October 23, 2008

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line

The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence

Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed

Baptist Church This is a live program and we invite your participation. If you'd like to talk with dr.

White call now 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll -free across the

United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five three three three -four -one And now with today's topic here is

James white And good afternoon. Good evening. Whatever time it is where you are.

It's actually closer to evening than normal for me I am NOT in the studios in Phoenix I'm not sure.

I'm really gonna mention where I am right now actually, but this is the first dividing line We've attempted to do via Skype.

Yes, indeed. That's what we're doing Today, we have done dividing lines in the past over the phone.

I didn't enjoy them very much But we we have done them and that was back when we were paying big bucks to A radio station for one hour's worth of time

So we figured better do it and I don't know that we've done much in the way of remote dividing lines since We went to the webcast format and we did that quite some time ago actually so This is definitely a first but from what we have tested today now remember

Testing electronic equipment is not the same thing as using electronic equipment. That's been my experience

You can test things a lot and that doesn't necessarily mean that they're going to actually work but we tested

My ability to continue to play sound files here over the connection and It worked.

So I have some sound files a queued up. We will continue looking at the Madrid debate and Lord willing we can take your phone calls too.

We have one online and There are others at eight seven seven seven five three three, three, four one

I'm actually gonna have to remember that now since I firmly have that little cheat sheet

Taped up on the wall, but how many times have I said that who knows but we will take your phone calls as well.

So Thanks for being with us today on the program. And if you do end up hearing anything odd in the background just ignore it

Because I really can't control my environment completely here Where I am at least 2 ,000 miles away from where I normally am.

So it is amazing what? Technology allows us to do these days

But I was sent by by the inimitable T quid Some some clips and so I would like to play a couple of them for you

Lord willing they will work for us and This is a very recent clip from Tim Staples and since it's directly relevant to The topic and relevant to something that I Read this morning on Steve Ray's blog.

I thought it all sort of fit together rather well here is Something that's a

Steve Ray posted this morning. And again, it illustrates to me anyway the fact that These guys just don't have any interest in Interacting with criticisms their position they as long as the people they want

To keep confused want to keep convicts convinced of their positions are convinced of their positions

Then the rest of it. Hey, I don't have to worry about it I don't need to interact with the

Protestants are saying we just don't really care. So here was a Article well just a paragraph that appeared on Steve Ray's blog this morning quoting

Tim Staples And it says quote based on the Bible alone How can you conclude there should be 27 books in the

New Testament and each of these books is inspired and infallible as an example? There were some among the early

Christians who did not believe Hebrews even today. We'd not know for sure who wrote it 2nd Peter said Hermas and letter of Clement of the

Corinthians should be included in the canon. I stopped for just a moment. Isn't it odd? That Patrick Madrid can be so certain that Matthew wrote

Matthew, but the Roman Catholic Church never told us who wrote Hebrews and if The Pope came out today and said

I hereby decree that Apollos wrote Hebrews how many Roman Catholic scholars?

teaching it especially less than conservative institutions would actually believe that Apollos wrote

Hebrews I Have to wonder I continue with the quote if you look at third

John for example It never mentions the name of Jesus Christ and seems to be a quick note written by the elder where he says he had much

To write but I would rather not write with pen and ink. I hope to see you soon We'll talk together face to face Some asked the question why this should would be considered part of the cannon when it explicitly says the elder did not want to include

It and what he really wanted to communicate and who is this elder anyway using the Bible alone?

why should I believe he was inspired and infallible and so here's the Circular cannon argument from Rome once again

We can Don't question us.

We have the ability we have the power Wasn't our cartoon that had something like that.

We have the power I forget. But anyway, and so he's gonna repeat part of that But here is let's see if we can figure out what tradition is

Thanks to Tim Staples What is tradition? Now remember, let's let's listen and let's see if we can figure out whether Tim Staples holds to part and part of or whether he holds to the material sufficiency view of Scripture that is does he he believe like many of the

Men at the Council of Trent that God's tradition God's revelation I'm sorry is found partly in the written traditions and partly in the oral traditions

Or does he believe in? material sufficiency Does he wander into the area where issues like the canon become a part of revelation itself?

So that tradition itself becomes inspired like Madrid did or will he do what Madrid does and flip -flop back and forth?

Use the one when it's convenient any other when it's convenient. Let's see if we can figure out what's Tim Staples Actually believes my question focuses on church tradition

And then especially in you know in 2nd Thessalonians 2 15 Get hold to the traditions that you were taught

Either word of mouth or by letter. Do we know regarding the ones that were taught?

Now exactly what those were in other words traditions that weren't captured in Scripture Sure, they would be the same as they are today now granted at this time the

What do you mean the same as they are today that's That's the question. We keep asking.

What is tradition and you can't get straight answers out of these folks Well, they'd be the same as every day.

Well, does that mean tradition has never changed? So that would mean that all the traditions that were delivered were delivered to that time so everything about the

Marian dogmas and and all that stuff that was all delivered and Everybody at Thessalonica knew everything there was to know

About the Bob the Assumption of Mary. Well, that wouldn't work because she wasn't dead yet. Hmm. How'd that work?

Okay proclamation of the gospel by the Apostles was ongoing and more of what

Jesus revealed was being revealed at this time, but generally Speaking, you know, for example, you know, the second

Thessalonians was being written in roughly 50 Some say as early as 52 it may have been 53 55

The book of Revelation wouldn't be written some argue until 95 or later. So we do have a period here

During the apostolic age where where revelation was ongoing? So, you know everything hadn't been communicated.

It was being communicated by the Apostles, but having said that The tradition doesn't change over 2 ,000 years the same traditions that we have today are

What were proclaimed in the first century in other words tradition doesn't add to the first century proclamation of the gospel

So the canon of Scripture, for example, you know whether Paul Actually wrote first Thessalonians and second

Thessalonians, which had been written by this time That would be part of Tradition the tradition of the church and the magisterium of the church would tell you whether or not this letter is is authentic Or not the doctrines concerning the

Trinity the hypostatic Union Justification salvation all of these things would be matters of tradition as well as Scripture so at this time

Before you had a lot of the scripture written it would have been just as Paul says in second

Thessalonians 215 he says stand fast in the traditions you have been taught

Either by word or written epistle the way that the gospel was proclaimed

According to the Bible according to st. Paul is through the oral proclamation the paradosis the tradition and That tradition would later be written down, but the writing of the tradition down didn't change it

Now if that's true, let's just let's just go with this argument. All right, let's let's go with Tim's argument here

If if that's true then and tradition does not change Then all those things that I keep challenging these men to demonstrate from Scripture Demonstrate or from history if they want however, they want to do it

Demonstrate that these things were being taught at that time and He's gonna the things he lists like hypostatic

Union and Trinity and things like this are traditions You know,

I it's it's Difficult to nail these guys down and find out exactly how their system works.

And of course once you get them to commit to something Somebody else to come along and say no. No, no, it's this way because The whole idea of this

Unanimous monolith of belief that is Roman Catholicism just doesn't exist You know, okay, you know the truth was already proclaimed and it was proclaimed orally and then of course later

It was written down. But again, even the oral proclamation was ongoing during that time

Where the gospel was written after this time period after this letter was written. Yes Yes scholars are virtually unanimous that the first written document was the first Thessalonians Many believe second

Thessalonians was written very sure in fact indicated in the text that it was written closely

Thereafter so Paul's epistles were written or at least these first two most likely before Matthew Mark or Luke or John?

Okay, all right, I'm just trying to come up with an answer to a Protestant asking, you know, what are the tradition

What you want to say to him is there the same traditions that we have now like the Trinity like, you know

Here's a good question to ask him. How does he know when he's married now that before we get this amazing statement?

They're the same ones we have now notice what he has not mentioned Notice what I have not heard.

I have not heard anything About such things as the bodily assumption of Mary the immaculate conception papal infallibility the very dogmas that Rome admits are

Utterly dependent upon tradition are the very ones That he is not mentioning here and they are the ones that are the issues

It's not the Trinity. It's not deity of Christ. I can demonstrate those things from Scripture I don't need Roman tradition in any way shape or form to do such things

But it's these other things that have been added to the text They've been added to divine revelation that are the issue.

Those are the things you should be focusing on How do you get married according to the Bible? Well, the Bible doesn't tell us how and it doesn't tell us when

The Bible speaks about marriage talks a lot about marriage, but ask your friend to show you in the

Bible is it when the The minister says I now pronounce you man and wife as you see in Protestant Circles because we don't do that in the

Catholic Church But but is that when they're married or is it when they consummate the union on their wedding night?

And where is the Bible verse to back that up? It's not there because that is part of our tradition

The whole you know The idea of the sacrament of holy matrimony being ratified at the altar and consummated on the wedding night

Is part of our tradition? There's so much now Immediately again never heard the when do you get married argument before but let's let's run with it for the fun of it this kind of radical skepticism is is

Very useful in in making a person question solo scriptura, but it's a it's a bait -and -switch tactic

There's there's no substance to it because he can't tell you that either. I mean he can say well We'll give you

XYZ answer that doesn't make it something the Apostles taught because Tim Staples says it

Doesn't mean that that's what the Apostles taught in the first place there's all sorts of things that the

Bible doesn't give you some exact chronological answer on and To say oh, well you need it.

Therefore you need our tradition Is the the perfect recipe for being sucked right into every kind of cult and ism there is out there?

and so to say well We have this tradition, are you seriously telling me?

Is Tim Staples seriously suggesting the Apostles are running around talking about altars and priests?

Performing sacramental marriages and this somehow is is how we're supposed to figure this out

This was this was apostolic teaching. This is long before the the entire concept of the priesthood even developed

Again absolutely amazing only meant to convince those who want to be convinced

Now did you hear that Canon and Trinity are traditions

Now if they're divine truths, then the Canon somehow is allegedly delivered by the

Apostles Which which Apostle delivered that that it did an Apostle deliver the Canon in Thessalonica. He knows that's not possible

He just mentioned that's not possible. He just said that if you put Thessalonica that the the

Thessalonian Epistles around 52 and push revelation all the way back to say 98

He's talking about a 45 year difference. So the only way That's the

Canon could be a part of this tradition Passed on by an Apostle would be if John did it.

Well, where did John do this? Can you tell us where John did this can you dogmatically define for us where John did this?

No, of course not. All he's gonna say is well You know the church reflects this later on blah blah blah blah blah the gap between the claimed origin of the tradition and the first evidence of alleged tradition is large indeed

That is Reliant upon both scripture and tradition without the tradition

You simply don't have the Christian faith. Well with Roman tradition. You don't have any

Christian faith at all That's that's the problem there so There's there's the argument put forward by Tim Staples and amazing

Arguments indeed before we take our first call. I didn't want to play a short one here and We have a another discussion but a little bit more reserved discussion of the veneration of Saints debate by Patrick Madrid now

I Would like to think that mr. Madrid would you know, I know that if Patrick Madrid Played our debate and went through it point by point

I would listen and I would I would want I would contact him I would want to be involved in And obviously if he had the phones wide open

I'd call in and I'd want to address issues things like that Of course, they don't do that when we do it That is

I think a rather telling thing personally, but anyway And you remember that mr.

Madrid identified the This particular debate as the painfully obviously debate where It was made so painfully obvious how a bad

The Protestant position is well, here's some comments. He made on that particular debate just recently second is the debate

I did with a Protestant Several years back now. It's called the great debate on on the communion of Saints Mary in the communion of Saints and it was held in front of an audience of close to a thousand people and it was a very vigorous debate on the question of Can the

Saints in heaven pray for us and do they pray for us? And can they hear us and all the other things and I approached it from a scriptural standpoint so if you're interested in hearing that debate and kind of hearing how these clear biblical principles can become confused and even distorted as Unfortunately, many many

Protestant preachers out there do then get a hold of that debate that is available at Patrick Madrid comments called the great debate now having gone through that debate and demonstrated the bankruptcy of Patrick Madrid's attempted use of scripture and Every time we went into a text we demonstrate in the debate

I didn't have to do it after the debate, but we just highlighted it just how badly he handles the text

It is sometimes difficult to listen to that and go what what were you listening to sir?

That's that's what I would like to know. What what were you? Hearing that you could think that That people are gonna hear the same thing you did.

But hey, you know what? I'm glad he makes it available I really am because I can trust the

Spirit of God to open people's eyes and you know people say well You know you do the same thing and there are people who become

Catholics. Yeah, you know, I was mentioning just last evening at dinner with Someone who actually would be on the cruise with us in in February.

I was well, let's go ahead I was talking with Gary DeMar and we were talking about people becoming

Roman Catholics and I Mentioned the fact that it does not surprise me at all

When people who are a part of churches that are very shallow and surface level, there's not an emphasis upon the gospel.

There's very shallow worship shallow preaching When when unregenerate people people who are just playing at the religion game

Hear the claims of Rome they can be very attractive because they are attractive to the natural man

The natural man wants a system where he can control the grace of God and that is in essence

Exactly what the sacramental system is. It is a man -made mechanism whereby you have this big reservoir of grace and man by what he does controls

The very grace of God that that is very appealing to the natural man

It truly is and it does not surprise me. I Said many times for on this program when you discuss matters of truth

You will rile up you will stir up The hearts and minds of the unregenerate who are amongst your your own your own numbers they are amongst those describing first John that had gone out from them because they were not truly of them and You're gonna see people converted.

Well, what's worse to be a hypocrite in a true church? Or to to finally just go and enter into a false church, which is worse for the soul

I don't think either one is better than the other. In fact, it might be better just to be a full -blown

Person in a false church rather than a hypocrite the true church You're just adding up for your you know piling up for yourself judgment

I would suppose but in any case doesn't surprise me at all But on the flip side when he distributes those tapes my of course belief is that the

Spirit of God opens the hearts of men and When the

Spirit of God is working upon someone's heart and They hear the truth of God They are going to respond to that truth of God and that truly is a wonderful thing and so I'm thankful that he's making it available and you know if the

Lord wants to Continue to leave him in a position of thinking that That he won that thing.

Well, that's up to the Lord I pray of course that Patrick would come to know the truth that he would be

Convicted of the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ and would would embrace it now This is gonna be the first time we've ever attempted to do this.

So Let's let's try it Let's go ahead and take our first caller and see if we can talk with Johnny Johnny, are you there?

Johnny, are you there? I Cannot hear Johnny Do do do do do do

Anything at all from Johnny? Alright doesn't look like phone calls are gonna work quite right

We didn't get a chance to test that part. So that might have something to do with it, but One last shot for Johnny here

I'm not getting any feedback. I Can hear something? What is that?

Is that you Johnny? No can't hear anything at all. All right.

Well we'll let the folks back in Phoenix see if they can figure that out and we will continue on and If they give me the word that they figured out what was going on great

If not, we'll just have to do it this way. All right going back to the Patrick Madrid debate

We are getting toward the end if I would quit playing other clips. Well, we Would get to the get to the end, but let's pick up right where we left off last time separate source of information

It's mr. Madrid. And so I want to turn around mr. Madrid and say mr. Madrid I challenge you to demonstrate on the basis of Scripture That what is in your supposed traditions is what is referred to in places like second

Thessalonians 215 or second Timothy 2 to? That is a challenge that I have laid before many a

Roman Catholic apologist and have not received an answer to it is the assumption That underlies the position and that assumption must be addressed

The simple fact matter is we see in the second Thessalonians 2 15 that the tradition he speaks of there is the gospel of Jesus Christ And you can't tell me that's not contained in the page of the scripture

And hence you show me a tradition sir an apostolic tradition That is binding upon Christians That is not found the pages of New Testament show us that apostolic tradition that we are told we must follow we must accept

And then we can move from there Which again he's gonna say well, I don't have to because I believe in the material sufficiency of Scripture And we just go back and forth and back and forth because he wants to have his cake and eat it, too

He wants to try to defend Roman Authority on issues such as the

Marian dogmas and All these other things developed way way way down the line while at the same time making it sound like He is actually defending a biblical position

Okay, Mr. White I'd be happy to take up on your challenge and here it is this Canon of the

New Testament is part of apostolic tradition Okay, now there we go now. We've mentioned this before but this is where he really lays it out there

Here is where Patrick Madrid says that the Canon is an apostolic tradition now remember, he's the one who's quote 2nd

Thessalonians 2 15 and yet Does he think Revelation had been written at that point as?

Tim Staples mentions there is no There's a very large scholarly consensus that there are a number of books left to be written after a second

It's onions including like the Gospels So, how can the Canon have been an apostolic tradition that Paul delivered to the

Thessalonians How does that work? Please explain? How that is a possibility it's not found in Scripture.

It is binding you believe in a closed Canon You believe that if we add to the Word of God, we're committing a sin

You would believe that the Mormons are wrong for adding the Book of Mormon to the Word of God You believe that Revelation ceased at the death of the last

Apostle Now the Canon of Scripture is something that I promised to hold you to which you have not yet addressed

At least you haven't given us an answer. That is one Apostolic tradition that is binding.

Mr. White and it's not found in Scripture It's a divine revelation and it's binding on the consciences of Christians Okay, so it is divine revelation according to Patrick Madrid.

It is divine revelation Which the Roman Catholic Church is not dogmatized until April of 1546

So no one knew this divine revelation For well, let's see after the time the writing.

Let's let's say that Tim Staples is correct, and we're looking at about 52 for the writing of First Thessalonians So people are gonna have to wait just Under 1 ,500

Years to have certain knowledge of this aspect of divine revelation

In fact, I would ask if you if you don't Know the Canon of Scripture in that sense from the

Roman Catholic perspective if they say we have to have divine certainty Could someone please explain to me how anyone

Defended the Trinity or the deity of Christ or any of these things before 1546 they didn't know what scripture was or Did not what an amazing thing?

For that kind of assertion to be made who as you would say hear the voice of their Savior and recognize it

There it is. How do you answer that? Well, it's quite easy first of all an apostolic tradition must exist since the time of the

Apostles But mr Madrid has been telling us that we had to wait to the end of the 4th century before we knew what can scripture was

How'd that happen? Remember apostolic traditions in 2nd Thessalonians 2 15 or what already delivered?

So your timings all along furthermore, mr. Madrid the Apostles did not believe that the apocryphal was inspired scripture

So you see me you're going against what you call a binding Apostolic tradition and so I say no you have not accomplished this

I challenge a Roman Catholic Show me where the Thessalonians were taught the bodily assumption of Mary trace it through history

Show me where the Thessalonians were taught these doctrines that Roman Catholicism has defined on the basis of tradition

Show me where they believed in the authority of the Bishop of Rome as the infallible Vicar of Christ The early church did not believe that They had no idea of that doctrine and yet Paul says these traditions were all ready delivered.

Where are they? No, they were not already delivered Rome has made them up over time Okay, and at this point

Patrick begged for a potty break Which is fine. I I didn't mind that at all

I imagine we were both drinking a lot of water at that time because as I mentioned it was a very very warm evening So we took a break and we're gonna come back.

We come back We're gonna try Johnny one more time and then start into the closing statements But first we're gonna take our break here on the dividing line

The Trinity is a basic teaching of the

Christian faith it defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us James White's book the

Forgotten Trinity is a concise understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters It refutes cultic distortions of the

Christian faith. It refutes the idea that the Trinity is the only way to be Of God as well as showing how a grasp of the significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a

Christian and Amid today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit. The Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the

Trinity Dr. John MacArthur senior pastor of Grace Community Church says James White's lucid presentation will help lay person and pastor alike highly recommended

You can order the Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at AO men org Alpha and Omega ministries is pleased to introduce the

Christmas morning CD by Todd Lindstrom Passion and peace are what sets Todd's music apart from others

These 12 instrumental favorites will bless and inspire you as you entertain guests and spend a

Christmas morning with your family You can find this beautiful music that celebrates the birth of our

Lord in the bookstore at a omen dot org You Hello everyone, this is

Rich Pierce in a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man -centered self -help program

The need for a no -nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater I am convinced that a great many go to church every

Sunday yet. They have never been confronted with their sin Alpha to make ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner making no excuses

Man is sinful and God is holy That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior?

We are to come before the Holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well

Support Alpha and Omega ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

Thank you Under the guise of tolerance modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality

Even more disturbing some within the church attempt to revise and distort Christian teaching on this behavior in their book

The same -sex controversy James White and Jeff Neal write for all who want to better understand the

Bible's teaching on the subject Explaining and defending the foundational Bible passages that deal with homosexuality including

Genesis Leviticus and Romans Expanding on these scriptures they refute the revisionist arguments including the claim that Christians today need not adhere to the law in a straightforward and loving manner

They appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to God's plan for his people the same -sex controversy

Defending and clarifying the Bible's message about homosexuality Get your copy in the bookstore at al min dot org

And Welcome back to the dividing line on a

Thursday evening. It's actually dark here now the Sun went down while we were doing the first half of the program and so it is a

Little bit unusual for me. It's getting earlier and earlier. My body says it's 430 and outside.

It says it's 630 So that's an interesting way of doing things We're gonna go ahead and try to get

Johnny on now one more time. Let's see if we can talk to Johnny. Hello, Johnny Hello, Johnny Here's something now.

Hello. Hey, there he is. How you doing? I'm doing good Good.

Hi. I I have actually a couple of questions and the first one may actually be a foolish question

So bear with me on this one. I was listening to you last Tuesday's not this

Tuesday, but I'm sorry the last Thursday's dividing line and one of the things that you were that you were

Putting on from the Madrid debate on social tourism. He kept harping on the cannon question and then something hit me

Just it just kind of dawned on me and I said to myself, you know, I remember I'm pretty sure you listen to the debate Between dr.

Greg Bonson and R .C. Spall and apologetic method. Oh I remember in debate and and the reason why

I bring that up is because R .C. Spall as we know is Classical evidentialist in this apologetic approach and one of the things

I remember him saying is that in in philosophy There is no such thing as philosophical certainty and and of course a lot of this philosophy goes back to the the natural theology of Thomas Aquinas or at least something along those

Lines and being that the Roman Catholic Church Basically holds at least somewhat of a similar view of apologetic method in in that regard

That would mean that according to this point of view there is no such thing as philosophical certainty

If this is the case, I mean, and maybe I'm wrong here. Aren't they in essence asking the

Protestant? To give them philosophical certainty on the cannon when they don't even believe that philosophical certainty exists

Well, if you're asking if they are being consistent in demanding of us what they themselves cannot provide.

Yes, of course Now, of course, there are different there are even differing viewpoints within Roman Catholicism on issues like that and of course, we need to recognize that Apologists on both sides of the spectrum tend to be among the more conservative individuals

But my recollection is that Madrid himself Would identify himself as being quite

Thomistic. And so I would assume that he would have Now of course at that point

I need to point something out they they might make a differentiation in regards to the church's authority being able to provide a kind of Epistemological certainty that goes beyond that which is provided by philosophy.

So you know What I'm talking about is from from the standpoint of see they're asking us to do that with the cannon

Okay But if if our grounds for accepting the cannon are insufficient for them

Then can't we turn it around on them and saying okay? Give me philosophical certainty that the Roman Catholic Church was the church that was established by Jesus Christ Not not this.

I mean, I remember when you asked that question that Patrick Madrid I think he said something about well Can I if can I show that the

Roman Catholic Church was established by Jesus and therefore that's the church I'm talking about philosophical certainty that Peter and Paul and all these guys were actually teaching the same things that are being taught today

If if they can't give us that philosophical certainty in that regard Then I don't think they should have the right to ask us for that philosophical certainty when it comes to the cannon.

I Would I would agree with you? You'll have to find the next place that Patrick's speaking out your direction and explain that Okay.

Now, here's the second question that I have it I'm sure you probably know about this But I just kind of it kind of got this in the mail because I'm on Roberts and Genesis email.

I mean a mailing list And Interesting stuff in the mail, huh? Yeah. Yeah.

Well, this was actually pretty interesting because they're they're asking for donations, of course But he said that according to this news release

I guess they just got that they removed a sentence from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the sentence says

Quote thus the covenant that God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid For them and according to this letter the

CAI has fought and they have finally removed this Sentence from the

CCC. And so I'm asking you what what do you think would be the ramifications of something like this? Well, first of all,

I've not heard anything about it at all secondly the idea that Roberts and Genesis and his very small band would actually be able to convince the

The Magisterium the Roman Catholic Church to remove something about the

Jews from the Universal Catholic Catechism strikes me as well

Highly unlikely. Let's put it that way so I can't comment on that because I wouldn't even have time to pull up the

Current edition online and that doesn't even necessarily tell me anything if they haven't updated it so I would be interested in finding out from somebody whether there has been a

Change there, but in light of even what I played last week and Tim Staples mentioning the close relationship between Jacob Neusner and rat singer and Hence the the church saying, you know in liturgical music and so on so forth that they can't use the term

Yahweh anymore that goes against everything that Rome is doing right now, so I Don't I don't know

More more in a liturgical level. I'm speaking. I mean, you're absolutely right We I guess this needs to be looked into because I don't have the latest

Catechism myself. I have the older one, but I just find it because this is a feel a very

Significant theological sentence about the Jewish. I mean it almost sounds sensational Obviously Rome is not dispensational, but it almost it's kind of Jewish friendly in this sense and for this to be removed it

I think it would change at least you know, the Maybe the paradigm or something along those lines

Well, it would it would depend a little bit If If it's a matter of where the sentence is being placed what some materials are, you know

Just just removing it from one place if there have been changes made elsewhere, you know

That's why I would have to look at it To know what what's really it's about.

I I don't I don't have any information at all So that's first time I've heard of anything about it

Okay, thanks for thanks for patiently hanging on so we get you on the air All right. Thank you

All right Of course, I'll go the scary is posting stuff in channel about various things like that, but that's from 2002 so Yeah, I I've not heard anything about that I've not seen anything like that pop up on any of my

RSS feeds or anything like that. So That would be a news to me. It might be significant, but that would be that would be news to me.

Well Let's take a look at maybe finishing off at least my portion of the debate here,

I believe I had the last statement and It's been a little while since I listened to this particular portion of it

And I am going to critique myself here. I do not believe that I gave a very good closing statement and The reason is very simple.

I was in 1993 still laboring under the impression of Attempting that that it's best to attempt to get as much information in In as short a time as possible

I have since then adopted the idea and have hopefully practiced the idea that Communication is best and the concluding statement should summarize wrap up Even if there is stuff you haven't gotten to and let's face it in any debate that you

That you're going to engage in there is going to be stuff. Do you wish you could have addressed? What I did in my closing statement is

I overdid addressing those issues I Address second Thessalonians 2 15 that don't get me wrong.

I I'm not disagreeing with what I said. I think it's important I wish I'd had time to include it in the debate itself.

But the fact the matter is I Could have done that much more briefly than I did and I took too much time partly because I had

Written material already on the subject and I went ahead and went through it I had a part of me felt like I needed to because I promised to do so earlier in the debate

I sort of felt sort of a necessity to do so at that point But in reality, it probably was not the wisest thing to do

So I did summarize a few points, but I could have done I think much better in this closing statement

As I've said before if after 15 years I have not hopefully improved in my abilities to debate and by the way, just in passing

I got word Yesterday that we have locations for everything except right now the

Monday debate with Shabir Ali in London So the Tuesday location has been nailed down now and in fact one of the things

I'm doing here Even while traveling is working on those presentations. So I keep praying for that. It's coming at us very very quickly

It's gonna be a wonderful opportunity but hopefully I will in those debates demonstrate that I've now done more than 70 75 getting close to 80 of these debates now and you learn hopefully how to Communicate a little bit better than you did initially and so I will criticize myself

I don't believe that any of the information and I share here is in error But I just spent too much time on Second Thessalonians chapter 2 and I should have gone back over some of the major themes

And press those home, but here anyway with that having been said Is the closing statement that I offered in the debate?

They're not having those breaks. So I thank you for that person Hey, mr. White and then mr. Madrid with their closing statement

My reason you didn't applaud is because you're too hot move your arm Problem Okay This evening we gathered to debate the issue.

Does the Bible teach the doctrine of sola scriptura and I have in my opening statements and in my comments that came afterwards.

It's done my best To make sure that we stick that subject, but despite my best attempt

We have gone into all sorts of other issues We've gone into hearing the

Roman Catholics say that he believes the Bible's inspired because the church tells him so Which of course is a very circular argument the church claims have authority because it appeals to scripture

But it says scriptures inspired because the church says so and that's a very circular thing They've tried to call it spiral, but it's

Virals or circles depending on which direction you look at it from so it's a very circular argument That's being presented to us in regards to the position taken by mr.

Madrid, and I would like to submit to you Please think about it all the objections of mr Madrid has raised in regards to canon issues so on so forth are if they are valid are equally valid against himself an

Argument that you use that when turned on your own position destroys your own position is not a valid argument It's not a valid argument

What have we heard from mr. Madrid in regards to my presentation on second Timothy 3 16 through 17?

Well we've heard well you're trusting in Greek lexicon No, I'm not trusting in Greek lexicon

Mr.. Madrid said that I brought all this fancy Greek stuff, but mr. Madrid brought the

Bible the Old Testament was written in Hebrew with a little bit of Aramaic thrown in there for good measure

The New Testament was written in Greek And all I did was

I went to what Paul said and demonstrated that what Paul said teaches the doctrine

Mr.. Madrid has provided us no counter citations He's provided us no reason to think that the

Protestant scholars that I cited were in any way unfair biased going overboard

He's provided us with no Catholic scholars if they all know Our kids own means he's provided us with none of that At the beginning of debate

I laid out what I had to do I had to demonstrate that the Bible is a rule of faith It teaches it's sufficient to function as a sole rule of faith and that in fact teaches that it does

Function in that way, and I did those three things So what was mr. Madrid's response?

Well? He's gone off after every other topic there is to go after Canon issues, and what well how do you know that type of the situations is like wait a minute?

Let's go back to what the scripture said and the scripture says Scriptures are sufficient for the man of God for doing the works of God Now I want to take the time so I promised it over and over again to walk you through a passage

I think will help us to understand this and this is 2nd Thessalonians 2 15. I hope you'll turn with me there Even though it's late in the evening.

I hope you'll still turn with me there Starting at verse 13 But we ought to give thanks to God always for you brother and love by the

Lord for God chose you from the beginning for Salvation by the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through faith in the truth

Under which he called you by our gospel so that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ Therefore brothers stand firm and hold fast the traditions which you were taught either by word or by letter of ours

What do we have here? This is really the primary passage that is used a lot utilized by Roman apologists to defend the concept of the oral tradition

We're told we'll see what you've got here is you've got oral tradition And you've got written tradition the twofold tradition just like we've always been saying

This is a command to stand firm and hold fast a single body of traditions already delivered to the believers

There is nothing future about the passage the Thessalonians have all ready heard

What Paul has preached? This is a single body of traditions that is taught in two ways

Orally that is when Paul was personally with Thessalonians And he preached to them and by epistle that being the first letter to the

Thessalonians Now what does orally refer to for the Roman Catholic to use this passage to support his position two things must be established first that the oral element refers to a specific passing on a revelation to the power of the

Episcopate and Secondly that what is passed on is different in substance from what is found in the

New Testament With reference to the first issue we know that the context the passage is the gospel message itself

Look again at verses 13 and 14 and how Paul speaks of God's work of salvation the gospel

The traditions of which Paul speaks are not traditions about Mary or papal infallibility

Instead the traditions Paul is talking about is simply the gospel message itself

Nobody said in his first epistle to the Thessalonians about what he had spoken to them and for this reason for Thessalonians 2 13

We also constantly thank God that when you receive from us the Word of God's message You accepted it not as the

Word of men But but for what it really is the Word of God which also performs its work in you who believe this is

God breathes revelation and notice also that if we Do a terrible thing and look at the

Greek of this passage the term stakatae that is translated as standing firm

Here in 2nd Thessalonians 2 15 is used by Paul elsewhere For example in 1st

Corinthians chapter 16 verse 13 1st Corinthians 16 13 knows what says

Beyond your guard stand firm in the face Be men of courage be strong Paul exhorts the

Corinthians to stand firm in what in the faith That is the context of his statement in 2nd

Thessalonians chapter 2 verse 15 as well There is nothing in the past that even begins to cause a person to think well

Well what Paul taught orally that's what he must have taught them about The oral traditions about Mary and the

Immaculate Conception the bodily assumption and papal infallibility Even though if I was even a bishop in Rome at the time

But but he passed it on anyways, and then that was passed on down to the power of the Episcopal That is what we're being asked to believe and I don't believe it

Now I have any reason to believe it The same thing happens when we look at Matthew chapter 23

Another passages frequently used by Roman Catholics in regards to the issue of well

Here's a passage that violates sola scriptura in Matthew 23. You have the discussion of Moses's seat

There's an alleged the concept of Moses's seat in Matthew chapter 23 1 through 7 is the passage that I would ask you to read

There's in fact a reputation the concept of sola scriptura for not only is this concept not found in the

Old Testament But Jesus is alleged gave his approbation this extra scriptural tradition But is this sound exegesis is this passage being properly understood when used this way?

First we know that the passage has spawned a plethora of differing understandings among scholars including Roman Catholic scholars

But a few items immediately remove the Roman apologist interpretation and application from consideration first Moses's seat refers to the seat in front of the synagogue on which the teacher of the law sat were reading the scriptures or Some scholars that dispute that but most say that that's the case

Synagogue worship, of course came into being long after Moses's day And so those who attempt to make this an oral tradition going back to Moses are engaging in wishful thinking

Beyond this we're here only speaking of a position that existed at this time in the synagogue worship of the day

Are we truly to believe that this position was divine in origin and hence binding upon all who would worship

God? It certainly doesn't seem the New Testament Church and so it this way Because the New Testament Church did not adopt it and did not have

Moses's seat We first note interpreters such as Jeremias and Carson view This passage is engaging in fighting irony read the rest of this passage and it is harsh harsh stuff

The Jewish leaders have presumed to sit in Moses's seat Suggested by merch

Moulton and John focusing on the use the heiress tends to serve to sit They sat themselves in this place, but not not properly such an understanding is entirely in line with the context

But I am more prone to accept dungarees understanding in which he says the following quote So long as sitting in Moses's seat qualifies the speaking of the scribes and Pharisees all things

Whatever does not include their interpretive traditions, but emphasizes the totality of the law They do keep their traditions.

They do not practice what they speak while sitting on Moses's seat And so traditions are not in view though elsewhere

Matthew is concerned to criticize the scribes and Pharisees interpretations the law here He is concerned to stress the necessity of keeping the law itself as usual.

His eye is on the Antinomians in the church So what do we have here? Jesus simply refuses to overthrow the current form of worship

That is engaged in the synagogue at this time because there is nothing in it like there was in the core bound rules

Violated the scriptures, but we know from Matthew chapter 15 that all traditions

Were held up to what standard by the Lord Jesus Christ over the Roman Catholic says.

Oh, those are human traditions ours aren't The Jews didn't believe the core band rule was a human tradition

The Jews didn't believe the core band rule is just a human tradition They didn't believe that the the rules in Matthew chapter 15 about washing the hands those were the traditions of the elders

They have divine authority All Rome claims the same thing

And I say to you we must take their traditions and examine them by scripture just as Jesus taught in Matthew chapter 14

For example the Roman Catholic Pontiff Has taught the following and I guess this would fall under the concept of sacred tradition

Consequently we declare state define and pronounce That it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the

Roman Pontiff. That's interesting There were hundreds of years when there was no

Roman Pontiff All you say all there's always been a bishop of Rome. Well, that's not actually the case But the point is there was hundreds of years when the

Bishop of Rome never claimed what Rome teaches about it today So, how could anyone have been saved? I don't know. The point is you examine what this thing says in light of what?

You just simply bow down before it and say well, that's my ultimate authority. So therefore I accept it Or do you examine the tradition the light of scripture and do what the

Lord Jesus said to do in Matthew chapter 15? the debate this evening

Was on whether the Bible teaches sola satura not on canon issues not on how the church recognizes inspiration and The reason that I focus so much in my presentation upon that very issue is because basically

I knew that's what mr. Madrid wanted At least I thought so Mr. Madrid didn't want to go off into all sorts of church history stuff and so on so forth

And so I focused my presentation On where the Bible teaches it because Catholic answers keep saying show us one verse and when we do what they do

What has been the response in showing? Mr. Madrid the one verse? The response has been well

That's just Protestant scholars. That's just that's fancy Greek. I brought the Bible. No my friends

Remember the thesis the debate Ask yourself the question has mr. Madrid refuted second

Timothy 3 16 through 17 in Matthew chapter 15 If he is not no matter what other neat things he said

He's not actually engaged the debate That is where it lies And I'm going to challenge him to again in his final closing statements focus on the issue and Deal with those passages

Thank you very much So there was the closing statement as I said,

I think I spent too much time on the second Thessalonians 2 15 Maybe you might disagree I did actually now that I listened to it once again

And like I said, it had been a little while since I had listened to it Did summarize most of the issues and try to get it back to the primary focus?

But you know that that worked out pretty well. Actually this worked out pretty well, too. I want to thank

Rich back at the office for running back and forth between Two segments of the studio to make this work and we are going to try the the testimonies have emphasized to me the need to try to Do the dividing line as regularly as possible.

So though I am a couple thousand miles away. We made it work We keep trying to make it work and we hope you'll keep listening pray for us

London's upcoming. We'll see you next week. God bless The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at six. Oh two nine, seven three four six zero two or write us at P O box three seven one zero six

Phoenix, Arizona eight five zero six nine You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org

That's a o -m -i -n dot o -r -g where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks