Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at KARM.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick live. Francis taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Everybody, welcome to the show.

Today is, let's see, July 7th, 2023. If you want to give me a call, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. We have nobody waiting right now, and I'm interested in talking to you. We have people on Discord. We have people in Clubhouse. We have people in Rumble. We have people on Facebook.

We have people on all kind of people places watching us. And all right, so I'm going to I'm going to offer a cryptic kind of a prayer request for somebody, and it has to be very cryptic on purpose. And the Lord knows who, what, when, where. But because of this person's safety in an African country, I can't give hardly any details. I can say that he is a missionary for the Lord Jesus Christ and that he has been working for the Lord and disseminating information as, you know, as we ought to do. And he was arrested for it in this African country. And long story short, they are trying to maybe get him executed and probably won't happen like that, go that to that height. But let's just say that the bad guys in this African country don't want him to disseminate Christian information. So he had been beaten while he was incarcerated and stuff, so we're going to call him, it's not his real name, we'll call him Moto, and if you would lift him up in prayer, that would be great. I've been praying for him.

So we would just ask that you would do that. We've had to help him out with a little bit of legal fees and stuff because he's had to hire a lawyer. The charges against him, of course, are false, but let's just say the corrupt system and religious people around him of a different persuasion don't want him talking. And so if you would remember Moto for his deliverance, for his lawyer to have insight and for the courts to be favorable, even though the courts are stacked against him, we'll see what happens.

There are laws, so we'll see if those laws are going to take effect and stuff like that. So just giving you guys a heads up, I've been threatened with death, we've had the FBI involved and stuff, I've been swatted, but that is what I've been through is basically nothing. That is what I've been through is basically nothing compared to what he's been through. So, you know, we can talk about persecution as Christians, we can talk about it, but he's living it. And he told me recently that he's prepared to die for our Lord, that he's willing to die and he'll go be with the Lord.

He's not worried about that. Man, so there you go. How about that for a nice Friday, 7-7-23. If you want to give me a call 877-207-2276, I want to hear from you. We don't have anybody waiting. So what I'm going to do is get on to the emails.

We have, we don't have any, don't have any, oh, I'm getting depressed. Don't have any hate mail. I like hate mail, you know, I really like it when people email me stuff, vitriolic stuff, invectives, you know, and name, per se, I like it.

And then I get to read it over the air to me is a lot of fun. So, uh, anyway, we were out of hate mail. Uh, but we do have some questions. Let's see. Um, I already got to that one. Uh, I already got to that one. Let's see. Let's see, uh, okay. The scriptures, uh, written after second Timothy, three 16, all scriptures are God breathes included the all scriptures that were written after second Timothy, since God is outside of time, right?

Okay. First of all, the phrase God is outside of time. I don't use that phrase. Uh, and the reason I don't is because we don't know what it means to be outside of time. Uh, it's functionally just a meaningless statement. I, you know, I just say that God relates to time differently than we do, and that's, that's good enough, but to say outside of time, like it's like, we know what outside of time is and that's where God is really.

What's that like? Oh, I don't know. So I recommend people don't use that phrase. That's all. Anyway, I have a friend who thinks it may only apply to what was only written before second Timothy, three 16.

No, it doesn't. Uh, let's see, where is, uh, there we go. When you go to second Peter three 16, it says, uh, Peter's writing and he says, I thought referring to Paul and his letter, speaking in them of these things of which are some things hard to understand, which that untaught and unstable distort as they do the rest of the scriptures to their own destruction. So, um, Paul wrote to Timothy and Paul and Peter both died within a couple, two, three, four years of each other. So, uh, I don't know if he was written after Paul and probably some debate about that, but, uh, the, all scripture is inspired and, um, so Peter recognized what Paul wrote as being scripture.

So we can say that it's scripture and the church recognizes that it's scripture. All right, all right, all right. Let's see, get back over here. Got a couple of calls coming in.

If you want to call me eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six. Why don't we just jump right on there and get to Dave who is gone from North Carolina and we'll get to whoever that is next as soon as they get some information on there. At least I can do another, another, uh, okay. Mm hmm. Okay.

Mm hmm. Okay. Interesting. Hmm. Okay. That's interesting.

So, uh, okay. I've enjoyed a lot of your content for about a decade or more, including your debates with atheists. I also encounter many atheists and a challenge by some answers.

Answer to the problem. Virgin Russell once posed when he said he didn't believe Christianity was true, nor that Jesus was a prophet because he was wrong about his prophesied soon or at hand or his generation return, Jesus failed to fulfill this promise. After looking at some of your answers regarding eschatology, I'm still left with the same questions unanswered. Uh, many instances of soon at hand about to occur. Yeah, the thing is that the Jewish mind, uh, was different, uh, the way they thought they would often say soon this will happen when it, when it wouldn't be, uh, from our perspective. Uh, so that's all it is, is, uh, the idea soon, and these things will happen and.

And stuff. There are plenty of answers about this. Uh, Virgin Russell didn't really study very hard that issue.

I'm sure. Anyway, it says, when I discussed with Christians, I hear that say the apostles are confused about this and that Jesus didn't actually mean this generation when he said this generation. Well, you see, now we have this issue of Matthew 24, Luke 17, this generation will not pass away. You know, Matthew 25, things like this. Um, which generation is he talking about? Because often eschatology deals with the present that was said as well as the future and showing that the beginning of his Christ ministry and the ending of my Christ ministry related to earth are going to have related parallel events. So the term, this generation can often be used for both of those at the same time.

And this is not uncommon at all. If you go to Romans 5, 15 through 19, you'll see how the phrase, the many and the all are used of two different groups, and it's just how the Jews did their work and they thought it's not that big a deal, okay. He says, I've explored this. I think by now I've heard all the excuses Christians make for why this doesn't make this generation. Uh, so recall many, okay.

What is the solution? What do I say to the atheist if he did fulfill, I just give it a solution. So, uh, so there you go. Okay.

Uh, he was born in Boise, but haven't lived there since he was 12. Okay. All right.

Hey, I have an idea. Want to get on the, uh, on the phones here. Let's get to JD from North Carolina. Welcome. You're on the air. You there? JD.

JD. I'm not hearing you. Let's try it again.

Heard just a little click of a noise there. I'm waiting JD we'll try it a little bit more and then we'll, uh, put them on hold and maybe they can work on a connection problem or issue on hold. Let's get to another, uh, okay. I've been trying to call the can't, uh, question. If you have not the spirit of God, none, you're none of his, we explain this in detail, you see, you need to give me the verse and because he didn't give me where it's located exactly, you'll just skip it. If you have a question about a verse and you paraphrase it, sometimes people will paraphrase a verse and I might know what they mean.

Uh, and then I've done this before, right? Oh, you're talking about this verse. They say, no, not about that one, this one. And so I learned over the years that if they don't give me a verse to look up, do I know exactly what they're saying? I just move on.

And so I tell people, give me the exact verse because that's what I need. Let's try JD again. JD, are you there? Yeah. Mac, you hear me? Yes, I do.

Now I hear you, bud. Oh, okay. This is what I want to ask you.

Uh, is the American church ready for the persecution that they're given over there in that country? That you just got through talking about? And I hang out with the church and I hang out with the church and I hang out and let you, uh, explain a little bit about that and say something about it. Okay. Yeah. If you want. Sure.

The answer is no. I just want to hang up and hear you. Okay. All right. Talk about it for me.

I can hear you better on the radio. All right. Sounds good, brother. All right. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate your call.

No problem. Is the American church ready for persecution? I would say no, uh, because the American church is full of liberals, wackos, uh, full of people who don't take the word of God seriously, who are more concerned with their own egos, their own bank accounts, their own healings than they are the promotion of the gospel of Jesus Christ there too many churches are woke. Too many churches are listening to apostate music groups, uh, like Hillsong. Uh, they are compromising the word of God for convenience.

It's happening all over America. Now there are a lot of good churches in America. America, on the other hand, uh, there are a lot of good churches, a lot of good pastors out there, but overall the Christian church is not doing its job.

And we can see that because you know, the alphabet mob that's, uh, loose, running loose, you know, the LGBTQ alphabet mob, and they're getting control of, of stuff and, uh, the wizard church doing, you know, we had this trans idiocy going on as drag crud going on, you know, just ridiculous idiocy. And so if the Christian church was really doing what it needed to be doing, it'd be going out there and, and protesting and saying no. And, but do you hear Christians doing this?

Well, infrequently, you know, you do a little bit, but not very much. And that's just the issue. We need to have a concerted effort of the whole of Christianity in America saying, no, we've had enough of this that needs to happen. So because of it, I believe that the Christian church is rather weak. And, uh, it's my opinion that the rather weak, uh, and I don't know. I don't, I don't believe that it's ready for persecution and I don't know if I'm ready for persecution. I don't, um, I don't know. I just don't think, uh, I mean, well, how would I do?

I, you don't never know. So, but I'd hope I would do okay under persecution. Of course I have been persecuted too.

I really have, but Hey, we're talking about the church as a whole. All right. Let's see. Let's get to Joseph in Louisiana. Hey, Joseph.

Welcome. You're on the air. Hey, that's what he says. Yeah.

And I'm going to ask you a question. Whoops. Hey, we got a break. Hold on, man.

We've got a break. We'll be right back. Okay. Sorry about that. Just the way the timing went.

Didn't know that was right here. All right. Hey folks, we'll be right back after these messages.

We have four open lines. If you want to give me a call 877-207-2276, we'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everybody. Welcome back to the show. Four open lines, 877-207-2276. All right, Bob. Back on the air.

What have you got, man? Yes, brother. I'm looking at Acts chapter two, verse 34. Acts two or Luke two? Acts chapter two.

Acts two what? 34. Okay.

For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says, the Lord said to my Lord, said, my right hand. Yeah. Until what?

To make all your enemies a footstool for your feet. Yeah. Yeah. And the next verse says, therefore, let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has done something right. Yeah. May Jesus both Lord and Christ.

Uh huh. So that means Jesus is God, doesn't it? It means that, uh, God made Jesus both Lord and Christ. It doesn't mean he's not God. When we say Lord here, we're talking about the Lordship of Jesus Christ and that Christ means he's the anointed one, the Messiah.

And this is because he's made under the law and is sent by the father. John 6, 37 through 40, furthermore, what David's doing or what, uh, acts, uh, two 34 is doing is quoting Psalm one 10, where it says, Yahweh said, said to my Yahweh, because that's what's going on. Well, not really Yahweh, but the second one, uh, it's actually, uh, Adonai. So Yahweh said to my Lord, and it's the replacement word for Yahweh, said in my right hand. So nothing in there, uh, denounces the deity of Christ.

Okay. What of Christ? Deity.

I don't understand that at all. It looks like the prophet. The deity means, uh, the divine quality. Okay.

Does anybody else have the divine quality? Yeah. The father said, Holy spirit, all have it. Uh huh. Did David have it?

No. He's not God. How did David, how did David prophesy? By the power of the Holy spirit. And the Holy spirit of God, right? Uh, yeah. The third person of the Trinity. Yep.

Uh huh. I hadn't found that verse yet, but I heard you say it. What verse? What verse?

The verse that says the third person of the Trinity. Can you find me a verse that says Jesus is, uh, is not a God? No. Can you find me a verse that says Jesus is just a prophet? No. Can you find me a verse that says the Bible is true?

No. There are lots of things that the Bible doesn't say explicitly that we know are the case. And then what you'll do and what others will do is say, well, the Bible doesn't say he's a third person of the Trinity as though that statement has to be there. And it just demonstrates your ignorance, your continual, willful ignorance about this issue of the Trinity.

You should be ashamed of yourself. If there was a Trinity, I would be ashamed of myself. There is a Trinity and the reason you're not ashamed of yourself because you are the spirit of the antichrist and you're deceived. How, how can that be if God made Jesus Lord and Christ?

Because he's Lord under the law, he's Christ under the law, and he's Lord under the law, he's Christ in fulfillment of the directive of God, the father. It's perfectly consistent with Trinitarian theology. Here's a problem I have with the Unitarians like yourself. You so rarely study our position. You see verses in the Bible you think prove your point.

You ignore the rest of them. For example, John 1, 1 and verse 14, in the beginning was the word, the word was with God, the word was God, the word became flesh. So if the word was God and the word became flesh, then God became flesh.

That's how that works. If A equals B and B equals C, then A equals C. It's called the law of proper inference. So if A equals B and B equals C, then A equals C. If the word was God and the word became flesh, then God became flesh.

It's called the law of proper inference. Now, what do you do with what the word of God actually says regarding the word, which was God becoming flesh, and we beheld his glory, glory to the only begotten, full of grace, what do you do with that? What Jesus is the glory of, and he is the only begotten son of God. Is the word, it says the word was God, do you agree that the word was God? I don't know what the word is. The word can be a word, it can be a phrase, or it can be a... It says, in the beginning was the word, the word was with God, and the word was God. Do you agree that the word was God? I don't know what the word is, so I can't...

It doesn't matter right there. John doesn't explain it. Can you show me a verse in the Bible that explains what the word word means in John 1-1? Hey, you are the one who says, you don't have a verse for the third person of the Trinity.

Well, I can use the same logic against you. Show me a verse that explains what the word word is. And if you can't find it, then we have to just stick with what it says. The word was God. Whatever the word was, whatever it is, it was God. Would you agree that the word was God?

If I thought that was possible, I would have to. The Bible says the word was God. Do you agree that whatever the word was, here in the context of what John the Apostle was writing, whatever he was saying, that the word was God is true. Do you agree that the word was God? So I don't understand what the word was that you think, but I... You're not listening.

You're not thinking. Could you do me a favor? Take your right hand and put it in front of your face, vertically.

Could you do that? Yeah, I see my right hand in front of my face. Now look to your left. Now look to your left. Okay. Okay. Look to your left.

Look to your right side of the head. Okay. Have I got your attention? I want you to listen. Here I go. Yeah.

I want you to listen. This is simple. Whatever the word is according to Scripture, whatever it is, it says the word was God. Whatever the word means, that's what it says.

Do you agree that it says the word was God? Okay, you're a heretic. We're going to move on. Okay. So let's get to Kevin from New York. Hey, Kevin.

Welcome. You're on the air. Chilling home, brother. Man, how you doing? Doing all right. Just, you know, I'm like a pile of something that's attracting flies.

I just insulted myself. So man, I'm telling you, they come out of the woodwork. All right, big man, what do you got? Yeah. So I reached out on Clubhouse to you a few weeks ago to ask you if you'd be willing to talk about compatibilism.

Is that questions about it? You said, sure. And I responded back with what time you never got back to my message.

So I had to call your show now. So I wanted to talk to you or ask you about compatibilism. And if you believe it is biblical, can you demonstrate or show me spots in the Bible where you believe it's showing compatibilism?

Because at this moment, I reject Reformed theology. Okay. So let's define what compatibilism is. Let me tell you. You tell me what you think it is. I know what it is. Okay. I'm just going to see what you think. Okay.

Receive from the same track. Go ahead. Okay. So I've talked to at least eight, nine different Calvinists and they all give me a slightly different definition. Okay. Of what all of them would say, I think it's that God has determined all things that come to pass, but humans somehow still have a creaturely free will.

Compatibilism means that human free will and God's sovereignty are compatible with each other. Okay. Okay. Oh, we had a break. Hold on. Can you hold on, Kevin? Okay.

Are you there? Okay. Hold on.

Okay. Hey, folks. We're at the bottom of the hour, if you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276, we'll be right back. Please stay tuned. Here's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone. Welcome back to the show. Hey, Kevin.

Are you still there? Yes, sir. All right. So just so you know, I've been defending Calvinism for over 30 years and I have a Master's of Divinity from a Calvinist seminary. And during a break, just to help out, I went to Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology.

He's Reformed. Compatibilism holds that absolute divine sovereignty is compatible with human significance and real human choices. Would you agree? Okay. That's compatibilism. Good enough?

Really? Well, I don't agree with it. I just want you to explain it to me so I can investigate it for myself. I want you to give me scriptural evidence of it.

Oh, I will. I will prove it to you. But I mean, that's what the definition is, that God's sovereignty and human free will are compatible. That's what compatibilism is. Okay?

That's what I'm saying. What's his definition of sovereignty? Well, that's just, yes, that's a good question. Sovereignty is the right and the ability of God to do as he pleases, whatever he wants, whenever he wants in creation.

Okay? Well, okay. But I disagree with that definition because to be a sovereign just means to be a ruler or a king. It doesn't mean to be a divine dictator that chooses whatever comes to pass.

Oh. Well, I don't know about you, but I believe God works everything after the counsel of his will. That's what I believe. Yeah, I reject determinism. I know Romans 8 says that all things work together for the good of those who love God. So he does work things together for the good of those who love him, but he doesn't dictate or determine all things. Yeah, I just was quoting to you Ephesians 1-11, he works all things after the counsel of his will. You just rejected it.

You just rejected God's word. What is that? The ESV?

I don't know if that's the best translation of that verse. It's the NASB. NASB. Yeah. Okay.

I tricked you is what I did. See? Also we have obtained an inheritance having been predestined according to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will. Do you agree that God works all things after the counsel of his will? Yes.

Works them together. That doesn't mean he's determined them. So I didn't say he did. He just says he works all things after the counsel of his will. Does all things include human free will choices?

Yeah, but I would say that the choices weren't determined. So hold on, hold on, hold on. You have a lot of misinformation. I can tell you're hostile to the idea. I'm going to prove to you that they're compatible. I'll show you from scripture.

But I want you to see. If I come off as hostile, I apologize. It's just I've been mistreated by Calvinists lately a lot. Well, you know, I could see why. A lot of Calvinists have their heads in the wrong place.

You know? I'm not angry with you. I'm just trying to just help you out. Okay? I don't care if you're a Calvinist or not.

I want to know if you're a Calvinist. I don't. I'm sorry if I'm bringing that to you. I don't mean to. But you know, you try to have a conversation with some of these people because I have a YouTube channel and they strawman what I believe and then they slap labels on me and they don't listen. And I get frustrated about it, you know? I wonder what that's like.

I wouldn't know about that one. Well, I can come on your YouTube channel sometime. We can talk, all right? Not a big deal.

All right? So when it says all things, he works all things after the counsel of his will, that logic would say, well, yeah, of course, that includes our free will choices. So let me ask you, let's define what free will is, okay? Would you agree that free will is the ability to make choices that are not forced on you? You freely make them not forced and they're consistent with your nature. The reason I say that consistent with your nature part is because God can't lie.

He can't not be God. He can only do things consistent with his nature and yet he's free. So free will is based on what God is, not what we are. Okay.

I say free will is the ability to make choices consistent with your nature that are not forced on you. Okay? Is that good enough? I'm not sure if I fully agree with that because we see even the lost sinners sometimes doing things that aren't, you know, wouldn't be considered sinful. Like, you know, the Bible says that even the sinner gives good gifts to their children. Yeah. Matthew 7, 7 through 14. Yeah. And that's a, it's a relative statement because, you know, we also go with Romans 3, 10, 11, 12.

No one seeks for God. And so there's different levels of talk about what's going on. So I'm just saying that free will is just what it is, you know, the ability to make a choice. You want to make a choice. No, it's forcing and you can do it. Right? That's what free will is.

Right? Would you agree? No, I agree. But I think where it breaks down is, did God determine the choices that you'd make with your free will or did you actually come up with those choices yourself? Both. But let me, uh, let me work with you. Okay. Now would you tell me, let me ask you, did Jesus have free will? I don't know because he says that he didn't come to do his own will, but the will of the father. So I'm assuming he did have his own will, but he put the will of the father first. Okay.

So he chose, he freely chose to put the will of the father first, right? I would say so. Yes.

Okay. So he chose to choose to do what the father did and had him do, right? I think so. Yeah. I mean, it would be hard for me to not see Jesus wanting to do that because, you know, they're the same God. I mean, different persons, but you know, it's the same God. Yeah. And did not the father send the son from the foundation of the world, of the universe? Right?

Sorry, you cut out a little bit, can you repeat that? Did the father ordain that the son would, did the father send the son to do what he had to do? Right? Oh yeah, absolutely. I believe that the crucifixion of Christ was, you know, now I won't, I don't say God determined all things, but we do see from scripture that God did determine that Christ would be the sacrifice for sin. Okay. Well, so God, the father ordained what Jesus would do from the foundation of the world, right? Yeah, I agree.

Absolutely. And Jesus had free will, as you admitted, so now, now what you just admitted is compatibilism. There you go, done. Yeah, but Matt, we're talking about God and we're not talking about humans, we're talking about God. Oh, Jesus is not human?

Is that what you're saying? Oh, come on, don't pull that on me, Matt. No, no, of course he was. Hold on a sec. Don't think that he's a God man. Hold on a sec. Yeah, he's not.

Hold on. Jesus defined people as a standard of righteousness and truth. He used God as that standard of righteousness, which is why when I defined free will, I went to what God was. Jesus is man. Two distinct natures, God and man, hypostatic union.

So we know that he has, as a human being, we know with the human nature, he has to have a will. Are you familiar with diethylitism? Diethylitism?

I've never heard of that term. Diethylitism means that each nature of Christ had its own will. The leo from the Greek will, die meaning two, two wills, but they're manifested in the one person as one will, which is why Jesus says, I am thirsty, I'll be with you always, claiming the attributes of both natures.

This deals with the hypostatic union, the communicatio idiomatum, and diethylitism. So Jesus is human, and he has the attributes of humanity, so you can't dismiss him. So if you're to say, well, I'm going to exclude Jesus, I got you. I'm saying that it's not a state of comparison. Yes it is. He's human. Yes, but he is also God, we are not. That's correct.

And he's also human. So he has human nature, and he has, let me put it this way, would you say that the second person of the trinity, the pre-incarnate Christ, the word, has free will? Well, yeah. Yes, right. And did not the second person of the trinity come to do the will of the Father? Yes.

Right? So that means then, from all eternity, God the Father ordained what the word would do in all areas. And he has free will. There, again, that's another proof that compatibilism is true right in scripture. Well, and it also said that Jesus became subservient to the Father. In other words, he freely chose to come and take the part of the servant. There you go.

There you go. He freely chose to do the will of the Father from all eternity that was ordained by the Father. And so Jesus, as the God-man, completely did the will of the Father, not his own, because he freely chose to do that, which means from all eternity, that's what was ordained for the free will of Christ to obtain. So there you go, it's compatibilism again.

Your rebellion against, look, you're rebelling against logic and truth, and the word, because you are, you're just headstrong bent on denying anything Reformed theology. That's your will. Well, I think you're making assumptions, I mean, you have a chance to see where I'm coming from here. Yes, I am. Well, you're not listening to common sense, you're not listening to the logic. I've used this before on people.

Well, that's a disgusting accusation, I am listening to you. Well, did Jesus have free will? Yes, I already said yes, yes. And was Jesus predestined from the foundation of the world to do what he did? Was he?

Yes. Then predestination, God's determination, and human free will are compatible, right? Yes, when it comes to Christ it is, yes, absolutely.

Oh, okay, so now all of a sudden it's not with us? So free will, when we look at God as the standard, works. But then when you reject God as the standard, you go to man, then you have a problem? I'm not rejecting God as the standard, what I'm rejecting is God being the author of sin.

We don't say he's the author of sin, no Calvinist would ever say that. Really? Okay.

Yes. I'm not giving his name out there, but I've had a talk with another YouTube apologist who is a five-point Calvinist. Hold on, we've got a break, hold on Kevin, sorry, we've got a break. I want you to give me his name, and I'll tell you, no, God's not the author of sin.

No true Calvinist who knows stuff would ever say that, all right? We'll be right back, folks. After these messages, please stay tuned for...

It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276, here's Matt Slick. Everybody, welcome back to the show. Let's get back to Kevin.

Hey, Kevin, are you still there? I am. Okay.

So, I showed you. Yeah. Free will and sovereignty are compatible. Okay.

Sorry? I showed you that they're compatible, and you agreed. Yeah, when it comes to Christ, but here's my problem.

Now, my Calvinist friend that I had a discussion with, he was saying there's no difference in the distinction between God allowing something and God causing something. No, that's stupid. Sorry, but it is stupid. I disagree.

Yeah, I know. And he brought up this analogy of a classroom where a zookeeper was coming in, and the kids were learning about animals or whatever, and he brought a lion. The lion gets free in the classroom and it mauls some of the students to death. And he says, well, no. Now, could God have stopped that? Yes. So he didn't, therefore that means that's what he wanted, he determined.

So God not only allowed the lion to get free and maul the kids, but that was actually what God decreed to happen. So he says there's no difference between allowing something and determining it. Yeah, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Look, I'm just telling you, he doesn't know what he's talking about.

He doesn't know. Okay. Okay.

And that's what you said, right? So depending on the Calvinist I talk to, they have different definitions of what sovereignty means, different definitions of determinism, different definitions of compatibility. I got you. Well, can I throw this out at you? I have a natural divinity from a Calvinist seminary.

Does that carry any weight? Well, sure. Yeah, yeah. Okay. I've been defending it for over 30 years, okay?

I can get up from memory and talk on it for two, three hours and run you through scriptures. Let me ask you, it doesn't mean I'm right though, I'm just saying I'm well versed in it. Does this person or are you familiar with ultimate proximate and efficient causation? Have you ever heard of those? That sounds like a fancy philosophical term that I am not familiar with. It is.

It is fancy. How about decorative, prescriptive, or permissive wills? No? Yes, I have heard the term permissive will, yes.

Okay. How about fiducia and assentia? Yes, that would be like in the book of James, right? The demons had a demonic faith which would be an ascension, like a mental ascension but not from the heart. Ascension.

Very good. Okay, we do use, and you recognize them and you properly saw that, that's what ascension is, okay? We use ascension, fiducia, decorative will, prescriptive will, permissive will, ultimate proximate and efficient causation, and we use these things.

Usually when I talk to people about these topics, I have to teach them about the different levels of causation, different kinds. Here's an example of something, you see, Adam was in the garden and Adam chose to sin. No one forced him to sin. No one got a fruit and put it in his mouth and, you know, and made his jaw go up and down and made him swallow and say, see what you did?

That's not what happened. No one forced Adam, he freely chose to rebel by eating that fruit. Would you agree? Would you agree? Are you there? We lose you? Yes, yes, I would agree but there would be people that disagree with what you just said there. I'm just talking with you.

You go in all over the place and out in the forest and look at all those trees out there. We're talking to you, one thing. That's what I'm asking you. Are you agreeing that Adam is responsible for his own sin and rebellion? No one forced him, right?

Yes, absolutely. That's called, he's called the efficient cause. He's the one who is the efficient cause.

It's just a term used. It means he did it. Eve didn't do it to him.

I didn't do it to him. You didn't do it to him and God didn't do it to him. However, when we go up the chain here, we see that God is now the proximate cause.

Well, what does that mean? Proximate cause means that God is the one who put the garden there and Adam in the garden, put the trees there and let the devil come in. So God let it occur. So he's now the proximate cause but the proximate cause is different than the efficient cause. You already admitted and rightfully so that Adam is the efficient cause, therefore he's the reason for his own sin, not God.

But God is the reason for the approximation or the surrounding circumstances in which the efficient cause occurred. So your friend here, your friend here doesn't understand the difference between those. And he says causation, God caused it. He doesn't understand the difference. He's, unfortunately he's a bit ignorant about these issues. Okay.

Okay. Well, I mean, would you still say, would you say that God determined that Adam would sin? Well, what do you mean by determined?

Good question. So what would be your, your definition of determined? Because there's different people have different definitions. There are because the word determined can have different meanings in different contexts. You can have a determination by direct hand and you can have determination by an indirect hand. But an indirect hand would be the proximate cause and a direct hand would be the efficient cause. See, this is why I have to teach people what these terms mean. And it's not me just trying to introduce weird philosophies like you like to say. It's just simple logic using the terms. You've already understood the difference between fiducia and essentia. It's just understanding concepts and assigning a word to it.

That's all it is. So Adam was the efficient cause. No one caused him to sin.

He did it himself. But the condition that allowed him to sin, that was God. But God's innocent of Adam's sin because Adam chose to do it, not God.

So your friend made a mistake and that he's mixing proximate and efficient causation. Furthermore, when we come down to the will of God, there's what's called the decorative will. And the decorative will is, for example, thou shalt, or let there be light.

Boom. There's this light. Here's the prescriptive will of God. You shall not commit adultery.

That's his prescription. It's called the prescriptive will. The permissive will of God is he lets you commit adultery.

He says don't lie, but he lets you lie. So it's the will of God to permit you to rebel against him. But the will of God to permit you to rebel against him is part of his sovereignty. It's part of his sovereign plan. Because he already knows what's going to happen and he knows he's going to permit you to do something in rebellion against him. So it's all part of his plan. Otherwise you're going to have to reduce God quite a bit to the level of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses and Christadelphians in order to continue to hold your position.

I'm just telling you that in advance. I don't deny that God is all-knowing, but I don't believe that he is. See, and that's the thing, because God claims that he is sanctified, he's set apart from sin and for that to be true, he can't have part in sin. So I cannot believe that God causes sin or decrees sin, but that he allows it to accomplish ultimately something that works for his good. Oh, I believe he predestines it. He even predestines it.

Do you agree or disagree? I wouldn't feel comfortable saying that. Okay, now let me read you some scripture. Acts 4, 27 and 28. For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, that's two individuals, along with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, that's two people groups. They killed Jesus, right?

Because that's what we know, okay? For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your purpose predestined to occur. God predestined it. Do you agree that God predestined this? He did not predetermine Herod and Pontius Pilate's choices. Wait a second, I didn't ask that, and you're going to deal with a text.

You're not dealing with a text. Did God predestine these things to occur? Did he predestine? It doesn't say he predestined their choices. You're not listening to me. I didn't say. You're not listening.

This is what you do. You're not listening. I didn't say he predestined their choices. I didn't say that. I'm reading you the text. I'm trying to see if you agree with the text. And here what you're doing is you're trying to argue against a text.

If I say, well, it doesn't say this, it doesn't say that, you haven't even agreed with a text. You're already trying to say what it doesn't mean, which means you think you know what it does mean. So what does it mean when it says God predestined this stuff to occur? What does it mean? It means he predestined the crucifixion of Christ.

Okay. How does he predestined the crucifixion of Christ? How does he predestined?

He predestined by sending Christ to a generation that God knew would reject the Messiah. Oh, so being God knew that they would do this and God set it up that way? Okay. Yeah. Okay. So then all their freewill choices were all compatible with the sovereign work of God through all this, right?

I'm sorry, there's like some static, can you say that? All those choices, the freewill choices that they made were part of the predestined purpose of God. There you have compatibilism again. Okay. Okay. I'm just showing you that it's there and it's there in scripture, okay, and it comes down to definitions.

If you don't have good definitions, you'll end up in error. And I can argue this, okay, so compatibilism is there. You have other issues you need to deal with. How about this? We've got another caller waiting and I want to get to the caller, two callers, but you can email me if you want. I'll come on your show and we'll talk about it, okay? No problem. All right. Okay. If you want. If you're interested.

If not, that's okay. Well, I mean, I tried to reach out to you and he never got back to me. I'm sorry. I apologize. I am tremendously busy.

It's both an excuse and it's true. I mean, I've been up working 10 hours already. I've had a half-hour break and I have another three, four hours in the evening scheduled. I'm just incredibly busy and that's all.

I have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds. I have literally thousands of emails I've got to get to. We have a group of people answering. It's just, I'm sorry, but it's just really bad. If you were to email me at info at karma.org, I'll try and pay attention and check it out within the next half hour, okay? All right? All right, Matt.

Yeah, yeah. And then bug me again if I don't get back to you because things happen. Just bug me again. All right? Okay? Okay. All right, man. All right. God bless. You too. God bless.

All right. How about Eric from Charlotte, North Carolina. Eric, welcome. You're on the air. We've got about two minutes, man.

What do you got? Eric. Hope we didn't lose him. And if we don't go to Eric, we'll have to go to, we're trash testing. Oh, wait, okay, let's go to Giggler. Hey, man, how you doing, buddy? You there? Maybe we're having phone problems.

It does happen. We're still connected. Don't know if you guys can hear me everywhere and stuff like that. I'm not hearing anything.

I hope you got about one minute in the show. So look, what I tried to do with the gentleman there earlier is to show compatibilism is true that human free will choices are compatible with God's work throughout all of creation. Even if God just knows what we're going to do, he can certainly work all things out after the counsel of his will knowing our free choices. That proves compatibilism is true. It's just so easy. I find that a lot of people just reject the idea of compatibilism because different people have different reasons, but I've found them to be basically they want human freedom to be sovereign.

That's what I've found, not saying that's with this guy, but I'm just saying that's what I've found a lot of times. Hey, guess what? We're out of time and got to get going, all right? I hope you all have a great weekend. I hope you have a great weekend, and may the Lord bless you, and by his grace, we're back on the air on Monday, and remember, pray for Moto, it's not his real name, who is under persecution and possible threat of life and or freedom in an African country. Pray that God will deliver him, things will work out, and he'll be able to witness. God knows who he is, but lift him up in prayer, we ask this in Jesus' name. Hey, God bless everybody, we'll talk to you tomorrow, I mean on Monday, God bless, bye. Bye-bye.