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 CARM.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. All right, and welcome back to the show. And let's listen to Matt Slick live.

OK, sorry about that. Doing all these things here. Hey, welcome.

So let's see, today is January 11th, 2024. Listen to Matt Slick live. I am your host, Matt Slick. Hope you're all going to have a good show tonight.

I teach Bible study. It's still on here in semi-snowy Idaho. I like the snow.

You know, from Southern California, where it was illegal to get below 60 degrees. So this concept of this white stuff falling from the sky was great. I like the snow. I appreciate it. All right. Hey, look, if you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276.

You can also email me at info at CARM.org, info at CARM.org. And put in the subject line there, put in radio question or radio comment. And I just started thinking here, just as I was saying that, you know, we're doing one-minute videos. And I'm writing them and voicing them and doing stuff.

And then Ernie takes them, he puts them up, distributes them and stuff like that. So I'm curious if any of you have watched them, what you think, I'd like to hear from you. If you want to give me a call and say, yeah, I've watched a few and what you think, some feedback.

We're always adjusting. I'm going to try a little bit of something new with the next couple, three that I'm going to do. Just a little bit, just slight variations on things, but we're just always looking for feedback. So if you have seen any of the one-minute videos that we've been producing here at CARM on the social media area, please, you know, give me a call and let me know. Let's give some feedback.

877-207-2276. All right. So, uh, last night I went into the metaverse, uh, and, you know, metaverse is really cool because when I sit here from my computer and, you know, I'm just working or I am in a chat room on my computer, not in the metaverse, but I'm in there and it's, you know, it's, uh, it's not very visual because there's, it's audio and looking at words on a screen and stuff like that. But the nice thing about the metaverse is you are surrounded in 3d in a new world. And it's really a sensory change is actually, uh, interesting and relaxing in a weird way. Well, anyway, so I went into a room last night and, um, and I had a conversation with, uh, humble places. We need a slick of verse.

There'd be things about heresy all the time, everywhere. Um, so I was in this one room, uh, and I like to go in and just sit and wait and see what's happening. What's happening, get the feel of it. And so we made a comment and I just, I go, well, you know, blah, blah, blah. And, uh, they, they know who I am. So generally speaking, they know who I am and, uh, uh, that's fine. Uh, and I had this conversation with a Catholic and it was really interesting.

It really, it bothered me and it bothered me for the simplicity of the mistake he made. And then this, this simplicity of this mistake is so common and it was simply that, you know, I said, well, uh, the cladicism of the Catholic church teaches that, um, the salvation is obtained through your faith, baptism, and the observers of the commandments. And I said, the Bible says, uh, the other one who does not work, but believes in him, which justifies ungodly his faith is credit is righteousness.

All right. So what's interesting is they hear the verse and then they immediately do one of two things. And this guy did both. They immediately try and contradict that verse with another verse and they don't realize what they're doing. And he went to James 2, 24, you know, uh, man is not justified by faith alone. And I said, yeah, the context. And he says, I know the context. I said, well, good.

What is it? Well, the church fathers say, no, what's it, what's the context he didn't know. So I had to explain it to him, but, uh, they do that. They'll set scripture against scripture. That's one thing.

It's really bad. So if you have a verse that you come across in the scriptures and another one you think contradicts it, well, then you've got a problem. It's not the Bible that's a problem. That's your understanding. That's a problem. You've got to change. But most people refuse to do that.

And I've discovered over the years that what people will do is they become emotionally committed to an intellectual position. They identify with it and that's it. And whatever you present can't be correct if it disagrees with their commitment. It's not an issue of the word of God. It's an issue of, of what does the church teach?

What is their, their preferences or humanist philosophy, which is rampant in the Christian church, both in Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism. But nevertheless, so I put the, the verse in context and I says, look, you don't set scripture against scripture. You have to understand each one in this context. Otherwise you're going to have problems. That's why you jumped to the verse to contradict what this clearly says. And I said, it's a mistake on your part. You shouldn't do that. You should look at what the text says.

And, uh, he, you know, he didn't want to hear anything like that. And he just jumps into what gives you the authority, your interpretation. It's like, dude, just read what it says. Just read it.

You know, you don't need authority. Just read it. And so the conversation went on for a little bit and then he did the second thing that, uh, I find interesting. And then it was, uh, he went to, I had to tell him where it was, but, uh, he says, uh, uh, he said, a new command is given that you love one another. I said, yeah, John 14, 34 and, uh, and, and he says, well, that's what you got to do. And I said, does it say there, like, that's what you do to be saved or to be justified. And when I said this to him, it was interesting to me, cause I've done this a thousand times, but it just, the light really shined on the issue once again, in that, uh, they don't think they don't examine God's word.

Their loyalty is to a church, not to God's word, not to the person of Christ and the evidence of that is exemplified it in something like this, where they, they look at a verse where Jesus said, I command you don't love one another. And, uh, he said, see that contradicts what you're saying. I said, no, it doesn't. And it's just, it's amazing. And then he comes on, he goes, he says, well, it's kind of like new, your interpretation.

I said, I just read it. I'm absolutely dumbfounded sometimes why people will refuse to believe what the word of God says. And I'm so accustomed to that problem that sometimes I don't think about the reason, which is a spiritual blindness, that there is a true blindness. In second Corinthians, uh, four verses three and four, I'm going to read that to you. It's really interesting. And it says this right here. Uh, and even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing in whose case, the God of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they may not see the gospel, the light of the gospel, the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

So this, uh, prick could be a versus second Corinthians, verse four versus three and four. I've used in a tricky kind of way. And, you know, sometimes you gotta, you gotta trick people to see something because they don't want to see anything. Uh, it's like magic, you know, this isn't magic, but I mean, you know, magic, they, they trick you to make you think you're seeing something that's not really not true.

Well, we're going to do this in reverse, trick them to see what the truth actually is because they prefer the trick that blinds them. So one of the things that I'll do is I will ask, uh, what is the gospel? And I get varying answers from, from people, um, particularly Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. They'll tell me the gospel is these variations of forms. They'll say, well, it's, it's, uh, it's the proclamation of what Christ did and the sacraments and baptism and the work of the Holy Spirit. And all this, they'll go, they'll say things like this and I'll say, are you sure that's what it is? And they, uh, yeah, they'll repeated a variation of that and I'll say, okay, you sure the gospel is no. So yes, that's what it is.

That's right. I said, okay, I take them to first Corinthians 15, starting at verse three, for I delivered to you as a first importance. When I also received that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures, and that he's buried, that he was raised in the third day, according to the scriptures.

And that's what, uh, it says right there. And what precedes that is verse one where he says, brother, and I make known to you the gospel, Paul reveals that the gospel is, and he says that Jesus died and was crucified, died, was buried. And I say to the people, I say, look, you didn't get the gospel, right? The gospel is, is right there in scripture.

And it was so simple. And the reason is because second Corinthians four, verses three and four. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing in whose case, the God of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they may not see the light of the gospel, the glory of the gospel.

The glory of Christ who is the image of God, and I'll say to them, so you didn't get the gospel, right? The Bible tells you why, because the God of this world has blinded you. Let's just say that doesn't go over very well with the people I address it to, but I do. And they don't like it. And in the case, last, last night, I got kicked out of the room because I wasn't saying things that they wanted me to say. And people don't want to hear the truth a lot of times, they want to hear what they want to hear. And it's a shame. I would say, read the Bible and open your heart and your mind to it.

Believe what it says, even if you don't agree with it, Romans nine is a good place to start. Let's get to Rick from Ohio. Okay, Rick, welcome. You're on the air.

Hello, Matt. How are you doing today? Doing all right. Hanging in here by God's grace. So what do you got, man? Fantastic.

Hey, I got a question for you. Can you give me some pointers or some significance of the word, of the altar, like the first time it was used in the Bible and whatnot, and why and it was used? Well, it first occurs in Genesis 8, 20, Noah built an altar to the Lord. It took every clean animal and clean bird, offered bird offerings on the altar. And the word is Mesbach in Hebrew.

And I just did a search that occurs 401 times. And so the altar is a place where an offering is made. It's a location. So when I was in Israel, we went to some of the high places, and sometimes when we go to these places, we'll see these constructs, these stone things. And I don't know, I'm not an archaeologist, I don't know which ones particularly are altars, which ones are not.

We've seen some of them. But you generally are built of stones to be permanent. And then you go to that place, you take an animal, you sacrifice it, you kill it right there, usually. And then you take the blood and you put it on the altar, on this construct of stones, this thing, it's arranged. And that's what it's for.

And it's a place of, they hope, propitiation, and stuff like that. Okay, does that help any? Yes, yes.

To get God's forgiveness for their sins, correct? And this is how they did this all. Yeah. Right. Okay. Hold on, we've got a break. We've got a break, okay, so you got anything else?

You just hang on for the break? No, that's fine, that's fine. That's all I need. All right. Thank you.

God bless. Hey, folks, we have wide open lines. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. Be right back after these messages. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick.

Hey, everybody, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. All right. You can also email me at info at karm.org. Just put in there a radio question or radio comment. Let's get to Brandon from Utah. Brandon, welcome. You're on the air. Hello, Matt.

Hey, how you doing? Good. I just had a question in Genesis 3, 22, after the fall. Then the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now lest he reach out his hand and take also the tree of life and eat it and live forever. I just don't understand. Can you explain it?

Explain what? Live forever, the tree of life, not eating it? So how do we become like one of them? And then what is like, I know God doesn't worry, but the way it's worded, it's like lest he reach out his hand and take also the tree of life and eat it and live forever. Okay.

So, okay. So you said several things there, but, uh, to become like one of us, it's the plurality of the Trinity speaking. And you'll notice that Genesis deals with the early aspect of the revelation of God given to us as associated with the traded order and the plurality of God is known. And, uh, so the Lord God, the singular said is going to like one of us knowing good and evil. And that's the context that he has knowledge that God now God already had good and evil and knowledge of it.

And now, uh, Adam and Eve, they had that knowledge and that's all that's going on. And so they were in a fallen state. The general idea here that's going on is that they have to be blocked from eating the fruit of the, of the tree of life in that they would then stay in that condition of fallenness. And the guard was put on, on the, on that.

So they could not get to it. This is ultimately pointing to the cross because the tree, Jesus was raised upon a tree. That is the true tree of life that we were by faith. We trusted Christ. We're supposed to eat of the bread that Christ has produced the bread of life in his blood and stuff, not in what is here and in the Genesis three. So that's all that's going on is the idea generally speaking is that God doesn't not want them to remain in that condition.

There's something better coming and that's in the redemptive order and resurrected body and things like that. Okay. Well, thank you. Yeah, that explains it better.

I just didn't understand it. So, all right. Well, there you go. I appreciate it. Okay. You're welcome. God bless.

Hey, God bless you too, Matt. Okay. All right.

Well, we have nobody waiting. If you want to give me a call, then all you gotta do is dial 877-207-2276. All right. I had an idea. I was talking to him. Look up the word us, and that's interesting because you become like one of us and knowing good and evil.

How come it doesn't have that? I see like that. And so the plurality of God is what I was a little bit intrigued with here because God in the early parts of Genesis does speak of himself in the plural.

You go to Genesis 1 26, for example, God says, let us make man in our image according to our likeness. We see that us, that plurality right there. And I think that's really interesting. I do.

To me, it's revelatory of the very nature of who and what God is. Okay. And so let's get over here with this. And we already went over this version.

This is 3 22. The man has become like one of us knowing good and evil. And we also find where God has let us go down and confound our language in Genesis 11 7. Anyway, I just find this interesting. Now I could get into some philosophy about this Christian philosophy in that God, the Trinitarian being is the necessary precondition for intelligibility. And in him is the one in the many, the equality and equal ultimacy of that which is one and that which is plural that exists in the nature of the triune being. This has certain philosophical ramifications as far as knowledge goes and justification and justified, true belief and some other things. And, uh, I find it interesting to me.

I find it very interesting. So, uh, anyway, you know, Hey, we have four open lines or three open lines. If you want to give me a call 8 7 7 2 0 7 2 2 7 6. Don from Ohio.

Welcome. You're on the air. Hey, um, I've been, uh, know if you're familiar with an artist named Jonathan con. Uh, I don't know. No, I don't know.

Okay. What about, uh, well, he's right. Um, reading the books called return of the gods. And, uh, he talks about, um, uh, different guys and they're in the Bible, like in the shadin Mesopotamia, I think the old, I ran and all that stuff. What I don't understand is all these people in Israel who scattered away from God. Why do you need like, and it doesn't explain it. Why weren't these gods like millions of other guys trade in Israel?

Why did they have to scattered to do that? I don't understand the question. Sorry.

I'm sorry. You don't understand. No, why did God, what was the, that's all right. No, no, re rephrase the question. Cause I'm not sure what you're, what you're asking.

There in the book, it talks about, um, when, uh, all the Israel people ran away from God and they went other places and they created other gods, like all that stuff. Right. You ever heard of that?

You know, that's okay. What, why did, uh, and they talked about even like today in America, how the spirit of all that stuff, like the bull in New York city, you know, that big, uh, bronze bulls that's in New York. That's, you know, that's another part of ball.

And, uh, anyway, the book like goes in all that stuff. It talked about the 19, what was it? 1969 in New York city when the homosexual bar went to a riot and all that.

You remember that? No. So what's your, what's your question?

Just curious. Well, no, my, my question was, no, my question was this is why did, why did, how many of those Israelites did it take to spread away from Israel to go to like the old, I ran in this to create gods? Why didn't they, why didn't they just do it in Israel? Why did they have to go out to other areas?

Wait, hold on, hold on. So you're asking why did the Jews go to other countries like Iran to create gods? Yeah. I mean, when they were running away from the real God, not these false Buddhocrats, I'm talking about there's only one God. They ran away like millions and created all kinds of like different gods.

There's millions of different gods. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Where are you getting this? What? What you're telling me? Where are you in the book? The book I was reading. And then when I Google over some of them guys that he's mentioning, I just asked you, I just asked you, I just asked you where you're getting it. Okay. And that's it.

So you're getting from this book and it sounds to me like it sounds to me like the guy's confused. Okay. I, I, hold on a sec. We've got a break coming up. So hold on, hold on.

Okay. Well, we'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick.

Everybody. Welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. Let's get back to Dawn.

Dawn, you're back on the yard in there. Hey, Matt. Okay. Yeah. I got a question.

Um, not question. Listen, I like the King James version Bible. That's it. And I also like preachers when I hear it.

I'm into like the old hellfire, like Lester Roloff, Lawson, been type of guys and stuff. And it's a problem around my house and stuff. I'm sorry. What? Okay.

I want to continue with the Jonathan Cahn thing a little bit. I did some research during the break. Okay.

I thought I was confused. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Awesome. Yeah. He's a big time writer.

He's a Jewish rabbi. Okay. Hold on. Hold on.

Hold on. So I would not trust him. Don't, don't follow what he says. There's, there's a lot of problems with what he said. He's made prophecies. He seems to be overly sensationalistic.

He's uses too much personal revelation, things like that. So if I were you, I would avoid him. Okay. Oh, okay.

Well, this is what my pastor said. He says, I don't agree with this, what he said. I don't agree with everything he says with this book he did like.

So I just audible it, but it's super hard to understand, but I appreciate it. Yeah. I think you're probably right.

But, um, I don't know if he has, if he follows the precious blood or not, he don't like come out and say it. When I try to Google, a lot of people don't, but I know I do. You do too. Right. Yeah. Yes.

So what's your next question? Oh, well, no, I was just saying that, um, when I, like, uh, I like the Kings things version. Like there's a ton of different, you know, there's a ton of different, like, or not a ton, a few different versions of the Bible.

I like the original one. It came out in the early 19 hundreds to follow from. It's hard to find preachers who preach from it.

You know what I mean? Like straight from it. A lot of preachers around Ohio. They don't even use the word hell or they have like, I'm not joking. You can Google it.

There's yoga, some Baptist churches even have yoga. You have, uh, they set sodomy. Now these are back.

This is, I'm not saying I'm not lying and you can Google it. I don't know, but they're there. Unfortunately. I know. Oh, you know, there's an, uh, I know there's an apostasy that's brewing in the Protestant movement as a whole, right? They're not trusting the word of God and they're adopting secularism and humanist philosophy. Yeah, it's, it's, I know I'm well aware of it. But so yeah, and parts of those, those adoptions are things like Christian yoga and, uh, the 12 step program, which is bad and we should not be in churches.

And, um, the acceptance of false teachers like Kenneth Copeland and, and Joyce Meyer and, uh, Joel Osteen. Oh my goodness. Nevermind. My mom went to one of her things in St. Louis.

It was awful. Yeah. That Joyce Meyer, uh, individual. Yeah. Yeah. She teaches, um, well, so there you go. Any other questions?

No, man. I appreciate that. I'm just gonna, Jennifer, no more Jonathan Cahn, but it was confusing and stuff. A lot of, but like I said, the guy I really liked said, I don't agree with him all the time with this book, but he's wrote seven or eight. He's never mentioned the young, but I appreciate it.

I hope we get more college though. I understand why it's pretty, uh, the most easiest gentle call I've ever had. And I call radio all the time. Thanks man. You be careful. God bless. Okay. God bless. All right. Wow. Let's get over to Jared from Indiana. Jared, welcome. You're on the air. Hey, so I called in a couple of days ago and asked you about Calvinism.

We hadn't got to talk again. So I wanted to ask you, first of all, what your thoughts about, uh, Calvinism versus dispensationalism. Calvinism generally speaking holds to, or those who hold to that reform perspective, hold to covenant theology. And then there are Calvinists who hold to dispensational theology.

So it's not Calvinism against dispensationalism. Generally it's covenantalism versus dispensationalism and covenantalism is the view that God works covenantally as a primary means throughout history. And that the covenant, which is a pact or an agreement between two or more parties and has a covenant sign. This is how God works beginning with the intertrinitarian eternal covenant of Hebrews 13 20. And it goes on and then the word in Latin for covenant is testamentum. So Old Testament, New Testament. So I'm a covenantalist and when you adopt covenantal theology, other things fall in line, but we won't get into that right now. So dispensationalism is a, an approach to biblical interpretation, which assumes that God uses different means to working with different people at different times, different places.

And there certainly is a level of truth to that. So not all, and I'll get into more, but not all covenantalists avoid certain concepts that the dispensationalists will use and vice versa. So dispensationalism, however, generally they will, they will divide history into periods.

And the most common one I've heard is seven periods, an age of innocence. And then, yeah, where Adam and Eve, you know, were there. And then before they sinned and conscience, that's from them to the flood and then civil government after the flood, there was government. And then the age of the promise from Abraham to Moses, then the law, Moses to the cross and grace crossed to the millennial kingdom and then millennial kingdom, the rule of Christ for a thousand years. And, uh, so most reformed and most that I've occurred, I've, I've understood this is my experience.

I could be wrong on the statistics, but most of my experience tells me that those who hold to covenant theology are also on millennial or post-millennial, not pre-millennial. So there are differences, but both are within orthodoxy and, um, you know, it's okay. All right. Yeah.

So the other day, whenever I had, I had called you and we had, we had talked and we got into John six and I had brought up a verse about the spirit hadn't been given yet. So if I give you a, if I give you a thought, would you be willing to just pick it apart and show me where I'm wrong? Sure. Give me a thought. Let's see.

Okay. So, because I had, I had quoted that verse and I asked if I, if you thought that maybe when he was talking to John six about, they couldn't come to him unless the father had, had given him. And so I said, I thought that because the spirit hadn't been given, it wouldn't reside in them.

And we had stopped and you went in further. So this was the thought. Um, so before the cross, uh, the, the, the old, older prophets, um, they went to, or, or anybody in the old Testament, I should say older saints. They went to Abraham's bosom, um, after Christ has risen, he brings them with, uh, and that is because then, because obviously he's glorified at that time. Um, it says in John seven with that verse about the spirit hadn't been given cause he hadn't been glorified yet. And that is why, um, they got to go because Ephesians one says that we're sealed with the Holy spirit of promise. And, and that's why they got to go then because they hadn't had the spirit of promise in them to, to seal them, to go to heaven. Yeah.

You close. Okay. So before the cross, they went to Abraham's bosom, that's out of Luke 16, nine, uh, 16, 19 to 31. And then after Jesus died, he brought them out and that's out of Ephesians chapter four versus roughly eight through 12. And then you can also cross reference it with first Timothy, excuse me, first Peter three 16 to 18.

Okay. It talks about that kind of stuff. But, uh, it wasn't until after the shed blood of Christ that they could then be moved out of Abraham's bosom into the heavenly realm, the crucifixion and the atoning sacrifice is what made the difference, not just the giving of the spirit, but the given the spirit was done because of the work of the blood, which cleanses the temple in which the spirit can dwell. And so in the old Testament, blood was sprinkled on objects and individuals in order to purify them. So the same kind of thing here is Hebrew speaks about this, but nevertheless, the blood of Christ is what cleanses us, cleanses us. And the holy spirit lives in us in that new and permanent and, and more better way. Let's just say, okay.

Yeah. So you don't, you don't think that has anything to do with John six, then though, um, that whole, uh, not being able to come to the father as is given because, because of that, or not just because I'm taking it in the view of dispensationalism, I'm an independent fundamental Baptist. So just so you know exactly where I'm coming from, but I listened to, I listened to a lot of people, as long as they're preaching and teaching the Bible and they're not way off. I listen, especially, I listen to a lot of Calvinists. I there's a lots of people, a lot of apologetics I like to listen to, but I'm trying to see where the difference is.

I'm trying to, I'm trying to pinpoint because you got, when it comes to the gospel and an election and predestination, it's so far off. I know it sounds close, but when you really dig, we got a break. The two are way off. Okay. We got a break, but we're going to go come back. I want you to, to summarize. What do you mean by way off? What exactly is way off?

Cause I'm curious about that. We'll be right back folks after these messages and talk to Jared and hopefully you'll still be listening. God bless. We'll be right back. It's Matt slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt slick. All right, buddy. Welcome back to the show. We'll get back to Jared here to sec. Thanks, Ernie. And, uh, for the $5 ramp there in rumble, really appreciate it. Good stuff.

All right, Jerry, you're back on the air. All right. So I was saying about the, the Calvinism and, and, uh, well, not necessarily just, uh, dispensationalism, but the, like how independent, uh, Baptist believe, um, so like when you get comes to Tulip, for example, so we'll just break it down to what, what it is they have come, there's a lot of differences in what they, what is believed in a independent Baptist church, as opposed to maybe what a Calvinist would teach about tulip. So like, um, total depravity, right? We believe like in the church that we believe that men are totally depraved, but not because they were, they were born in sin, but they pick sin and not according to their nature, as much as that is the choice that they just make because they love sin more than they love God. That's what I formed. Calvinists hold to that too.

Okay. Variations of that. Well, and then unconditional election. We believe there is conditions and it's in Christ, not the person, but only in Christ that the elect is Christ. That's what Calvinists teach. That it's not based on anything in the individuals based on what God wants to do. He doesn't look in the future to see what you're going to do and then pick you. It's not conditional on anything in you. It's conditioned on what's in him.

Okay. That's what it means. Yeah, but that's, but that's a little bit different than the definition. The definition that, that is taught in independent fundamental Baptist churches, that God's elect is Christ. And then until we're in Christ, you're not elect. No, no, no. That's faulty.

I mean, I would, I would just actually bury that one, uh, in the dirt. All right. The elect are the individuals chosen and you can go through and look up the word eklektos, eklegma, and things like that. And you can find out the elect are those chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. That's Ephesians 1.4.

So that one they're just wrong on. Jesus is a chosen one, but the elect deals with those who are in Christ because they were chosen before the foundation of the world. That's what election is. Okay. Yeah.

And they would also say that, um, and then that election is to service, not to salvation. We have there, there, there. Okay.

Um, I'll, to, I'll just call on you cause I want to talk to you about it. Yeah. Election means, uh, being chosen, right? Right. Okay. Second Thessalonians 2 13, but we should always give thanks to God for you, brother, uh, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the spirit of faith and truth. That refutes that idea right there. That verse refutes it next. Well, can I ask one more to that real quick? Um, so, and I've heard like, uh, so when Christ was talking about to the apostles, he said, I have chosen 12 of you, but one of you are a devil. And that would, I mean, he chose him, but, and we know he was, he was foreordained to that, but I'm just saying, but if he chose them, doesn't that work the same way in that as well? Or no, no, no. It's a no. If that's what their arguments are giving them, then they, they, they don't know how to, they don't know what it means to execute scripture.

Sorry. The word means what it means in this context to be chosen, uh, of the 12 doesn't mean every one of them is chosen to be saved is chosen for the purpose of being an apostle. And Judas was one chosen specifically in that. And Jesus knew from the beginning, he was, uh, he was bad. That's the end of John six talks about that. So that's different than being chosen for salvation, which is what second Thessalonians two 13 says. So a lot of times what people will do when they criticize various things is they will take words like that were chosen and it has a wide range of meanings and they don't know how to separate what the context is and the different usages that is given. And then they make these, all these grandiose mistakes in understanding scripture like that. Okay.

So one of them too. Okay. Limited atonement. Um, the, so they, they would say that as you would say that atonement is limited, but they don't believe it's up. That's not because God picked some and didn't pick others, but it's limited that what you have believed based on what you have chosen. Yeah. That's faulty.

Yeah. See that's humanist philosophy and that if God does this based on what you're going to do and look at me, everybody, look how good I am. God's going to make choices based on what I do.

That's a humanist philosophy and it's woven into a lot of that mentality. Um, see everybody limits the atonement. Reform people limit the scope. The, uh, the non reform limit the power. So look at it this way. The reform people say that the blood of Christ is so powerful, it is so wonderful that for whom it is shed, they're cleansed.

It's done. And so we limit this powerful, we limit the scope, but the other side, they say, well, it's up to you to apply. It's up to you to do this stuff, more humanism.

And so they limit the power so that they can broaden the scope. They are humanist philosophers. And I would in a heartbeat debate one of the best one they've got on this, this issue.

I would do a fly out to their church, have it be recorded and do a debate and point out their humanistic philosophy that they have in that kind of stuff. Cause they do. Okay. Well, and there's, I've heard many a pushbacks on all these so far. I've debated it for over 30 years. Yeah.

I'm quite familiar with the arguments and I would be glad to know. I've heard you lots of times. That's why I'm calling you irresistible grace. And they would say, obviously God's grace is resistible because obviously you would have the knowledge.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Irresistible grace does not mean you can't resist God's grace. It means at the point of regeneration, you can't resist God's grace. That's what it means.

Okay. So when God regenerates you, he causes you to be born again. First Peter one, three, you're born again, not of your own will.

John one 13. That's the irresistible grace. That's not, not to say that people can't resist God's goodness and gracious enough to them throughout their life. Okay. So the formed Baptist, I mean, the Baptist, uh, fundamentalists don't understand what the other position is.

Okay. Well, and then, and then obviously perseverance of the saints, um, that, and I know that obviously Calvin is, I have listened a lot and a lot of them that you persevere to the end because of God's grace, um, that you're going to persevere and the, and it's just the change, I guess the changing of the deficit of all the definitions, but the, they would, they would say at the fundamental Baptist church that you're, you don't, you persevere because of Christ. And that's what you guys would say too, but there that you don't have to make it to the end to prove it.

You already know it. And I've heard John MacArthur a lot on perseverance of the saints. He's, he's, he says on both sides of it, that if you, when you get to the end, you'll know that you were of his, of his for sure, because you persevered. And, and, and the, and I've heard Calvinists also say just like an independent fundamental Baptist say, you persevere because of Christ no matter what. So, um, well, we persevere because we persevere because God has ordained that we be with him. And though we, we might be capable of some pretty bad things, even as Christians, but we're changed, we're born again, made new creatures. And we have been given by the father to the son for safe keeping and the will of the father is that Jesus not lose any. Jesus can't fail to do the will of the father. So we're going to persevere.

The means of the perseverance is open for discussion, but the, the end result is that we don't lose our salvation. Otherwise Christ failed to do the will of the father. Okay.

Well, yeah. And then the last point is not of the tulip, but the wrapping up of tulip in determinism. And they said that that does not bring glory to God in determinism. We don't teach determinism. Yeah, look, it's very, let me explain. It's very frequent that the other side misrepresents what we teach.

Okay. And, and, uh, it's not determinism. Determinism says there's no free will.

There's, it's just predestined in the sense that you can't do anything. It's just how it is. That's not what we teach. All right. That's not, not our position. Well, that's so they're misrepresenting it.

They're bearing false witness. All right. Well, so listening to James White, that's what he teaches.

Absolutely. James doesn't teach that. I'll be, I'll be talking to James in a couple of three, four weeks.

I got to go out to Tennessee. We can talk about it. But the thing is God determines what server shall come to pass, but it does not mean we don't have free will. See a lot of times when we talk about these kinds of things, those on the other side, they don't think very, I mean, sorry, but it's the case.

They don't think very deeply about these things. Well, you said determined. That means you can't have free will. We didn't say that. You're contradicting yourself. No, we're not.

Can we talk about it? What is free will? We don't believe in libertarian free will. We believe in compatibilist free will. People have the ability to make choices that are consistent with our nature that are unforced.

Don't we? Calvinists affirm that. It's just that God can determine where you're going to go. God determines even the choices you can make. It freely, just like I can force you to do what I want you to do without violating your free will. I have illustrations for that and we get into more deeper discussions and I find that the free will Baptists and the fundamental Baptists, generally speaking, my encounters with them, they have not, they do not have a good understanding of our position. They think they do.

And then they don't. And I correct them politely and they say, you're wrong. I said, no, I'm not. I've been defending it for, since basically 1991. All right.

So 20, 33 years have been defending this. So, you know, all right. So I did hear a clip of, of James White saying that God does ordain rape. Yes, he does. Look, yes, he does.

Glory to God. You don't understand. Yes, he does. That's why I'm asking. That's why I'm asking. I'm trying to explain it.

What does it mean to ordain? So if you go to Ephesians 1 11, God works all things after the counsel of his will. So let me ask you, does God work even the issue of rape with the counsel of his will? Does he? Does he? I don't, I, the answer is, well, I don't. Yes. He doesn't bring, he doesn't bring it. Hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on. The scripture says yes.

I mean, the scripture says it. You got to say yes. Then we ask the question, well, what does it mean? And that's what you have to do with ordain.

You have to ask the question. What is meant by the issue of ordination? Does it mean by direct or indirect?

Does it mean through what we call, uh, proximate means or causes or efficient causes? And I, I've yet to find any of the critics of, of reform theology, predestination and all this stuff. I've yet to find them even understanding the basic issues. Seriously, it's embarrassing for them. And I explain it to them and they still get it wrong because they don't want to see it. They only want to, to put their vitriolic hatred forward about God's sovereignty. And then they attack Calvinism and they misrepresent it. And I, I, I call them on the carpet and say, stop bearing false witness.

At least know what we actually teach and disagree with that. So when we say that God ordains whatever shall come to pass, even the death of my son or a car accident or robbery, it doesn't mean that God saying, Hey, I want this to happen. Ooh, look at this.

It's good. Oh, that's not what's happening. And that's how they interpret it. That's not it.

I wish these people would stop with their amateur theological analysis and start doing some serious thinking and some serious study. Try to be crazy. Sorry.

No, that's why I call it. I'm trying to, I want to, I'm trying to, I'm trying to figure out the depth of, of each of the positions. And that's why I've been, I've called you the second time.

Now I emailed you. I'm just trying to get in there. Look, the fundamental Baptists don't trust them. Don't trust them when it comes to analyzing reform theology. If you want to really know what it is, go into, uh, like systematic theology by, uh, Wayne Grudem. Get the habit.

All right. Study that. Study ordination. And you need to study such things as the issues of causation. We're out of time.

I go really fast here. Ultimate proximate efficient causation. You need to also study the issue of the creative will prescriptive will and permissive will with these, you can then understand what the reform perspective teaches. Otherwise they'll continue to bear a false witness like they do.

They don't even know what they're talking about. All right. Sorry, man. We're out of time. Yeah.

All back tomorrow. We'll talk about this more. Okay. Hey folks, there you go. So much heresy. So little time. Hey, but that's what I do.

Isn't it? Refuted that is. Hey, we'll be right back. No, you won't. We'll be back tomorrow. God bless. See ya another program powered by the truth network.