The Conquering Truth

When confronted with the historical doctrines of grace, Arminians frequently respond by citing popular proof-texts like John 3:16, 2 Peter 3:9, and 1 Timothy 2:4 to deny God's absolute sovereignty over salvation. But are these passages being handled righteously, or are they being ripped entirely out of their biblical contexts?And this question about context matters, because the main problem with the way Arminians handle scripture is that they ignore or twist the context of their proof texts to arrive at the conclusion they desire. This is true whether you are talking about the general context of the harmonization of the Old and New Testaments, where so many Old Testament passages show the weakness and inability of man and are quoted in the New Testament, and Arminians act as if the Old Testament and New Testament have no relation with each other. The other way they do this is by quoting only one or two verses and completely divorcing this short excerpt from the context of the passage it was found in. This second category is where we spend most of out time in this episode.In this episode we break down the most common verses used to defend Arminian theology. By examining the surrounding text, the immediate audience, and the overarching counsel of Scripture, we expose wrong thinking and the poor hermeneutics that drive these misinterpretations—and try to show how ignoring context can pave the way toward serious errors.Thumbnail image by AgnieszkaMonk on PixabayTimecodes00:00 Hermeneutics07:46 John 3:1624:19 2 Peter 3:935:59 1 Timothy 2:451:02 Matthew 23:37Production of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

If grace is the goodness of God, then it seems obvious that some goodness can be resisted while others can’t. Think about a baby being born. If the mother and father want to bring the baby out of the womb there’s nothing the baby can do to stop it. Or consider an unconscious man whose heart has stopped or is beating irregularly.. He will find it impossible to resist the emergency surgery or the doctor shocking his heart back into a normal rhythm. But other types of grace can be resisted. That same child years later can refuse to celebrate his birthday with his family and can sulk and pout even if his parents force him to come to the party. The man whose heart has been restarted can refuse to take his prescribed medicines or to exercise as he should. It is similar in the Christian life. Scripture talks about man resisting the grace of God. But it also talks about man being born again and the Spirit blowing where it will. It talks about God giving man a new heart and replacing the heart of stone with one of flesh. If an earthly parent can show irresistible grace to their child then it is hard to argue that the Father of Spirits cannot do the same. For those who hate to think of God as God, as the One who sovereignly rules in heaven, irresistible grace or effectual calling is considered something immoral. But scripture says that it is about the glory of God. It is about God choosing to show compassion to those who He wants to show compassion. We are saved by grace and if you don't want to receive grace from God, you should question if you are saved. So let’s start off with a question: Is there a biblical reason why we would want saving grace to be resistible?Timecodes00:00:00 Intro00:08:04 Why Grace has to be Irresistible00:12:29 Fallen Man Cannot Understand Good Gifts00:21:25 Hate the Prerogative Belonging to God00:26:14 This Grace is Given Throughout a Believers' Life00:34:24 It is God's Work and God's Purpose00:38:59 Irresistible Grace from Scripture00:43:41 Picture of Jonah00:48:23 Example of Those that did not Receive Grace00:52:51 Resisting the Holy SpiritProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

Arminians want to argue that to have free will is somehow against predestination and the election of God in salvation, but that is not what the Reformed confessions teach. For example in the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith it says, “God hath decreed … all things, … yet God [is] neither the author of sin … nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor is liberty taken away, but rather established”. When people claim that Calvinism says that there is no such thing as free will, nothing could be farther from the truth. The issue is the definition of free will, because many Arminians hold to a definition of free will that according to the Bible, not even God Himself has. So let's start with a question: what is the nature of God's free will?Listen to the audio version here: Timecodes00:00 Nature of Free Will05:08 Libertarian Free Will is False16:17 You can only choose what pleases us25:58 Fallen Man Chooses Evil30:16 The Heart is the Problem32:53 God Gives us Light to Make the Right Choice51:11 How God's Means Affect our Choices59:09 Who Are We to Reply Against GodProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

There are churches that hold Super Bowl parties or cancel Sunday evening services so people can watch the Super Bowl. If the Sabbath is a day of rest, why shouldn't we do what we want to relax on that day?Thumbnail image by Alan Owns under BY-NC-SA 2.0Timecodes00:00 Sabbath Made for Man09:56 Superbowl Idolatry13:22 Sabbath Sports28:57 Joy in God40:05 Childrens' Sunday Sports42:54 Fighting for the Sabbath57:28 Community Testimony01:01:33 Are Sports Special?Production of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

Dispensationalists often argue that Old Testament promises to Israel must only be fulfilled in a physical way to the earthly nation of Israel. There are many complexities with that view because even in the Old Testament, the word “Israel” is also used to mean the promised land, the northern kingdom, the church, or even Jesus Christ. And while there are promises that were made to the physical nation, it is important to understand that God laid the groundwork for bringing in the Gentiles to Moses all the way back in the Pentateuch. In Deuteronomy, in the Song of Moses, Moses understood that the earthly nation of Israel was just a type and that those to whom God gave the gift of faith are the true Israel. In this episode, we look at how fundamental the typology of Israel is to redemptive history and how easy it is to miss it because of how strongly dispensationalism has been pushed in the US and much of the rest of the world. Timecodes00:00:00 Song of Moses00:09:47 Tower of Babel00:22:01 Rejoice O Gentiles00:32:57 Israel's Rebellion00:49:40 DispensationalismProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

Does the Bible clearly teach that those who did in their sin are tormented for all eternity in the lake of fire? Or does it suggest that there is an end to God’s wrath against sinners? While the church has long held the former position, in late 2025, Kirk Cameron posted a video where he genuinely questions the doctrine of eternal judgment, or, as those who hold to conditional immortality like to call it, eternal conscious torment. This view, often called annihilationism, redefines Biblical death and eternal torment for a period of judgment ending in annihilation. While we will deal with many of the verses that they use in this episode, it is worth first considering how changes to eternal judgment affects all of theology. Those who argue for conditional immortality often act like their view does not impact other doctrines. So here’s the question: Are they correct?Thumbnail image by Ivan Vtorov under CC BY-SA 3.0. It shows not hell, but a lava lake in a Hawaiian volcano. Timecodes00:00:00 Why Does it Matter?00:04:49 What Is Death?00:19:12 Changing Terms00:22:26 Eternal Contempt00:28:16 Unpayable Debt00:36:56 Rich Man and Lazarus00:42:36 Destroying Soul and Body00:52:19 The Second Death00:59:13 God Can't Be Like That?01:08:11 Wages of Sin Death01:12:42 Corruption in Hell01:14:09 ConclusionProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

Kirk Cameron came out recently saying that he leaned toward a view of conditionalism which is a flavor of annihilationism. Many people started to ask, “Is Kirk Cameron a heretic?” Todd Friel described why he thinks annihilationism is not a heresy and why therefore Cameron is not a heretic. To do this, he utilized a common method that categorizes each theology as either “Essential” or “Non-Essential”. In his view, to be classified as a heresy, the wrong idea must be about an essential doctrine (he also seemed to say if you hold to a heresy, then you are a heretic, but that may have just been in the context of Cameron’s position as a teacher) The problem is that this method of categorization regarding heresy does not come from Scripture. So we feel that it is worth discussing what the bible actually says about heresy and what makes a man a heretic. While Friel and many others say that heresy is different than error or being wrong, the Greek word that is translated heresy means “to choose”. The word also contains the idea of creating divisions. So heresy fundamentally means to choose to believe something that is not true. But does this mean that everyone who chooses to believe something that is not true is a heretic. NO. Absolutely not. According to scripture, a heretic is one who refuses to repent when corrected and who teaches their false view to others, causing division in the body of Christ.So, why is it dangerous to make heresy to hold to something essential? Because what scripture teaches us is that God loves those things that we do out of faith and he hates those who love lawlessness. And lawlessness is not limited to “essential” doctrines, but springs up in many places and defiles many. It’s also dangerous to define heresy as something other than error, as it makes distinctions and categories that God does not make. It lets us give ourselves a pass on willful disobedience to the word, and it ignores the fact that all doctrine is connected. As we will discuss in this episode, annihilationism attacks the nature of the atonement and the depth of God’s justice and mercy. This is true of many other doctrines that would not be considered “essential”. So we disagree strongly with Todd Friel about whether annihilationism is a heresy. But is Kirk Cameron a heretic? Watch the episode, and let us know what you think in the comments (more importantly, let us know what you believe the scriptures say, and help us correct our thinking if we are wrong). Timecodes00:00:00 Todd Friel on Heresy00:03:51 What is Heresy?00:10:32 Gradations of Heresy00:34:37 Confessions00:36:59 Essential Doctrines?00:43:35 Advancement of Doctrine01:00:09 Lofty Goal01:05:00 All Doctrine is Serious01:09:58 Reject a Heretic01:32:47 Pulled from the FireProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson

Do the New Testament writers ever use the Old Testaments verses that they quote out of context? It’s an important concept to consider because many people use proof texting to make theological arguments. They will quote a verse divorced from its context and declare that it means what they want it to mean. So if the writers of the NT, who were inspired by God, used those same techniques, then proof texting must be approved. But of course that is ridiculous, because the heart of proof texting is to put your words in God's mouth rather than putting His words in your mouth which is the purpose of the Word of God. In this episode, we examine how the New Testament writers handled the Old Testament and how often comprehending the meaning of a passage in the New Testament requires knowing and understanding the fuller context of the Old Testament passage that was referenced. New Testament writers would often just quote a single line from the Old Testament, expecting that those who love God and His Word would be willing to study the Bible and spend the time to understand. But today, most people in the pews, and even most pastors know very little about the Old Testament. So here’s the question: If it is wrong to proof text, how does that change how we should look at the Word of God when it quotes from an earlier writer?Thumbnail image by Arran Bee under CC BY 2.0Timecodes00:00 Intro05:22 God Inspired Everything14:30 Under the New Covenant22:29 Muzzling the Ox29:57 The Just Shall Live By Faith38:59 Den of Thieves50:08 The Virgin With Child52:20 Out of Egypt I Called My SonProduction of Reformation Baptist Church of Youngsville, NCPermanent Hosts - Dan Horn, Charles Churchill and Joshua HornTechnical Director - Timothy KaiserTheme Music - Gabriel Hudelson