Brethren Moderators, my Worthy Opponent, and Kind Friends:

I am here before you again in the negative of the proposition that you have heard read. I do not believe that God predestinated all things that come to pass. I do not believe that God predestinated sin and wickedness; therefore, I am here to deny his proposition. Before I refer to anything that he has said, I am going to read his questions to you:

     No.1. "Did God determine in the counsel of His own will in eternity to make a world, and Did he not, engage His wisdom to devise a plan and His power to perform it?" Answer: Yes, Q. "Was not th wisdom of God abundantly sufficient to devise a plan for a world that would in all its parts, in every way and at all times and places meet and perform the demands of His will, and was not His power equally adequate to perform it?" Answer: Yes.

     Q. "Did not God will the existence of, and determine in the counsel of His will to make a world that would turn out in every way as it has, and could He not have made it so that it would have turned out differently if such would have suited His will and purpose better?" Answer: His making the world has nothing to do with sin, whatever.

     Q. "If it was God's will to have a world into which sin would never come, and yet, He engaged His wisdom and power to make one into which He knew sin would come, did He not knowingly engage His wisdom and power in the making of it so that it would result in the defeat of His own will?" Answer: Did God will sin?

     Q. "Could sin have entered the world unless God had allowed it to enter? And could not God have prevented its entrance as easily as to allow it? And would it have been best for it not to enter? If so, did God do that which was best when He allowed it to enter?" Answer: Sin is not the act of God. He is talking about sin entering into the world and what God allowed and what He didn't allow. It doesn't have a thing in the world to do with his proposition, as to whether God predestinated it or did not predestinate it.

     Q. "Did not God create all things for Himself? If so, do not all things belong to Him? And if they do, then did He not have the right to determine the exact sphere and position that each thing should occupy in the world?" Answer: Did He determine it? We are not talking about rights. And yet, He determined it and He did not cause it, according to his own logic and reasoning. Do you know a thing in the world about language? What does the word "determine" mean, sir? I wonder if God doesn't cause what He determines. Will you tell me how God determined something and did not do it?

     MODERATOR SMITH (interrupting): Pardon me, but I insist honestly and fairly he is charging consequences on the same hypothetic reasoning as I would if I asked him if he caused the thing he foreknew, how could he foreknow and not cause it? It is the same basis.

     ELDER WEST: I am making my argument on the definition of the word "determine." You read the definition of the word "determine."

     MODERATOR SMITH: Will you answer the question asked you on foreknowledge?

     ELDER WEST: This is a question on "determine."

     MODERATOR SMITH: It is the same basis of reasoning.

     ELDER RHODES: Let him go ahead.

     MODERATOR SMITH: You did not question my consequences awhile ago.

     ELDER WEST: We are doing that now on what the word "determine" means. Read the definition of the word and see if I am charging consequences. This is your word. I am not responsible if Brother Sikes or somebody wrote that in there for you.

     MODERATOR SMITH: Elder Cayce wrote some of yours, didn't he?

     ELDER WEST: Elder Cayce didn't write any of mine.

     ELDER RHODES: I would like to speak a word. I would like to say this, and I re-state again that I believe that he thinks from the words used, that it is his conviction, and that he has a right to charge consequences, but it isn't charging consequences. I believe God is the first cause of all causes in the sense that I explained to him, like the London Confession of Faith.

     ELDER WEST: We are talking about these questions and not the London Confession of Faith.

     ELDER RHODES: All right, let him go.

     MODERATOR CAYCE: I am going to rule that Elder West in his answer to that question is not charging consequences. He is talking about what the question itself has in it, the very wording of the question.

     MODERATOR SMITH: May I make just this rejoinder? I asked the question at the beginning, was that minister or elder that you are debating with, if he stated simply relative to foreknowledge, would he be charging consequences? He would say, why, sure, I cannot answer Elder West because Elder West believes his doctrine that God foreknew all things; therefore, I just had to do like I did do because God foreknew it. It is the same basis of reasoning he says has to be like Elder Rhodes says because God predestinated it. Isn't that synonymous and a parallel case? If not, I am somewhat duped. You can call me befuddled.

     ELDER RHODES: I think Brother Smith is right. I agree with him, but rather than have any further disturbance, I would rather let him go ahead. God knows who is right and who is wrong. May God direct our conscience.

     MODERATOR SMITH: Did not God create all things for Himself? Did not all things belong to Him? If they do, then, did He not then have the right to determine?

     ELDER WEST: Is that charging consequences? I am not responsible for the words that he put in his question. I didn't frame the question for him. That is what he says. Didn't God have the right to determine the exact sphere and position that each thing should occupy in the world? I am going to ask you, then, the question, Did God determine everything that happens in the world?

     Q. "If God created all things for Himself, then did He not have some use for, and some purpose to be fulfilled by each thing that He created? If so, did He not make them in such a way that they would be best suited for and most certain to serve the use and purpose for which He created them? If not, why not?" Answer: God had a purpose in all His creation.

     Q. "If God has determined to deal with man according to man's conduct and yet has not determined what man's conduct shall be, but has left man free to determine his own course of conduct independent of any influence which God has determined, then does not man determine both his own course and the course of God in all of God's dealings with him?" Answer: I said that he said God determined what man's conduct should be, and then he got up here and said that West got up and said God determined that West said that Rhodes said God determined what his conduct should be, and then they say "he is charging consequences."

     MODERATOR SMITH: Ladies and gentlemen, I beg your pardon, but I don't think we said anything to him. We said that you charged him with believing that predestination itself was not causative; that it was charging consequences because he disavowed it. Isn't that correct?

     ELDER WEST: Did God determine his conduct? Does He determine an individual's conduct?

     ELDER RHODES: That doesn't bring it to pass.

     ELDER WEST: All right, then, He worketh all things after the counsel of His own will. Is He bringing that to pass?

     ELDER RHODES: He worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.

     ELDER WEST: Are you rising to a point of order, or have you forgotten the agreement of yesterday?

     MODERATOR SMITH: We have all violated it, haven't we?

     MODERATOR CAYCE: Your seats are too hot, is what is the matter with you. If you are too hot, move over here.

     MODERATOR SMITH: What is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

     MODERATOR CAYCE: I am just stating what the trouble with you is.

     ELDER RHODES: Let him go, and let's not bother him any more. Go right ahead.

     ELDER WEST: The question says, Did God determine the man's conduct? If a man were to take some man's daughter out here and actually violate her being a virgin, did God determine his conduct, sir? I know that it hurts.

     MODERATOR SMITH: Just a second. Hold his time. On the same hypothesis of reasoning, I am going to insist on him going to use foreknowledge. That is not the exact proposition under discussion, it is true, but I am telling you that it is a parallel case. I want to know if a man ravaged a man's daughter, did God foreknow it, and if so, could he have escaped doing it?

     ELDER WEST: Do you want to debate this proposition?

     MODERATOR SMITH: I insist on the same proposition of reasoning. It will be charging consequences if you do that as you are.

ELDER WEST: Is that what he says? Why is it he stated "determined man's conduct?"   

     MODERATOR SMITH: Determining a man's conduct and predestination being the cause of that conduct, what you charge is a different thing.

     ELDER WEST: I didn't say a word about it being the cause. I am asking if it could be. I have asked him, how could He determine the thing and yet not be the cause? I wonder if it is ugly conduct for him to act ugly? I wonder if the Lord determined that he should act ugly. If he determined his ugly conduct, will he have to do what the Lord determined?

     MODERATOR SMITH: I am going to keep on until I am forced by law or some other way. On the same hypothesis of reasoning, if the Lord foreknew he was of the conduct, did he have to perform his ugly conduct?

     ELDER WEST: We are not talking about the word "cause" but the word. "determine."

     MODERATOR SMITH: We are talking of "foreknown" also. It is a parallel case. If foreknown, it couldn't keep from coming.

     MODERATOR CAYCE: I will have to call you to order.

     MODERATOR SMITH: I stand corrected, but I still insist that he is out of order.

     MODERATOR CAYCE: These brethren are not debating the question of foreknowledge, and you cannot bring that into it as a parallel case, regardless of what the consequences might be in that.

     ELDER RHODES: Let him go ahead.

     MODERATOR SMITH: One more thing and I am through. When I stated that this morning, neither of you questioned it.

     ELDER WEST: I was not calling for that in a question. That is not what we were talking of then. All I want is for you to state plainly was just what Elder West said that was charging consequences. That was all I asked for. Let it all go in the record.

     MODERATOR SMITH: We are willing to let it go in the record and trust the whole consequence to God.

     ELDER WEST: I wonder how many more times I have to go over this question

     Q. "If God's conduct in dealing with man depends upon man's conduct, and yet man in the performance of said conduct does not depend upon God, then is not man more independent than God?" Answer: Man does not depend upon God for his conduct and I will challenge you to say that he does.

     Q. "When God alone existed in eternity before time began, did not all time with all the events of time of every shape, grade and character, depend upon Him as to whether they should ever exist or not?" Answer: That is exactly what I said he said. All events-all of them, regardless of what shade, grade and character, depend upon Him as to whether they should ever exist or not. Yes, all events were fixed by God, according to him. It had to come to pass because it was fixed. It doesn't matter what you folks do, according to his doctrine, you couldn't help it. He put these words in here, or somebody did for him, and I am not responsible for it.

     Q. "If time with all of its various and varied events did, back in eternity, depend upon God as to whether they should ever exist or not, then did He purposely arrange for their existence, or did He do it accidentally?" Answer: I wonder if you should arrange something if it would come to pass. He uses the word "arrange." Did He arrange it on purpose or by accident? I wonder if the Lord arranged something, whether He would cause what He arranged. Now, I wonder if they will tell me that is charging consequences.

     Q. "If any part of the events of time did not or do not depend on God for existence, then would they not have been just as certain to exist had there been no God as they are?"

     Q. "If, in eternity before time, time with all the events of time, did depend upon God for existence, and yet some of them do not now depend upon Him for existence, will you please tell me when, where, and how their dependence upon Him for existence ceased?" Answer: The events that happen in time are not dependent upon God for existence. All right, we will pass on.

     Q. "Did God eternally foreknow all things? If so, is His foreknowledge, like Himself, immutable, and if it is, can any power in heaven, earth, or hell, change His knowledge or deceive Him? If not, can any event of time be changed from the way He knew it would be? If so, how could this foreknowledge stand?" Answer: God did foreknow all things.

     Q. "Did God eternally foreknow anything independent of the counsel of His own will? If so, what was it, and upon what was such foreknowledge based?" Answer: Yes, He foreknew some things independent of His will. He knew Adam would sin, and it was independent of the will of God that sin entered into the world, because sin came by man and not by the will of God. So, we pass on to the next question.

     Q. "Did God foreknow that this world and all the creatures therein would exist before and independent of His determination to make them? If not, did not His foreknowledge of their existence rest on the fact that He had determined to make them?" Answer: Yes, to the first part, and no, to the last part.

     Q. "If God's foreknowledge of the existence of all the creatures of time was based on His determination to make the creatures, then did not His foreknowledge of their acts rest in the same determination, since they could never exist unless He had made them and they could not act unless they existed?" Answer: They had to exist to act, but God does not cause them to act in sin. If they had to exist to act, would that make their actions directly dependent upon the Lord? Or would I be charging consequences, if I were to say their actions, according to your doctrine, rested and depended exclusively on God?

     Q. "Does not the nature of the acts of each creature depend upon and flow out from the nature of the creature, and did not the nature of each creature depend upon the way they were made, and did not the way they were depend upon the way that God in His counsel, seeing that such feelings come in connection with that which He rather had never existed?" Answer: What does that have to do with your proposition? The next question:

     Q. "If God had rather sin had not entered the world, then is it not also a fact that He had rather to never have spoken one word to or concerning man as a sinner, Himself, by His prophets, His Son, His apostles, or His ministers, seeing that all such words have been spoken to and concerning man as being in a state or condition which God had rather he had never been in?" Answer: What does that have to do with your proposition? Your proposition says that God predestinated all things that come to pass, both good and evil. All right, we will go to the next question.

     Q, "Has not God' always thought of man as a creature that would sin, had sinned, or had been redeemed from sin? If so, and He had rather sin had never existed, then is it not a fact that He had rather never to have had a single thought which He has had concerning man?" Answer: I don't know what God thinks and I am sure He was not thinking of him existing as a sinner before he sinned. I am sure of that fact. We will pass on to the next question.

     Q. "If God had rather sin had never existed, hence, had rather never redeemed the man from sin, and carry him to heaven as a redeemed sinner, then is it not a fact that He had rather there would be no shouts of praises in heaven by redeemed sinners, praising Him for their redemption, seeing they will be praising Him for something He would rather have not done?" Answer: What does "rather" have to do with your proposition?

     Q. “If God had rather sin had not entered the world, then is it not a fact that He had rather not punish any man for sin, either in time or in eternity, seeing that such punishment is inflicted because of something which He would rather had never existed?" Answer: In your question you make an argument on the word "rather." The next question:

     Q. "If the foregoing question be true concerning God's attitude toward sin and its entrance into the world, then has He ever had one thought, spoken one word, or performed one act, in heaven, earth, or hell, in time, or eternity, that has been as He originally would rather it should be, seeing they have been shaped according to and in connection with a thing which He rather had not been?" Answer: Therefore, regardless of what happens, the basest of crimes that ever existed, it was the pleasure and will of God. That is exactly what you are affirming. That is what you say, that it was the pleasure of God. It could not come to pass unless it pleased God. He said "Yes" I believe it." But God says He has no fellowship for sin or wickedness and is not pleased with it. Does sin please the Lord? If sin doesn't please the Lord, according to his doctrine, how in the world is it in existence? Do you believe the London Confession of Faith? If so, you should come over and join our folks-if they will have you.

     Now, then, he gave me his questions in two speeches.

I will answer the rest of his questions in my next speech, if I think of it, and if I don't think of it, I will do it after lunch.  

     All right, I have some questions to ask you. Do you do everything you do because you cannot help it? Do you contend in your questions to me that God is the cause of all events? Did you say that no events come to pass without a cause? Is God the cause of events? If God is not the cause of events, who is the cause? Did God determine all events? Is determination causative?    

     All right, he said God is the cause of all causes, but he objects to me saying that God is the cause of something, but He is the cause of all causes.

      All right; on this side of the board we have God. Over here on this side we have the devil. I am not much of an artist but that is the way some folks are supposed to see the devil. All right, we will argue a little on second causes. God is not the cause, but there are second causes and first causes. Is the second cause a cause? If it is not a cause why all the second causes? When I have been saying that you were talking about causes here, your moderator got hot and jumped up and said it was not the cause at all. Charging consequences. I didn't say whether it was the first or second cause, did I? Did I say anything about what kind of cause it was? If you fellows will admit there is such a thing as a second cause? Is this second cause a cause or something else? I have been using the word "cause" and laid a little trap and somebody walks right into it. All right, here is the first cause, according to your position. Deuteronomy xxxii. 4: "God is without iniquity." So, if God is without iniquity, He cannot be the cause in the first sense, the primary sense, or the second cause. If there is no such thing as cause, why have you been talking about second causes in this record? If He is the cause of the second cause or the first cause of the first cause, because the second cause is the indirect cause. So. He wouldn't cause this man to sin directly, but He had a nasty little devil do it for Him as a second cause. Is that right? Is there such a thing as second cause? You have been objecting to the word "cause" all the time. What is the meaning of first causes and second causes? They started a wrangle over "cause." I did not.

     All right, we wilI proceed with some negative arguments. His proposition cannot be true, because God has given His people certain commandments and forbid them to do evil by His commanded laws. Exodus xx. I to 17: "And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery." I wonder if the Lord told those folks that they should not commit adultery, and then as a second cause, caused them to commit adultery? Was that a second cause or a first cause? I will give them their own medicine. They object to the word cause. "Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's."

     Now, I am going to give you the Rhodes version, according to his questions: Thou shalt have other gods before me, for I predestinated it, and if you have other gods before me, not the direct cause, but the second cause. Thou shalt make graven images, for I have predestinated it, according to second causes. I am not the first cause of it, but I am the second cause of it. You shall take my name in vain, for I have decreed and predestinated it from all eternity. His proposition should have said "from all eternity." I will hold you guiltless, because my name is glorified by your cursing. Poor old Peter glorified God by cursing, and the cock crowing glorified the Lord. Break the sabbath day and keep it evil, for I have predestinated it. You cannot help it, because I am the second cause. Spit on thy father and thy mother and dishonor them, because you cannot help it. I am the second cause. I will get good out of it, and your days will be long on account of your evil deeds. Kill, because ye cannot keep from killing. I predestinated it. According to his doctrine, you cannot kill any more folks than the Lord predestinated and determined for you to kill, and cannot kill any less folks than the Lord predestinated and intended for you to kill because He is the second cause. Commit adultery, because I have decreed it. Yes, He is the second cause of all events, so don't feel a bit bad if you commit adultery. If you get out here, according to his doctrine, and absolutely go down with violence of this city, it is according to the predestination of God, according to his doctrine. Steal all you can and glorify my name, according to his doctrine. Somebody said that is charging consequences. That is not charging consequences, according to his doctrine. Can they steal any more or less than the Lord wanted them to? Can they? Can they steal more or less than the Lord wanted them to? If He decreed all events as events coming to pass as a secondary cause, then, by the secondary cause they cannot steal any more than He wants them to or any less than He wants them to. Can they? If you can, your argument falls. Bear false witness against thy neighbor. You cannot keep from it to save your life. If all events were fixed and determined and caused by second causes. Absolutely, they couldn't bear any more false witness than the Lord wanted them to, or lie any less than the Lord wanted them to lie.

    Time expired.