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 at 602-973-4602 or toll-free across the United States, it's 1-877-753-3341. And now with today's topic, here is James White. And welcome to the Dividing Line. I was just commenting on Channel Run to the Battle by Steve Camp. It's still one of the best theme songs around. And those who were on the cruise, not this last time, but the one before that, got to hear Steve do a special Alpha Omega Ministries Prasapaligion Dividing Line version of Run to the Battle. So that was a lot of fun. Welcome to the Dividing Line. Yes, I'm going to jump right into the fact that yesterday I had the opportunity of being on Chuck Christmeyer's Viewpoint broadcast, as soon as I heard his voice, I knew I had been on his program before and I think he was talking about Mormonism or Roman Catholicism or something, I don't know. But I've been on one of my books before, but this time it was on debating Calvinism. And I have mentioned, I know I mentioned it on the channel, I may have mentioned on here, I mention everything on here and it gets me in a lot of trouble. I may have mentioned on my blog, not sure exactly where, but I've said from the start It seemed odd that all of a sudden Dave Hunt would abandon his very clear perspective, his very clear choice of not debating me, not doing any type of encounter with me at all, where he would be put in a position of having to answer questions. So I even wrote to Multnomah when they contacted me and I said does Dave Hunt know if he's supposed to be there and so Anyway, we discovered that I got the feeling anyways, and those of you who listen maybe you can tell me, but I got the feeling that Dave didn't know that I was going to be there. And I'll try to find that section toward the beginning. Problem I've got here is the recording I have of yesterday's program is a RAM file, and unlike the other formats, MP3, I didn't have a chance to convert this. uh... into mp3 or wave so i don't have the nice waveform to pick places out and and uh... it only gives me like you know i've one little tiny move of my mouse is thirty seconds and all the rest of the stuff so uh... we may have to jump around a little bit here to try to to get where we want to uh... where we want to go uh... and in fact just getting to the start here but what everybody really noticed was the fact that once again we have uh... we have a situation where I was obviously in the minority. In fact, the host of the program was considerably more consistently Arminian and on the other side of Dave Hunt, because he denies eternal security. It was fascinating listening to the introductions and to the questions that were asked and things like that because they showed such a real strong anti-reformed bias. Let me just play you the opening of this so you can see for yourself here. Let me try to get to right at 30 seconds and it's going to put me at 34 seconds no matter what I do. Do you remember how Daniel went into the lion's den? Can you imagine how he felt? I mean, here he was told that he was going to have to be facing these very, very hungry lions. And so he had to face it. He knew he had to go into the lion's den. He was going into the lion's den. But have you ever considered how he felt? Well, today, you can well understand how I feel today, because we're going to be dealing with one of the most difficult issues challenging the mind and the heart of professing Christians today. It's the subject of Calvinism. There are a number of issues that are facing the church today, theological issues, that are great divides. They create dividing lines in the sand. One of those is the pre-tribulation rapture. As soon as I heard that, I was like, oh boy, I better keep my eschatological comments to myself. These lines draw very great distinctions between various professing Christian believers and their pastors and theologians and so on. Another one of those is Calvinism. In fact, there are some who would rather follow Calvin than they would Christ. Whoa! As soon as I... I mean, I was sitting there and I was using my computer to type notes as I was hearing things, and the very first thing I have is, would rather follow Calvin than Christ? What on earth is that? Where did that come from? It's a fascinating discussion. Not long ago, well actually it was a couple of years ago, I had the opportunity to interview a gentleman who I had deep respect for, a rather well-known gentleman here in our nation, a theologian, one who obviously had a very good handle on what the Bible had to say, and also was very concerned about our nation, the spiritual condition of our nation. So we had a wonderful interview together. And as we closed our conversation, and after we were off the air, I asked this gentleman why he had spent so much of his time quoting Calvin and almost no quotes from Christ, the Lord of the Church. His response was, well, I believe in Calvin. I said, yes, but don't you believe in Christ? Well, yes, but... And that's where the conversation ended. Excuse me? Sorry, what? At this point, I haven't even said a word yet. And already, you've got this picture of Calvinists who are cultists, you know? You can just see these black-robed, black-hooded dudes, you know, who follow after pictures of John Calvin or something. And it's like, wow! This is starting off real well, isn't it? So many of us have that kind of knee-jerk reaction. Many of us have become slaves to isms in our lives. There are all kinds of isms that we have. Today, we want to try to have an open and honest discussion about this very difficult subject. It's essential that we get to the bottom of this. It's essential that we at least open up the issues. And today on Viewpoint, we're going to do that. We have 55 minutes. In order to kind of lay this thing out, there's no way we can deal with all of the issues in all of the detail that would be necessary. But at least we can open some of these things up and begin to have an open-hearted and open-handed discussion on it. John Calvin was a French theologian and Protestant Reformation leader, ranks as the most influential thinker in non-Lutheran Protestantism. Okay, we're three and a half minutes into the program yet, and so far, neither Dave Hunt nor myself have gotten over it edgewise. His theology and his views on church practices became the basis of the reform movement known as Calvinism. His thought dominated Protestantism in France, the Netherlands, and Scotland, and was very strong in parts of America, England, Germany, and Central Europe. Calvin was trained for Catholic priesthood, and then for the law, and in 1533 Calvin joined the cause of the Reformation following in the wake of Martin Luther. John Calvin, the Genevan reformer, created and systematized the reform tradition in Protestantism. In Paris, the young Calvin met the teachings of Luther, and as I said, about 1533, experienced a sudden conversion. He next broke with Roman Catholicism, left France, and lived as an exile. He began to form... Now what's funny right there, for those of you who have not read the book, and I'm not going to play the whole thing, I'm just trying to get to the point where Hunt said something, but the funny thing was, Hunt in his book says that Calvin never, ever, ever gives testimony of conversion to Christ. And so he just said he's using from the Commentary on Psalms the sudden conversion story. Calvin was the great systematizer. He took up and reapplied the ideas of the first generation of reformers. His institutes have been a classic statement of reformation theology for centuries. Calvin claimed that even before the creation, God chose some of his creatures for salvation and others for destruction. Well, joining us here today on Viewpoint, two very special guests. Dave Hunt and James White. James White, in fact, both of these gentlemen have written a book called Debating Calvinism, five points, two views, and with that at the basis of our discussion here today, James, it's good to have you on board. You are the one who is promoting the doctrine of Calvinism. You are the one who eats children behind the... I'm sorry. Okay, so I got just a few minutes here. We'll go ahead and listen to that. I just want to get to the point where Dave Hunt does his introduction because I want to see if the rest of you hear the same thing that I heard, or at least I think I heard, or something along those lines. Supporting that, can you give us just a quick two-minute preview as to what we ought to be expecting here? Well, yes, I hold to what are called the doctrines of grace because of the exegesis of the text of Scripture. I believe firmly that a consistent, sound exegesis of the text of the Bible leads us to believe that God is sovereign over all things, that when He created, He created for a purpose. There is nothing purposeless in this world, that everything will eventually resound to His glory. Both the redemption and salvation of a people unto His grace, as well as the punishment of the wicked, will result in God's glory. And that, because of that, there are certain things the Bible teaches about the doctrine of salvation that, though they are very unpopular in many circles today, are very clearly taught by the Lord Jesus and by his apostles in regards to man's inability to believe outside of God's grace, the effectiveness of God's grace, the effectiveness of the work of Christ as the Savior. These are all part and parcel of what the Bible teaches concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ. And I believe it's very important, especially today, I'm an apologist and giving a defense to the Christian faith to be consistent in the hermeneutical methods that we use in handling the Word of God and allowing the Word of God to speak. I would just like to say that, interestingly enough, in our book, the vast majority of quotations of other people did not come from me. My citations were primarily focused upon the Scriptures. Now, those of you who have not seen the book, you need to get it, but if you have, you know that my presentations were biblical presentations. They were focused upon exegetical discussion of certain passages, and even in the introduction, I bet you anything that there are more citations of Calvin and other sources in Dave Hunt's introduction than in the entirety of everything I wrote in the book with the possible exception of the number of Spurgeon quotes I had. And of course the reason I did the Spurgeon quotes was because Dave Hunt continues to misrepresent Spurgeon and so I just wanted to keep proving the point just by, you know, a model citation. I'm not John Calvin or Augustine or anyone else and I honestly have never met a Calvinist who would ever say there are some who would rather follow Calvin than Christ. I've never met one of those folks, and certainly they wouldn't get along in the Calvinistic circles that I travel in, if such a person ever existed. All right, well I appreciate that quick and succinct statement. Dave Hunt, join us. Okay, here comes Dave Hunt. This is the part I wanted to get to. Joining us, also a man of considerable ability, presenting the opposing viewpoint. Dave, give us your minute and a half statement, will you? Two minutes. Well, first of all, let me correct James in one implication. He says I quoted other people more than he did. That may be true. He says he quoted primarily the scripture. If you want to go to the book and check it out, as we have, I quoted the scripture far more often than James did. And I quoted a much wider range of scripture. Yes, you know that's probably true. The problem is what he's counting there are mere citations without a word of exegesis or the long list of times he would just simply list verse after verse after verse and not even offer the first attempt to demonstrate that those passages were saying what he said they said. That is not a valid use of scriptures, and the point is that it is Dave Hunt, who in the book is constantly going after John Piper, John MacArthur, quoting Calvin, quoting this secondary source, but what he doesn't give us, and this is what is I think just plainly manifests anyone. What he doesn't give us is exegesis. Interpretation. Something where you're actually getting into the text and the reason is simple. Dave Hunt does not possess the capacity to do so. He just hasn't studied the field and for some reason feels that it's wrong to do so and accuses those of us to do that, of being elitists. This is nothing new. Those of you who have followed us for a long time know this, but you know. Anyways, we still haven't gotten to the point where he says something that's very interesting. Listen. James did in our debate. I was not aware that we were going to have some kind of a discussion here. I was told... I was out of the country when this was arranged. I was told that this was to promote the book, Debating Calvinism. But anyway, we won't mention the book. I don't know about the rest of you, I just get the feeling that Dave didn't know I was going to be there. That just to me sounds like he just did not know that I was going to be there. I don't know, that's just how it is to me. Now, later in the program, I took the time to reiterate my challenge to Dave Hunt. I still believe that he should do what he initially said he would do when when we stood well I stood in front of Dave Hunt's table in the basement of the church in St. Louis going to be very near that church in fact here in a matter of hours and his he had one copy of What Love Is This on his table and I started thumbing through it and see my name appearing numerous times and so I talked with Dave about doing a debate. I said, you know, let's get in touch with each other. Let's find out when. Let's put the dates together. And he did not stand there and say, no, no, no, I don't think we should do that. He agreed to that. He was agreeable to doing a public debate. And so I said, I still believe very firmly that this book would be greatly aided by a DVD of a debate, or multiple DVDs, of a lengthy debate, a Bible-based debate, where we engage in cross-examination of one another on the basis of the text. Okay? I continue to believe that because I do not believe in a written format where you have half as many words each time you respond that you can meaningfully hold a person to the same level of accountability that you can when you have a live debate. Okay? I stand by that. That's very, very clear. Anyone who has watched debates knows. that it's cross-examination. It is when you're trying to answer questions. That's when you discover very quickly whether you've just presented a story or whether you actually have a position. Okay? So that was my position. So I raised these issues. And so toward the end of the program, And I got the majority of the time because I was debating the host, Chuck Krismeier. Dave Hunt didn't get nearly as much time basically because he and Chuck Krismeier see eye-to-eye with the exception of eternal security, which of course I don't believe Dave Hunt has any basis for believing in the first place, but be that as it may, that's why he didn't get as much time as I did because the guy is, you know, debating me. So 41 minutes. So I got to start this at the beginning and then drag the little thing over, try to find 41 minutes. So here we go. 41. All right. again i welcome you back to viewpoint it's conversation with conviction we're moving from information hopefully to transformation but we're talking here today about uh... one of the uh... most prominent doctrines within the protestant community uh... in fact uh... this particular doctrine i would i think it would be fair to say divides the protestant community just about in half uh... almost as much as the difference between the protestant community and the catholic community at this juncture uh... the the implications of this are so uh... important and uh... They're worthy of our discussion. Let me ask some questions just very quickly and then we'll get back, return to Dave Hunt now. It's his turn in this discussion. Now listen, here is where the host, these are pre-prepared questions. Now listen to what these questions are and what they're actually saying. I would love to respond to each one of these questions with a question from the reformed side, but I didn't get a chance to do that. If men are absolutely predestined by the pre-established causative will of God, either to heaven or hell, why evangelize? Which I had answered earlier. Out of obedience to Christ, love for God, love for my fellow man, God says he's going to use us as the means of bringing his elect people unto himself. I didn't get any responses to that, but here it is being repeated again. If God is absolutely sovereign, are men mere puppets of God's will? Wow, never heard that one before. How many books on the Reformed faith answer that question repeatedly and ad nauseum? I don't know, but every introductory text I've ever read from Sproul or Boyce or whoever, including my own, all address the robot or puppet argumentation. If man has no choice in following God's will, why teach or preach? Man has no choice? No, man has a choice. The problem is his choice has been enslaved to his corrupt nature. That's why Jesus said, if you commit sin, you are the what of sin? slave of sin. You preach because you trust the Holy Spirit of God can break that bondage in the life of his elect people. Or even read the Bible. Well, Christians read the Bible because they are no longer under that condemnation and then you suggest reading the Bible to other people because the Holy Spirit then uses the word to open their hearts and minds. Isn't it all pre-established? It may be, but that's not our experience, and since we don't know what the decree of God is, then we can only go on what he holds us accountable for, and that's what we do. If the majority of men and women are absolutely predestined to hell and without any choice, I corrected that one over and over and over again. When he says the majority, he keeps talking about how it's a microscopic number that could be saved. That is not Reformed theology. That is not what we believe. There is a number that no man can number of people surrounding the throne in Revelation chapter 5, and so that is a straw man. And secondly, without a choice, Let's make sure we understand what he's saying. Without libertarian free will, their choice is controlled by their corrupt nature. This is why you need to have a biblical anthropology. You need to have a biblical view of the nature of man. All these questions are coming from an unbiblical, traditional view of man, rather than the one given to us in Scripture. How can the Bible say that God desires that none should perish? Wow, one of the big three, Matthew 22-37, 2 Peter 3-9, 1 Timothy 2-4, addressed rather fully in the Potter's Freedom, which by the way, we are going to attempt to get to, Mr. Chris Meyer, because after the program was over, he mentioned the possibility during the breaks of having a program on with each one of us separately, and since he was very strongly opposed to eternal security I said let's discuss it because I'd like to present to him the perfection of the work of Christ and John chapter 6 and really hold him to it and maybe if I didn't have to be fighting with two people I might get somewhere there, I don't know. But that all should come to repentance. If those who are saved are absolutely eternally secure how can the Apostle Paul warn of a great falling away? Um, maybe because that's from the formal church, and like John said, they went out from us because they were not truly of us. Can you fall away from a position you've never been in? Uh, yeah, you can fall away from being in the church. That doesn't mean that you were regenerated or united to Christ. If I confess Christ as Savior and am eternally secure, why should I have to obey God or live a holy life? Wow, you know, I've heard that exact same question asked of me by Mormons. And I always respond with Romans chapter 6. I go, did you know you just quoted a passage of Scripture? You know, where Paul's talking about, shall we continue in sin that grace might increase? May it never be, for how shall we who died to sin still live in it? That's sort of just a biblical response. I've already got my ticket through the pearly gates. Oh, ticket! No, I don't believe in the ticket stuff. I believe in the perseverance of the saints stuff because of the fact that I'm a Calvinist and therefore the faith that I have is not just a faith that I've made up for myself but it is in fact the work of the Holy Spirit of God within my heart and that's why it perseveres and so on and so forth. Don't I? These are questions that are worthy of consideration and they all flow from Calvinism. Unfortunately, none of the questions that could be asked the other direction were even noted. All the questions about how God has knowledge of future events. All the questions about what Dave Hunt or even Chuck Grissmire's theodicy would be. How do they explain God's creation in the light of the existence of evil and things like that? All the issues of man's cooperation, making the very work of the Trinity, dependent upon the free will of man, etc., etc., etc., etc. None of that gets mentioned at all. Now, let me play one more because I wasn't going to spend this much time on it, but I thought answering those questions would be worthwhile. Toward the end of the program, I didn't get to say much. Like I said, I had gotten the majority of the time, so I knew toward the end of the program I wasn't going to say much. And in fact, I just sort of sat back and listened to Dave Hunt sort of self-destruct. I'm perfectly honest with you. It didn't come across very well. I'm just going to fast forward here to like the last couple of minutes of the program, so you can see for yourself here. There we go. ...respond to John 6. I responded to it in detail. I responded to everything that he said. Now, I had made the point that Dave Hunt does not respond to the exegesis of John chapter 6. I stand by that. What he does is provide excuses. I was meaning he does not provide any meaningful exegetical response. Running off to another passage, or showing your utter ignorance of the original languages by counting the word whosoever in the basis of Strong's exhaustive concordance of the English translation of the Bible is not giving a response. uh... that's what i was talking about uh... and so he's skipping you know the context has never been real real strong in the responses i've gotten from uh... from from dave as far as cross-examination is concerned i thought we cross-examined one another in this book now james makes statements that are not true uh... on his web so forth he says i agreed to a debate and now i've gone back on on my word well if you want to go back and see my response to his open letter to me Now listen to this. He's bringing up stuff that actually I had not raised in the program. I could have gone after so much. I had a whole list right on my screen of all the exegetical errors that Dave Hunt had made. I had the page numbers where he inserts stuff into 1 John 5.1 that would force him to believe and work salvation and all the rest of this stuff that's going on. I didn't bring any of that up. I didn't have time to. I mean, I was taking on two people at the same time, basically. And so he's starting to bring all this stuff up. And listen, this just did not go over too well, because listen what the host does. Here's how it begins. But what's happening here is we're having a spitting contest and it's not going anywhere. Well, I hadn't talked for I don't know how long at this point, so I wasn't the one doing the spitting. I was just chuckling in the background there. Dave, tell me, do you see any practical implications of the Doctrine of Eternal Security in the life of our country right now? No, I think James and I would agree on the doctrine of eternal security. I don't believe people can be lost if once they're saved, and I don't think that is the major problem of Calvinism, although Calvinism, it's not that Christ holds us, but it's the perseverance of the saints, and the only sure way of knowing that you're one of those is according to Calvinism. Now listen to this. Just, just, so sorry. Dave Hunt doesn't yet quite get the feeling, the understanding, of what this debate's all about because he's just about to throw out some stuff from Calvin. First of all, again, completely misunderstands the foundation of perseverance and all the rest of that stuff. But the worst thing here is what you're just about to hear. Remembering who I am and the fact that I'm one of those reformed Baptists. You know, Baptists. Listen to this. If you were baptized as a baby, even by a Catholic priest, or... Did you hear that? Baptized as a baby by a Catholic priest. Hello? Hello? Did anyone hear a debate recently that you're just sort of going, wow, you can't win for trying, dude. You're going to get hit one way or the other. So that's another issue. But the fact is that James and I have had a debate. I think we covered the issues very well, we thought very carefully about it, and we agreed upon this. Now for James to say that I agreed to an oil debate and I backed out on that, that's not true. In other words, you can get the written debate debating Calvinism. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, there's that. It was about 54 minutes, and that included the commercials. It was what I expected. There's no toys about it. It was what I expected. And I know we have at least one caller that wants to talk about that, so I'd like to get to Jim in Nashville. because I believe he has some comments on yesterday's interview as well. And I'd like to, if some other folks want to comment on that, I'd like to try to keep those topics together if at all possible. I saw somebody in channel saying they wanted to comment on it as well. So this would be your opportunity, 877-753-3341. 877-753-3341 if you heard the program yesterday on Viewpoint, wanted to comment on it now. Now is the time to do so. Let's go ahead and talk to Jim in Nashville. Jim, did you get a chance to hear the program? I did indeed. And do you have any hair left? I didn't have hair to start. You know, it was really funny because I was watching folks in channel because I had advertised this on the blog, maybe that's even how you knew about it, I don't know. And I was watching folks in channel and man, especially when it really started getting heated, everybody in channel was just like, I can't believe he's saying that and they're getting all upset. And I would take the time to type in channel, guys, I'm perfectly calm here. And people are like, how can you do that? And I'm like, you got to realize, if you have the right reason for why you're doing this, When people start doing that, the only reason people behave that way is because they're not doing well. They're not making their point. You know, from my perspective, I don't care that there was two on one. I got an opportunity to speak the truth. I can trust the Holy Spirit to apply that to somebody's heart. You know, the Calvinist is always in a win-win situation at that point. Well, Hunt got positively whiny toward the end when he complained that you and Chuck were doing all the talking and that he wasn't getting equal time. And I thought, you know, shut up, dude. The host is winning for you, you know, where your side is concerned. Let him just carry the torch for you. There was just one comment that you didn't play. You covered most of the points. And it did sound to me like Hunt did not expect you to be there. Although I'm I'd be interested to know how he thought he was going on a 60-minute radio program to promote the book, but there wouldn't be any discussion of the actual topicality of the book. Ah, that one I can answer for you. Yeah? Because up until this time, I even had to contact Multnomah, because they were only arranging him when they would arrange a radio program, they'd only contact Dave Hunt. They wouldn't contact me. It was like I was the ghostwriter or something. Right. And so he had already done a number of radio programs promoting, debating Calvinism, without me, and I wasn't even given the opportunity of being there. And I had to finally contact Milt Noman and say, excuse me, but this is a debate book, and so shouldn't we both be there? And only one of the people who had already had Hunt on then had me on later to counterbalance it. All the rest of them that had already had him on just skipped it and just went with him. So I can understand that and I can understand that Dave has been traveling to Australia and all the rest of these places, but the fact of the matter is, it did seem to me that somebody arranged this and forgot the little bit of information there. It said, oh, and by the way, James White will be on with you. Yeah, it could be time for Dave to go back and talk to his staff about prepping. But the one comment that Chuck made that you didn't address, that if you could address, I think would be, it's rather obvious, but I found it really, really disturbing. And I don't know exactly how he constructed it. Maybe you can find the audio, maybe not. But he basically said that there was an area of the country where Calvinism was most prominent. You found Calvinism prominent among this particular group or area of people. And among those people, though he had nothing to substantiate it, uh... you saw a high degree of divorce and consequently uh... as soon as you believe in eternal security you have christians and this was a quote who live like hell and want to go to heaven and as soon as he said christians who live like hell is the direct result of calvinistic notions of eternal security and of course the only example he gave was not christians out uh... drinking drugging shooting each other he went for okay they get divorces and use that as his evidence of of living like hell uh... it was not only convoluted but if there was ever a truly fallacious charge uh... the notion that what then people who believe in calvinism uh... uh... by virtue of that like you said uh... earlier paul's question is should we send all the more the grace may abound uh... he turned that completely around and said well that's exactly what happened yeah calvinism is taught and people live like hell as a direct result and and i found that charge to be Not just spurious, but absolutely insulting. Well, I even actually tried to overtalk him at that point, which is impossible to do when you're on the phone. But I even said that I cannot even begin to accept such a statement. But that was right as we were going into... I might actually be able to find that. Let me see if I can... And if I can do this, folks, you all have to say, wow, he's really good at that. Wow, he's really good at that. I didn't do it yet. Hold on a second. I've got something playing here, Rich. You might want to pot it up. You know the red socks and the white socks and they're going to each is going to have their cheering sections and neither one... Let me go a little bit farther there. consistent biblical worldview and I believe that foundational to all the Christian worldview is the fact that God is the creator and he created with a purpose and the reason that God knows what's going to happen in the future is not because God just looks down the corridors of time but because God created with a purpose. I think you've hit it right on the nose. And one of the things that I note, Jim, is that as you look across America at the majority of those who are calling for a worldview... Okay, by the way, here it is. So yeah, I did a good job. Okay, he starts off by saying something nice. and then takes it all away. So here's what he said. The ones that are holding world view conferences and so on are almost all Calvinist. But here's an interesting point. And that is that the divorce rate in the Bible Belk of America, which is the greatest concentration of Calvinistic thinkers, is 50% higher than the nation as a whole. Which supports, in my opinion, the idea that once you have preached a doctrine of absolute eternal security, people really do believe they can live like hell and go to heaven. I think that's a practical problem. I cannot begin to agree with that at all. Dave Hunt, give us your final thoughts on that. Actually, if you went back and counted the minutes that you and James have had, I'd have very little to say. There you have it. I'm sitting here going, excuse me, you know, not only is there not even an attempt to make a meaningful connection between the proclamation of... And worldview. Worldview stuff. But not only that, but the Bible Belt? That's where you find the greatest... By the way, I'm in Nashville. I'm in the Bible Belt. Yeah. And how many solidly reformed churches are there around you? Not a lot. Not a lot. In comparison to Southern Baptist churches? uh... there are plenty of huge about the fact that our church in fact lays in the daunting shadow of a gigantic First Baptist Church. You know, that's what makes me just... obviously from his perspective, he's probably, including the Southern Baptists, as Calvinist at that point, because he probably would not even make the differentiation between a Charles Stanley view of one saved, always saved, and a meaningful... More importantly, what research is he using? Is it some Barna report he found somewhere that says that The divorce rate in churches is 50% higher than the world at large. And then having determined that number, he decided that they were largely also Calvinistic. Let's just say that if I go back on the program again and I specifically said, hey, let's discuss that particular issue. I think it'll come up again and I would obviously want to seek to challenge it on that very basis because it just, I was, what can I say to something like that? How can you respond to something like that? It's next to impossible. You can't actually have an intelligent conversation the type that let's say grown-ups might have if you're going to be able to just make stuff up out of thin air. If you're going to make a statement like that you better have some facts and figures to back it up or you lose all credibility and that's the point at which me sitting here listening to it having no hair started tearing out my skin because it really is so genuinely senseless You know, how you kept going, I don't really know. Well, from my perspective, look, you know, I really did try to explain this after the program was over. You know, there was somebody, in fact, he's in China right now, who at the end of the program said, well, that was a perfect waste of 54 minutes. And I just sort of sarcastically wrote back, well, you know, thank you for your support. And he just insisted. That was a complete waste. I do not believe that that was a complete waste. Now, if what you were looking for was a scholarly, moderated debate, you shouldn't have been listening to that program in the first place. I mean, you should have known what was going to be coming in that context to begin with. I'm simply looking for the opportunity. How many of this fellow's... Well, actually, let me back up a step. This is why I wrote the book. I didn't want to write this book, really. That was not something that sounded really exciting to me. But I realized, wow, new publisher, and a completely different audience that would never pick up a book from me at all. Am I aware of the fact that there are people in Calvary chapels who've picked up this book and didn't even read my section and then pronounced Dave Hunt the victor? Of course I'm aware it's going to happen. I knew that before I wrote the first word. Does that bother me? Well, it bothers me on the level that anyone would be such a sloppy thinker as to think that way, but I can't help that. There's nothing I can do about that. If we're consistent Calvinists, then we believe that a person is never going to bow the knee to the sovereignty of God and recognize their own creatureliness in the way it's necessary to truly understand and embrace these things unless the Holy Spirit of God is the one who causes that kind of radical change in their heart. And so if that's true, then I just look at the book and radio programs like this as a wonderful opportunity to be used to get a message out to an audience that otherwise would never ever ever hear this. Now will a majority of them probably on at least first blush mock me and slam doors in my faces and make sure I never show up at their church to talk about something else? Yes. Have there been opportunities I could have had on Mormonism or Roman Catholicism that I won't have because of the fact that I'm Reformed? Yep, that's true in all those cases. But can I trust that the Holy Spirit of God is going to bless His truth even when I get a minority of the time to present it. Yes, I do believe that, and so that's why I'm willing to do that. I fully understand why some other people would say, I just, I could never do something like that. Those, you know, those people, they just make me so angry. Yeah, I realize, I talked years ago with my fellow elder, now my fellow elder, at the time I wasn't an elder in that church, And he had seen one of the debates I did with Matitix, and he said, I could never do that, because if a guy like that treated me like that, I'd walk over and punch his lights out. So I said, well, that's why you're not called to do that. Exactly. So, you know, that's how I view it. Well, we are given gifts according to our calling, and I do think that it's never a waste of time to tell the truth, regardless of the forum. I mean, Paul spent enough time on Mars Hill All right, I appreciate it. I've taken enough of your time. Thank you very much. Thanks for calling. God bless. Take care. Bye-bye. 877-753-3341. Yeah, people say, don't you get frustrated? Well, yeah. I mean, I never get used to the idea that people can think that way and that they can be so closed to correction or so closed to any kind of thing that's beyond their tradition. Sure. But you know, like I said, as it was getting warmer and warmer in the discussion, and I'm watching the channel, people just going, this guy is an idiot, and all the rest of the stuff, I'm getting calmer and calmer. And if you've watched the stuff in the debates we've done, if you watch the debates, remember the Stravinskis debate? As Peter Stravinskis is pulling at his collar and he's rocking back and forth and looking at his watch and he's doing anything he wants to do to get out of that place, what am I doing? Am I doing the same thing? Am I getting all excited? No, I'm getting more focused. I'm getting even calmer. I mean, that's just, that's just, that's what you've got to do. From the very first debate I ever did, as my opponent got more and more angry, I'm just like, well, this is going well. Just calm down. That's all you can do. And I think it's the best way to handle it. So it was definitely an interesting encounter. And we've got a Catholic in the channel saying he didn't have his gizmo, he wasn't prepared. Well, you know right, you're exactly right. He was not prepared. He had every opportunity in the world to be prepared, but you know, those Baptists aren't much of a challenge anyway, so that's what happens when that takes place. I saw somebody in the channel that said they were going to call We had one person did call who dropped off Because I asked I think because I asked to bring it down to just one one question But it may have been because all those questions didn't have anything to do at all with the subject of oh good Of the topic today, and so let's so we do have a caller just got online Also from one of those one of them there red states Let's talk to Josiah in Dallas hi I Well, hi there. How you doing, sir? I'm doing fantastic. It's great to talk to you. Good to talk to you. Well, I do have hair left, but I think I was losing it there. Wow. Did you know about it from the blog? Yes, that's where I saw it. I'm sorry, I'm hearing the dividing line while I'm... You know, that will really confuse you. That'll sort of put you into a time warp when you do that. Yes, I better not do that then. I was just going to say, one of the things that was so frustrating for me is the way he presented. He would speak of Calvinism as though he were ignorant, that his position had an ism behind it as well, or Arminianism. He spoke as though you know his position was simply scripture right and uh... Doggone Calvinist! And I did see this, and unfortunately because of the topic of the book and the way the title is phrased, there's not a lot I can do about it. But the fact of the matter is, you do have to try to point out that these folks have a tradition, and they have their ism, and they can't just assume that their position is quote-unquote biblical. But they do, and you need to at least understand that that's exactly what they believe. That's exactly how they're hearing everything I'm saying. And sometimes people, once they have come to understand the sovereignty of God, or maybe was raised within the context of that kind of teaching, they get very frustrated because they just can't understand how someone can't see this. But see, if you were raised within the traditions that these folks were raised in, and every service you've ever seen had a 10-15 minute long or longer invitation and you know every verse of just as I am and have thine own way Lord that's ever been written a few that hadn't ever been written and were created and that's all you've ever heard and you've heard John 316 used in a particular way from the time you were in Sunday school Then when you hear me talking, you think I am wearing a black robe and I eat children. I mean, it's just, there's such a strangeness to it. that when you first hear your traditions challenged, it's like, whoa, that is really odd, that's really weird, that's really strange, et cetera, et cetera. I understand that, and we need to understand that. And I think when we do understand that, it helps us to be, hopefully, a little bit more patient, a little bit slower to get out the huge Calvinist Tommy gun and just start blowing these folks away, because Once you understand that, then you'll do what you can to persevere and to express yourself in such a way that shows you understand that for them, this is odd, this is strange. But let's go with the Word of God. Let's consider what the Word of God says. And you know what? There's some people like Charles Haddon Spurgeon that have believed these things before, and so on and so forth. But you're right. That's exactly the mindset of both of the gentlemen with whom I was speaking, is that we're just simply going with the Bible. And if I had time to pull it up here, I could pull up for you a clip that, in fact, I'm going to be using in some of my... Well, look at that. Where's KPXQ3? Uh, is it KPXQ2? Let me just try this just for the fun of it. I'm saying the Bible says he's not willing that any should perish. Now you twist that to make it a limbless rock. I reject the assertion about twisting that, Dave. You say he's not willing that the elect should perish. That's redundant. No, it's not. Of course they're not going to perish. No, it is not, Dave. And I would just like to say, since you're going to make the accusation I'm twisting scripture, you haven't answered any of the passages that I have presented to you, you run away from them to other passages. And I'd like to say that you're utilizing the traditions of men to do so. It is your tradition to understand the world the way you do, all the way you do. It is your tradition to not see John 6 in its clarity, where it clearly says that all that the Father gives him, it's your tradition to see foreknown as meaning God. Dave, the people that are the most enslaved to tradition are the people who think they don't have any. That was the original encounter between myself and Dave Hunt, July of 2000 on KPXQ. And if you didn't hear it, at one point I kept hammering in the word tradition and he said, James, I have no traditions. And my response was, Dave, the person who is the most enslaved their traditions is the person who doesn't think he's got any. And that has been from the very beginning. If you read my open letter in response to his book, enslaved by tradition. That's what you're seeing here. And I think, you know, at least we're being very consistent. Because when we say to Roman Catholics, look, see what your tradition is doing to your exegesis. See what your tradition is doing here, there, and everywhere. We've got to turn the other direction and look at the people in our own quote-unquote camp, or at least on our side of that divide, and say, you know what? There's all sorts of traditions around here, and the ones that seem to be the most controlled by their traditions are the ones who say they don't have any. And so at least we're being consistent at that point. Definitely. I thought you did a tremendous job at keeping the discussion exegetical, or at least on your side of it. I tried to. Yes, you did. Also, the other thing I grew up in a Pentecostal home, and I started off going to a Pentecostal school, and I started reading Sproul, and then numerous others, and came to see that the Reformed position was faithful to Scripture and careful biblical exegesis. And what seems strange to me is that both Dave Hunt, as somebody who's going to be debating this issue, as well as the host had about as much knowledge of Calvinism as many of the students who had never read anything on it, with whom I discussed it as I was reading and seeing the biblical nature of Calvinism. And it was just a little bit frustrating, because there's such an enormous amount of misrepresentation of strawman arguments that it would take hours to flush all those out. Yes, and unfortunately it does take hours and that's really where, for example, the Potter's Freedom has functioned so well for so many people is at least in that context they get to hear both sides and it takes hours really to work through all those things. But you're right, most people, I have only met Let me back up. A very small percentage of those people that I have dialogued with, who specifically reject and attack Calvinism, only a small percentage actually were attacking what Calvinism actually is. The vast majority were functioning on their own traditions, they were functioning on strawman argumentation, and most of this came to them through the fact they went to their pastor or to some spiritual leader at some point in the past, and they said, hey, doesn't this passage sound odd here in Romans 9? And all of a sudden, they get this look that tells them, wow, you know what? This guy is really serious about this. And they get warned. about the evils of Calvinism and it's communicated to them this is bad stuff these people come in and these people split churches and these people do bad things and so since it's someone that they trust they're like whoa man don't want to have nothing to do with that no you know and that's why I've mentioned a few times this fellow that at the Southern Baptist Church when when I became Reformed I was still teaching there and and I remember talking to him after class I had taught and he said You know, I remember when we read through Romans 9, and I remember thinking, boy, that sounds like Calvinism. That sounds like we're predestined, but I know we don't believe that, so I'll come back to it later. You know, and that kind of an attitude that really shows that we're not really practicing Sola Scriptura. We're not really pushing forward to a position of maturity to where we can really hold even our leaders accountable for what they're saying. It's a demonstration that while we may say Sola Scriptura, what we're really doing is Sola Pastora. And I'm not saying that we don't learn things from our pastors. I'm not saying we don't learn things from our elders. I'm not saying that anyone in their entire life could ever get to the point where every single thing that they believe, they have been able to check out so and so forth. I'm not saying any of that. What I am saying is that people will take these things, and especially when you sit down and say, well, you know, could we sit down with John 6, and could we walk through this passage together? At that point, what Christian would ever say, I refuse to walk through a passage of scripture from the lips of the Lord Jesus with you, you evil Calvinist. Well, you know, but there are some people who would. There are some people who really respond that way, and it's sad. I've seen it. Maybe you've seen it as well. They're like, I've heard about you people, you know. And how many times have you done, maybe you've had this happen too. You just read a passage. You just read John 6. And the person goes, that's just your interpretation. I had a friend who was discussing or was just going through scriptures with an Armenian young lady and she started crying and then she just was outraged at him. What are you doing? You're twisting scripture. He said, wait a minute, you're reading it. How did I do that when you're the one reading it? Or the other thing that you have to love, the host begins with the story. Those are always When you want to discuss Calvinism, there's always this story of what this Calvinist, some unnamed Calvinist who just said something that, of course, anyone who knows anything about Calvinism wouldn't say. Anyhow, I think he did it. Well, that's exactly what Tim Staples did. I don't know if you heard me playing that a few weeks ago. Yes, I did. But the story of his friend who became a Calvinist and lost 40 pounds, and everybody in the channel started talking about, oh, the Calvinist diet! We could make millions on this, you know? Or the one I love of a pastor who's talking to a lady, and she's feeling sorry for her sin, and she wants to talk to him. He says, well, you're nuts. I don't think you're one of the elect, so sorry. All those great stories. I love those. And the sad thing is, those folks really, really, really do believe that those stories are true. And as long as it's the pastor telling the story, then it must, of course, be true. So anyway, well, hey, I appreciate your calling in today, Josiah, and listening to the program. And who knows, maybe we'll get a chance to be back on that program. and talk about the perfection of the work of Christ as Savior. You know, who knows? I got the feeling from talking with Chuck that he'd be willing to do that. And at least at that point, we'd be able to make a clear distinction between a God-centered gospel and a man-centered gospel. That's really what it comes down to. So, Lord bless you down there in Texas, and keep the faith. Thank you. Hey, thanks for calling. God bless. Alright, folks, hey, I'm heading to St. Louis tomorrow. I'm going to be there at the Covenant of Grace Church. I'm going to be talking about this stuff. I'm going to be playing some of these clips, in fact. So if you're in that particular area and you want to drop by, we'd be glad to see you there on Sunday morning in the Sunday school service and in In the morning service we'll be talking about the Synoptic Gospels and the relationships that exist between the Synoptic Gospels and things like that. And so you'll want to be there and participate in that if you have the opportunity. And we will be back in time for next Dividing Line next Tuesday at 11 a.m. Mountain Standard Time. We'll be here, Lord willing. Hope you'll be there as well. Thanks for listening. God bless. At the crossroads, let this moment slip away We must contend for the faith our fathers fought for We need a new reformation day It's the start of the tide The truth is being trampled in a new age paradigm Won't you lift up your voice? Are you tired of plain religion? It's time to make some noise I'm going mad I stand up for the truth, won't you live for the Lord? 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 37106, Phoenix, Arizona, 85069. You can also find us on the World Wide Web at aomin.org, that's A-O-M-I-N dot O-R-G, where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks. Join us again next Tuesday morning at 11 a.m. for The Dividing Line.