Brethren Moderators, Worthy Opponent, and Kind Friends:

     Elder Rhodes, do you endorse the poetry that you just read?

ELDER RHODES: I most certainly do.

ELDER WEST: Elder Rhodes says that he most certainly endorses the poetry that he has read. This morning, and it has gone into the record, Elder Rhodes said that he did not believe that God was the author of sin, and I am going to read the fifth verse of your poetry to you:

     If He decreed the death of His Son,

     The sinless, the righteous, the most holy One,

     And this did not make Him the author of sin,

     To make Him the author, where would you begin?

     That is all I want to go into the record. It is signed by J. C. Sikes. Had I been you, I would have given the daddy of it. Do you really want that verse to go into the record?

     ELDER RHODES: I want it all to go into the record.

ELDER WEST: That is fine. Now, then, he talks about me being in a tight. I wonder why he is so worried about tomorrow. We will wait until tomorrow comes and see what a tight Ariel will get into. I don't blame you. I would want the folks to think of tomorrow, too. I wouldn't want them to think of today if I were you. And I don't believe that I would want them to read about today.

 All right, Revelation i. 19, John wrote about the things that he saw, and they were shown to him that he might write them that those individuals might see certain things that would come to pass. But did that say that God predestinated it? You know, this morning he talked about the ladies blushing. He said God stirred up those people to do that. He repeated that, time after time. I want to read his Scripture citation; I think I can find it, in the thirteenth chapter of Isaiah, beginning with the fifteenth verse: "Everyone that is found shall be thrust through; and everyone that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished." Now there is not one word there about God predestinating it. I am not going to stop. I am going to read the next verse to you: "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it." "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them." Rhodes said the Lord stirred them up to do it. I wonder where he found that out. The Book doesn't say that. How did you find out that the Lord stirred them up to do that? Then again, let us see. He said that the Lord will raise up His children even to murder. Let us see if the Lord did. Is there any difference in Ephriam and the Lord?

     ELDER RHODES: You misquoted me. I did not say that.

     ELDER WEST: It is in the record.

     ELDER RHODES: If it is in the record, let him read it.

     ELDER WEST: He said the Lord will even raise up His children to murder. Is that what you said?

     ELDER RHODES: That is what I said.

     ELDER WEST: All right, Ephriam shall bring his children to murder. It didn't say that the Lord should do it, but that Ephriam would do it.

     ELDER RHODES: Will you read this verse here?

     ELDER WEST: I have already read that. You can read it yourself. I am following you. "For the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: All their princes are revolters." That is all that I am going to say about that. There is a little difference between Ephriam and God, isn't there? You just haven't studied your lesson. That is the trouble with you. You haven't read your Bible. That is all that is the matter with you. .

     All right; give me the London Confession of Faith, please (addressing Elder Cayce). Chapter IV, page 39. He has made a terrible to-do about the London Confession of Faith. Let me read to you from paragraph 2: "After God had made all other creatures, He created (Gen. i. 27) man, male, and female, with (Gen. ii. 7) reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God, for which they were created, being (Eccl. vii. 29; Gen. 1. 26) made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God (Rom. ii. 14, 15) written in their hearts, and power to fulfill it; and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was (Gen. iii. 6) subject to change." If everything was unconditionally predestinated, then, He wouldn't have had to have given them the power to fulfill it, because, according to your doctrine, they just had to fulfill what was predestinated for them, to fulfill, and no more and no less.

     All right, we will come back to Chapter III and what we talked about on yesterday. We made an argument on the word "contingency," and contingency means that which is dependent upon another, and so, God predestinated some things upon conditions. That is what the word "contingency" means. You can laugh if you want to, but that is what the word "contingency" means. Laugh and show your ignorance.

     He said that I said that predestination was causative. I deny the term. I said that God caused what He predestinated, over and over, but he said that West says some things just happen. The record does not say that West said that. And West did not say it. But that didn't hurt him. He told it all over this country that Elder Cayce had signed written propositions with him to debate and then backed out after he signed them. He went crowing all over this country. He said that, he wrote that, and said he had as a matter of record-there is his letter there on the desk-that Elder Cayce signed propositions with him and then backed out. I asked you time and time-again to produce them. And he said Elder Newman did the same thing. It doesn't hurt you to say that West said it just happened.     When did Elder Cayce ever sign a proposition with you? He said I misquoted him. If I did, God absolutely predestinated all thing to come to pass. I cannot help it to save my life. I just can't do it.

     Hand me that red book, please. (Elder Cayce hands the book to him.) He wants me to answer the Scripture in Isaiah xlv. 7. All right; I am going to read this into the record: It is not my work, but it will be found on page 107, and I want that to go into the record also: "Isaiah xlv. 7, is also introduced to establish the universal predestination of God. It reads thus: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” If darkness and evil in the text signify sin and wickedness, and the text proves that God purposed sin and wickedness, then the inevitable conclusion is, “I the Lord do all these things.” The Lord fully explains the real meaning of the text in subduing nations by Cyrus; also in frustrating the tokens of liars, and making diviners mad, and turning wise men backward, and also in making their knowledge foolish. The title of this book, is "The Baptists in All Ages," by Newman.

     He said that the sin in David's heart did not please the Lord. Was there something in David's heart that didn't please the Lord? Then, how could it have been there, seeing that nothing exists only that which pleases the Lord? How did it get in there if it didn't please the Lord to let it in? But, it was not pleasing to the Lord. Then, he quoted Scripture after Scripture about the fulfillment of prophecy. Why, I believe all that, every bit of it. But that did not make God predestinate all things that come to pass, because the Scriptures were fulfilled.

     I offered him $25 for a text. Do you care if I make you that offer again?

     ELDER RHODES: Will you state that again, please?

ELDER WEST: You mean about the $25.

ELDER RHODES: Yes.

ELDER WEST: I want you to find the text in the Bible that says that God predestinated all things, whatsoever comes to pass, Both good and evil. I will give you $25 for that text. I will give you $25 for the text that says He predestinated all things. I will give you $25 for the text that says that He predestinated evil. I am getting generous. The brethren told me they would lend me the money, and that is why I am so safe. Let us see if he can do it. If he doesn't do it, he should quit and go home, shouldn't he?

     He said that the word of the Lord shall endure forever. I believe that. There is not a bit of difference in the world between us on that. I believe the word of the Lord will endure forever. But what I don't believe is that He absolutely predestinated, from the beginning, whatsoever comes to pass, both good and evil. His proposition says that the Scriptures teach it, but he took up five minutes of his time and had the thing all cut and dried so they could funnel him with it and bring it right to the end of the five minutes, what the poetry teaches. He is affirming things by poetry instead of the Bible; proving it by J. C. Sikes.

     Now, don't get mad at me if I have a little fun. God predestinated it, you know. Let's see what he said about can't helping it. He said if some man came into his home and tried-you would see whether he could help it or not. Well, if God predestinated it, then you couldn't help it.

ELDER RHODES: I would find out if He predestinated it or not. (Laughter in the audience.) ELDER WEST: Let's not have any demonstration out in the audience. I know it's funny, and

it is sad; it is ridiculous. God predestinated something, and then Brother Rhodes showing that He didn't predestinate it. All right, we will pass on. I will notice some more negative argument.

     His proposition cannot be true, because the absolute predestination of all things, both good and evil, are not taught in God's Book. Second Timothy iii. 16 and 17: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Don't you imagine that if it was profitable that they would be thoroughly furnished unto all good works, and they had to believe in the absolute predestination of all things to be thoroughly furnished, you wouldn't have so much trouble getting that $75 that I have offered you. You wouldn't have any trouble at all, would you? But the absolute predestination of all things is not given by the inspiration of God, and it is not a thorough furnisher unto every good work. Therefore, your proposition is not the truth. You have said nothing in the world about the revealed will and the secret will of God. I want you to talk about that a little bit. So far, you haven't. Your brethren have spoken a lot about it and written a lot about it.

     You asked me if I believed the London Confession of Faith. Yes, I believe it. Do you believe what Brother Sikes believes? I know you do, because you tried to prove your proposition by his poetry. Elder Sikes says in the Old Faith Contender that there was a revealed will and a secret will of God. If you want me to read it to you, I will read it. I will surely do it, as surely as there is a God in heaven. "Reveal" means to make known. I should be able to read what his brethren say if he can read poetry. "Reveal" means to make known. You Absoluters say the predestination of God in all things, both good and evil, is His secret will. Will you tell us how you found out about it, then? How did you find out one of God's secrets? When did He tell you one of His secrets? if it is a secret. He said something about the revealed will of God in his argument, but never said anything in the world about that secret will. You brethren say there is a secret will. You deny that your brethren say that? If I am charging him wrongly, why, then, I want to know it. If it is God's revealed will that you should keep His commandments, how do you know that it is God's secret will for you not to keep His commandments? "Secret things belong to God."-Deuteronomy xxix. 29.

     God did not predestinate whatsoever comes to pass, because such doctrine denies that God suffered sin, and such doctrine makes God the cause of sin. He has hallooed and hallooed about charging consequences. If that wasn't the consequences of his doctrine, why would he halloo? That is the point. That is the consequence of his doctrine. I am not going to charge false consequences. But here is the truth of the proposition, as far as any man will ever be able to go, according to God's Word and not speculate. The trouble with you fellows, you are wise above that which is written. You want to find out more than God has ever revealed. That is the trouble with you. It is the revealed word of God that He suffered and allowed sin to enter into the world. God suffered that. Somebody said, "How do you know that He suffered it?" I didn't say predestinated it, but suffered it. There is a difference in predestinating something and suffering something. Yes, sir, we can shake hands and have a peace meeting if they will just come on the ground that God suffered sin to enter into the world, and not predestinated and fixed it and created and purposed it. All right; Acts xiv. 16: "Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways." He suffered it. He didn't predestinate it. Do you know the difference between suffer and predestination? I wonder if you do.

     His proposition cannot be true, because God is a God of judgment. Deuteronomy xxxii. 4. Would He command His children to do something they could not do, for His predestination was that they sin or be disobedient to His command, and then chastise them for not doing His commandment? As God is not that kind of God, He did not predestinate whatsoever comes to pass, both good and evil. Would you tell one of your children to do something and make them do it, and then whip them for doing it? I wonder if you would. I wonder if he has no more sense of justice than that.

     He keeps asking me, and keeps asking me, where the devil came from. He said that he was going to tell us. He has but one more speech to tell us in. I could tell you something you don't want to hear, but I will refrain from it.

     His proposition cannot be true, because God is not the author of confusion and sin. Confusion comes to pass and He is not the author of it. God did not predestinate it. First Corinthians xiv. 33: "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." God is not the author of confusion, and did not predestinate confusion. God predestinated the salvation of His people. He predestinated that. I am putting this in the argument now, the fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians, so that I can talk about it in my concluding speech. The resurrection of His people. He predestinated their goal. He predestinated that they live in heaven. But let me ask you this before I close my remarks at this time: If God had not predestinated those folks unto the adoption of children, in the eighth chapter of Romans, how in the world could they have ever been glorified? Don't you forget that. He said God predestinated things; he did not cause them. Let him answer the question how those individuals could have ever been glorified. Would they have been glorified if He had not predestinated them? I will drop that and pass on.

     His proposition cannot be true, because the text that he uses proves his proposition would make God a sinner, according to his application, and he said that God is not the author of sin. That is what he said. Proverbs xvi. 4, "The Lord hath made all things for Himself; yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." If that is sin and wickedness, then God made it and it didn't come by man at all; therefore, your proposition is not true. God is not the author of sin, according to Rhodes. But God made evil; therefore, God made sin, according to Rhodes. God is not the author the dilemma the gentleman is in again.

     "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid?" I have to quote some of his own text for him and help him out a little. That is Amos iii. 6: "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? Shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?" Is that sin and wickedness? Then, the Lord does the sin and wickedness, but He is not the author of it, according to his doctrine. He does it and is not the author of it.

     His proposition cannot be true, because the Lord God says that no man is tempted of God. "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth He any man." I do not have the citation here.

     We are going to look at this picture for a moment. He has made a long argument on causes, yet He does not tempt any man. He said that He does not tempt any man directly. But if I understand his contention, He takes an indirect route and God just uses the devil to do what the Lord doesn't want to do Himself. Isn't that your contention? He just used the devil. Rhodes said He made the devil. Did He make a good devil?

     Voice in the audience: "Yes."

     You say He made a good devil. Therefore, He made a good devil. But he was a liar from the beginning, and yet a good devil, according to you.

Time expired.