Duncan, MacArthur, and Sproul: Questions and Answers #1

science aside dr. Duncan twice made reference to first Corinthians 15:19 and although I am in preferencing my question I'm joyful Christian and I'm going to spend eternity with all these folks but people I witnessed to say what if you are wrong what if Christ was not resurrected what if what have we lost I'm joyful I've gained everything but what do I tell so you know the philosopher who's already also mentioned today Blaise Pascal it made his famous wager that if you bet your life on the Christian faith and when you die you find out or you maybe don't find out but the reality is that it was not true you haven't lost anything because you've still had a joyful life and lived it to the fullest whereas the person who bets against it and it ends up being true spends eternity in hell that that's a kind of facile view of things I think I've never been all that impressed with the wager because Paul is not that optimistic they references that he made here is that if Christ is not raised the implications for that are enormous not only are we of all people the most to be pitied but we are still in our sins we've become false witnesses of God because we've testified that God raised Christ from the dead and you know we have been following after a lie and those who have gone before us who have died they have perished you know and so I mean the stakes are enormous but I'll shut up now because our guests are here and they are the ones who are the object of this inquiry God we were just filibustering giving you so let's start over here hello good afternoon and my question is for dr. Duncan you stated that science does not possess the tools to prove or disprove the origins of life can you expand on this and also does this apply to those who preach the theory of intelligent design they seem to be trying to use science to prove the existence of God are the tools of science equally limiting to those who preach intelligent design when when folks in intelligent design make arguments from the microscopic intricacy and the the content of creation giving evidence of a designer that's a perfectly legitimate thing to do but it's another thing to say that you've got the tools of science to disprove the existence of God or the origin or to disprove the Christian view of origins in one there is much evidence that can be gleaned in the other you're moving out of the realm of what an empirical process is actually capable of doing as I said philosophers would step in and say there are some things that empirical study can get you an answer for there are other things that it can't get you an answer for so for instance you know we might if a materialist scientist were to say if you can't measure it if you can't weigh it it's not real a philosopher might come back and say well what about the laws of thought the laws of logic can you weigh those can you measure them no what does that mean they're not real well he might then say well yeah it means that they're not real they're just social conventions and then the philosopher could say okay so that mean that I get to make up my own laws of thought if so I just made up a law of thought that I'm always right and you're always wrong and therefore Christianity is true so there are limits on what certain types of processes can yield with regard to philosophical evidence and conclusion but the guys is the expert in that sitting next to me so RC we just passed the rule that the only one of us library was one but new also I bite my tongue off I do have to say that one of the things that's almost constantly overlooked except by such people such as Anthony flew in his most recent book and was certainly present with with Carl Sagan is that the metaphysical assumption of all science is that the universe is knowable that is it is intelligible that screams for design if there is no structure if there is no design then the universe contrary to mr. Sagan is not cosmos but chaos and therefore unintelligible so when the scientist wants to rule out design in the universe he's not simply ruling out the possibility of theology and philosophy he's ruling out all possibility for science because the necessary assumption for scientific inquiry is that there's something we can know out there of a question they're talking about the University campuses and intelligent design those kinds of topics in the last couple of years there's been a forum that's developed primarily from scientists at UCSD having to do with it's called beyond belief and it's on the video it's on the internet they have to this is I think they're starting the third one in November and I'm just wondering if other you gentlemen or any questions you know have thought about creating a forum called beyond disbelief and to go ahead and provide some sort of counterweight to that now I think the people who would organize it would be receptive to having Christians there I just don't think they know who what Yoji ins to invite and so I'm just wonder if you've heard of it and if you have thought about that kind of because I know that beyond belief is also on other campuses and that seems to be the phraseology for people who are trying to put the scientific non belief of Christianity in practice well just to excuse me I'm not contagious but I think we have to understand what we're talking about here there there is no such thing as the science of creation there's no such thing as creation science because creation can't be explained scientifically does that does that take you someplace you've never been in your thinking there isn't any more than there would be such a thing as observing Lazarus after he came out of the grave watching how he walked how he ate giving him some kind of medical tests and that would explain how he came back from the dead you're not talking about anything that science can explain there is no scientific explanation for creation it is not repeatable observable it is not it doesn't fit science it is one massive miracle so what happens is all good I may say that again somewhere and whatever works right I'm a pregnant good so listen so here's what I'm getting at creation quote-unquote scientists all they keep doing is disproving evolution right they keep saying it can't happen it doesn't happen genetics tells it doesn't happen it's never happened we don't see it we haven't seen it we won't see it can't happen it can't happen it can't happen at the end of the day okay I give that tells me nothing about creation because creation is a divine miracle so if if you want to know about creation you only have one source that's revelation so if you're going to have a group of people together they have to be people who believe the book of Genesis and can articulate it and show that science what is and is observable now is consistent with that account what I see in intelligent design is a safe haven for people who are stuck with the fact that evolution doesn't explain it stuck with the fact of teleology and design but don't want the biblical account so I see intelligent design as a safe middle ground for people who are at least honest enough to say the evolutionary model doesn't work but are not willing to end up with the god of the scriptures and with divine revelation so where Christians need to go I think and what we need to proclaim is faith in the biblical account which is the only accountants and eyewitness account from the Creator I'm not I'm not familiar with that group but I will say that I think that the that the kind and I don't know what beyond belief does I don't know what the substance of their stuff is but things like the Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins arguments all I want to do is give them the microphone say please keep talking you'll drive people right to the Bible right to the gospel because the vision of life that they then attempt to lay out after they've done their deconstructing I don't know how a human being can survive with that kind of meaninglessness so animal microphone let them keep talking invite that group to your campus and just be ready to do the gospel in the aftermath so hi mr. McArthur when you spoke of the relationship that God has to evil you use the word that he allows evil and he wills evil and they seem a little different to me one seems active and one seems passive and I was just wondering if you could speak to that well I think that I'm simply using simple terms not in a technical sense evil exists God is God and he is absolutely sovereign therefore God allowed evil to exist if he allowed it he had to will it not allowing it is simply the act of his will so that's that's simple distinction without causing it and God distances himself completely even in Romans nine it didn't get around it pointing it out vessels fitted to glory is an active verb vessels which have been fitted for destruction is a passive verb God even distances himself from that in a sense so takes all responsibility for vessels fitted to glory no responsibility for vessel vessels fitted to destruction so it's simply the allowing is the effect of his willing thank you wait wait wait wait wait we're doing this in sequence no no no wait wait wait wait wait wait you have to wait I'm very sorry I know it's hard but you got to do it cuz he's up at the microphone in 2nd Timothy 3:16 when Paul says that all Scripture is god-breathed what specifically is he referring to as you're referring to the Septuagint and if so what does that imply as regards inspiration and inerrancy to whomever who's he asking it in in the first instance he's referring to the Old Testament Scriptures whether you mean them in the Septuagint translation or another early Greek translation or in the Masoretic text but his words by extension apply to all Scripture if you if you look over in chapter 5 he he has the quote where he quotes from both the Old Testament in the New Testament in one verse and calls it Scripture and so but most directly it's reference to the Old Testament scripture by extension it refers to all Scripture hey gentlemen thanks for being here when sharing the gospel how important is it to use the law to reveal sin to reveal the need for the Savior and how do you do it without being legalistic for anyone well I think it's essential that the person understand that what salvation is is rescue divine rescue from eternal damnation you know we're not saving people from a lack of purpose we're not giving a gospel that's going to bump them up on the few notches on the comfort scale in life and make them more prosperous and happier and give them more self-esteem this is a serious rescue operation from eternal damnation which then begs the question how did that happen to me well why would god damned me I'm a nice person than etcetera etcetera eventually you're going to end up if you're giving any kind of gospel presentation that has any kind of real spiritual weight with the issue that this individual stands culpable before God as one guilty of violating the law of God and I think the ultimate sin and this is where I think sometimes some of these approaches where they drag people you know through the 10 commandments don't get at the real issue which was articulated by Jesus who said you're going to be damned because you don't believe in me sooner or later you've got to get past the 10 commandments to the great sin of all sins which is ultimately to reject Jesus Christ but I think it is necessary that people understand that God is holy and righteous and has revealed that in Scripture and has established the law not only the external law of the Ten Commandments but in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus takes the whole thing inside and then expands it to rejecting him and they've got to understand the consequences of having violated the law of again that goes back to Romans 10 they have to understand that God is far more righteous than they think he is and they are far less righteous than they think they are and the separation is is impossible to bridge and they need a redeemer and a savior to rescue them from the consequences of these violations which are relentless and unending and then you know Romans 3 plays into that that there's none righteous no not one there's none that does good and all of that of course is drawn out of the Old Testament text so yeah I think it's critical to understand that not in a superficial way and not in a way that is demeaning sometimes you hear people doing this and saying well you got to face it you're a lying adulterous for a you know blasphemer well there's a lot more to understanding this than just something like that so but I think it isn't essential the gospel only makes sense when you understand divine judgment thank you to dr. MacArthur still in this quest for the source of evil in the context that nothing can come something something cannot come from nothing so if Satan was a fallen angel and came and infected the Garden of Eden what was the devil that made the devil do it in other words worded worded that evil in death and the devil come from and why well my parting shot would be explained what a leaky dispensationalist is okay stay there to ask the second let me let me compound your question even more or the the temptation that Satan fell to theoretically didn't come from outside of him theoretically didn't come from inside of him because he was holy in one sense and there was nothing unholy outside of him which makes the dilemma even worse right in one sense so if you expect me to answer where it came from hope you would yeah I'm not able to do that I'm not capable of that except that's what I give you a little bit of hint when I talked about the the depravation asked but the private you know the metaphysical concept that that because there is good it in itself speaks to the issue of evil so it is the opposite of what God made the opposite of what God created but you still have the ultimate dilemma of where the prompting for that came we know where it came into garden but in heaven we we don't know okay from where it came thank you and then your question was about I think you've described yourself in the past of time or two as a leaky dispensationalist I was wondering what that really meant well because I I have to distance myself from what most people think of dispensationalism you know seven different dispensations two new covenants the difference between the Kingdom of Heaven the kingdom of God and the book of Galatians have you no isolates itself and James has nothing to do with us and all of those convoluted kind of things that are imposed on the text I I simply believe and you can this is the summation of my whole quote/unquote dispensationalism I simply believe that there is still a future for Israel as a nation as an entity in the purposes of God absolutely because that's what's promised in the Old Testament and that's it and anything that connects with that or relates to that I just take the Old Testament at face value and I'm unwilling to change my hermeneutics when I come to those passages and make promises to Israel become promises to some other entity including the church so that that's purely an exegetical thing for me being consistent with your hermeneutics rather than a system that gets him imposed which is more complex and I think very difficult to defend biblically everybody believes in dispensations everybody we all understand pre-fall post-fall we understand pre-law post law we cross post cross we understand this age and the age to come so we all understand that there are different economies in which God has operated there was a time when God overlooks certain things and now commands all men everywhere to repent acts 17 so it's it's making sure that those distinctions are biblical distinctions and not some kind of external distinctions imposed on the text I understand thank you okay over here over here yeah I guess this question is kind of providential to the answer you just gave I think you would all agree that between three of you you all unite around the gospel of Christ and reformed theology is known for being doctrinal theology it places a great stress on doctrine what do you do in a church when as I know you three if you talk long enough some of the differences in doctrinal perspectives would begin to surface dr. MacArthur is dispensationalism our Sea Scrolls covenant theology there'd be some issues over maybe eschatology and other things that you unite together but yet you're divided in certain areas how do you deal with that when it happens in a body because I've seen churches split over it and what do you do well since I'm the odd man out here with these coven analysts that's true actually I just want you to understand this that what we disagree on is is minimal and it much of it has to do with eschatology and and I I am humbled eschatologically by the by the words of Peter who said that even the prophets in the Old Testament looked at what they wrote to understand what person on what time they were talking about so when you're talking eschatologically you you you decide you're going to interpret eschatological passages either in one way or another but we all understand that we are humbled by the reality that what hasn't happened yet is cannot be fully known especially when much of the passages that are eschatological are in visionary form and other than just simple straightforward historical statements so but but that's the future so I think with that and maybe a few other ecclesiological issues we would differ but ninety-eight percent of the things that the scripture teaches we we affirm together all the way but certainly all the way from theology proper through Biblio soteriology Christology pneumatology amar d ology angelology when we come all the way down and finally we get into ESCA ecclesiology and maybe we you know we talk about the baptismal mode and all that kind of thing and and then we get to eschatology and what there's some dividing points at that juncture I've tried to minimize those in my understanding of Scripture by asking not to be referred to as a dispensationalist because that's a that's a buzz term in fact Gerstner said one time that I was the only dispensation he ever met that didn't take it to its logical conclusions because he said that at our seminary when he was giving a series there he couldn't understand me because it bothered him that I didn't have consistent logical powers he didn't he was afraid of where I was going to end up you know if I wasn't going to be where all dispensational end up it would be some other tragic place a scary thing about your question to me is the worst thing you can possibly do in light of the reality that doctrine at times does divide is to flee from doctrine that's like saying the truth of God doesn't matter and God forbid that we should ever set it forth in our church because if somebody gets upset or offended we're going to have a split a church that never cares about the doctrine is a dead church but I think I think some people use doctrine as a big club and they beat people up with it and I think as a pastor you encourage the faint-hearted you help the weak you exhibit enduring macrosomia you know patience we have a doctrinal statement at our church and it's 14 15 pages long we call it what we teach we don't call it what we believe because we don't all believe it yet and so we we don't say to someone you have to sign this doctrinal statement to come into this church because I don't want to spend my whole life preaching what I believe to people who already believe it that's redundant I know all these people are in process all we want to have people say is are you willing to submit yourself to the instruction that's going to be built on this so I think it's the it's being arenak it's being gracious it's following the patience of Christ as he endeavored to communicate with his apostles who were Blockheads as we all know and he was going back over the same thing again and again I think I think it's the patience and the love it's the first Corinthians 13 attitude and it's I and I know there's a side of me that only you hear a sermon and you read a book and you you would think maybe the grace Church was a pretty hard-nosed place our doctrine is clear and we don't hesitate to proclaim it but it's the church should be pervaded by the patient love of its leadership to let people be in the process that the Spirit of God is working in their hearts with the truth being taught to them to bring them to that place of conviction if you go into a church and slam dunk reformed theology on people's heads you're going to cause a fight because people have reason to believe what they believe somebody told them this was the truth of God and it's sacred to them and there's definitely a process in letting people move along and you want to make sure that that there's openness and generosity and graciousness in the proclamation of these truths without wavering on the truths themselves thank you very wise my questions for John MacArthur um kind of one ask if you think my theology or belief is true or not biblical whatever when I first became a Christian about the first I don't know five or six years I start to learn I even know the job I thought John the Baptist's and Gospel of John were the same guy so I had to learn you know from my pastor and asking questions and things like that but then I start to you know believe that uh read certain things that said Wow you shouldn't do this and he would say the same thing so when I work in LA well I got to stop doing this and things like that and I would you know hear about daily disciplines reading the Bible in the morning or whatever and start your day with the Lord things like that in turning from sin and so forth so that wasn't my focus and then I met some people on the way that said well that's old covenant theology or your legalistic and and things like that and so the past seven years or so second half of being a Christian I I get scared that animai am i Pharisee or am i you know am I and I like one guy told me at one time he was like well you're you're happy when you or something like that what you feel good about yourself when you do the right what God you think God wants you to do but when you when you don't you you're down and that's somewhat true so I I is that the way right way to grow as a christian and then how do you know if you're not trying to earn God's blessing or something like that well first of all I don't know who you're running into but cancel all these people out you need to be listening to the right people telling you the right thing and as babes desire the pure milk of the word that you may grow thereby if you have tasted that the Lord is good if you've seen the kindness of the Lord in your salvation if you've seen what the power of the truth did to save you then you understand what the power of the truth will do to sanctify you and your you will if you're truly regenerated and converted you are going to desire you're going to desire the things that the new nature longs for you're going to have holy aspirations now it is it is irresponsible and wrong to tell you that to pursue obedience to the Word of God is some kind of legalism that smacks of classic and anomie anism the idea that you know where sin abounded grace much more abounds so more sin means more grace and you forget the god-forbid part so you grow by the Word of God man doesn't live by bread alone but every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God John 17:17 sanctify them by thy truth thy Word is truth you're in a process now of being sanctified you're being conformed to the image of God you have given new impulses new longings new desires we say this that when you know you're a Christian not by the perfection of your life but by the direction of your life and all of a sudden you're moving toward the things that you your heart wants you have a new set of values a new set of motives new set of desires you have an appetite for the truth you have a hunger to honor Christ you don't want to displease him those are all the impulses of the new man and one dominating characteristic of that new man in first John is if you say you your Christ then you walk the way he walked and Jesus was no legalist but he kept the law of God perfectly and he's the model that's not legalism illegal as says I'm capable of earning my salvation by what I do I don't think you believe that so you understand that salvations by grace and the drives and impulses of that new life shouldn't be restrained they should be exploited to the max so you want to take every opportunity you have to expose yourself to the Word of God understand the Word of God and implement it in every facet of life so that's the other part of my question when I so when a Christian when I do things that I know are wrong and I sin or Ebell if I do that does it mess up my like Hank Hannah grass has a mess up your communion with God I think is that because that's what I thought messes up my closeness that's the way I put it in well sure it's not going to change your salvation because salvation is for the purpose of saving you from your sin and that's eternal but but that's why John said these things I write into you that your joy may be full he's writing to believers and telling them how to have full joy full joy comes from obedience Jesus said happy is the man who hears my word and does it so if you don't do it you're going to forfeit that joy you're going to you're going to you're going to feel the striking of your conscience which will accuse you you may even lose your assurance of salvation that's part of it so obedience brings you the fullness of joy that comes in the fullness of that relationship and disobedience takes that joy away that's why David says restore to me not my salvation but the joy of my salvation thank you over here this question is for dr. MacArthur can you tell me do you believe sorry do you believe that God is still sending us prophets today and if yes how do we recognize them and if no why not and where in the Bible would we find that I do not believe that God is giving direct revelation today I believe that Jesus 2:20 says the church was built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets you put the foundation down and then you go from there you don't put the foundation down the twentieth floor again so I think the the gift the New Testament gift unique gift of the Prophet was to speak divine revelation not so much on a scriptural level as on some pragmatic level in the life of the church and I think that the Apostles ceased I think that there they were unique there were obviously a twelve-hour unique they who saw the risen Christ that were even I think church apostles who had a unique responsibility of leadership and I but I think the apostles and prophets were foundational it was one of those temporary revelatory gifts that God gave in the in the time before the scripture was written and now we have the scripture which is the faith once for all delivered to the Saints and it is complete intact there are no further revelations at all from God doesn't mean he doesn't lead us doesn't mean the Spirit doesn't direct us but there are no more verbal revelations coming from God now if you say there are then you have the dilemma that I read about in a book I read some years ago that said when somebody stands up in your church and gives a prophecy you know they either got it from God or they didn't well that's not helpful is there a red light on their head that goes on when it's from God how that is not helpful and I think clearly in all the epistles of the New Testament the church is not waiting for some prophecy they're under the direction of the Holy Spirit through the word so I would I do not think I know there are some people who don't believe in cessation at that point and they think they are pried there are prophets today but they've had to redefine the gift and they've had to say this these prophets that still exist can be wrong often are wrong and shouldn't be judged by the biblical standard of a prophet was if you're wrong you stone him right that's what they say and they shrink away well if you say do you mean you're an agent of Revelation that your teachings should be included in the next edition of the New Testament most of them are saying I'm a prophet but no I'm not going to go that far we take out the concordance and put words from Tom right I would add to that if you do run into people seriously claimed to be prophets or apostles in the biblical sense that you run for your life and I would also say grab your wallet why this comment is on dr. Duncan's lecture about the rampant materialism and and atheism are seeing it in today's top scientists I'm a big fan of Soren Kierkegaard and I think he answered that question some 160 years ago technically speaking you put it every science lies either in a logical imminence or in an imminence within a trance attend to explain more popularly put he said what mathematicians and astronomers save themselves they can with infinitely disappearing my new magnitudes but in life itself this does not help a man to obtain his examination papers and much less to explain spirit they meant a lot of good things in Kierkegaard but watch it truth is not subjectivity yeah that's a disastrous concept that he passed off to the world I don't know that he really meant it the way many contemporaries interpreted is I've always been a large fan of care guard myself but maybe just be careful okay over here dr. MacArthur I followed you very well when you were talking about the sovereignty of the Lord and that he has willed evil to exist but I completely lost you when you started talking about the wrath of God who is he mad at what does he matter unless he has given some choices why would he be mad well God is not mad in the sense that we think of you know some days you're happy in some days you're mad God is angry all the time all the time access creation he is angry all the time at sin he is angry every hour of every day that's in because all of God's attributes are always fully operational at all times he's also loving all the time gracious all the time merciful all the time etc etc so you don't want to think of God as sort of getting picked off on a certain day and drowning some country there is a steady reality to the wrath of God God is angry and necessarily angry God is angry and necessarily angry over everything that violates his holiness and he has to be you know we had a talk about this Sinclair Fergus and I were at the banner of truth conference in England Ian Murray's thing and but the question came up about why would Jesus say when he we went to the garden Father let this cup pass from me and Sinclair said if he didn't say that he wouldn't have been consistent with his holy nature because he was about to become an object of God's wrath a sin bearing substitute this repulsed everything in him it was it was expected that he would say that because it was so Contras it's contrary to our nature to do what's right for his to do righteously for him it was contrary to his nature to sin God is all the time angry with sin because it violates his holiness because it pollutes his universe and he will judge every sinner but at the same time all his other attributes are working at the same time so it's not that when we get mad everything else disappears is that what you mean I'm truly trying to understand who isn't what just to say that he's all the time angry at sin question his sovereignty because a sovereign Lord wouldn't how would he allow a situation to go contrary to his well because I'm angry and because anger for him is not a sin anger for him is a manifestation of his holiness it's a manifestation of his righteousness and he has every right in every desire to put his full glory on display do you understand that there's such a thing as righteous anger would you be angry if somebody came in and molested your child would you be angry if someone murdered your member of your family that is a righteous indignation God's anger is always righteous anger it is never sinful anger and it is consistent with his righteousness to have that anger thank you mm-hmm can I just add one thing there just to put a second on his view God ordained zeal does not mean that evil is good we can't call good evil and evil good that's not what John is doing he's saying that nothing can come to pass except through the sovereign will of God and that in a certain sense God wills yet so ever comes the pass including the fall and He wills that for his own glory because he is willing that there be evil is not because he thinks evil is good but he thinks it's good that there is evil because even in the presence of evil he manifests his righteousness he manifests his holiness and when He wills evil to come into being He wills at the same time his own wrath against it so there's no real contradiction here but go ahead right here Pastor John regarding suffering and our health it suffering and our personal health uh-huh if someone is chronically ill many years and then they get a diagnosis they have a terminal illness which could be cured possibly can they choose not to be treated and just go home and be with the Lord is that would that be wrong morally or how would you speak to that absolutely not absolutely not for a believer going to heaven is game ya gain for me to live as Christ dies gain far better to depart and be with Christ no that's a choice comes up a lot in pastoral ministry heaven is far better and sometimes the pain and the the inevitability of things it's not uncommon for people to decide not to take you know heroic kinds of things I think there's a natural instinct building to us to survive and to live and I think most people who are Christian people who have a great hope of heaven battle because of the people that are around them that love them and that to whom they're helpful and needful and all of that but no III don't think particularly for Christians that you are required in any sense to exhaust every alternative I I would be more prone to do that with a non-believer just to extend the opportunity for the gospel thank you I have a question for dr. MacArthur I have a friend of mine and I came to the conference today we are part of a men's Bible study the beats every Thursday night and last night our Bible study one of the elderly gentlemen said that a couple years ago he was speaking to a young man and the young man told him he simply couldn't believe in God and he said the reason he couldn't believe in God is because he was sexually abused as a young child and he just couldn't understand how loving and all-powerful God could allow that to happen to him so I was just wondering how you would respond to a young man for whom evil is so personal and so painful yeah well I think I would first of all I would say you have a very personal view of the universe if you think that the reality of whether there's a God or not depends on what happened to you that's you you have overestimated your importance in deciding major questions that is it that is a really myopic approach to it but I got a practical level on a pastoral level you would say to a person like that everybody lives it with evil we all live in a fallen world you're not the only person who had something evil happen to you but far more important than the evil that happened to you is the evil that's in you and I would drive them directly to a cut to a recognized in to me to what I am you can't get him to the cross that I would tend to think that that is simply an excuse that you know pulling that up is merely an excuse for him not to believe because he doesn't want what the gospel offers he doesn't want the Christian life but I think inevitably when you deal with people like that who are blaming the blaming the evil that is outside of them they need to deal with the evil that is inside of them and and the violation of the law of God in their heart and move them to Scripture and to the gospel from there thank you I think you're next over here I am haha I couldn't resist that the devil made me do it all right it's your turn I'm glad I'm in the house of Lord and dr. MacArthur you said that God willed evil into existence please explain the difference between willing and creating as a huge difference uh explain well all right how about this you got some splaining to do yeah how about this I can will a lot of things but I can't create anything so it's a completely different concept God creates and He wills to allow things that he does not create and it's not an object it is a reality and we get you have to go back to that sort of metaphysical idea that it is the violation or rebellion against what God created that he willed to permit but he didn't lead the rebellion he didn't lead the violation I understand these questions ultimately resolved in our confidence in Scripture and it's as far as we can go I mean you can if you just keep pressing this thing you're going to find yourself under the bed saying the Greek alphabet you know eventually you rest in the fact that look I got a pea brain and I'm a finite creature and I will never capture in between my ears the infinite mind of God so I'm content to take the revelation of Scripture and rest in that I either believe God willed evil or he didn't if he willed it he's in control of it if he didn't it's in control of him if I have a God who is under who is subject to the power of evil then I don't have the god of Scripture and I don't have a God that I can trust for the future thank you um - for dr. MacArthur and I enjoyed what you said it's just I was wondering what you would say to someone who is in tragedy like right now like just lost their child and is a non-believer even if they are a believer like what do you say because what you're saying is harsh I mean its truth but what do you to say to someone who's like in it now can I jump in John one of my favorite one of my favorite already said more than I know I I saw a program once at 700 club ok Pat Robertson was interviewing a young lady a young woman who had two children between the ages of 1 and 3 in separate incidents both of her children were tragically killed and she was weeping and sobbing as she said how could God allow this to happen was unthinkable and Pat Robertson was trying as hard as he could to comfort her and he would say you can't blame this on God and God had nothing to do with this this is the fallen world this is the depth everything but God I started actually talking out loud to the television I was sitting I say Oh pat pat pat pat pat please don't tell this woman that God had nothing to do with that because you've just talked taken away from her any hope of ever finding the redeeming purpose in this out of her biblically it is God who giveth it is God who takes away drawn recited passage after passage he brings prosperity he brings calamity that's not harsh what we have to tell people is that your only hope in the midst of your pain in the midst of your suffering is that it is not an accident but that the supreme wisdom of a loving and transcendently holy God is behind this and you can't possibly know today why but we if this is his world and it see who else would you like to have in charge of it beside the creator god I mean that meant that I don't think that's harsh it may be difficult but I don't think it's mean-spirited I don't think it's harsh I think it's the truth that we have to speak to people to give them any hope at all in the middle of this well that's exactly what I'm saying if God didn't have anything to do it but not that well but if if God didn't have anything to do with it then nobody's in charge of the universe and nothing makes sense if God did have something to do with it if he had everything to do with it if it fit within his plan then everything is in his control and everything has meaning and points back to him and to his glory and you can you can begin - as time goes on you know very Christian people see things like that in retrospect and they they can give you a litany of things they can see that God did in response to what appeared to be a tragedy at that particular time as they look back as time goes on so it's better to know that God is in control there's there's hope and every every issue becomes redeemed or redeemable in that situation all right we have John Duncan we can have another Q&A tomorrow right all right let me just tell you we have time for two more one here one there and the rest of you can sit down I'll wait for tomorrow so Europe I have some family friends but then I've read in the press the growing acceptance of an accommodation of Eastern thought and particular interest in so many Americans that believe in more or less reincarnation could you address how to apologize as a Christian and and lead them correctly who are you asking that anyone who may you've been off first of all people have this thing of reincarnation because they hope to come back a second time and so on but in the theories of reincarnation to bound all the way back to the pre-socratic days with the mathematician Pythagoras and the transmigration of the soul you have this concept that in the next incarnation you have no conscious recollection of a previous incarnation right so what is the world is the point if I have not if if I have no continuity of personal existence and awareness between Who I am now and who I was the last time around and who I'm going to be the next time it's it's a meaningless thing I really don't see I'm it's just but like its wish projection I I just have never been able to put a whole lot of stock and well I mean it's even worse for Eastern thought because an Eastern thought reincarnation is not your goals the nation is your goal Nirvana is your goal where there's nothing it reincarnation is a curse it's like karma coming back on you and so you know when you you live a and life and you come back as a housefly so we've Americans have Disney fied the the very depressing view of reincarnation that exists in the Eastern religions so and you have the wonderful privilege of asking the ultimate question for this cure I'll try to be worthy doctor scroll in light of the troubling times in which we live and my brain is now leaving me in light of the troubling times in which we now live there's been a lot of teaching that's come along lately encouraging Christians to try to redeem and preserve their culture and my question is what is the Christians responsibility to his culture real quick I would say a lot of people who are Christians are praying for revival all the time and when I see for revival is a revival means a renewed life where you get lots of conversions in this quantum leap and the number of people who come to Christ that's a wonderful thing that's the goal of evangelism but ok but then what happens after the people are converted I've always been very much committed to a new Reformation and what a Reformation is is the change of the forms of a given structure and we need new forms in the culture because the old forms are decaying they're dying they're corrupt but Reformation I believe begins in the church when those who are been revived when those who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit grow from infancy spiritual infancy to adulthood and they begin to manifest and exercise the godly life in their mature adulthood if that happens in sufficient numbers the structures change that's what happens historically because the Christian faith has implications for economics for political thought for education for aesthetics for every sphere of human life which is what culture is involved with you don't need to capture the political structures of a nation to reform the culture that's the last thing I'm concerned about I'm concerned about being salt and light manifesting the power of the gospel in every corner of the culture you

Channel: Ligonier Ministries

Views: 188,114

Rating: 4.8248758 out of 5

Keywords: evangelism, Intelligent Design, Creationism, science, apologetics, evil, divine sovereignty, inherency of scripture, inspiration of scripture, Dispensationalism, eschatology, doctrine, legalism, gift of prophecy, cessationism, wrath of God, illness, suffering, reincarnation, redeeming the culture, God, Christianity, fal08, ligon duncan, john macarthur, sproul, rc sproul

Id: 0zYLlyMzUSw

Length: 56min 19sec (3379 seconds)

Published: Wed Aug 14 2013