Link to J. White critique of Steve on Romans 9

[Guest]

http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20070724fta.mp3


I can't wait for the debate! When you get a chance Brother Steve, listen to this file. It will give you a idea of how James is going to argue, though you probably know all of what he is going to use.

God Bless!

[Guest]

Just got through listening to the above and have a comment....

James was talking about how no man can resist God's will for there lives, and that Steve's exegesis is flawed because Steve does not take into account the "descriptive" and "prescriptive" will of God ETC...

So if this is correct, God wills for all men to come to him in faith, but his other will says "no", and the persons "will" which is evil by default, takes care of the rest???

If the above is true, how can James get around Luke 7:29 And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him. ??

The passage says that the will of God for the pharisees and lawyers was to submit to the baptism of John, which they rejected... I can see in some bleak way them saying God has two wills, but how can these two wills be in direct opposition in the same verse? The verse says God "willed " it, and the Calvinist says that God obviously didn't will it in his "secret will", because it would have happened!! Then they argue that we try and get around the sinfulness of the man resisting, but I say "No way!! I am just not convinced that it is God who willed them to be that way from eternity past. So I put full responsibility on the man for his sin, not God. I know that the Calvinist may say that they do too, but how can they get around the fact that there doctrine teaches that "ALL" things have been scripted??
[/i]

[Guest]

Just for you Brody, as we have a wee history. I wish you would come over to doctrines of grace and interact with us there. You will be treated very well, I promise! I am not welcome over here because I called out a Heretic and tried to warn you guys about the heresies fostered here, but none of you want to listen to me nor my warnings, but rather kick me out as a divisive man and a trouble maker! Come over and let us discuss these issues.
I believe you reject Open Theism, do not question the logic of the Trinity nor deny the innerancy of scripture, unlike the person here I rightly call a heretic! Please, come over and let us interact.
My bark is worse than my bite brother.

but how can these two wills be in direct opposition in the same verse?

In the same way that these verses teach God's will and mans will in the exact same event.

Act 4:26 The kings of the earth set themselves in array, And the rulers were gathered together, Against the Lord, and against his Anointed:
Act 4:27 for of a truth in this city against thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together,
Act 4:28 to do whatsoever thy hand and thy council foreordained to come to pass.

Here we have one event, with man sinning but God ordaining what happens.
Same with Joseph and his brothers sin Gen 50:20 And as for you, ye meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.
.
One series of actions involving the sins of his brothers but the exact same actions ordained by God for His purposes.

Arminians do not understand God's will.
They do not understand God's Decretive will and His Preceptive will.

All Arminians should be given a bible study on this subject, but because most of you attend and sit under Arminian theology, you will never get a Bible study upon this subject.

Mark

Brody, can you not see how God ordains whatsoever comes to pass, yet man has freedom to act according to his nature, and God uses that freedom in man to His own ultimate ends and holy purpose?
And that God does this through the very same actions and events that unfold as in the above two examples from scripture?

In both examples, man was doing what his heart wanted to do, and in so doing was going against God's Preceptive will, but at the same time, doing exactly what God willed in His Decretive will?

[Guest]

http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20070724fta.mp3


I can't wait for the debate! When you get a chance Brother Steve, listen to this file. It will give you a idea of how James is going to argue, though you probably know all of what he is going to use.

God Bless!

For everyone's convenience, here are all of James White's recent broadcasts on the topic:

7-17-2007 -- A few minutes starting at timestamp 52:10, about the potential debate
7-19-2007 -- Playing the recent caller from The Narrow Path whom Steve had to correct, and presenting his own exegesis of Romans 9
7-24-2007 -- Playing some of Steve's exegesis of Romans 9 from the Calvinism lectures, then responding to them.

Now, he thought he was playing all of Steve's comments on Romans 9--he said he could have missed something, but he thought he had it all. However, I went back and checked, because I thought I remembered some more. I was right, there's about a half hour of material starting 33 minutes into Steve's 9th lecture. (Some of that repeats or expands on the comments that Dr White did play.)

If anyone remembers any other sections that Dr White missed, please let me know. I want to make sure it's brought to his attention.

[Guest]

Just for you Brody, as we have a wee history. I wish you would come over to doctrines of grace and interact with us there. You will be treated very well, I promise! I am not welcome over here because I called out a Heretic and tried to warn you guys about the heresies fostered here, but none of you want to listen to me nor my warnings, but rather kick me out as a divisive man and a trouble maker! Come over and let us discuss these issues.

Hey Mark,

I did not kick you out of anything Bro. And I know that Steve had his reasons for saying the things he did. The whole purpose of the Family Bible Fellowship forum is to be able to voice different opinions on scriptural topics, and to do so in a spirit of unity and love. Most understand who post here that this is indeed what Steve wants. I and others have learned so much here, and you could to Brother. But calling people "heretics", "false teachers" ETC.. will only breed contention. And I will tell you that I wish you could tone down your language a bit, because I do like to see you interact on scripture here. I am sure that Steve would not mind you posting here at all, if you can just show a little more humility. I will look into the forum you mentioned.

I believe you reject Open Theism, do not question the logic of the Trinity nor deny the innerancy of scripture, unlike the person here I rightly call a heretic! Please, come over and let us interact.
My bark is worse than my bite brother.

I do not reject the Trinity, though I do not understand it as clearly as some. I am not an open theist, but do not think that ones salvation lies in understanding God's perspective of time. Which I believe to be the core of open theism. I also believe that the scriptures are "God breathed" and profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction..ETC... As I said, I will check into the forum you mentioned, but I must confess...I do not expect to be greeted with a warm welcome at that forum.

but how can these two wills be in direct opposition in the same verse?

In the same way that these verses teach God's will and mans will in the exact same event.

But thats the problem Mark!! The verse in Luke 7 says that it was "God's will" for the lawyers and pharisees to submit to Johns baptism. And the text says that they "rejected it". If Luke would have understood it from your perspective, he should have worded it differently. The logic of Calvinism would have us believe that God both willed it, and didn't will it. I can't accept that kind of reasoning.

Act 4:26 The kings of the earth set themselves in array, And the rulers were gathered together, Against the Lord, and against his Anointed:
Act 4:27 for of a truth in this city against thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together,
Act 4:28 to do whatsoever thy hand and thy council foreordained to come to pass.

But ask yourself this, what was "foreordained" to come to pass in this verse?...I believe it to be the death of the Messiah, who had to die and rise again the third day.Lk. 22:21-22; Acts 2:22-23

The Jews who killed the Messiah had no clue they were doing so, and were responsible for there own actions. You see Mark, it is me who is arguing that man is responsible all by himself for his own sins, it is you who is arguing that it is man and God responsible for his sins.

Here we have one event, with man sinning but God ordaining what happens.
Same with Joseph and his brothers sin Gen 50:20 And as for you, ye meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.
.
One series of actions involving the sins of his brothers but the exact same actions ordained by God for His purposes.

But the text says nothing of God ordaining the "sin" to take place. I believe that God had a purpose behind what happen, and he did not have to ordain that Josephs brothers would be evil sinners and put the thoughts in there hearts for them to carry out those purposes.

Arminians do not understand God's will.
They do not understand God's Decretive will and His Preceptive will.

All Arminians should be given a bible study on this subject, but because most of you attend and sit under Arminian theology, you will never get a Bible study upon this subject.

I listen to James White, Gene Cook, and others weekly who are Calvinist. I have been listening for years. I am not close-minded, and do not think that I have all truth on lockdown. But I do not accept ideas that are contradictory to scripture and reason.

Brody, can you not see how God ordains whatsoever comes to pass, yet man has freedom to act according to his nature, and God uses that freedom in man to His own ultimate ends and holy purpose?
And that God does this through the very same actions and events that unfold as in the above two examples from scripture?

In both examples, man was doing what his heart wanted to do, and in so doing was going against God's Preceptive will, but at the same time, doing exactly what God willed in His Decretive will?]

But by your logic above, how can we ever know anything about God's will? How can you know the difference? And what would it matter? Could God tell me to do something, and really not want me to do it, and decree that I do something else contrary to what he said before hand?

Also, not to switch gears, but Calvinisms weakest link to me is Persaverence of the saints.
Will the forum you mentioned discuss this? Because scripture seems to be very clear that men who were once saved can fall away, and suffer eternally for it.

Thanks for your invite, I will check it out Bro.

[Guest]

Hey Brody,

You wrote:

As I said, I will check into the forum you mentioned, but I must confess...I do not expect to be greeted with a warm welcome at that forum.

I don't think you would have to worry. Mark has invited you to come. You could bring other people over as well, so it wouldn't be you against the world so to speak.

You also wrote:

Also, not to switch gears, but Calvinisms weakest link to me is Persaverence of the saints.
Will the forum you mentioned discuss this? Because scripture seems to be very clear that men who were once saved can fall away, and suffer eternally for it.

Yes, this topic has been discussed. You could start a new thread on it.

Resting in Christ,

Haas

[Guest]

We listened to Steve Gregg's entire presentation on Romans 9 from his mp3 series on Calvinism today, and I then provided my response. No one can say we aren't fair in letting the other side have their time, to be sure! So we will open the phone lines on Thursday for callers. Anyone who wishes to defend Mr. Gregg's comments (including Steve Gregg!), or attempt to refute the exegesis I offered last Thursday of the text, is welcome to call.

What Steve covers re: Romans 9 (in the Calvinism lectures) isn't nearly as comprehensive as in the Romans lectures themselves:

Steve Gregg's The Narrow Path site
click: Verse by Verse Teaching
scroll to: Romans
then: listen

James White hasn't heard Steve's Romans lectures...and it shows in his mp3s (as he doesn't comment on what Steve says in them). Being critical of someone's teaching before before (actually even) hearing them is...not very wise, is it? At least White had the insight to admit he hasn't really studied out what Steve says. We can give him credit for that....

Rick

[Guest]

James White hasn't heard Steve's Romans lectures...and it shows in his mp3s (as he doesn't comment on what Steve says in them). Being critical of someone's teaching before before (actually even) hearing them is...not very wise, is it? At least White had the insight to admit he hasn't really studied out what Steve says. We can give him credit for that....

Nope. Not wise at all, especially since James (directly or indirectly) gives people the impression that he's a scholar. If he hasn't really studied out what Steve says, he isn't qualified to critique his work. So when his followers and followers of Calvinism hear him, they're liable to have the wool pulled over their eyes and think to themselves "yeah, he knows what he's talking about. Tell em James," and this is laughable. Especially if they still conclude that Calvinism is biblical. (which is open for debate).

Everyone, the great defender of Calvinism has spoken. Believe it, or be deemed a heretic. 8)

[Guest]

Mark wrote,

Arminians do not understand God's will.
They do not understand God's Decretive will and His Preceptive will.

All Arminians should be given a bible study on this subject, but because most of you attend and sit under Arminian theology, you will never get a Bible study upon this subject.

This repetitive nonsense that you splurge everywhere is starting to get rediculous. I'm sure this is a debate fallacy of some sort. Steve understands God's will, and he also is familiar with the Calvinists interpretation of it (Revealed will/Secret will). See herefor evidence:

[Guest]

I am not welcome over here because I called out a Heretic and tried to warn you guys about the heresies fostered here, but none of you want to listen to me nor my warnings, but rather kick me out as a divisive man and a trouble maker!

As near as I can recon it, you've been being "kicked out" for nigh on two months now. Are you aware that all it would take is a couple of mouse clicks?

Do you not see how self-contradictory your continual laments about being kicked out of here are?

Perry