that free will gets to exist and partly because somehow he's under some kind of Necessary need to Let the system run on its own without Performing miracles regularly that he can't intercede.

He can't get involved in these things and I I don't see any reason for any of that to be perfectly honest with you I I don't see any reason to to at all posit the idea that God is in essence wound up a mechanism and now He's just letting it run and and that's a part of his will but the details of it are sort of just.

We don't need to worry about actually thinking about details. We don't need to worry about especially thinking about wrath or Judgment or anything like that. We can maintain our omnibenevolence Aka Dave hunt equal love for everybody no matter whether they are a sinner under your wrath or not and That way we don't have to worry about the idea that you know God brings his judgment to bear and sometimes he he calls sinners out of this world in a very very sudden and Dramatic fashion and sometimes he calls a lot of them out of this world in a very sudden and dramatic fashion.

Which is supposed to have the result of making us see the sovereignty of God the holiness of God the judgment of God the wrath of God and his name be proclaimed and the result is repentance but as long as you keep trying to just simply turn all this into the the random tremors of a Insignificant swirling ball of dust around an insignificant Sun and insignificant galaxy.