Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Comments are turned off for this media
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 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 welcome to the dividing line on a Tuesday morning our regular time though. I think I'll probably be going late today. I I need to get Through all of the use of Ismael Bashir Vania Material before I head to South Africa.
We're putting together the final touches on the schedule. They would like me to stay like a week longer than I can. I just I cannot I cannot stay that long. I have an expiration date.
I read that email yesterday and I got the impression that they were just planning on keeping you.
Yeah, I just go down there and a number of debates. I mean, it's like to you know, sometimes May is to a day I mean We're gonna shoot right past the 130 mark real easy on this one up at about 135 140 somewhere around there, I don't know and Not a one of them has been in Arabic in a mosque Though some of them have been in mosques.
None of them have been in Arabic though I have used Arabic and probably can pronounce it better than certain people who Should stick to Swedish. But anyway There's a by the way So many things let me see I'm gonna forget all these things.
Lagos is putting together a collection of my Baker publications, which I'm you go Baker. I've never seen Baker owns Bethany house. So what's neat about that is Mary another Redeemer and my two youth books What's the dudes the door and what's with the mutant the microscope will be available.
I hope they include the really cool fun Artwork we did for those youth books because I met a lot of adults who really liked especially what's the mutant and microscope because it It sort of explained things on an on a youth level that they were like, that's cool.
So anyway That'll include letters to Mormon elder and everything that will be in Lagos and it's but it's on prepub right now. So who knows if it'll make it, you know some some yes pre-publication, you know, and and I haven't ordered it.
What.
Yeah letters isn't there to remember they publish it for a long time. They released it to me to allow it allow it to other people, but they they did they did publish it. So I Guess I don't know how it all works.
I People going how can you not know that stuff? I look you write it. Yeah, give it to them. They publish it. I Lagos we even had people saying well, hey, how come the Pirates freedoms on there? Well, the Pirates rooms are published by Baker that's why and Well, why didn't you I had nothing to do with it.
Nobody talked to me I didn't hear from Lagos I didn't hear from from Bethany house. Nobody. I'm just an author. I'm just I'm irrelevant that I don't I suppose you could put things in contracts to where you control such things, but I've I Just write the book give it to them and I just want out there and then we go sooner.
So anyways, there is a prepub on at least my Baker stuff for Lagos for those of you who have the Lagos Program and It's on it's on prepub. Which means I have no idea if or when it will ever actually become available.
Because a certain number of people have to purchase it before it becomes available. So just mention that Friday night. I'm going to be at the grace life group in at Grace Community Church in Southern, California better known as John MacArthur's Church there and This came up really really really really really really really fast and it just so happened that I could do it I still have a doctor's appointment on Friday that I need to call them because I don't think it's real I think I think that was a that was one that was like, you know You put into your calendar six months ago and then something changes and it gets canceled anyways.
And so I don't think it's real. But anyway So I'm supposed to be in Southern, California very very very briefly On Friday night to speak on Islam at Grace Community Church and Then we are planning and I should have had my calendar up here so I could do this a little faster but we are putting the final touches on a Presentation I will be speaking Lord willing The 7th and 8th in the Dallas area a 7th and 8th of September I'm sorry 7th 8th of September in the Atlanta area.
Let's get this right and then flying to Dallas and We are putting the finishing touches on arranging and this is that we need to get hold of Shamgar. Okay, I need As impossible as it is to get hold of Shamgar.
We need to get hold of Shamgar Because I'm heading to Dallas. He's in that area. We need to minimally minimally Live stream the audio of this. I would rather live stream the video of this because we're gonna be playing video clips.
But we are putting together a presentation in the Dallas area. One of the nights the 11th. I will be speaking on Islam in general for Christians.
But.
On Tuesday the night before that I am going to do a full presentation Within driving distance of Arlington Baptist Bible College or whatever it's called Entitled Arrogant canner one man's jihad against Christian apologetics to Islam.
I'm going to put together all the clips. I'm going to put together all the evidence and We are going to discuss how one man Can start off just by puffing his resume? But by step by step by step by step over time with the willing assistance of quote-unquote discernment experts end up becoming a one-man jihad against meaningful Christian apologetics to Islam and So we want all of the students and the faculty of Arlington to To know about this to recognize that they are welcome to attend.
It's not right next door, unfortunately, but if worse comes to worse they can tune in the live broadcast and listen for themselves and obviously Obviously if dr. Ergun canner Would contact us and like to request an opportunity to dialogue about what I say We would be happy to do so, but everybody in this audience knows the man would never face me never in a million.
Years.
Face me. He can't and he knows it and it drives him crazy. Drives him crazy. He knows it but if he'd like to show up way at the invitation is open. So we will have information About that and how you can attend if you're in the Dallas area, that should be should be Lord willing Tuesday night September 10th.
I mean there's nothing on a Tuesday night. That's gonna get in anybody's way. You don't have to go to church cetera, etc. So Tuesday night September 10th Ergun canner one man's jihad against Christian apologetics to Islam In the Dallas area will be giving you details on that and details on where I'll be speaking in Atlanta the preceding weekend as well, so.
There are some of the things coming up there. I'm speaking twice at PR BC. I'm gonna be in prior, Oklahoma at two different churches August 23rd and following 23rd 24th 25th, I think is yes, sir.
I was just gonna say while you're on the calendar issue here I want to point out there is now believe it or not shock of all shocks a public calendar. People can access if they use Google Calendar. They can click if they're in the story.
Eventually it's gonna land on the main page of the website when we redo that. But up in the upper right hand corner, there is a a Live real calendar they can click Google Calendar and they're gonna pop up.
What your schedule is all the way through, you know as far out as we've got it locked in. So as we update it, they can they can actually go and click on it if they're in the area. You're gonna be speaking.
They can actually click on the event and lock it into their own calendar. Cool. So nice.
Have you been adding stuff even this morning? Because this isn't this isn't what mine my calendar I haven't added yet this morning. Really? No, that's weird. But I see more things on This calendar than I see on the one on my laptop.
That's not private. That's probably not a good idea.
Because I don't really look at this. Well, we'll take a look at it after the show and get all.
Tweaked. Yes, I guess um in October. South Africa the 2nd through the 9th. London is before that. Need to get back in touch with Our Roman Catholic friends in London to firm those things up there as well.
After I get back from South Africa, this is all in the Lord willing category I'm going to be heading down to Votie Balcom's place in Spring, Texas. The 18th 19th, I think maybe the 20th. I'm not sure.
But that weekend down there heading back to Texas I'm gonna be talking like this by the time I get all that stuff down there in Texas and then 25th the 27th gonna be up in Vancouver, Canada for the solo scriptura conference up there as well and so.
Visiting our Canadian friends at that's a particular point in time and then I've got something in Tucson Toward the end of November than our regular trip to St. Charles in December as well. So I I think I'm going to actually make it to platinum level frequent flyer this year.
Yay Yay.
I'm gonna be renting that's a Tom Hanks movie terminal because that's sort of how I'm I'm gonna be feeling coming up with with all that.
So.
Anyhow, that's that's oh and and I knew I was gonna forget this. Next Wednesday Thursday and Friday July 31st August 1st and 2nd. So starting a week from tomorrow, I will be guest hosting live three hours each day.
For Janet Mefford, I will be I'm not just gonna be a guest on her program. I will be the program. I will be the host of the program and Right now looking at having Carl Truman on on Wednesday. Hopefully a case got elephant on on Thursday and I still have a few more emails to send out for for other folks so if you Listen to the Janet Mefford show.
It's on Salem broadcasting whenever it appears in your time zone your time area, whatever. I will be guest hosting for Janet Mefford the 31st 1st and 2nd the first of July 1st 2nd of August and Looking forward to that and that could be very interesting.
And of course, uh, it could be very dangerous to have Carl Truman and I on with me as the host on a national. It's one thing here, you know people expect it on the dividing line. Okay? Yeah, I should invite Irving Kanner.
Yeah, that that's not gonna happen you.
And.
His first English accent. The transmitter will shut down. Well, it's not just one transmitter. It'd be many many transmitters. It would have to shut down as soon as I do my first but Carl is British for crying out.
Loud so.
He can he can say whatever he wants but it could be dangerous for he and I to start talking especially if I end up going the direction. I'm thinking about going and Asking about his little book that I read recently where he basically says the key issue is gonna demonstrate that evangelicalism really doesn't mean anything anymore is the subject of homosexuality and Boy, I could get us into a lot of trouble first day.
I mean that could be it. Who knows? Well, we'll find out but that's that's next week guest hosting for Janet Mefford on the 31st 1st and 2nd. So if you want to listen that. Oh get Lou rug on. Yeah, that would be.
That would be really great. That would really help ratings a lot. Yeah, Proverbs 129 was that what it was that when it was. I forgot what that was. I've lost my trip, okay. Saw an article on Fox News that concerned me.
Concerning Sergeant Lane Wilson a 27 veteran 27 year veteran in the military was formally reprimanded for an email. He wrote last December the chaplain at West Point and his six-year reenlistment contract was reduced to a one-year contract.
John Wells an attorney representing the airmen. So we're only getting one side here. I realize that said the military coerced his client and the sign the one-year extension after they cancelled medical benefits for his wife.
Who is suffering from stage 4 breast cancer? It would seem to me that cancelling the medical benefits for a sick cancer victim. To coerce and underling to sign an illegal contract constitutes cruelty and maltreatment under the Utah Code of Military Justice.
Well said this type of action is unconscionable and I would expect the guard to initiate investigations around the case. The issue is Wilson who is about Christian and has religious objections to gay marriage found himself in trouble after wrote an email to the chaplain at West Point.
This is wrong on so many levels. He wrote if they want to get married in a hotel that is one thing our base chapels are a place of worship. And this is a mockery to God and our military core values. I've probably served 27 years and this is a slap in the face to us who have put our lives on the line for this Country,.
I hope sir that you will take appropriate action to this. This does not happen again. Instead the military took action against Wilson accusing him of bringing quote disgrace and discredit end quote upon the Air National Guard and failing to Quote render the proper respect to a commissioned officer end quote Quote you are hereby reprimanded and quote write a letter from Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Tobias Quote as a non commissioned officer.
You're expected to maintain a standard of professional and personal behavior that is above reproach. You have failed exclamation point end quote. I just want to go. How do you determine what is above reproach that that requires a certain standard of morality, doesn't it?
It does even for the military. A public affairs officer with the Utah Air National Guard told Fox News They could not comment on Lane's case. A June 19th 2013 memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel Tobias to Wilson indicates his religious.
Now listen to this his religious objections to homosexuality Made him incompatible with further military service. I remember that now keep that in mind. We talked about his feelings about d-a-d-t and how he doesn't agree with it.
Tobias wrote. I then told him that maybe this is a good time for him to move on. Because we've been ordered to not have an opinion about gays in the military and We need to treat them as we would treat anyone else in the service of our country.
So you've been ordered not to have an opinion. Really. No, you have not. You've been ordered to have an opinion and it needs to be a positive one. Needs to be a good one. You need to you need to confess.
This is good stuff. This isn't sin, this isn't rebellion this won't bring the wrath of God. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That's the old days. Everything's changed now. You need to celebrate this.
Even if it's right smack-dab in the middle of your place of worship. You need to celebrate this. Tobias then wrote that he was not comfortable Reenlisting him with his strong feelings about this matter.
The military then rescinded Wilson's six-year reenlistment contract replaced with a one-year contract. However after his attorney objected the military reinstated the contract. While the reinstate with a six-year contract to step in the right direction.
It is not enough. Well said the letter of reprimand must be expunged and we need to receive assurances there will be no reprisal. Wilson also accused the military of spying on his clients Facebook page and Attempting to monitor his activities.
The data mining is of great concern. He said it looks as though they're trying to trump up some potential charges. Unfortunately, I've seen this done before and the guards action displays all the attributes of a witch hunt.
He accused the Department of Defense and the Obama administration of trying to quote purge the military of conservatives. Who do not agree with the liberal agenda of the left end quote? Quote this purge includes fundamentalist Christians Roman Catholics Jews and political conservatives who support God and country well said in the same vein as The Stalinist purges of the 1930s will be left with a hollow military.
It will not be capable of properly defending this country and Quote interesting interesting interesting. I have said for a very very very very long time. They do not want equal rights. They want uber rights.
They want to silence Silence the expression of any statement that would say that Homosexuality is evil. That is what that's what they want. Okay, I we must must must must must must must finish.
The.
Calvinist call-in show because we're almost there. I mean we're this close. We've just we've just got to get done.
So I.
Guess We do have a phone call. So I'll try to get that. I I need a little bit more information would be good. But because it's sort of a right now. But we got to get the Calvinist call-in show done because we've we've Been dragging it out too long that there's no trace, but so we only have a few minutes left.
Let's I played. I played this question last time, but then I didn't get to comment on it. So I said we'll just start there. So Picking back up, but the Calvinist call-in show. Michael Brown and again sped up just a little bit.
I'm not a Calvinist. But I of course some of my positions would have to line up more on that side and I don't just consider you like Armenian As well. I love your eschatology. The question just to make it a little bit interesting if it if I could is how?
Then I mean as far as free will would be. Would Judas Iscariot had free will? To not fulfill the scripture or was the scripture only predicting from foreknowledge. So if it if that be the case the scriptures that speak about Jesus was.
Was God just saying that Jesus was going to be put up on a cross or was it? For ordained from the foundation of the world to happen. And of course that was but was Judas Iscariot or You know Esau for that sake Predestined from the foundation of the world to be in the position that they were the scriptures.
And if not, then what's the difference between the two and how can we exegete? Between what is actually Predestined or foreordained or just was foreseen.
Now again, I think that's an excellent question. It is. It goes to very important issues. For example the issue of the crucifixion. Think of of all the quote unquote free choices on The part of so many men.
Went into The issue of the crucifixion and the event of the crucifixion the timing the people involved. Judas a very important element of this a vital role the inside man to allow the Jewish rulers to.
Do.
It in such a way as to not necessarily incite the mob The issue of the relationship to Passover all of this stuff there are just so I mean clearly this type of Specific prophetic fulfillment is one of is the reason that open theism Will only ever appeal to people who are willing to sacrifice biblical authority the only way I mean You you look at this and if you say well God doesn't know for certain the actions of free creatures because if he did and not really free and therefore he only knows What's natural and and that's what not what flows from the actions of free creatures.
There is no way I mean, I remember John Sanders when I when I challenged him on related issues. Well, remember you Calvinists have had hundreds of years to work out your theology. We're just starting on this.
Well, I don't care how many hundreds of years you're given you're never gonna make this work you're not gonna be able to hold together the idea of of biblical authority Inspiration inerrancy and everything else.
You're not gonna be able to hold that together with The concept that God is ignorant of the actions of free creatures. It just it doesn't work. It's not possible. It is not possible but as I've said many times before open theism is the only consistent Arminian ism because if you Accept that God has exhaustive Infallible knowledge of all future events including the actions of free creatures Try as you might you're not gonna be able to hold that together.
You're gonna have to just throw up your hands and and appeal to mystery at some point Even if it's not mystery as the New Testament defines this mystery You're gonna have to do it. It's not possible to put it together.
You're gonna have to hold to some level of incoherence inconsistency contradiction call it mystery all you want, but that's that's that's what it is and.
Judas.
Displays this very very clearly. I Mean if you want to hold to a libertarian perspective Judas is a real fly in the ointment. If you want to if you want. All of them are because the whole thing could have fallen apart at any point.
Judas decides not to not to go through with it. Pilot decides listen to his wife. Herod has a lucid moment. I you know the centurion leads a mini rebellion. You know there's just so many ways it could all fall apart that I remember.
It's interesting so I guess on the Wayback Machine right now or what. Not right now, but. This morning or something the Steve great either the Steve Gregg debate was playing or I was playing Steve Gregg stuff or something like that.
And I was you know I remember at least he tried to be consistent in the sense of saying well Paul. Yeah, Paul could have said no. Paul could have you know Paul could have resisted the the call of God even though he's knocked off his horse and and.
Then God would have had to go find somebody else and. You know at least you're being consistent there. I don't that's not the guy of the Bible, but you're being consistent at that point and.
So it's an excellent question and let's let's listen to Michael's response right. Very good question. And of course Acts the fourth chapter says explicitly that Herod and Pilate and the nation's Jewish leaders conspired together to do what God had for ordained them to do so.
The question is did he. Then say okay high priest you're gonna. Do this regardless of your will of participation of order.
High priest you're gonna. Do this. Not listen listen to it again.
You're gonna. Do this regardless of your will of participation of regardless of your will and participation no.
High priest you're going to do this because it will be your will to do so in fact In many instances as I as I emphasize many times God is restraining the evil of man. I mean for example. What would have happened if One of the soldiers let's say one of the soldiers let's say this was the temple guard not Roman guard in a sudden flash of Zeal for the ancestral traditions had pulled his sword and run Jesus through in the garden.
No cross. No Eloy Eloy Lama sabachthani kills Jesus in the garden right there Ruins everything well if he's free he could do that right. I mean if you really believe In the autonomy of mankind you have to say that could have happened.
God's just lucky it didn't work that way. Right so it is not the reformed position That the high priest's will is. Has any bent toward good the high priest even the high priest we certainly know the high priest is.
Priesthood was extremely corrupted this time. Yes, that's that's an argument frame when I would hope and so you have an unregenerate man religious man. But but just read Matthew chapter 23 get an idea of what that's all about so you've got an unregenerate man and The idea I think in the back of Michael's mind here is well, but he could have chosen I Got a firm you could have chosen to do otherwise and the Calvinist says he can only choose do worse.
God's restraining him from doing the worst he could do but the reality is the text of Acts chapter 4 says They did what God's hand had for ordained would come to pass. There isn't a question about there's there's no.
You know there's no argument here about you know language or anything like that To do Whatsoever your hand and Your plan your bullet Had pra or is n pra or idzo predestined to take place. And notice it's poy a say hossa, whatever.
There's no limitation. Poy a say hossa. Hey Kyra, sue your hand Kai Kai. Hey bully sue and your will Predestined to take place. I Mean it's really strong. You know Michael has said more than once how could it be any clearer and that was after listing all the all passages and we went Through every single all passages said how it's not nearly as clear as he thought.
It's actually clear the other way well I Said this to you and say how could this be any clearer to do whatever your hand and your will Predestined to take place it is just absolutely. There's outside of whether the second pronoun is found sue.
It's pretty straightforward. Very straightforward very very clear. So it's not as it's being presented here. Well, you know God was cons was God constrained by the will of the high priest and Again, if you say well, but see God foresaw that these people would be this way.
And so he just worked things out so they'd all be but even man in his evil. Does he not have different ways. Is it is it not the case that we are sometimes shocked at? The expression of man's evil for example, I I saw one of the most Amazing stories online a couple days ago these two Thugs.
Just absolute thugs. Lord this young girl up on top of the roof of a brownstone in I think it was. I think it's Philadelphia Raped her and Then when they got done raping her they threw her off the roof To the pavement below now aside from that being an incredible argument for capital punishment It also.
How many times have there been people who? Rape someone and then they just leave them. Well, these guys came up with the brilliant idea of tossing her off the roof. Man in his evil can act in many different ways so again, it's the specificity of the fulfillment of prophecy and God bringing about the crucifixion in the exact way he wanted to you just look there can only be one Autonomous will in this and it's God's and why is it the Christians want it to be man's?
I want to be God's for crying out loud. I really do.
So we go back then say okay high priest you're gonna do this regardless of your will of participation. I've ordained you to do this pilot I've ordained you to do this Herod I've ordained you to do this or.
Because God had a specific plan and because of God's infinite wisdom He then worked things out in a certain way to accomplish his will by people.
Michael Michael Michael Michael. What do those words mean? By his infinite wisdom. Yeah, exactly. It's called his divine decree it's cause it's called that decree that gives formed the very fabric of time which includes the Responsible actions of men in time.
That's the basis of it. That's the basis of it. The whole reason that we can be held accountable is that God and his decree has made a world in which that is possible. We are not the slaves to cosmic forces that are beyond ourselves.
We're not like the the pagan Greeks and Romans who had the gods and Mount Olympus who controlled the destinies and the fates of men. And all the rest this kind of stuff.
No.
What gives there the very fabric and form to time itself is God's sovereign decree and that decree included. The wills of men like Herod and Pilate and everything else. To every single soldier the whole nine yards it is all a part he predestines.
Everything that comes to pass. Ephesians 111. The one who works all things out of the council of his will that's God. He's the one who accomplishes his will in heaven the earth and deeps and all all places.
I mean that's been the confession of Scripture all along. Has it. Not. It has. It has so to say. Well, but but he you know, he has a purpose and so by his wisdom, what does that mean? Whose wisdom Gets the credit.
Because could God's wisdom have failed. Could it have been other than it was? The consistent proponent of.
Autonomy of man's will will have to admit. Well if man's autonomous then it could have been other than it was. But you see the problem here is God is so clearly actively involved actively involved in.
Bringing together of these tremendously, I mean think of the think of the vast difference between the intentions and Wills and nature of the Jewish leadership over against Herod over against Pilate over against the Roman soldiers and Yet the prayer of The early church brings them all together Both Herod Pontius Pilate along with the Gentiles to people's Israel to do whatever your hand and your plan and predestined to take place massively different intentions and Yet it's God's intention.
That is accomplished.
Who would be given to that? So how do we determine really? It's very simple because all of the Bible from beginning to end makes clear that we make choices.
Of course, we make choices. But as R .C. Sproul puts it I am free. God is free when my freedom runs into God's freedom. I lose. No one is saying that Herod did not make choices. It's a it is a simplistic Presentation of what we're saying.
To say that Herod is was just this this Puppet on a string. And God said Herod be bad. Okay, God, I'll be bad. That's not what we're saying. But it's also wrong to say that well God had looked down the course of time and oh There's an opportunity at that time.
These kind of people are gonna be around and they're gonna be given to this kind of stuff. And so I'll be able to use them again. That that sounds. And and Michael says he's not a Molinist, but that's Molinistic language.
That's a Molinistic language to where what God's trying to accomplish. He's dependent upon the actual characteristics of the individuals involved. That's that's Molinistic language. He what did he he actualized the particular world where Herod had this kind of characteristics.
And and Pontius Pilate had this kind of characteristics. And so given these circumstances they do these things. That's that's the road to Molinism. And Many there be who follow who go in there at these days.
That's for sure all the Bible makes clear that God's saying you can repent you can choose life. You can choose death and that's why to some he says well done good and faithful servant and for others He said over and I gave you opportunity over and over and over and over and over and you refused.
Now notice he's going back to the default argument that as long as there is an admonition to make choices Then we must be autonomous. So if the choice is to be perfect or not be perfect, we must have the capacity to be perfect.
Well that doesn't follow. We've already pointed out that that is a fundamental category error. But it's also not answering the question. Because well, I guess in a sense it is saying well, yeah does sound like Judas was Predestined to do a specific thing at a specific time in a specific way and it was personal and everything else.
But we really can't go there because we have this general overarching concept that but when you look at all of Scripture it says this and I just simply say that's not how we do theology that is ignoring one part of the Revelation so as to hold another part of the Revelation without harmonizing the two together and.
That's a bad thing. So when God was going to Accomplish his will with the Exodus. He raised up a particular Pharaoh that he knew in advance. This man will not let you go.
No, he said he would harden his heart long before Pharaoh did anything. God said I will harden his heart because he had a purpose and the purpose was to Demonstrate his power against the gods of Egypt.
And so the question is does God have the right? To use his creatures to proclaim his own glory that really, you know when you get down to it. That's really the overarching question. Does God have the right to use his own creation to demonstrate his own glory?
Or does he not and One side seems to say no because it's more important that God Treat everybody the same. Now that sounds great in Western culture, it's sort of a little tough when you read the Old Testament.
Because that's not how God ever did anything in the Old Testament. He did not treat the Egyptians the same way. He treated the Israelites. He didn't He treat the Assyrians Babylonians same way. He treated the Israelites the Amalekites the Amorites the Jebusites, I mean we can we can do a lot of ites here and The answer is going to be clear and obvious all the way across.
He was accomplishing a purpose and by grace. He used a particular people who were not foreseen To be better than somebody else. He didn't look into the future and go wow those Israelites there. They're they're more pliable than other people now.
It's just the opposite. They're stiff-necked hard-hearted. I Mean, how many times do the prophets say that it's clear.
It's it's it's it's right there and Pharaoh hardens his heart over and over before God then in Hebrew Strengthens his heart. That's the first thing that happens strengthens his resolve. So when it was a purpose specific, I see this again, this is ignoring Exodus 4.
I mean before Moses says word one to Pharaoh. God says this is what I'm gonna do. This is what I'm gonna do.
It's right there civic purpose to accomplish something from the Lord. He raises up a specific person to do it as opposed to take someone who's a God fear who's humbled himself.
Who's that? Who's that. There is no God fear. Isn't that what Paul said. I Mean, I think. Let me let me look here real quick. Let me let me look. Did it did it did he did eat the D? Well, it certainly says there is none who seeks after God and Verse 18 of Romans 3 says there is no fear of God before their eyes.
What. Who's the God fear. The only God fears ever existed those who've been the recipients of God's grace. That's why Noah was a God fear or Job was a God fear or anybody else any other for the fallen children of Adam Recipients of God's grace, but that grace has to be free.
And so where does the freedom come from comes from God? God is free and That then results in man.
I.
Guess it would help if I.
Reclicked on the right program again. And who's pleading with God for help and mercy and responding to the voice of the Lord says no I'm gonna harden you. So what's the overall testimony script now? Did you catch that?
Listen up again.
Who's a God fear who's humbled himself and who's pleading with God for help and mercy and responding to the voice of the Lord says? No, I'm gonna harden you. So what's the overall testimony scripture?
So I'm gonna harden you. Who would ever say that.
But again, see this is where theology matters. Michael believes that there are people who could do that and I say there are no people who could could do that outside of God's grace and this is why the assumption of prevenient grace on The part of Michael and others I have to challenge it.
Where'd you get that? I know where it comes from. I know where it comes from. I Don't have the The book in here, maybe we can it will take a break here and I can I Can grab it? Let's take a break at 45 since we're going for jumbo today.
So it'd be halfway through. I know where it comes from. We'll talk about it. But okay just a couple couple more here. Honestly, maybe a minute left.
Maybe a minute left with Cain and Abel that Abel humbled himself in a certain way that Cain didn't and one Thing that one did was pleasing the other was not. I see that God finds Noah. There's something in Noah that's pleasing in his sight.
So people are responding to God throughout scripture.
It really sounds to me like like Michael is saying that that men apart from specific grace are able to be pleasing to God. I can't understand in any other way because I I don't I have not heard him say that there is a saving grace over against prevenient grace.
So it sounds like what he's saying is God sees goodness in certain people and rewards that and that that goodness is an inherent thing and that that is a fundamental anthropological difference. And I Cannot begin to understand the exegetical foundation of any idea that God would look at someone and go well.
Well, well, there's there's someone who's there's someone there's Noah. He's he's great. Well, why was Noah great? What's the difference. I mean I I would say to you that the overarching discussions of all of human anthropology found in the found in giving the foundation of the gospel in.
In.
Romans 1 through 3. Romans 1 through 5 trumps everything else. Now if you don't believe in in biblical theology or systematic theology the idea there is a Theology taught by the Bible as a whole very very very few people in seminaries do anymore.
You know Paul's got his theology and might be different strains of that and then John's got his and Peter's got his and they're all different from one another and all the rest that kind of stuff. Then I you know.
We're right with that's we got to deal with that on different different level, but I don't think that's where Michael and I are.
I see that Abraham responds and God chooses him and calls him. I see that then in Genesis 20 with Abimelech a passage on a message that God withholds him from sinning. So so God stops him from sinning.
Why is this. Because because he saw he was doing things with a clear conscience. He saw that Abimelech was actually a God-fearing person. And so why was Abimelech a God-fearing person?
Again this is the only I suppose the only way to to substantiate the idea that well You know the elect are chosen because they're better than other people. But see that goes back to the very thing where Michael was so upset with Brian and didn't really understand.
His point is That if you're gonna say well, it is really dependent upon. You know the better people the people that are more pliable the people that will have more spiritual they're the ones that will be chosen by God and.
And I say no. It's it's all of grace. It's always been all of grace from the beginning. This is a good argument for the the covenant of grace for the for covenant theologians. It's a good argument for it.
If you don't have that concept of a covenant of grace from the start then.
It could cause you some issues. Did what he did with a certain Ignorance. Paul says God had mercy on him because he acted ignorantly and in unbelief. God looks at no no no no and.
God had mercy in Calling him to service not in why he was chosen to be a Christian why he was chosen to be saved. That would never fit with Paul's not only Paul's personal testimony, but Paul's theology.
He was he was shown mercy in in being called into position a tremendous position of authority. Because he acted out of ignorance, but not his calling to salvation.
That no no no at these things. He does not just look at us as all given over to sin and never responding by his grace we can respond by his grace.
Okay, so again we go back to the exact same point. They made last time by his grace. We can respond. Grace what kind of grace prevenient grace? Does everybody gain the same kind of grace if everybody gets the same kind of grace and some people respond some people don't that means?
They're better. Again unless you allow grace to have purpose unless God's grace matches God's character and will. It doesn't make any sense it becomes peanut butter. It's just spread around and Sometimes it ends up on a piece of bread so you can eat it and sometimes it ends up on a transmission.
So you can't I mean really that that's what you got one one thing that will take the whole so a.
Judas was chosen for a specific mission not because God created him for that. But because based on choices he made and who he was he was given over to that. Tendency he was he was given over to those things.
He was not going to respond not gonna repent. That's why he was chosen. There's nowhere you can show me in Scripture where God chose him and said okay. Even though I know that given the opportunity you would humble yourself or given the opportunity return or given the opportunity you'd receive my love I know you would I'm going to harden you and use you in judgment.
No such concept exists in Scripture.
And of course no such concept exists in Reformed theology because we don't believe that there's anyone like that. Given the opportunity. Given the opportunity. Given the opportunity. Every single rebel sinner will spit in God's eye.
Read Romans 3 10 through 18. Multiple times if necessary until the point sinks in but it all goes back to it. Well, what does grace accomplish etc, etc? So there you go, there's there's the end of. My comments on the Calvinist call-in show believe it or not it took that long.
And if there's ever a second call Calvinist college show I would like more Calvinist to call in. That would be much more useful obviously. But I think that there are some things that we need to discuss and Maybe we can find a time.
Obviously this issue of what does deadness and sin mean? What is the nature of man in sin? What is this idea that will God sees certain people and you know, he chooses them because they're better or they're more sensitive.
Etc, etc. And what is the nature of grace. Is God trying to save every single person equally. Can you prove prevenient grace? Let's see it exegetically. These are all some of the some of the issues that we need to look at so we're gonna be coming back with with Peter and Then more here on the divine line.
We'll be right back.
Hello everyone. This is Rich Pierce. In a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man-centered Self-help program the need for a no-nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater.
I am convinced that a great many go to church every Sunday yet. They have never been confronted with their sin. Alpha Omega Ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner making no excuses.
Man is sinful and God is holy. That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior. We are to come before the Holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well. Support Alpha Omega Ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.
Thank you. Breaking news from the White House and the issue gay marriage for a lot of people. You know, the word marriage was something that evokes very powerful traditions religious beliefs. I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.
The NAACP has passed a resolution Endorsing gay marriage as a civil right. This comes two weeks after the president announced his support for same-sex marriage.
Under the guise of tolerance our culture today grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality. Anyone opposing or questioning this today is quickly shouted down called a bigot a homophobe a hate monger Threatened and accused of discrimination.
It's become commonplace to see people who take a biblical stand against homosexuality Ostracized to the point of losing their job. How soon will it be before we will also see people losing their freedom.
Now more than ever Christians need to be equipped to be Approved workmen of God correctly dividing the word of truth as we are told in 2nd Timothy 2 15. Dr James White and pastor Jeffrey Neal have partnered to bring you their book the same-sex controversy if you are Christian.
This book is just one of the tools you'll need to be prepared to give a proper defense of the faith in the face of The unrighteous onslaught we face today. The author's right for all who want to better understand the Bible's teaching on this subject explaining and defending the foundational biblical passages that deal with Homosexuality including Genesis Leviticus and Romans in a straightforward and loving manner.
They appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and return to God's plan for his people. The same-sex controversy Defending and clarifying the Bible's message about homosexuality. Get your copy today from the bookstore at a omen.
Or and don't forget to search for other resources like debates and past dividing lines Dealing with this very provocative issue and remember theology matters.
I could have used a longer longer commercial there actually.
Let me see here. Yes. Let me let me read a few things here.
The D.
It is furthermore declared than adults the beginning of that justification must proceed from the predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ. That is from his vocation whereby without any merits on their part They are called that they whose sin had been cut off from God may be disposed through his quickening and helping grace.
To convert themselves their own justification by freely assenting to and cooperating with that grace. So while God touches the heart of man through the illumination of the Holy Ghost Man himself neither does absolutely nothing while receiving an inspiration since he can also reject it.
Nor yet is he able by his own free will and without the grace of God to move himself to justice in his Sight. Hence when it is said in the sacred writings turn ye to me and I will turn to you We were reminded of our Liberty and we said convert us O Lord to thee and we shall be converted.
We confess that we need the grace of God. Now that sounds pretty much like what we've been being told that there is this Necessity of this predisposing or prevenient grace. That is necessary. That has to be cooperated with.
That it can it is grace comes first. But then there has to be the human response. Grace is not enough in of itself. Of course what I was reading at that point. The very words that I read is chapter 5 of the sixth session on justification from the Council of Trent that's from the the Council of Trent and that is where you will find the language of prevenient grace and again, that was one of the major dividing lines between Rome and the Reformation and It remains one of the dividing lines To this day as well.
I challenge.
That.
Assertion that you will find in the teaching of Scripture in regards to the bringing about of the salvation of God's people that there is a kind of grace that tries but fails. That tries but fails. So, there you go.
We've got one phone call and then I'm going to Transition right into the last half hour. We're going to be Trying to finish up as much of the use of Ishmael. We need to get to Bashir Vania I heard from Bashir just this morning.
And so I'm in contact. Stuff coming together debates coming together. Like I said, not as many as folks folks down there would like me to be there for a long time debating every day just every day and I I'm just not capable of those things.
I've got about two weeks away before the wheels fall off. So we want to have good debates not just simply for the number, but obviously, we should have opportunity in the future to to revisit These things and if the Lord blesses this first trip, then there will be more to come in in the future.
But let's talk quickly to Peter. Hi Peter. Oh, yes, sir. To give a message this Friday about 20 minutes, but I was wondering if you'd give me some you know, what what? Well, not really fair to call the program to get sermon prep, but Obviously You know if 20 minutes isn't isn't a lot You you can barely touch upon things and me personally I'm unlike a lot of folks a lot of folks would give a very Philosophically oriented answer to that question.
I Especially when speaking in the church Think that the the sheep Respond best to the Word of God. So if I were to have 20 minutes Personally, I would take about six minutes and 20 seconds.
On.
Probably three key texts to be able to Trace the line through to Its conclusion and obviously what I would do as I did in the potter's freedom. I'd probably start off with Joseph and I would you know, you don't have time to be reading all of it, but you you summarize the story and The fact that that Joseph at the end of his life Certainly saw things with much more clear clarity than he did at the beginning and you go to Genesis chapter 50 and you go to his statement that in light of His brothers who are now cowering before him after the death of their father He says to them you meant this for evil, but God meant it for good and to save many lives to this day and so Joseph had come to understand that God's purpose is behind everything.
But he did not come to understand that his brothers were not accountable. He did not come to understand that their actions were automatic or robot ish Instead just as they had an intention in their actions.
That was evil God had an intention in their actions. That was good and You can then Trace that directly into Isaiah chapter 10. This might be a little bit difficult in six minutes because Vast majority of people do not have a historical background twice any of the prophets Isaiah I need the rest of them so it might not work so you might want to just divide into ten ten and go Genesis and acts but Isaiah chapter 10 God's utilization of the Assyrians as the literally the axe in his hand to bring judgment upon the people of Israel to fulfill the curses and Blessings of the book of Deuteronomy.
Then his turning around and judging the Assyrians based upon the intentions of the heart of the Assyrian leadership and again the clear example of This is my intention. This was man's intention. The two are compatible with one another and then you you want to The danger in having too much material and then rushing at the end as you get to the most important text and you have the least amount of time to actually deal with it.
And that would be the one we were just talking about in Acts chapter 4 and the just the the crushing clarity of The prayer of the early church that they recognized that in the greatest act of evil that man has ever Contemplated the murder of the sinless Son of God there has never been The the murder of an innocent person on this world until the crucifixion of Christ.
That in that incredible action you have the absolute Predestined hand of God to accomplish what his hand and his will his desire is Expressed in his boule his his will his plan is is clearly indicated there and so I Found most Christians, especially start talking about the cross you start talking about the crucifixion of Jesus they they listen very well at that point and So that to me anyways would would be a biblical way of approaching it and Letting the the word speak but for many others, they'd want to have a nice, you know maybe in only 20 minutes two points the philosophical points in regards to Compatibilism and so on and so forth, but that's just that's just me.
So those would be some of my suggestions. All right. Thank you. That helps a lot. Okay, good. Well, I hope it goes well, and you have a church to go to in a few weeks. Peter. Be careful, thank you, sir.
Yeah. Alright, I guess I can close the the phones there and Get back to Here at the end I want to try as best I can To finish off as much of the use of Ismail debate you may recall because I want to get to Bashir Vania.
Because I think I'm gonna be encountering Bashir just about as much as Yusuf. My concern is what I'm hearing is is that you know, I started hearing things toward the end there about other people coming down to South Africa in that later time period and doing more debates all the way into the weekend and I'm just like whoa folks folks folks There's there's there's just yeah, I As it is I'm going to be coveting everyone's prayers to Stay healthy through that.
That's That's the issue. So we'll have to have to plan some of those for the future, but you may recall at the last of the use of Ismail Debate what we heard was the presentation of the avatar Christology by William Lane Crick and we had Avatar of course being much more influenced by Hindu thought and Christian thought.
We had that presentation of the as a model and as I said, I would have rejected immediately The call by Bashir Vania to present a model from the created order that would parallel the unique nature of the incarnation of Christ because To even attempt to do so is to say it's not unique it is a self.
It'd be like saying give me a model from creation of Allah's immutability a Thinking Muslims going to go. Well, I can't because all of creation is mutable. Only a law is immutable and I'd go exactly. Bingo, there you go.
So why are you asking me for a model from creation for something that I say is absolutely unique? It's what I would have said that's what I will say if called upon to do so but Anyways, let's let's go back with the use of response to The section where Craig presented the avatar example.
Thank you for that. Dr. Craig and thank you for that Highlighting the movie Avatar. It's quite interesting that in Avatar Jake Scully basically has two bodies. Yet the belief in Christian theology that you have three persons manifest in one divine being in the case of Jake Scully.
He had his avatar body and he had his personal body and in the end now.
While I actually happen to agree with Yusuf's Criticism here. He just confused the categories. Because Craig did not use avatar in regards to the Trinity. He used avatar in regards to incarnation two different things.
I'm not talking about three persons sharing the one being of God or anything like that in regards to the. If you want to criticize Craig on that you got to go for his Kerberos stuff. Okay, the threaded dog stuff, but he didn't use that here.
So there's a there's a confusion of categories here.
When they ended up bearing the real body of Jake Scully when he gave it up. So that's not the same in terms of Christian theology. It's interesting that avatar according to James Cameron. He said he found his inspiration from Hinduism.
He found his inspiration from Hinduism. I find it quite remarkable Coming to the point of About Jesus making himself or making the claim that he was a divine son, but before I deal with that It's quite interesting to note that Dr. Craig has not given us a model yet in terms of which he can illustrate that.
It's basically Jesus has two particular models. He hasn't even answered two particular natures.
I think is what he meant to say there and again, like I just said. Nor will I nor should anyone attempt to do so because that is a you're asking us to contradict our own belief. You're asking us to contradict our own statement that this is an absolutely unique event.
That that this has never happened before and it will never happen again. And it is not something that happens in nature on a regular basis. They're not incarnations or anything else you're at. You're asking us to give an An illustration that would contradict our beliefs and we shouldn't be doing.
The question that when he died.
He believed in human faith in God's power to raise himself. Oh on the other hand did he face death with the infallible divine knowledge that he would be resurrected. Which was it because of the divine nature knew something that he did not.
Then we are back to two persons. Muslims would say that Jesus never committed blasphemy and I do not have to be Proved a skeptic that Jesus of the Quran is true. It's quite interesting that even though dr Craig has raised the issue of the 600 years later He says look, it's a bland type of Jesus that he presented, but he can find no particular exception.
The Jesus of the I'm not sure he means there find no particular exception. I mean, I certainly do find the Jesus of the Quran to be utterly unlike the Jesus of the New Testament. Utterly unlike the Jesus that is presented in the first century documents.
And again, the the I just point out that the one time that the Jesus the Quran speaks from identifiable locations from his cradle and That that is from an outside source. It shows the Quran depending upon Non-inspired sources for its its information.
The author of the Quran did not seem to realize.
The story that he had heard of Jesus speaking from a cradle is Half a millennium removed from the actual events of Jesus's life. There's no. Again, if if Allah is the author of the Quran.
Then.
Allah would know these things and would not make these kinds of errors. But if it is a man living in Saudi Arabia in the beginning of the well, obviously what's now Saudi Arabia? In the peninsula in the the beginning of the 7th century of this era.
Then it would be very easy to understand why a man living in that context would be confused about.
These particular issues the Bible on the other hand. The apologetic of dr. Craig and that offered by many Apologists is that the resurrection is presented as a solution to a particular problem. Now following what dr Craig said if Jesus made these particular radical claims That he was the Son of God in the divine sin such that CS Lewis would say that you would have to choose between Declaring him as a son of God or declaring him as a liar.
Now, you know, I I mentioned this it's not really directly relevant way just said but it is illustrative. Sunday morning in I Was speaking on John chapter 14. I'm actually I was trying to actually accelerate My Sunday school lessons and I again only got through one verse.
It's just it's a reformed Baptist curse it really is but I Was struck and and I am going to incorporate this in the future into all my debates on the Claim. That I would imagine use of Ismael and both use of Ismael and Bashir Vania would probably make I don't know.
It would be a very interesting topic to debate at some point but Whether Muhammad is prophesied in the Bible, of course, they have to believe that but there are different understandings of how that works out and John chapter 14 is one of the key texts and.
Think Yusuf takes a little bit different viewpoint here. But in listening more recently to Bashir Vania Quotes a lot from the Gospel of John and and never says well, you know, we know that this isn't really what originally said he quotes from it a lot in John 14 26 the very text that is cited as foundation for Muhammad being in the New Testament because the the parakletos of John 14 26 the paraclete the helper is supposed to be Muhammad.
But the helper the Holy Spirit whom the father will send in my name He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. And all of a sudden it struck me whom the father will send in My name.
Now, how could him how can a Muslim understand that? Because see what what? Caught my attention was what he was just saying right now in regards to Jesus as the Son of God. Well, listen what Jesus says here the Holy Spirit now if if that if the if the parakletos is Muhammad.
Then he was sent by Allah in the name of Jesus. Allah acts in the name of a human prophet. It's a given thing in Islamic theology that Allah sends the prophets. He doesn't do it in the name of somebody else.
Allah does not act in anyone's name, but his own for crying out loud. I mean think about the level of blasphemy. That would be involved in John 14 26 if we didn't already recognize who Jesus is. If Jesus is just a virgin-born miracle-working prophet, but he's just a prophet.
This these words are blasphemous. But the parakletos the Holy Spirit whom the father will send in my name He will teach you all things and bring your remembrance all that I said to you. Which of course is not what Muhammad did by the way for the disciples or anybody else so that doesn't doesn't fit there either, but as I'd mentioned that because it it struck me as As I was teaching through that text.
Jesus made those blasphemous claims and following that Jesus was crucified as a blasphemer. And so it stands to reason that without assuming the Resurrection all we have until we experience the resurrection or proofs of the resurrection is that Jesus died as a blasphemer.
Because dr. Craig admits it he can't come now and say well look. He never made these blasphemous claims because then you'll be going against what Galatians 3 13 states that Jesus Died as a curse. So in other words if he died as a blasphemer Then there would be no reason for the disciples of Jesus to believe him at that particular point He was crucified for blasphemy the only okay.
Let's let's identify the category error that use of a smell is is committing here because it's pretty blatant.
Utilization of Galatians chapter 3 and Jesus dying as a curse is Derived from the method of execution he who hangs upon a tree is cursed. So the idea is Curses everyone who's not who's not do all the things are written in law.
We've all done that. Therefore how can that curse be taken except that it be transferred to someone else who did everything law? And that's what Jesus did and so he bears that curse in our place. That's different than Jesus dying as a blasphemer.
The blasphemy According to John chapter 19 as the Jews says he called himself the Son of God and for this he must die. They recognize that to claim to be the Son of God unlike Ahmad D dot and God has sons by the tons.
It is very clear to any honest reading of the New Testament that the type of sonship The unique sonship that Jesus claims for himself, which is not physical Despite the ignorance of the author of the Quran on this matter who clearly thought that it was.
It is not a physical relationship it is an eternal relationship and it communicated the Jews the fact that the one who makes this claim was claiming to be divine and so That's a completely different category the Jews accused Jesus of Blasphemy John chapter 10.
I mean all through it By claiming because he claimed to be the Son of God. All right, that is not why Jesus died. The Jews were wrong in The accusation of blasphemy against Jesus because Jesus was who he claimed to be.
That is not relevant to the fact that Jesus Voluntarily takes the curse and is hung upon the tree in behalf of his people because that's the purpose for which he came. I mean that would be like saying well the intentions and beliefs of the people who crucified Jesus Determines the categories of what he can accomplish upon the cross.
So if the Romans have one idea and the Jews have another we have to limit it to what the Romans and Jews would have Understood and obviously the Romans and Jews had completely different understandings of why Jesus was being crucified.
Anyways, that Wouldn't make a lick of sense. So there's a category error here and he's mixing The two different areas. Why should the disciples believe in Jesus? Because he was who he claimed to be as He's going to prove to John put here put forth your finger, you know, see see and believe and Thomas's It's in the book of John, but spoken to Thomas and Thomas's response to that is Hakodi a smooch.
I hath a a smooth my Lord to my God. Jesus accepts that worship and commends that worship as an act of faith in John chapter 20 same chapter where he has differentiated himself from the father. I would point out which again is why we believe in the doctrine of the Trinity and are not modalists or one this advocates.
Very very important. Keep in mind. Only reason they could turn around is that Jesus apparently reappeared from the dead. So from where I stand in it seems that I would be in the same position as the disciples of Jesus.
Unless he reappears to me. I would have every particular reason to think that he's a blasphemer. But I don't think so because the Quran of course testifies that he's true. I believe in Quran and I believe in Jesus.
But if I put away the Quran and I turn to the Bible I would come to the crucifixion. Which would prove to me that Jesus was a false pretender.
No, it would prove to you that the that the very same same thing ironically. That would be the accusation of the Quran the Jews unjustly condemned Jesus. It would not it would not prove the accusation of blasphemy.
Because he's failed to make the connection between the Galatians passage again the category error that I was just talking about.
Unless we have good reasons for thinking that Jesus would want to resurrect from the dead or God would want to raise Jesus from the dead.
Are they I mean aside from his having prophesied that a number of times during his life. And if you believe his true prophet, and he prophesied these things then if he doesn't rise so dead. Then he's a false prophet and so which is it?
You have to throw out.
Prophecies and Jesus's own words of his death barrel and resurrection like in the Jonah prophecy and so on so forth. You have to throw that out to save the Quran.
But there.
Because if you accept Jesus as a prophet then his prophecies must come true. He prophesied his own death barrel resurrection, but the Quran says it didn't die therefore couldn't be resurrected. And so you really have a contradiction, but it's only it's only created by following a document that comes 600 years later.
And is not connected to the life of Jesus any good reasons for thinking that God would want to raise Jesus from the dead. Firstly why would God want to raise a blasphemer from the dead. Because it wasn't a blasphemer He was truly the Son of God.
And in order to maintain that God raised him from the dead You can only assume it. You cannot prove it. Well prove it on what basis.
Can you prove that the moon split over the mountain according to the Quran? Can you prove? that Muhammad rode a winged donkey To Jerusalem and then and then Goes up to heaven and visits all the seven levels of heaven.
Can you prove that I? Mean there's all sorts of stories, and if we want to expand out to the Hadith. There's all sorts of stories. Can you prove that? Let's talk about standards of proof here.
I'm saying a secular bit of reasoning. We can only know that Jesus was true If God were to raise him from the dead and God can only raise him from the dead. If you were true. Would you dr. Craig would say that he died as a blasphemer saying that case?
Why would God want to raise him from the dead?
Because those who condemned him were unjust and unrighteous and he wasn't a blasphemer.
In order to vindicate the claims of a blasphemer that would be theologically impossible according to all kinds of Christian theology. Regarding the parable of the wicked tenants, which dr. Craig had referred to it's interesting to note that in this parable.
When you analyze the particular story you will notice how foolish was the behavior of the owner of the vineyard. He sent his servants one after another and knowing that they were beaten and killed nevertheless.
He sent his beloved son to the same danger.
Yeah, well. It's it's parable my friend. It's it's not. Parables are are not meant to be made to walk on all fours the the whole point of The parable and it's interesting. In a debate I listened to Yesterday Involving Bashir Vania One of the statements that was made is there was there was no Reference in Jesus parables to his sacrificial death and someone brought this one up.
Because clearly the son that is sent by the father is Jesus. The point of this parable is.
That the.
The unrighteous Servants are the Jews. The vineyard is Israel and. So it's it's similar to Matthew chapter 23 in the condemnation of the Jewish leaders. And so God has sent prophets. They've mistreated the prophets.
So then he sends his son. So the point is the identification of who Jesus is and who's responsible For rejecting his ministry. That's that's what it's about. That to try to make it about anything else is to miss the point.
He did nothing until his son is definitely killed. He's also ignorant of the future because in this parable he maybe maybe assumes that the wicked servants will respect his son. So can one now compare that foolish man to God, but that is what the entire story does.
That's why it's admitted in the Pelican New Testament commentaries of St. Mark page 309 that it is unlikely that Jesus told this particular parable.
Secondly now, I love that the Pelican New Testament commentaries, let's let's pick and choose. So let's let's grab ourselves a nice liberal commentary and Again, if you were to be consistent, then you go to the text of the Quran you find you know, you get a nice liberal commentator who likes the earlier surahs and Will say well, it's obviously unlikely that surah 9 was actually Again, I mean this is this would be so this is so easy liberal theology is Simplistic it's easy to do.
You don't have to harmonize anything. All you got to do see see what liberal theology does is it takes a 10 ,000 piece jigsaw puzzle and Says I'm only going to put together sections of 10 pieces at a time and I'm never gonna put them all together at once.
Well, that's pretty easy to do That that's not difficult to do so you just you just break it all apart into pieces and Go well Here I'll show you how it's done. You know, I think Muhammad Well sort of looked like a 21st century liberal Which is what everyone's always done with the historical.
Jesus is Often been said that everyone who engages in the historical Jesus stuff. It's shocking that the Jesus they end up with looks strangely like.
Them.
Which is quite true when you when you boil it all down. But so I'm going to I want to present a Muhammad who is so very Attractive to the modern intellectual age, and so I'm gonna I'm gonna emphasize His his sufferings and his kindness and his openness in in the earlier surahs of the Quran obviously, I mean earlier in the sense of Chronologically speaking.
I'm not talking about in surah 2 or surah, especially surah 4 or 5 or 6 and like I'm talking about the earlier Meccan surahs and The earliest of the Medinan surahs, which would include surah al-baqarah.
But anyways So I'm gonna present I'm gonna put this together and here's what Muhammad was like and and Muhammad was just he was just concerned About you know, he was a social reformer. He was concerned about the stratification of The rich people and the poor people in in Mecca and so I'm gonna create this view of Muhammad.
All right.
Then on the basis of that then I'm gonna go to the Quran and I'm gonna run into some of those Nasty surahs and surah 3 and surah 9 and you know this stuff about jihad and this stuff about striking at the necks and and Clearly Clearly that's not Muhammad.
That came later that came once that you know. Just as in the in the Jesus movement. Jesus was one thing and then this this hard-nosed Ecclesiastical organization developed over the centuries and and just completely hijacked the message of Jesus and and so all that.
Stuff about a divine Jesus comes from from other people. Later on well clearly. Then surah 9 isn't from Muhammad that that comes from the time after Muhammad when you've got his successors and and now you've got military stuff going on and and so it's necessary to follow the Successors of the Prophet and so we have to present this militaristic perspective and and oh clearly I mean, it's just obvious.
And you know all I do is put it into some liberal commentary some some journal someplace and then you can quote it and go see. There there you go so again, I I just I continue what may be a fruitless quest.
Looking for the first Muslim who will actually provide a consistently Islamic criticism of my faith because I've never met one I Know one who has tried. I Know a couple others who have at least made an effort that direction a little.
But I've never met one that succeeded. Never one that succeeded because when you start hearing people quoting from our liberals Without applying their worldview to the Islamic worldview and hence saying now, of course, I I Recognize if I'm gonna make this kind of criticism that that I need to let my Muslim friends know that I I no longer believe.
That the moon was split and I don't I don't believe in the mirage. I don't believe in in in going up to heaven and I don't believe in I don't believe in any of that stuff. I Can't if I'm gonna be consistent I've not heard that happen.
Now are there are there liberal Muslims out there someplace? That's you know. Probably take those perspectives maybe but they don't tend to do debates either and If they did they probably debating a lot of the same Muslims that I'm actually debating And in fact, they probably are agreeing but those people are not actually Muslims would probably how that would work, but Anyways, I just I just point that out.
If you look at Jesus mentioned clearly being the heir of the vineyard That's the thoughts and the very words of the tenant not the owner. God and therefore dr Beliefs are basically actually accurately measuring their beliefs not God's word.
Because that besides that a man can send his son because he expecting that The tenants will respect him but not necessarily that he is his only son. And exactly what the owner did not mention. But he did not say my only son.
Regarding the issue about the. That dr. Craig raised about the facts pertain to the Jesus being close to God. It's interesting to know that in Islam a believer is higher than angels and a non-believer is lower than animals simply because Angels have no desire pushing them to sin.
I need to convey nature to always be obedient and so an obedient human is better than the angels. At the same time animals have No intellect to utilize like humans. So it's normal to be uncontrollable on their particular desires.
I see no particular problem in respect of that. Dr. Craig made mentioned quite significantly of the resurrection. It's interesting to note that you can point out no less than 41 contradictions in the resurrection accounts alone.
And again, I Know exactly what he's referring to here, of course and We are going to be I'm going to be spending a fair amount of time Working through the resurrection accounts at PR BC. If you find this program to be useful, you might want to sort of keep an eye on the Phoenix Perform Baptist Church website in regards to the sermon audio page.
Because we're gonna be getting back into as soon as I can the Crucifixion narratives. Well first the obviously the betrayals like that, but in the synoptic study that I'm doing No one is going to suggest.
The harmonization of Matthew Mark and Luke or John for that matter is an easy thing. But I would point out to you that I Find this type of argumentation again aside from the inconsistency of.
A.
Supernaturalist using naturalistic argumentation leaving that aside. I think we've we've established that rather rather clearly. I find it rather.
Disingenuous and.
To be somewhat of a less than compelling argument When Muslims who have from their perspective a Document that has one author Written over a very brief period of time in a very narrow geographical location That is just over half the length of our New Testament and hence is only.
What about Things I want. I'm gonna figure out the exact number. I'm gonna get the exact number. I wanted to do it earlier today, and I forgot. I Think I'm gonna guess but the Quran is between an eighth and a tenth.
Though.
I'm gonna say it's somewhere between actually a sixth and an eighth of The length of the Bible it may be actually. Smaller than that I'm gonna. I'm gonna get the numbers out, and I'm gonna I'm gonna run them.
To figure this out you're talking about a much smaller document. It's. It's comparing apples and oranges. To deal with a much younger smaller single author document Than it is to deal with for example the Gospels of Jesus Christ that tell his story from four different perspectives.
Now you still have to deal with other issues that that I will raise to Yusuf Ismail should it come up in regards to the parallels in the Quran that contradict each other.
There's still a major difference in comparing these documents that I really think we need to look take a closer look at and I don't think that my my Muslim friends are overly fair in Trying to make that to comparison, but we will pick up at that very point.
Next time around here on the dividing line. Thanks for listening. Like I said my intention is to try to Do at least half an hour at the end of each program lengthen them out until we can get all these done because as I've told The folks in South Africa. I'm doing it.
So I want them to listen make them better debates. Support us look at that the link and helping us to get to South Africa if you would. We'll see you next time on the dividing line.
The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries.
If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -4602 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 omin 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.
Join us again this Thursday afternoon at 4 p .m. For the dividing line.
I'm.