A Question about Textual Views in the Eldership, Continuing with the Flowers/Wilson Interview

Greetings and welcome to the violin folks. I'm in the middle of downloading PDFs. Sorry. It's just I'm Chasing stuff through I Enjoy doing this wish

I had more time to do this it's some of us like doing this kind of stuff, but I'm chasing all sorts of references in regards to Forms of determinism and the

Essene's and the Qumran community, which is I pronounce it and Just just arrived in the mail we have the myth of Pelagian ism

We have culture and philosophy in the age of Plotinus and this one that came from This came from the st.

Louis University library actually This come yesterday day for yesterday because I brought him yesterday, okay

This is Manny and manichaeism by Geo Wittengren Translation by Charles Kessler revised by the author

I was sitting up till way too late last night with this one and Likewise, I was just listening to latent flowers

He I'd missed this and I know exactly why I missed it I miss this when I first listened to it because there is a dog at the corner of Remember Camino that goes out 43rd right the corner there.

Yeah, there's a real nice Mormon lady and her husband I'm not sure if he's I assume he's Mormon too, but I've only met her and their dog is named

Raider and So whenever Raiders out in the in the lawn Then I either stop my bike or stop my run or whatever and go over and I've actually gone to Target and bought

Raider Christmas goodies in the past, you know, so Raider started barking at me as I was running past while listening to The latent flowers

Ken Wilson thing and it was right at this point. That's why I miss this Whole world did not need to know that but it knows it now point is

Just Overwhelmed with the amount of Different directions and material that you can go with in dealing with These assertions so I was right in the middle of downloading that PDF and I have no idea where it went

Just I hate when that happens download PDF, okay, and Okay, you download it where'd it go is is what

I want to know But that's okay. I'll I'll find it eventually somewhere on You know, it could end up in Dropbox.

And so it's in the clouds. I don't know. Anyways, welcome to the program Obviously I was working hard on getting clips set up from the from the interview and I've mentioned that I am in contact with a few other people

And there is one young man Who and I'm going to try to say his name his name is

Vietnamese Twending Tran Twending Tran, I think is his name and He I've lost track of how many

Images he has sent me from books He is

Focused in one particular area the issue of baptism in the early church prior to Augustine and The the concept of faith as a gift from God and He has provided numerous citations blowing major league holes to Ken Wilson's Claims in regards to baptism and Augustine and the things that we've already played on the program and and that are key to the whole theory

That has been put forward There was one Let me see if I can scroll back to it here

Yeah there is a I have these I have all of these in my

I Could pull them up in Accordance here, but There is a whole set

What is it entitled the ancient Christian writers commentary? Basically, you can and I have all of it in accordance

You can look up texts and these editors will provide, you know, obviously it's not exhaustive.

It couldn't be exhaustive but Representative samples and commentary from various early church writers and one of those individuals

Which we spent way too much money Getting I'm glad to have it because it could be useful in all sorts of things

All this is gonna be useful in all sorts of things to be honest with you I mean one of the neat things is all of These citations

I'm running into about Sola Fide and the deadness of man and sin and faith is the gift of God that I only knew marginally or did not have at all before and one of the sources is

Marius Victorinus who when Augustine read

Aristotle and people related to him as a young person. He was reading this guy's translation in the Latin So he is before Augustine and in his comment.

He was a well -known Non -christian orator Teacher so on so forth who later in his life converted to Christianity and began writing commentaries and One of the books he wrote a commentary on was

Galatians and this one on Philippians Be Ready to suffer for his sake

It was therefore within his purpose. This is a commentary on Philippians 129

It was therefore within his purpose that he gave to us the gift of trusting in him

This was an incomparable gift. It is only by faith in him that we are blessed with so great a reward

We are to believe in such a way as to be ready to suffer for him So notice he gave to us the gift of trusting in him.

What's Philippians 129? Philippians 129 is one of the texts that we reform people

Point to when it says it is not have been granted you to believe in him but also to also to suffer for his sake and so here you have someone prior to and I want to I want to bring up I Wish the one thing

I wish to be honest with you Um, yeah, I do have Marius Victorinus's commentary on Galatians here the one thing

I wish Kindle the Kindle reader would allow you to do is to have more than one book up at a time because you have to you Have to jump between books

Maybe that's something that's coming or maybe they still want you to be able to do that. I don't know but Anyways, there's just so much stuff and I I want to acknowledge where a lot of the a

Lot of the baptism stuff and stuff like that is coming From that from that source and I believe that when is going to I've encouraged him to be looking at a book.

He's got that much material and it'd be well worth doing and So he is a

Lutheran a good He still believes What Luther wrote in the bondage of the will

I like Lutheran's like that It's the really Synergistic ones that Give the

Lutheran's a bad name or the liberals. He's neither a liberal And he's he's he's he's a good guy.

So what? Well, I was just gonna pop in here real quick and point out to folks that You know some of these books that we've been getting here.

I've got a price tag. That is my you would be the one that and And I would like to point out that when while the travel fund folks, you know kind of It's a little full right now.

We're not traveling anywhere. We can't do that. I'm still hoping we'll get to yes Yes, empty it out by the end of the year

But folks need to recognize that when they donate to those specific ones, we have to use those funds for that purpose

We can't use them for anything else. So they're segregated out But when you've been donating to the material resources list

That's what allows us to do it. First of all all these books any of those kind of books this research Okay All gets paid for out of that fund any special equipment that we have to get along the way or anything like that That's a revolving fund and it's off budget

So given the fact that this is in my wheelhouse really present tense in my brain right now, right? It's it's important to mention this so when you've been donating to the

MRL fund you're making that Possible to for for books with great big fat price tags

To be acquired to for this kind of research. So I just wanted to mention that well, thank you for Doing what

I never do do by the way, there's nothing on the screen just in case you're not aware of that. Um So yes, that's that's how we can do all that kind of stuff

And someone certainly is going to write to you and go. Yeah. Well you couldn't buy the Dissertation you had to send it to him and now you're spending all this stuff and other stuff well, no because Because I will

I will because I will repeat that This is solid material. I had already

I already looked at this and went This is bad So I'm not gonna you know,

I have to say just for the sake of clarification It was not about the price tag so much.

No one as this is the process it Is it is customary that you do it this way if you're gonna come out and challenge somebody to Debate or interact with your work.

It's customary that you send them your work provide it. Yeah, so that's that's what that was about Okay, so I've got 47 ,000 things on the on the screen here how

I'm gonna keep all of them straight. I have absolutely no earthly idea But I will I will do my best and we'll we'll

We'll go from there. Oh He's talking so loud we can still hear him so I can

I'm still hearing him through the through the glass Someone called in I guess but before we get to all of that I Want to answer a question that was sent in by an old man.

Well, I mean an old friend Who like me is becoming an old man He is younger than I am.

I think I'm pretty sure But that doesn't mean much anymore because a lot of people are

But a and I won't use his name because this is a question of Well, let's put this way he says he's asked other people who

I will not name either and no one will give him a A response and I know why this is a hot potato football issue type thing and But it's one that I've addressed many many times and we'll address it again here and basically he said well we have a new minister who insists upon using

He didn't say it's he already said the majority text but Utilizing the non -critical text and hence preaching on the longer ending of Mark the

Prick of a adultery the woman taken adultery and Says this is the way that God has has preserved his word now

Fundamentally, I I think that any Group of elders

Needs to make a decision as To what stance they're going to be taking and If a group of elders want to adopt a

TR only position or a majority text position Just be clear about it. Make sure people understand it

That's that's your responsibility as the shepherds of that of that congregation the vast majority of elders

Will utilize the modern Greek text and that's the all in UBS, whatever it might be but in non leadership positions will allow for differences of opinion and utilizations, but most these days because of our because of our phones and Because we have so many hey, my phone just told me to watch me

No, seriously says watch live now, I'll make ministries the dividing line live I'm like, I feel like saying how can

I because that would become an infinite loop? I've been subscribed for a long long time

YouTube's just getting around to telling me these things now So so my phone is telling me to watch myself so that could be that could be strange

I think that each church just needs to be very clear and I think a lot of churches are not clear about it at all and And tend to leave it on on the side, but because we all have our phones that means there are people sitting there they're using multiple different translations and It is an extra

Step in sermon preparation to be looking at a wide variety of translations now

My suggestion on a practical level by the way, just in passing at that point is if you preach from NESB ESV Christian Standard Bible The upcoming legacy standard

Bible In other words if you if you preach from a Bible a modern

Bible that is based upon the modern eclectic text and a 26 onward

Um Then I would compare the New King James You don't have to compare

Dozens of different translations. I would just make sure take a quick glance at a New King James and see if maybe you're dealing with a text where there is a major textual difference between What you have in The modern eclectic text and what's in the

TR basically? That's that's what you'll see when you look at the New King James And if you use the New King James do it in reverse, you don't have to spend a whole lot of time

But it is good to make sure that you do some some checking there Now The the problem here is that we live in a day where The textual transmission of the

New Testament in particular. There's not that much There just isn't that much difference in the Old Testament I think your elders should have a knowledge of what the

Greek Septuagint is and How you're gonna view it? But the

Old Testament isn't generally where this stuff comes from there's very very very few differences between the 1525

Blomberg Which the King James used and the modern Hebrew text so It's it's the

New Testament where these issues come up so you should be aware of Where your preaching is coming from and The fact they're gonna be people who are exposed to all these other perspectives and in our day the transmission of the text

New Testament is under tremendous attack and No matter How we try to hide from it.

It's not been ever something I've tried to hide from but a lot of people do You have to address these issues as a as a pastor as one who has a responsibility to Refute the gainsayers to use the

King James terminology though refute those who contradict and so we can't avoid these issues and You if you're in a situation where the eldership has determined That there can be variation amongst the elders on this issue

Then you're gonna get The the trumpets gonna sound a different note Because You're not going to be able to say to the people well, we believe that God has preserved the the word in this way

Because now you're gonna have multiple ways being Presented as the mechanism And I think honestly and we've gone over this over and over and over again the only really consistent way

From a Reformed perspective seeing that God is king over all that takes place in time is not to do the drop kick

We're gonna just grab hold of this one over here Because it looks good to us and it came out of the

Reformation at least Whatever form we've decided to use did And therefore that's that's just the text

I think if you believe that what sort of takes place in history does so at the predetermined counsel of God for his own glory

And for his own purposes then you need to look at all of church history you need to look at what the church used in the fourth century and The second century and the seventh century in the twelfth century and you can't ignore any of those things and when you do that,

I think you will be forced to recognize the necessity of a

Reasoned eclectical approach to the Issue of of the text and so it is problematic

I would highly recommend that amongst the elders there be a Unanimity of opinion now if you're in a situation where that unanimity is already non -existent

It's a tough situation You know, obviously I can get along with fellow believers that Just for whatever reason are absolutely convinced.

They need to use the King James or the TR Whatever else up to a point but once we get into defending the flock against the unbelieving attacks

Coming from the outside We need to be on the same page and you're not gonna be on the same page as far as what text you're even defending

So wisdom would be that when choosing Elders and things like that be aware of this that have thought it through think it through there may be people say hey,

I take a different position, but I will I'm willing to go along and I'm not gonna

I'm not gonna raise a stink about it and I'm not gonna start having a home Bible study about why the rest of the elders

Are wrong about this. I mean Sadly, I'm well aware of how many churches have

Come apart over stuff like that So If you find yourself as a member in a church

Where this starts being presented then the question you have to ask is

It being presented as the consistent understanding of the entire elder body is the elder body divided on this are they willing to give and Able to give pastoral direction as to how to handle

These things are they aware of the fact that? You know either direction you go if for example you get to the end of an exposition of Mark and You do not preach through verses 9 through 20

No matter what you have to explain why you can't just go and we're done and Everybody the

King James our new King James is going or even other modern translations that still have the brackets

They're gonna be wondering why it's there. And of course you'd be wondering Should we really be picking up serpents and drinking poison?

and and is this really a sign of those who follow me and this sort of seems a little weird and Stuff like that.

So you can't just finish the verse 8 and then walk off to you know, whatever book you're gonna do next

Or you're going through John the pre -capital trait If you're a member of a church then you have to determine just you know, how far can you bend?

How many weeks can you? If you're convinced, this is not Scripture Are you willing to just Take it for a while and because it's gonna gonna move on because here's the issue

The TR and the NA 27 28 that they teach the same thing The the differences just aren't that great

It's it's an important issue to address but it's not a different faith. It's not a different religion and You would have to really put a tremendous amount of imbalanced emphasis

Upon the few major differences and I've already mentioned the Pirker Bay adultery The the long writing of Mark and In this instance person had asked that majority text of the majority text they wouldn't even have the

The Kami Ohanian first John 5 7 if they are then they've got a real problem but Is the is the connection

That you have built through the loving service of other believers in this place over the decades is is that not enough to Give you patience during a relatively short preaching series on a text that you're you're convinced isn't actually canon scripture, but you're willing to Go well, well, you know, it's just not gonna make that much of a difference

To me it would seem that that would depend upon the

Application and fervor with which the position is presented and If the eldership is divided on the issue my expectation would be

That there wouldn't be as much Energy invested in promoting a particular perspective because that would be energy that's dividing the eldership as it is.

So I my personal counsel would be patience But I'm well aware of the fact that there are people who turn this into a real a real crusade and So I get that I get that But you know, this goes along with the common question.

I'm asked it all the time. Would you preach? John 17 through 8 11 mark 16 9 through 20 as canon scripture

Would you preach them if you're preaching through Mark and through John and my answer is always the same

No, I would not but I also would not ignore their existence I would minimally in a recorded video a class in some context make available to the members of the church a full explanation of Why I do not believe that those

Lengthy chunks of traditional text were actually written

Originally within the place where they're found most of the churches I've been a part of already got all that stuff and Know where I'm coming from and I don't necessarily have to do a whole sermon about it

But there are a lot of churches where that would be walking on eggshells or landmines one of the two

I fully understand that it really would so so there is a lengthy response to One of our former

Channel rats from long long ago Who asked that asked that question?

In fact, he he said he probably had coronavirus two weeks ago So we hope that he will can continue his recovery

Just as we hope that Boris Johnson will recover as well

England does not need England does not need to have that happen to them

You know, I saw some report it was obviously premature in an error, but someone had posted something concerning the

Queen testing positive as well and I'm like That would be really really rough

That would be a She's I think 96 or something like that somewhere around there

Just probably the classiest lady running around out there not currently running around anywhere actually most people in England aren't but there's um

There's there's a wonderful lady. I'm not I'm as a as a full -blooded yank.

I'm still going to mourn definitely at her passing and Again listening to her

Christmas Devotionals, I I think she's a believer and at least

I hope so She gives gives very good reason for thinking that she is.

So anyway Dignity, yes, very very dignified very very dignified

Someone that you you just have a tremendous amount of respect for Okay All right with that.

Let's get back to what we've been doing Well, we've started doing it on and off obviously because I realize

This is a technical area of study But I think it's a very important area of study if you love church history and theology this is your stuff this is your thing

But And if you go well, yeah, but this isn't my real my real interest in this area or this particular perspective yeah, but one of the things

I was mentioning to Rich as we right before he came on the air is Yeah, I've got all sorts of stuff sitting here going all sorts different directions but I love doing this kind of stuff and at the very least

I feel like my knowledge is expanding and I'm I'm shoring up areas of of Study in church history and seeing you know connections and so it's it's great.

It's That's a that's a good positive Element to to all of this even in the midst of the controversy.

It's a good positive element. And so When I probably next time around Well, once we get this thing done and I'm pointing at my computer screen.

You have no idea why I'm pointing in this history once we get the 2018 interview between Leighton flowers and Ken Wilson done

Then we'll do something on mannequin mannequin ism. I Started putting together a keynote presentation last night.

I don't know if I'm gonna keep pressing on with that. It is I Even know how to explain it

Honestly I've looked at there's an excellent article here in Fitzgerald's Augustan through the ages and encyclopedia this book right here

Like I said, I was reading through this work Manny and mannequin ism last night

I've gotten all sorts of stuff online as well as audio stuff that I've listened to all running and writing and stuff like that and What I'm discovering is there's

Nicely, there's a fair amount of agreement Obviously a little bit of an emphasis here emphasis there, but there's a fair amount of agreement from modern writers as to What mannequin ism would have been in the days of Augustan, which is what we are

Concerned about here. And if you're wondering why? we Are saying that let me once again remind you of I've read this statement each of the last three

Programs, but this will give you because it's I consider it an excellent summary statement

From Ken Wilson the famous reformed theologian Benjamin Warfield commented the Reformation inwardly considered was just the ultimate triumph of Augustan's doctrine of grace

Period that really should be a dot -dot -dot because that's not what he said Was just the ultimate triumph of Augustan's doctrine of grace over Augustan's doctrine of the church

Warfield statement is pinpoint accurate, but unfortunately due to Luther's and Calvin's reliance upon Augustan the unmerited grace of the

Christian God did not triumph in Augustinian Calvinism reformed theology.

It was the radicalized grace of the Manichean God that triumphed so we have to Understand was there even such a thing as a

Manichean God? I would argue there wasn't There is a principle But to even use this without making the appropriate

Differentiations because Manichaeism is a completely Fundamentally different religious concept it is a dualistic

Gnostic Amalgamation of Heretical Christian concepts with Zoroastrianism and Buddhism all mixed in together with Iranian indo your indo

Religious concepts Just all sorts of Almost no one knows

Almost no seminary graduate really knows what Manicheism is therefore you can make that kind of a claim and Who's gonna catch you on it?

There's almost Only well the people who read this well read this the dissertation should have caught this evidently didn't the the radical difference in what every single word for example

The radicalized grace of the Manichean God that triumphed that's in contrast to Augustine's doctrine of grace given the

Manichean concept of Deities many deities of The realm of light and the realm of darkness

The glorious father the fact that Well Let me try to explain to you how difficult it is try to put this into a into a keynote presentation

Okay, if the kids are around you might want to turn this down for a second.

There is a point in The Manichean there are three moments in the

Manichean cosmogony and It's this battle between light and darkness that the darkness sees the light and wants the light and invades the light and There's a primeval man who goes and fights with the five shields, but he's overcome

But it was actually sort of a trick and so he sort of invades the realm of darkness but they take him and they they take his light and So now light is trapped in darkness and This gets connected together with like I said six seven different Ancient religious concepts a bunch of astrology.

There's a bunch of astrological stuff so the Sun the moon become spark collection centers for the light that comes out of individuals when they die because they're being freed from the darkness of the physical body and they go to the go the moon to go the

Sun and and it depends on what time of the month it is because As this as the moon's getting bigger and then as it gets smaller

There's this there's there's a lighted path of sparks that are going up into the realm of light

That's easier to see once the moon isn't full You know what? That is the

Milky Way The Milky Way are sparks which are so which we would call souls

That are going up to the realm of light that have been trapped in the realm of darkness and that's the Milky Way No, it's not the rest of our galaxy, which we know it is.

But anyway So you got all this stuff going on and then at one point at one point

And I'll have to just read it for you directly. But but at one point there are these beings demons something and Some beings from the realm of light take on such beautiful forms

That it sexually arouses these other Creatures and the male creatures

Spill their seed on the earth and the female creatures for some reason are pregnant but they're so excited by the male creatures, which are sort of both male and female that they abort their babies and these fall down upon the earth and Out of them come

Other demons that mate and these two demons mate and when they mate what they birth is

Adam and Eve That's where Adam and Eve came from. How do you how do you put that in?

In a in a keynote That's what I'm struggling with right now. I Mean because most people just sit there and it's a little bit like when you do the eternal law of progression thing on Mormonism.

I Never thought I'd study something that would make Mormonism go. Oh, okay Space gods from Kolob Sounds a whole lot more believable than this stuff.

But now I have and it's called Manichaeism So Just just with what

I just told you with all the astrology and the different gods and and different Jesus's and and the historical

Jesus is actually an evil Jesus and then there's another kind of Jesus and there's a kind of Jesus over here and Can you see that the term grace

Of a Manichaean deity is different than the grace of the triune

God of Scripture You think there there might be just a smidge of a difference between the two?

Yeah, you think so You think so? Yeah, I think so. Yeah so So you may end up learning

More more about Manichaeism than you ever want to know but it is important I mean, this was a major religious movement in the

Roman Empire starting in the middle of the third century Well, okay, it took some time. So It started in the middle third century and then it came the

Roman Empire, you know by the by the 300s or what What are you laughing? Oh, I can just see the you hit the wrong button.

Yeah, you changed you change user I I did didn't I I I can just see the The conspiracy theories now boy those

Calvinists been hiding a lot more than we ever knew. That's right. That's right No two ways about it

No two ways about it also Has required and this is extremely helpful

When you hear that we are determinists What does that mean and If you're if you're a

Calvinist you tend to just go well, yeah God God decrees I mean

Ephesians 111 That's what it says It that's worked out in Acts 2

Acts 4 Isaiah 10 Genesis 50 all over the place This is a biblical teaching.

Yeah, okay, but what I've been forced to do is to expand my understanding of the categories of what determinism means because For example, they the

Provisionists argue that the Manichaeans were

Determinists and That's where Augustine got it and then that's where Calvin got it

And that's why you and me the Bible has nothing to do as well. What we believe see you need to understand that we've

We just we just said as long as Augustine says it

I believe it most of most Calvinists. I know have read a few paragraphs of Augustine may have read the

Confessions Haven't read and they haven't read anything. He wrote against Julian or the

Manichaean movement I had no idea, but that's what we're being told now is it's just straight line unmodified boom -boom -boom -boom

Which of course is absurd on his face, but anyway That's what we're being told about this stuff

The fact is there's all sorts of different kinds of determinism All sorts of different kinds of term as I had one here.

Yeah Just in general categories logical determinism theological determinism psychological determinism and physical determinism

But each one of those has all sorts of different Elements to it. So under theological determinism

Someone who believes that God has knowledge of future events is included as a theological determinist because the outcome is already known to God Therefore it can't be changed

That's what open theism is trying to avoid is that exact thing? And so the funny thing is to remain a

Southern Baptist Layton Flowers has to be a theological determinist Not sure if he's ready to Start buying into manichaeism yet or just what but we'll we'll send him the the starter kit so so but there's other forms of determinism and Stoic determinism is not theological determinism in parallel to the

Christian concept at all Neither is manichaean. There is no deity in the manichaean universe not even really universe but in the manichaean concept that has a divine decree of self revelation self glorification

There is no Concept of time as being created by God The fabric of time being created by God There is again, there's no personal deity in Manichaeism that would be parallel to the monotheistic concept of the one creator of all things the ground of all being

At best you have two equal deities the light in the darkness, but they're not personal

Beings with a personal name and revelation and so on so forth so the whole idea that The manichaean

God even has the attributes to be able to have a divine decree of self revelation so as to accomplish without failure

The redemption of a particular people in Christ just not there. It's ridiculous to so to try so to to draw that kind of parallel and Say that Calvin's God and Luther's God is the manichaean

God. That's what that's what you're being told. That is so radical That it's astonishing and it's so full of holes

That I'll tell you right now Once we get done with all this and once these other folks put out their stuff

We're gonna be the ones going so what happened to that debate challenge Because it ain't gonna happen.

I Already have hours worth hours worth of errors in the dissertation.

Okay, so Something Tells me once we put that all out there and you can go check these sources and you can look these things up and go

Huh? Yeah, that is what that says, huh? Wonder why it says differently in there

That all of a sudden there's gonna be a reason why You know, we don't want to yeah, look look at the time.

I gotta go. I got a floss my cat That that's Not gonna happen But it would be would be interesting

So anywhere where what in the world are we doing here? Oh, I'm just putting this stuff back up here so that because some of these clips whether I get to him today or not some of these clips

I have some counter examples to to provide and We'll see if we remember to do that so I have the audio plugged in and We're ready to go and we've got the speed right so didn't sound like the chipmunks.

That's always good Okay, we're picking up where we left off in the 2018 interview

Leighton flowers and Ken Wilson, did you in your in your preparations? Did you read through many of these other early church fathers as well?

I did I have many chapters in my dissertation Discussing their views all talking about original sin about freedom of will and the earliest

Christians those guys You just mentioned Irenaeus and Tertullian and Clement. They're all arguing against Stoics and against Manichaeans and Gnostics they're saying no the

Christian God is a relational God He he and his foreknowledge knows who's gonna respond and who's not

It's not just this arbitrary thing that happens like the Stoics believe and like the Gnostics believe like the

Manichaeans believe now You see how you put them all together No serious scholar would ever do that. No serious scholar who wants to be honest with what

Stoicism believed what? Which group of Gnostics there are so many different group of Gnostics with so many different perspectives

Manichaean understanding Certainly has the the elements of Gnostic dualism within it

But it has all sorts of other stuff. I mean it borrows from the indo -iranian Concept of the light and darkness as twins that were given birth at some point in time and again even within the the

Manichaean sources you you have a Fragment of something over here and a fragment over there. Does this represent this rhythm?

There is no Care demonstrated by by Ken Wilson and how he says these things and it's the same thing in the dissertation, too

It just it's just thrown out there as if yeah, they all said the same thing and we're gonna see this There's a section coming a little bit later on where it says.

Oh, yeah, nobody before Augustine Everybody believed the same thing and that's just it's just fallacious on a level that's hard to comprehend

I mean there are entire books documenting the different perspectives that were taken and The reality that on some of these issues no one had written full dissertations yet.

And so our information is partial and so careful scholarship goes well

That's a good question here are some of the things to consider limitation of information we have

You know this that the fact that many of these things are written in response to something like this And so you've got to be careful not to jump to a conclusion that because they respond to this

Objection in that way that they would necessarily make the application you would make today. That's what careful scholarship does

That's that's that's what people who want to accurately represent what came before and you know why this is

Maybe resonating with me a little bit more is the years I was debating

Roman Catholic Apologists on church history when Ken Wilson was doing his first study at Golden Gate Actually, I was teaching a

Golden Gate when he was doing that. And so I've seen what happens I've seen when people

Try, you know, the Roman Catholic is Very often forced to find things in the early church

Because Rome's dogma says this is what's always been believed So when you encounter stuff that's different than that What do you got to do?

Well, you got to play with the sources you got to you got to make the dogmatic stuff work

So I've seen all this before and I have decades literally decades of evidence 25 years of my saying

Let the early church fathers be the early church fathers.

They weren't Baptists They weren't Roman Catholics. They were who they were let them be who they were read them in their own context

Don't try to turn them into some unified body That you can then use as a club to beat somebody else over the head.

I've seen this before I've seen this before and Rome does it a lot better than Ken Wilson does

But I've seen this I'm gonna unify everybody together. I'm gonna forget all their differences I'm gonna ignore a lot of sources in the process and a lot of places where people said faith is a different God No, no, whatever.

What are you about? That's a unified body make up a theological bat and whack you over the head with it knowing that Well, remember when we first started why did why did our entrance

Alvin Megan ministries? entrance into the debating scene With the

Roman Catholic Church United States make such a huge splash such a huge Difference the problem is

I can't turn the audio off without turning the audio off Why did it make such a huge difference?

It made such a huge difference. Oh, I know how to fix that. Thank It made such a huge difference because we did not back off of church history we went we went we went toe -to -toe and All you got to do is watch what happened in Denver in 1993 with Jerry matics on the subject of papacy

Yeah, you gotta listen. You can't watch. Yeah and You'll see it exactly what we mean and actually it was before then it was when we debated

Jerry on the infallibility of the Pope At City the Lord in Tempe, Arizona That's when the wheels started wobbling and coming off that that particular car.

So Ben there done that got the t -shirt we We've been consistent on this all along and I think that's important.

Yes. Wasn't there an exchange with you and Was it Scott Hahn in this rock?

Well, that was No, that was Patrick good Pat Madrid. Uh -huh So what it wasn't what am

I remembering here white man's burden was the was the thing about trying to a single quote from Athanasius That I'd point out that Athanasius did not function as a modern

Roman Catholic would and then he stood against councils and bishops of Rome and and was proved to be true to be accurate and so Yeah, that ended up in a very lengthy exchange between the two of us

And I remember you making in the response which is on our website Yep That very point that you just made what so now 25 years ago.

I was 93. So yes, you know 27 years ago. Yep Yep, and we've been consistent on this for a long time

Been consistent for a long time. Okay back to the quote It's not just this arbitrary thing that happens like the

Stoics believe and like the Gnostics believe like the Manichaeans believe So they're fighting the very thing that Augustine ended up Putting out there is the truth.

Okay, that's not what Augustine taught. I'm sorry. This is just the There there is a there is there is a term that he

Writes it out but in the in the smaller book he he abbreviates it for good reason which he himself says he he coined okay, it's dupied dupied d -u -p -i -e -d dupied and So in the book he abbreviates it because it takes up pretty much an entire line of text.

Here's what dupied stands for divine unilateral predetermination of individuals eternal destinies

Okay, so dupied is Divine unilateral predetermination of individuals eternal destinies now

Dr. Wilson believes this is what we believe When you hear that do you recognize what the fundamental problem is from the start any fair Reading of Let's talk about a

Classic on the attributes and existence of God and hence Will give us grounds for looking at God's eternal decree

Stephen Sharnock if you look at Sharnock if You look at Warfield if you look at Turretin and You look at what they wrote concerning God's divine decree

Will you define it? first and foremost in regards to creatures because that's what that does that Defines God's decree in regards to what the eternal destinies of creatures has nothing to do with God's eternal decree to glorify himself even dupied is man -centered

Provisionism Man -centered from the start that's its essence. That's its that's its goal.

That's its heartbeat is Man -centered ism. God is always on the outside. So even the definition is man -centered eternal destinies but Why would eternal destinies?

be determined Well, are you saying that the reformed understanding of that is the same as a stoic a?

Non -manichaean Gnostic a Manichaean You will find differences between each one of those

Because the stoic doesn't have an all -encompassing God. He has a naturalistic determinism laws are followed by nature and Those natural cause and effect.

So what will be will be? But it's not because there is a purpose

It's because that's the way creation is Neither the Gnostic nor the

Manichaean system has an overarching deity who is eternal self -existing creator and sustainer of all things so immediately on a

Basic, this is what's so shocking to me. Is that this is a man who's teaching in a seminar on a basic theological level

There cannot be any meaningful parallel drawn there can't be you don't have a

God To have a decree in these systems so the decree that you will find in reformed writers the theology of God is rooted in the monotheistic creator of all things and his desire to self -glorify himself in and through creation itself and the redemption of a particular people it

Through the incarnation through the person of Christ Jesus as it turns out in Christianity, obviously, that's his intention

That is completely different than naturalistic determinism that says cause and effect just gonna play it's gonna be amongst the

Manichaeans Most Manichaeans you have Differing groups many had the elect and Immediately, of course that becomes see there you go there.

There's there's the elect but the elect Amongst the Manichaeans were a particular group who made a particular commitment to live by certain ascetic

Values and you know what one of their you know, what their primary religious duties and accomplishments as The elect was

Due to the Manichaean worldview producing excrement.

Yeah So they had very strict dietary laws and there were certain aspects of food

That by eating certain things they were purifying the world By going poo -poo and This is paralleled with the elect.

I didn't make it up The seat just collapsed even the seat was embarrassed by what

I just had to say if you can't tell the difference between People who are made in the image of God who are

Justly condemned by God for their sin who suppress the knowledge of God who are chosen

Not because of anything in themselves the elect in Manichaeanism Contained the spark you see that spark

Wants to go back to the realm of light the realm of light wants it. There's something about the elect that draws them

They are special There's nothing about the elect in scripture

That draws God's love. It is unconditional.

It is based upon what what is the continued? What's the repeated statement? His grace not anything in of themselves his grace his grace alone you're gonna compare that with the

Manichaean elect Who helped purify the earth by digestion? Sorry, um, yeah, okay.

I'm not gonna get very far today because Putting out there is the truth

That's not a coincidence, that's not a coincidence Yeah, it's also it's totally meaningless once you actually know something about the background

So you have these this guy who's really known as a heretic fighter

They're talking about Augustine here. And and what Leighton has asked is well, how come he got away with this like?

The thesis here is that no one had ever ever believed anything like this before so and Later on and I'm just waiting to get to this one later on And I think this is what

I'd started to mention to you Leighton makes a comment about something I had said

During our debate because he quoted from Clement of Rome and I point out the Clement of Rome actually taught much from Pauline doctrine and Pauline letters on the subject of the elect an election

And he objected to this and he uses Wilson Wilson's Wilson Wilson is the scholar of this movement

That's why they're so invested in this They needed to have somebody because they didn't have anybody before and so now they've got this so they're invested in this they better start checking around and looking around because Yeah, anyway

And so he says I you know, I had this problem with James White He mentions the Clement mentions the elect as if that makes him a

Calvinist And I'm just I'm just sitting here going wow the way that patristic sources are used

By Wilson you got no room making that objection a B and I can guarantee you

I guarantee you one thing Leighton flowers You've never read Clements letter in Greek You've never taught it at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary in development of tristar theology from the original language.

Have you? Guarantee you you have not You have no earthly idea of what you're talking about, but you'll accept what somebody else has to say without checking their sources

Hmm. Hmm. Okay All right. Well, there you go So you have these this guy who's really known as a heretic fighter

Well when he brings in something that's not quite right people still respect him. Even Jerome did not agree with Augusta So as he gets a little pushback

Even the Pope did not agree with him that at the infant baptism is self -evident when you dump it in the put the baby in the water

He doesn't agree with that and they're damned if you don't now again, I I Have received literally at least a hundred and fifty pages

Graphics pictures of sources from the friend that I mentioned earlier on this subject of baptism in the early church and I don't want to Use all his stuff.

I want him to be able to use his stuff But did you just hear this

I Even the Pope didn't believe well Which Pope are we talking about because there were a couple

Popes obviously many Popes during Augusta's life and I'm intimately familiar with the

North African response to Zosimas and to Pelagius his rehabilitation

Because that's where the Rome has spoken the case is closed stuff comes from that we had to deal with again with subject

Roman Catholicism back in the 90s But Later on he's going later on Leighton's gonna bring up Eastern Orthodoxy and Basically, he's gonna say yeah, these are thoughts.

They didn't believe they didn't have Augustus. They didn't believe any of this stuff and so therefore as the result of that They're just believing what was believed from the beginning in the first 300 years

So why aren't you Eastern Orthodox? I? Really?

I'm wondering why aren't you maybe that's where this is going Yeah could be could could go down the hank

Road. It very well could be I I don't know I don't know but there you go

I'm writing a book right now on God's sovereignty looking at the historical impact all the way from Augustan even before then all the way up through the modern period and how that happened and and what we're viewing

It's gonna be interesting That's gonna be really interesting

Okay Well, we'll be looking forward to that one But the Catholic Church even to this day does not readily admit that Augustan taught double

Predestination which he does three or four times in his writings. They won't they won't recognize that because it's

They go to his earlier writings and say well look he believed in free will well Yeah, I did back then but his later writings.

He thinks it's worthless He's even says I tried to say free will but I God's grace triumphed

He did specifically say that But what is I what I need to know please is what is the

Catholic Church to which you refer How does how does the Catholic Church? Make has the

Catholic Church actually made an official pronouncement on Augustan's perspective on these things and and who made it because I know all sorts of Roman Catholic scholars who will honestly

Admit to pretty much everything that That was said by Augustan and the differing perspectives of Augustan and the whole nine yards so How does the

Roman Catholic Church? Figure in here. How does how does that work? I I'd like to know because You know people would say well

Rome says this and Rome says that and all the rest that kind of stuff But I wonder who that actually would refer to You have to be careful about saying well

Rome says this and Rome says that I mean at the very end of my book I list all the scriptures used by Manicheans to support their doctrine and guess which ones they are

They're the very ones that Calvin is used today, is that a coincidence? No, okay

Now I want to Everyone if you've tuned out tune back in Because this kind of reasoning is so flawed that you need to understand why it is flawed

I've been looking for I haven't found it yet, but I'm not gonna say it's not there yet, but Given that the

Manicheans had Other scriptures given to the

Manicheans Rejected the prophets and Moses Given the Manicheans rejected a number of the

Gospels and hence had an extremely limited biblical canon plus the revelations of Manny Plus other books from other religions.

I'm wondering I'm really looking forward to finding in here Haven't found it yet, but I'm gonna keep looking

The hermeneutical methodology That allows you to make a statement like what was just made there because what what is what underlies that statement well look at the verses they used and They used them

To support Manichaeism really what verses do you think you can pull out of Paul? to To substantiate the idea that we are

Sparks of the realm of light trapped in dark bodies that were actually created by demons that made it and made

Adam and Eve Where do you exactly do you think you get that from Paul? In fact, how do you interpret

Paul? Without the prophets How do you do that?

He's constantly quoting from the Old Testament he's constantly quoting from the Psalter from Moses from the prophets and If you've rejected those as revelations of an evil

God Then could you please tell me how any? Person who is trying to deal honestly with The historical context of these writings could come up with the idea that well, hey the

Manichaeans use these verses and The Calvinists use these verses so must be the same thing

They used the same Exegetical methodology they they used a grammatical historical perspective pan canonical.

They took the entire can description No, they rejected the vast majority of the can description that they limited to just total scripture just the

Christian camp No, they didn't. In fact, they they had a completely different canon scripture

They they believed the scriptures were inspiring it No, actually they didn't the Manny's stuff was but but the

Christian scriptures Obviously been been manipulated and changed and you got to pick and choose what you want even in Paul because Paul says things about the

About the about the Jews and things like that and about the Creator God and we know that the Creator God's evil so that can't be so Why have a list like that, what is that supposed to come it sounds good to someone who has

Zero understanding of logic or history if if that's what you're trying to do is impress that kind of person okay, but to anyone who does any meaningful study of interreligious studies interfaith

Encounters any type of missionary work apologetics studies any church history. You're just left going.

Did you just say that? in public Did you just say to everybody that if you use the same verses

I was reminded The first time

I heard this while I was running And listening to this I was reminded of The argument that was used 21 years ago

When I had one of my few opportunities to engage a well -known

Leading figure in the oneness Pentecostal movement. Dr. Saban may call that in 1999

I was I was only two years away at that point from finally just give it up So I still had stuff up here, but it it was pathetic anyway

We did a debate on the Trinity and If you've watched that debate or listened to that debate

You Are aware of the fact that one of the arguments that dr. Saban used Was that the verses that James White has used to prove the

Trinity Are the verses Roman Catholicism uses? To prove the

Trinity we know that Roman Catholicism is the whore of Babylon Roman Catholicism murdered all these people

But this man's using the same verses Now why do you think he was doing that?

well, I would argue it's because he did not have a meaningful exegetical response to what

I presented and he didn't and What the later

Roman Catholic Church did is irrelevant to the truth content of the prologue of John John chapter 17 specifically verse 5 and to the carmen christian

Philippians chapter 2 all three of which present Jesus as a divine person in communion with the

Father prior to his incarnation, which is a refutation of the oneness denial of the

Trinity Why was he doing that and and who would be who would be impacted by that kind of argumentation?

It is a false form of argumentation, it's irrelevant to the the substance of the argument but what you're saying is somebody else makes an argument like that and They're bad

So he's bad So ignore the argument. There's a whole appendix

Well, excuse me, but if you're gonna be having discussions about The stuff that's in Romans 8 9 and 10

What other verses you gonna go to I Don't understand how is that even relevant?

It's the same ones same interpretation No, it's totally different form of it has to be a completely different form of determinism

It can't be the same form because there's no God in Manichaeanism that could be the foundation of The decree that includes the creation of the world remember for the

Manichaeans demons mated and made Adam and Eve Didn't make it up but how can you

For a second suggest that well, they just used the same verses and meant something completely different by it

So I guess it would be valid a valid argument for me to point out that for your provisionism

I can go to the LDS website and the ensign magazine and show you

Joseph Smith and the Mormons Using your verses and they actually use it the same way you do

Right, so that means you all are actually crypto Mormons Great if if Layton starts wearing a

Name badge and calls himself elder flowers. I Can just see that coming up on yeah

And he needs to have needs to have the 10 temple garment on underneath to or it's just fake at that point

The Problem is I could then give you the sure sign of the nail

But you don't know what the sure sign of the nail is. So there you go No, we don't want to know yeah, yeah, okay

There are It's a handshake.

Yeah, it's it's one of the signs in the temple. It's it's it's one of the signs I think is a McCulloch is our priesthood anyway

We have that's That's what that's why they close the temples is you you you can't have the five points of fellowship during the coronavirus.

No No, no Not happening. We're skipping out on that one.

Yeah big time Wow How did we get here?

I don't know how we got here. I've lost the point where I was the point is obviously this is

This Is fallacious argumentation to the extreme and I would invite you provisionists who recognize well, okay.

Yeah Yeah, you could find Mormons using the same verses we use to sort of make the same point.

That doesn't It doesn't invalidate the point just because the Mormons are arguing it. That's like I mean, they don't even believe in one true

God exactly Will you which one of you were provisionist is gonna come out and say, you know what?

I'm not sure about all the rest of this stuff. But yeah, that's a bad argument because it is it's just a bad argument it's indefensible and If you'll defend it then you'll defend anything this man says it doesn't matter you don't care

There's no standard here. There's no standard so Yeah, all right.

Okay. Mm -hmm. Yeah, did he did he did he? 13 minutes. Okay, and Every person who is a determinist quotes

Augustine, right? They all get it from Augustine Okay, so we have no definition of determinism we do not have a distinction between Mechanical determinism logical determinism psychological determinism physical determinism theological determinism

We have no distinctions No recognition And I'm not going to say this based upon Extensive reading of Augustine, but I'm quite certain

That the clarity of formulation in regards to the divine decree in Calvin is greater than that in Augustine And then

I think that even gets greater in the next century So that you have tremendous clarity with in turn and by the time you get to that point there anybody who can confuse

The dualistic naturalistic non -decretal No monotheistic

God determinism of manichaeism without a reformed theology is just not functioning with the full deck

That's just dishonest. It's just dishonest in its extreme That's just that's just as clear as you can as you could possibly make it and so and and all through this

I'm just sitting back on so Not one of us has ever read a verse the

Bible, huh? All that stuff not just in Ephesians and Romans, but man,

I mean Isaiah 40 through 48 You know the the certainty of the coming of Cyrus How do you how do you make that work,

I mean Cyrus Cyrus was the result of literally hundreds of thousands of free choices of creatures

How did how did God know? without a decree Centuries before The soldiers decided hey, let's not rip that That seamless garment.

He's got let's let's get some money. Let's cast lots for it Hundreds of years

Millions of free will choices God's pretty good guesser, huh? Yeah.

Well, there you go And and and dr.

Wilson you correct me if this is not correct But it seems to me that what compatibilists are saying is that men are free as long as they do what they want

But what they want is determined by their nature, which is determined from birth by God's decree Yeah, and that's what

Augustine in your estimation taught in other words are born with this fallen nature That's what you have the babies, you know corrupted.

Okay. Now, let's let's let's make sure we see what the connection here is in Manichaeism You are born with a corrupted nature because you're born period

There's no federal headship If I mean Adam is the first man

Who is the offspring of demons But your connectedness to Adam is that you have a spark of light contained in you

That is not natural to this realm and needs to go back to the light realm That's not federal headship

That's not covenant theology That's not based upon a monotheistic worldview. You don't have a creator

How do you make these parallels? Why do you ignore these fundamental contextual facts that change everything?

How? How is this done? I'm it. I am stunned

When I listen to this stuff, how can you ignore this stuff? Are you really gonna sit there and say it doesn't matter doesn't matter.

I don't know. Nope It's worded. Yeah, we're using the same same terminology, but Yeah, and that's what

Augustine in your estimation taught in other words are born with this fallen nature That's what you have the babies, you know corrupted with his guilt and they are gonna be

God haters from birth because that's the nature Unless God steps in and changes their nature to make them want

God. Yes. Is that oversimplifying it? That's a very easy simple way to explain it that's true

So when God's chalk in 800 taught it though because he wasn't the famous, you know, Augustine, you know the fighter

He was deemed a heretic. I I'm not sure how much about God's chalk

Layton flowers actually knows I Layton honestly without googling.

Do you know who Ray Burtis and retro amnesty were? If you don't stop talking about about God's chart

Because you don't know what you're talking about You're just yeah

And so when you appeal to history as an authority Then it's it's really depending on which council you want to appeal to you know

You kill the bill of the Council of Orange or the Council of Dort or the Council of nice to you or this counts of? Which is one of the reasons that we do want to appeal obviously to scripture as our first and foremost authority

You guys get to do that. We don't so so Our but you did you didn't challenge him when he said that every determinist just gets it from Augusta But now we want to appeal to you get you want to get to appeal to scripture

Like we don't You know, you and I should debate Romans Oh, never mind. We already did because no matter what what view you hold to you can find some council somewhere that probably supported

Whatever weird view you all want to want to support Yeah, they're both chuckling but that's exactly what this is all about you got a you you decide you're gonna come up with the way of cramming

Southern Baptist traditionalism in the early church And so yeah, you can find a quote here a quote there interpret it in your context and boom.

Boom. Boom. You got it Yep especially the early church is liable to a tremendous amount of that kind of let's

Let's cram our our thinking into these guys. Yeah, that's you're right

Layton It's exactly what y 'all are up to the early church fathers prior to Augustan Were confused about this issue and and didn't know what they're talking about and obviously didn't get it, right

So Augustan was kind of the first I think it's Lorraine Botner or Bettner However, you pronounce that it was also a

Calvinistic historian who admits that Augustan is the first to introduce these things

Lorraine Botner. Okay. Yeah, it's Bettner at least. Dr. Wilson knew that I think that's what he was saying in the background but again, this is a super simplified simplistic

Way of of approaching it what has been said was The early centuries up to this point in time were focused upon what?

doctrine of God in Christology doctrine of God in Christology What were the what were the councils about?

What was Nicaea about? What was Ephesus about? Why was there the Arian resurgence? Why do you have? Why do you have

Athanasius kicked out of why was Athanasius kicked out of his church five times? While the Roman soldiers are running in the front door, he's running out the back.

Did it have to do with soteriology? No, it didn't. It had to do with the doctrine of God, the doctrine of Christ, doctrine of the

Trinity. What about Chalcedon? What about Ephesus? Why were the monks beating the snot out of each other at Ephesus?

Wasn't about this so There was a shift at this point in time to a new discussion and And you can pretend that well

They were when they were arguing with the pagans. They said this and therefore I'm going to assume that that meant this

You can do that if you want, but again, you're just not accurately representing what was going on in history

Was there any other debating among the church fathers like between Polycarp and Irenaeus or Ignatius?

We have almost nothing Polycarp ever said like it's all secondary sources and other notable

Recognized church fathers that may have said Okay. Hey, wait, wait, look at Romans 9 guys.

This is obviously teaching Something about God, you know sovereignty over our choices

Is there any evidence of any of those types of people prior to Augustine that you're aware of?

Okay now What should a meaningful scholar say at this point a meaningful fair Balanced scholar is going to say well

There is a lot we don't have There are entire books that people wrote that we do not possess

For many of the early fathers. We can only answer that question in light of what somebody else said that they said

But in light of that Then we can see Multiple different perspectives

We can contrast Clement of Rome with The epistle of Barnabas and the

Shepherd of Hermas they're roughly contemporaneous I think Clements good bit earlier, but within a hundred years, obviously

And then we have for example from Ignatius we can Glean certain things, but he's writing epistles as he's going to die.

He's not writing a systematic theology. So there's going to be imbalance even in what we have and so there is especially as Greek philosophy takes more and more of an important role.

There's going to be a Lot of emphasis upon the discussions that the

Greeks were having concerning the nature of man and you know, then we could get it adjusted and he doesn't have the complete canon and see that's what that's what

Someone who wants to teach history rather than use history That's how they're gonna respond.

Let's see what the response was Not in the Christian circles Everybody teaches the same thing, which is

What I point out in my in my Oxford thesis if we're in Christianity is everybody agree.

I mean That's phenomenal that everybody can agree for almost 400 years

Yes, I mean it's like they all view a general sovereignty of God like a king controlling a country

He doesn't micromanage everybody's, you know lives He's there and it's not until and they're fighting the dictatorial

Micromanagement view of stoicism Manichaeanism and Gnosticism. Okay. Now we have we repeated enough now that you're starting to recognize the theme here

This is may get a little old Sorry but To Draw the parallel and without the parallel all this stuff disappears.

It becomes irrelevant. It becomes an argument about whether Augustine went back and edited a couple of books

Later in his life, which no one actually argues or could care one way or the other But you hear what's being done now, so you take the

Stoics you take the Gnostics and take the Manichaeans differences between each one big

Important differences as to what determinism would mean to them

None of them have a monotheistic God Who is sufficient ground for a meaningful decree of self -glorification?

But what you want to do is you want to plant in the mind the idea

They were teaching the same thing Augustine went back picked it up. That's where it came from.

No one had ever dreamed of this Don't worry about what anybody said before this don't read anything that that Clemens said don't don't read the epistle to Dionysius Don't look no, don't they were all on the same page.

They were Southern Baptist provisionists As they were just just believe me.

I went to Oxford. I know I read it all see and We're supposed to go so this massive difference in What the decree would even look like would it be based upon what it could be cut?

We're just supposed to go Worry about that. Yep. Yep, basically That's what we're being told.

So for all these years, they're saying the same thing until you get Augusta There is no debate and that's commonly known.

I mean the encyclopedias and the big guys who write those Point that out that there was no conflict between human free will and divine sovereignty

Until Augusta, that's when it started. So there is your

There's your super simplistic Assertion you're super simplistic assertion.

It only started that Historically You had discussions of the nature of the will

Prior to this where there were disagreements. How do I know this because I've studied church history

But it was primarily in reference to the human will of Jesus because the focus and the energy was on Christology So Nestorian ism

Polinarian ism Eutychian ism They're all directly relevant.

The whole hypostatic union is relevant to anthropology and the nature of the human soul but a argument on this subject

Had not come up to this point There was no debate. It's right There was no debate not because it was something that everybody had already decided on and there was a unanimous position

That's the that's the faux Position here. Is it? Yeah, we've all discussed that we're all on the same page

Everybody believed the same thing and then Augustine came along and turned us all into Manichaeans. No If if you think history works that way

Then you need to go read a book called the trail of blood because it's a little bit more along your lines Sadly sort of a conspiratorial type thing.

All right, I'm gonna mark Where we are here because we're almost

Yeah, we're almost there it's not there's there's not a whole lot more there So that's we actually got through a lot today.

We we actually I am I am pleased we we are and besides that we are

Doing many dividing lines, so we will we will get there as we as we get there

So save this file so I don't lose all this stuff And there you go Sorry parents if if you left your kids sitting in the room when

I had to start Describing some of the Manichaean beliefs, but we all we

Calvinists are secret Manichaeans. Anyways, that's what we've we've been told by Oxford Scholar, so that's what we are.

So we're just gonna sneak it in whenever we can because Because of something

Anyhow, all right. Now you got admit if you stuck with me this long For the past hour and ten minutes

You thought almost nothing about kovat 19 we are here to serve

Guy met cuz I didn't so there you go. We are here to serve

I hope I can remember it. I just gonna leave all this stuff here because I'll get to it tomorrow But I've got some stuff about Augustine And Eastern Orthodoxy here.

I've got stuff about the Essene's from Qumran. It's Qumran. That's how you say And I've got all sorts of neat stuff and I may have more if I if I get a chance to roll through stuff

Who knows we'll see but thanks for joining us we will see you Wait a minute.

What's today? Tuesday we'll see on Thursday. Oh, oh, oh, wait, wait, wait, wait

Wait, there's more tomorrow If you want another two hours to not think about kovat 19 from 4 to 6

Eastern Daylight Time iron sharpens iron Chris Arnzen We're gonna be talking about the debate on purgatory with Peter Stravinsky's Chris was there

He introduced it he didn't moderate it we Having Chris moderate would always but that would have been a bad idea at almost any point in time when you think about it

Because the temptation that he would have experienced. I Mean as it was we had to you know, like like at the baptism debate with Bill Shishko.

Yeah. What's that back here? They Got ourselves a kiddie pool wasn't swimming pools a kiddie pool and yeah, and The burial in debate would not have even happened if if we had been foolish enough to let

Chris Moderate that one and he will admit that won't you Chris? Yes, you will you're laughing. I can hear you laughing right now

I can I can hear it all the way from Pennsylvania because Chris Arnzen's laugh is absolutely epic.

But anyway Maybe he'll tell you on the program tomorrow about how utterly humorless

I was When we first met and how I owe all of my humor or lack thereof

To Chris Arnzen, but anyways, we're gonna talk about the Peter Stravinsky's debate And the

Doctrine of Purgatory and and maybe some of the other debates along the way we'll just we'll just see so that's tomorrow 4 to 6 p .m.

Iron sharpens iron look look up on the web market and We'll be on tomorrow.

want to make sure that we got that out there. Thanks a lot for watching today We'll see you on Thursday.