Russell Moore’s Statement, Steven Anderson on KJVOC Chapter 2

Greetings, welcome to The Dividing Line. We have a lot to get to today. I'm going to try to hurry and Take at least like two or three calls toward the end of the hour.

We'll see. I have a Steven Anderson thing But it's the shortest one so far.

Anyways, it was only 28 minutes or something like that. So It wasn't a whole lot in it that we will get into the

The Greek Septuagint and a few things like that. I just realized I may not have one in here, but Anyway, so we'll try to get through that and a few other things we need to get to and then try to get some phone calls and Try to do it in an appropriately lengthed period of time everybody by now has heard of the

Houston Chronicle story on the crisis in the Southern Baps Convention, which

I find interesting because as far as I can tell All of this was pretty well known this is just sort of a collection of stuff that's it's not done yet I think what tomorrow?

I think the next section is due out tomorrow and then the last one over the weekend or something. So It's one of those things you can't

It's being responded to but it's it can't be responded to completely because it's not done yet.

It's it's strange It's it's like well, you have to respond to it, but you can't fully respond to it. It's not really done yet and It's it's odd how this is being how this is being done, but there was of course an immediate response from Southern Baptist leaders and especially from Russell Moore of the

ERLC and I was not the only one to notice How odd how oddly?

He began his response, I mean literally and this is February 10th

Southern Baptist and the scandal of church sexual abuse It is the Second paragraph, so we're talking

Right the beginning this is this is how Russell Moore is framing His response.

This isn't some addition down someplace else. This is right there Here's what he says the first is to see with clear eyes what is before us

Some have ridiculed this concern as being some irrational sweep into a secular

MeToo moment now This was written very very shortly after this came out.

So I'm not sure how there could have been enough time this this This is referring to stuff before the report comes out this is a preemptive political strike

Okay, some have ridiculed this concern What concern

I guess seeing with clear eyes what is before us? So I guess clear eyes is seeing the way that Russell Moore sees and the progressive

ERLC sees ERLC sees right anyway Some have ridiculed this concern as being some irrational sweep into a secular me too moment

Implying the problem is political correctness over an issue that is no law no real problem within church life well,

I wonder who that is because plainly There are all sorts of problems that have been been being pointed out in Southern Baptist Ecclesiology For a long long time and when

I mean Southern Baptist Ecclesiology, I'm referring to the self -calling to the ministry

Where the you know, someone gets a feeling at At age 19 that they're called the ministry and you can't you cannot even question that That is just sacrosanct rather than what you see in Reformed Baptist circles if a young man

Feels a call to ministry then the elders Plural one of the key issues here

One of the key issues here is the single pastor making deacons into elders

Wrong -headed unbiblical ecclesiology no question about it and Some of us have been talking about that for a long time.

I've got a got a book back there Yeah perspectives in church government

Well, I've argued that issue for a long long time Plurality of elders is incredibly important and a plurality of elders helps to dilute the

Temptation to spiritual power over others being transferred into other areas of life Which seemingly is a lot of what we're hearing about here

But anyways, I am digressing and preaching too much Over an issue that is no real problem within church life.

There are lots of problems along those lines So I'm not sure who's saying this.

I'd like to know who is saying by the way I did Contact in it through Twitter, but I know he saw it

Russell Moore and I asked specific questions about something. I'm about to get to here. I asked for clarification and I was given none.

So Take that for what it's what it is. Maybe he's just too busy to get around to answering questions like this

Others have suggested that the church should not concern itself with questions of justice and that Preaching the gospel itself will resolve matters of injustice.

What who has suggested this? We know who he's talking about. This is a shot at the statement of social justice, which has absolutely positively nothing logical

Logically or rationally, it's it's not connected whatsoever To this particular subject.

This is just I'm sorry. It's a cheap shot It's just like I'm gonna take a shot here while ostensibly beginning to talk about something very important about sex abuse is other

Babs churches but I'm gonna take a shot at unnamed people who never make these presentations because the only people

I'm talking to now are the people on my side anyways and This is the kind of language and verbiage that gets them going and so that's what

I'm gonna do Others have suggested the church should not concern itself with questions of justice who who has ever suggested that That is a gross

Misrepresentation a facile misrepresentation a misrepresentation that explains why people who make the misrepresentation of the rest of us

Will never face us with it because it would be so easily refuted by anyone with a modicum of intelligence

But who actually says that that's what that's what I would like to know and that preaching the gospel itself will resolve matters of injustice now

Whoa, Nelly Um Maybe if we started realizing that a lot of what is going on in Southern Baptist Churches today

Which is a bunch of decisionalism isn't the same thing as preaching the gospel Then we would have a better stance a better standpoint from which to look at that statement and go well

The church has been given the gospel and the spirit and that's all we got and if that ain't enough

Then you're gonna start looking for other stuff like oh the state Which is sort of what progressives do

Let's get the state involved. I guess to to bring about final justice I Thought Jesus was bringing about final justice, but that's the whole point justice has been so redefined

In the cultural context that who knows what and what in the world is it? How isn't the world is it to be defined in this context justice for the victims justice and punishment of others?

The perpetrators what what what is this justice? if you are not specific you will always end up leading to confusion and When you have a bunch of people that you yourself have been promoting to attune their ears to hear the term justice to be economic equality

Not just an economic equality of opportunity but economic quality of results

Socialism progressivism eventually. Yeah that word communism down the road if they're attuned to hear that that's what justice is then

How does that even fit in here? It doesn't it leads to all sorts of massive confusion anyway

Others have implied and this is where I went Excuse me.

What what? Others have implied that the horrific scandals we have seen in the Roman Catholic Church are due to the theology of Catholicism the nature of a celibate priesthood and so forth

Yeah That I can easily trace that back to the

Lawlords You know who the Lawlords were? They were pre -reformation lovers of God's Word followers of Wycliffe John Wycliffe the pre -reformation reformer in in England and You can look up the things that were being said in the late 1300s 1380 ish and Specifically right then and there

Rome's Doctrine of the priesthood Practice of priesthood leads to homosexuality.

They didn't call it homosexuality back then they used other terms sodomy in the confines of the church, this goes all the way but this is

Coming up on 700 years This has been said 700 years 650 minimally

The Scriptures identify as false teachers those who prohibit marriage for a specific reason

Even it is it is considered normative that the elders of the church would be husbands of one wife there is absolutely positively not a scintilla of evidence of a celibate

Sacramental priesthood in the New Testament. It did not exist. We've debated that I don't think it was much of a close debate you have to believe in Evolution and development of doctrine and you have to believe that the

Apostles didn't have to teach it and Jesus didn't have to teach But it could be an acorn you see and it falls into the ground then it grows

Newman's development hypothesis is the only way to come up with this disbelief. It is not apostolic. It is not New Testament and Anybody in any denominational position in the

Southern Baptist Convention that thinks otherwise should be dismissed immediately for not being a

Southern Baptist, so That Has and look

Since the rest of this series of articles hasn't even come out yet. All this is somewhat premature

But What I have seen so far Has troubled me and the report has troubled me in other ways.

Now. I'm not I'm gonna get back to this I'm not leaving it. I just want to make a comparison here because Obviously the question has come up and I saw

Matt Walsh doing and something about this To try to compare

Southern Baptists and Roman Catholics Roman Catholics want to try that they'd love to have anybody else but themselves in the middle of all What's going on with Cardinal Wuerl and all the rest that kind of stuff?

And All sorts of people have been saying all this is due to the fact that there's no centralized organization the

Southern Baptist Convention They need to have a presbytery. They need to have yeah, it helped the Roman Catholics a lot, didn't it?

in fact What it did in Roman Catholicism is allow this to go to the absolute highest levels of the

Vatican itself And then they could move people around to protect them. Yeah, that's that's the way to do it

And yet I'm hearing a lot of people that you know, it's this Reflexive response. We got to do something now.

We got to do something now Maybe the dumbest thing we've ever done, but we've got to do it now. That's how people think now It's not we really need to think this through and and we need to make sure that what we do will actually have

Positive long -term benefits for everyone involved. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, that's that's the old way of thinking now

It's just do something You know, I just heard today that the governor of California Who himself

Would fit in very well in communist China and and Venezuela and South Korea in place like that Has scrapped the high -speed rail that they've already spent over five billion dollars on I Had that thing it started same thing.

We got you something we got you something and Everybody at the time said this is stupid This is dumb.

What don't you see how dumb this is? But we've got to do something. We've got to save the trees and so Now you're gonna have

The railway that goes to nowhere Really nicely done for five billion dollars

Of your great -grandchildren's money It's this kind of we've got to do something we've got to do something type stuff that we see all around us these days and It's a lack of thought it is completely a lack of thought so anyway

The point is that when we look at the kinds of abuse in Roman Catholicism What is the common element that everybody's like, oh,

I can't I can't talk about it. It's called homosexuality It's called homosexuality

The vast use well, it's it's child abuse. It's sex with young men by other men it's homosexuality and there are a huge number of homosexuals in the

Roman Catholic priesthood The Roman Catholics know that there are thankfully honest

Roman Catholics who will not hide that reality who've written books about the subject the absolute infiltration and control and protection of these

Homosexuals at the highest levels by homosexuals at the highest levels of Vatican. There's no question about this that this isn't even debatable

So The kinds of abuse and the extent of the abuse reaching to the hundreds of thousands worldwide hundreds of thousands factors of ten and a hundred more than what we're talking about here in United States all over the world and this is just in this century and like I said

We can trace these accusations all the way back to the days of Wycliffe and maybe even before I don't know

That's just as far back as I know That there is a fundamental theological reason

When you deny the God -ordained institution of marriage

You are fundamentally contradicting the goodness of that relationship and the way that we've been created and the result has been disastrous down through the centuries

I'll stand by that I'll debate Russell Moore on that. He's not gonna do it, obviously

Because he knows better so Others have implied that the horrific scandals we have seen in the

Roman Catholic Church are due to the theology of Catholicism The nature of the celibate priesthood and so forth. Yes, sir. That is exactly correct.

Are you saying that's wrong? Yes, because he says all of these are not only wrong -headed responses but are deadly dangerous both to the lives of present and future survivors of these horrors and To the witness of the church itself now friends

I've had people saying well, you know, you're just focusing on one only he started his article with this

These are his words not mine He's the one who says that these are wrong -headed responses

That means the theology of Catholicism has nothing to do with a sexual abuse scandal in Roman Catholic Church That's what

Russell Moore is telling Southern Baptist. Why? Well, no arguments right here

I would love to challenge Russell Moore do you mind explaining that you want to lay that out for us

How is that how is it a wrong -headed thing that from the days of Wickliffe till now

Those of us outside of Rome have said, you know, this isn't healthy.

This isn't right. This is this is wrong how is that a wrong -headed response and More so how is it deadly dangerous both of the lives of present and future survivors?

What I mean, that's that's that's very emotionally

Evoking language, but Would you care to explain how you come with this conclusion?

You know provide some argumentation something that's more than just simply emotion Could you could you explain that and then this is deadly dangerous to the witness of the church itself to believe that The theology of the

Roman Catholic Church in regards to the celibate priesthood has been relevant to the horrific sex scandals Only is is deadly

Dangerous the witness of the church. I even

I even said, um Could you you know was this just poorly written maybe written too quickly

Confusing words. Would you like to? Take a second shot at it of course didn't get any any response to it and so you have a miss mishmash of unfounded

You know ridicule this concern irrational sweet and secular me to move moment, whatever that is

Shot at social justice Roman Catholic priesthood not no connection between any of these but they are all together wrong -handed and Deadly dangerous to the lives of present and future survivors and the witness of the church itself that is a

Tremendous amount of Assertion being made without the slightest effort to substantiate any bit of it

Why why start a response and something as important as this with this kind of?

Unfounded disconnected assertion Thinking people would like to know it

It's truly troubling. I would like to give you Dr.

Moore's Response because I asked him, you know, what do you believe?

Do you believe that the identification of Roman Catholic priest is an altar Christus? Would you not agree?

this is a fundamental denial of New Testament truth would like to be able to tell you what he would have to say about these things, but there was no there was no response to the inquiries as as I as I made them so The Fact the matter is that if you dive into The theology of their own

Catholic Church regarding the priest you find a

Doctrine and a practice both they'll say it's wasn't the solvency partisan doctrine.

It's just a discipline. Yeah Well, good luck. Just go ahead and let's just let's just see all the Roman Catholic priests

United States go Mass so much for the discipline. We're all gonna marry. We'll see what Rome does then now

With Francis in charge, who knows? Nobody knows anymore with Francis He's he's just out there in in non -island, but The fact is that every

Roman Catholic priest is still identified as an altar Christus another Christ in his ordination every single one of them and I'm not sitting here saying this as someone who has never interacted with folks on this

Cut I already a couple times linked to the debate with Mitchell Pacwa on this very subject

On the subject of the priesthood. It's available on YouTube still Check it out for yourself.

Check it out for yourself. I realized the vast majority of Protestants. They don't have a clue

What Rome teaches about the priesthood they just figure that well, they just call their ministers priests no

No, no. No, if you don't understand the sacerdotal concept of the priesthood the very marking of the soul of The priest with an indelible mark that cannot be removed

Then you don't understand Roman Catholic concept of priesthood at all and It is

Grossly unbiblical completely contradictory to the message in New Testament, especially the singular role of Jesus Christ as our one high priest, it's just that's the way it is and evidently

For some people today. It's just wrongheaded to point out that that has something to do With the very different nature of the systemic

Protected Homosexually based sex abuse within Roman Catholic Church Which cannot happen in that form within the

Southern Baptist Convention it can't It's a very simple reason again the doctrine of the church the ecclesiology.

In fact as Dr. Moeller was talking about this morning on the briefing

I've been a lot of people saying why isn't there some central? Governing authority that can control all of these things.

Well, even if there was We've seen how central governing controlling authorities act in their own self -interest and Can be used to perpetuate such things

That's not a panacea But obviously the real issue is

Are we willing to? abandon biblical parameters of ecclesiology

To look good in the eyes of society which hates us to begin with and I'm seeing people look folks

We are it is amazing how deft The left is at Using language it sounds like they're just they're just broken about something but they're using each one of these things as a means of promoting their agenda and You are right now.

I see all across our culture and all across denominational lines

Presbyterians Lutherans all through the Reformed world a Full -scale retreat and collapse on biblical categories of male and female relationships roles and functions in the church and the family full scale collapse

See it it's happening everywhere and there is no denomination that is not in danger of Experiencing these things none you if you think you are that makes you all the more in danger because I look at the younger people coming out and they have no foundation in the idea of a created order of a creation mandate and Seeing that within the realm of male and female roles than the church

It's it's obvious to me. You see it all around you If you have eyes to see anyways, and so I'm hearing people saying well then those

Baptists just need to change our ecclesiology well, okay You want to Yeah, hey, thank you someone that's that's my it's one of my favorite quotes

Yeah, that that bingo I'm gonna okay go over here and save image to downloads

I'm gonna put that on my desktop so I can pull this up again So I just look over at this and my thing has already scrolled

Roll down here Reformed Christian 1986. Does that mean you were born in 1986? That's that's when my son was born

I feel so old when people do that to me reformed Christian 1986 posted my favorite quote on the subject of the

Roman Catholic priest from John a O 'Brien's faith of millions. I've quoted this in numerous debates.

It's in The Roman Catholic controversy the fatal flaw, etc, etc, etc

Here's what it reads of What sublime dignity is the office of the Christian priest who is thus privileged to act as the ambassador and the vice?

gerent of Christ on earth by the way almost every OS that I know wants to change that from vice gerent to vice regent

It's an old word. I've run to it over and over and over again. I've seen it miscited. It's vice gerent learn the vocabulary

He continues the essential ministry of Christ. He teaches the faithful with the authority of Christ He offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which

Christ offered on Calvary No wonder that the name which spiritual writers are especially fond of applying to the priest is that of altar

Christos For the priest is and should be another Christ and If he's

I've never heard that before listen to my debate with Father Packway. He defended it He defended it said yes.

Yes in my ordination. That's language is used. Yes There you go.

Anyway If you cannot see how that is a blasphemous doctrine

If you think that we can just look past that and Hold hands in cooperation with someone who claims to be an altar

Christos then you don't understand the exclusivity of the office of Christ or What it means to follow him as Lord without anyone to distract you and to detract from your worship of him in his unique offices

This is what is so heinous about Rome's doctrines of Mary Because very plainly the development of the centuries has been to try to parallel in Mary the unique offices of Jesus Christ Plainly I'll def

I've have defended that and will defend that in public moderated debate

So I Don't believe the Russell Moore is an expert Roman Catholicism He does not have one one thousandths my experience in interaction with Roman Catholics in Evangelizing them.

He has a lot more experience in cooperating with them. No question about that but in evangelizing them not so much and as a result,

I simply have to say that to identify that statement as wrongheaded the statement that The horrific scandals we've seen around kind of the church or do the theology of Catholicism the nature of the celibate priesthood and so forth

It's not just that as in excluding just plain old sin But it is sin taking advantage of error and false teaching

That has led to the specific nature of the kind of abuse you see in Roman Catholicism Which so often has that homosexual focus to it.

That's not wrong -headed That's right -headed and it's Russell Moore who is wrong -headed to say otherwise

I Think that's important to cover. All right. Oh, there's so many things

Did you see the Ellen Page stuff man? This this this woman is hmm to see her saying that The gay marriage thing should never have been a debate at all.

It should not even be allowed to be debated It's done. It should have always been done

You need to we've tried we tried to warn people I Remember 2015 my memories could not going quite that fast.

It wasn't that long ago. I Remember 2015. I remember 2014

I remember going way back before then folks warning people if you allow the redefinition of marriage

It will not stop there. It's gonna keep going. These folks don't want equal rights

They want uber rights How long have I been saying that now? I wonder if we could find somebody who's just got a ton of time on their hands

To go back through the archives the dividing line and find out that the first time I used the phrase uber rights in regards to what homosexuals were demanding

That would be a long ways back Algo should know though. We should we should task

Algo with that. So, you know because he he just listens to them all over again anyway, so This is what they want.

They want uber rights They want they are totalitarians. They do not believe in Liberty.

They do not believe in debate they do not believe in objective truth and They want to silence anyone that would offend their extremely shallow and immature little worldview

They truly on certain levels have the maturity of a three -year -old Mommy tell him to stop it.

I don't like what he says that Is that not what we have in our culture today? Is that is that not what we have in Colorado?

Canada That's offensive. Can't say that the

Lady in in in England. I don't know the whole whole thing there But misgendered somebody and ends up in prison with the laptop taken away for misgendering someone on Twitter It's the end of any meaningful cultural exchange

It's absolute totalitarianism. It's the Stasi prison on steroids

That's what is is coming And you see that in Ellen Page's radical wild -eyed craziness

But speaking of Okay, two more and then I'll get to Anderson.

I'm not doing too. Well, am I sorry? um Justin Welby Archbishop of Canterbury When asked about Anglican Vicar's becoming

Roman Catholics Who cares? I don't mind about all that particularly if people go to Rome, which is such a source of inspiration

I had an email from a very old friend and Anglican priest who has decided to go to Rome I wrote back saying how wonderful as long as you are following your vocation you are following Christ I don't really care whether it's

Church of England or Rome or the Orthodox or Pentecostals or Lutherans or Baptists They are faithful disciples of Christ He's met with the

Pope on a number of occasions Considers him very helpful. His spiritual advisor is

Roman Catholic priest named Nicholas Boutet Yeah, okay

Anyway, I Feel sorry for my for believing Anglican Brothers And then on February 8th,

I saw this article and I put it in the file and I also just this is from BP News Baptist Press News BP News .net

Trauma healing conciliation focus of racism forum by Diana Chandler, February 8th

Philadelphia Pastor K Marshall Williams Has experienced what researchers

I love This is the new This is the new term

To substantiate what could never be substantiated in the real world in The online world researchers say

Who when where how they argue? What were their conclusions? Have their conclusions been examined?

This is how people used to think but now it's all researchers Mmm Pastor K.

Marshall Williams has experienced what researcher researchers term you ready for this? I'm reading straight folks

Post traumatic slave syndrome post traumatic slave syndrome the trauma and pain

African -americans suffer from societal and institutional racism and marginalization This is in 2019

This is in 2019, I cannot help but think that there would have been a large number of Freed slaves

In 1865 who if you had told them that 40 155 some -odd years later their great -great -great -great -great grandchildren

Would be claiming a form of post -traumatic slave syndrome even though they've lived a

Life that in comparison what the slaves lived was one of absolute pampered royalty

Food wise care wise work wise environment wise everything wise that they would have wept

That their descendants could be so talked into a victim mentality that instead of Rejoicing They actually would say

I experienced post -traumatic slave syndrome Though I was never a slave.

I I Hope some others will address it cuz

I'm not allowed to It doesn't matter if I had slaves in my ancestry that doesn't matter.

No, no, no, that's it That no, no can't can't talk about that. Okay. Oh, yeah.

Let's go to something less frustrating. Let's go to Steven Anderson. Oh When going through your your your social media feed

Results in you wanting to listen to Steven Anderson to get away from the craziness, you know

The end is near Right Now I'm ready to adopt any realism

Post -millennialism Millennialism pre -millennialism. I don't care if it just gets us out of this mess.

Just just something please it's just Oh Okay, anyways what oh

I better slow this down because I 1 .6 is a little fast I am gonna pick it up to 1 .2. I always tell people that all right

What is this? What are we doing? Steven Lee Anderson faithful word

Baptist Church King James only guy Yeah, the guy got tased in the car and yeah, the guy stands on his pulpit kicks his pulpit and kicks people out of the church and yells and screams and and Does stuff like that?

Um He is Doing a 10 part series.

I'm not even sure if he's done all of them yet. I I only have six That's gonna take me

I figure that's gonna take me long enough to get through the six We'll get to the other ones when they when we can 10 part series

Respond to the King James only Controversy and so he did the introduction in chapter one.

We've responded to that Here's chapter two. Why are we doing this? Hopefully with the last response that was made obvious we do this because we are touching upon many really important topics really important issues and a

Lot of background issues today we're talking about the Greek Septuagint I think people need to know about the Greek Septuagint and they'll hear

King James only people questioning the reality the Septuagint saying that it wasn't in existence of days of in the days of Jesus things like that and Since we almost never talk about that kind of thing

Except on this program, but certainly not regularly in church That can cause confusion for people there might be people trapped in these systems

That haven't heard a response from the other side and say figure. Well, that's good argument I guess I gotta stay here until you know, that argument is dealt with and I don't hear anybody talking about it

So, you know, so that's why we do these things we address these these less than popular topics and it does prove to be helpful to a lot of folks and so Let's get to this this

I'll be honest with you with the preaching that I was doing beforehand in this I'm it doesn't look like where I get to phones today. I'm sorry

I should have known that ahead of time I didn't know how long I was gonna feel like talking about this stuff earlier

But I probably talked about it too long and get myself in trouble. All right, let's get to Steven Anderson now his review of chapter 2 a chapter 2 in the book is basically a historical review where I point out that It has been a standard

Human response For a particular text to become popularized and accepted to become the tradition and when there is any challenge that text any going earlier and He's saying, you know

Our commitment to just this one kind of a text might not actually represent what the

Apostles want for us isn't like that That there's a big pushback. It's like oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, we can't we can't do that and That this has happened a couple times down through history, but what's interesting is that he starts off Agreeing with me about all sorts of stuff

It's just it's still again I have to make mention of it watching him and his

NIFB buddies only two months ago Cranking out all these videos attacking me and Jeff Durbin and accusing us of all sorts of just vile

Disgusting stuff and just yelling and screaming acting in such and then of course, they all blew up.

They just Within within like five days seven days of the last

Last video they put out attacking us. Boom. They're all on each other you know, there is a big split in Florida and in Texas and and You know, they're all just eating each other alive and now they're all false prophets and blah blah blah.

So Lord sir took care of that anyway To have him doing that stuff and to see him kicking people out of his church and you idiot get out of here and yelling

And screaming and and the camera pans back and you see people sitting there and they're just like oh man What's going on here and then to have this?

Well, you know, he's right about this he's it's just it is just really freaky weird to to see the the shifting going on, but I Digress let's

Let's jump into this he then says KJV only individuals generally are not interested in church history as a subject

Now he's right about that too in general KJV only us are not really interested in church history as a subject

But let me explain why that is now. I personally love history and I've studied a lot of history including church history

Although I must admit that church. Remember we've played some of his church history stuff and to call it a unique perspective

Is is very very kind tree is not my favorite history I've studied a lot of it, but I I prefer

Pretty much every other kind of history to church history And the reason why that we feel that way is that church history more often than not just ends up being a study in false

Religion why because it's going to emphasize the Roman Catholic Church now here this this is what's fascinating to me these folks are

Anti Roman Catholic, you know, we just heard what you were just saying. Do you see a difference?

I hope you see a difference If you can look at the five debates

Well, you can't look at all of them because Scott Butler is still sitting on to him, but you can listen to all of them if you can look at listen to the five debates that I've done with Mitch Pacquiao and You can't see the difference between them and the kind of anti -catholic rhetoric

That someone like a Steven Anderson or the NAFB's put out Then you're not listening

There is a serious Historical case to made against Roman Catholicism.

These guys don't make it. They can't that's why Rome does not fear them That's why Rome uses them That's why

Karl Keating in Catholicism and fundamentalism could use their lack of knowledge of historical realities as a

Weapon to convert people to Roman Catholicism. In fact, that's how Catholic answers started.

You need to understand Keating was responding to this kind of shallow a historical fundamentalism and He's a sharp guy and you can use history and tear this stuff apart.

It's easily done and That's what was so Shocking to them when we started debating them back in back in 1990

Especially the the two debates especially the second debate of the two that we did in December Was it 90?

December of 90 because we had done August was the first debate in Long Beach That's first debate I'd ever done at a church in Long Beach and then at Northwest Community Church In December and then the next night at City of the

Lord in Tempe. I don't even know where that is. I'm not even sure if it exists anymore. I'd have to look it up It's on Mill Avenue.

Okay and That second debate was where everything started changing

For the Roman Catholics in the debate scene at least in the US Because up to this point in time

They had been running around they had been debating Calvary Chapel pastors and Calvary Chapel folks

Are not church historians either. That's not their thing and They had owned that field

The second debate that we did see the first debate we did was on solo scripture at Long Beach the second debate was on eternal security or perseverance of the

Saints the third debate was on the papacy and I Made a historical

Presentation pointing to the fact that there is plenty of patristic information that Contradicts the claims the

Roman Catholic Church in regards to the subject That was the first time this group in that period had been hit with a historical argument on the subject historical and biblical

I combined them both and And We did that again with Mitch Pacquiao on the papacy we did again with Jerry Matitix nearly seven hours on the papacy from 93

But that changed that changed everything That changed the whole landscape of the debates with Roman Catholics is

And certainly I'm not the only ones done it and many people have gone far. I mean there look we've got

There had always been Tremendous works on the subject. It's just History had pretty much forgotten them.

I mean they were still stuck in people's libraries someplace But you know

Whitaker and good and What was the Lutheran guy anyway

Think of it later, but there are just all sorts of collections infallible Church The first first real one of those classic works

That that I read in response to Carter Carter Newman. These books were out of print they were in libraries, but it's not like they were sitting on your

Christian bookshelf at the Christian bookstore and so That changed they recognized these reformed guys

Who do history are? Dangerous they are dangerous to our claims the fundamentalists like Anderson no danger at all

They are not a danger Because they cannot make a historical argument because they don't they just don't care to for this very reason

That's just we're studying Roman Catholicism. No, you're not No, you're not

I Mean once you buy into this and I would assume I'm just assuming he didn't say

I'm assuming that Anderson does the trail of blood stuff and that there's the the disciples were

Baptists and That there's always been

Something that looked like the faithful word Baptist Church with a tie and white shirt and proper suit and the appropriate, you know

Blessed assurance and things like that being sung all the way back in English probably in in Jerusalem But that they were hidden away and that they're you know, nobody knew anything about them and So that everybody that you would study whether it's

Augustine Ignatius Tertullian Cyprian they're all just a bunch of Roman Catholics, you see and So they just dismiss all that stuff.

And so they have no meaningful historical argument to make it's just That's not that's not what the

Reformers were and they he will separate himself We're not we're not part of the Reformers. We're not that's just Catholicism light

We're our own separate thing. See they're not historically obviously anybody who knows history knows that's not the case, but it's almost a sense of delusion

Along those lines a lot of delusion the Orthodox Church and these mainstream Protestant government churches

That's what's going to be emphasized in your so -called Church history the Church Fathers and the early church from the history books is basically

What would become Roman Catholicism and and the East Orthodox Church and just a bunch of false doctrines?

So why would we want to learn a lot about this broad way that leads to destruction, you know?

These billion Catholics today in 2019 on their way to hell And just all the other hundreds of millions of East Orthodox believers that are on their way to hell with their pagan

Idolatrous apostate Christianity, you know, why would we want to just sit and read up on that and learn all about that?

And then there's this false left -right paradigm between the the Catholics and Protestants because you know, the Protestants are just Catholicism light

It's not even that different What they believe and so and we're not really interested in studying a lot about these false religions

We'd rather study the Bible and base everything that we believe on that Well, there you go

Which of course is what leads to the tremendously incoherent and inconsistent theologies very surface level theologies their their inability or unwillingness to interact with All the debates that have taken place down through church history

Then they don't have the language to even engage it because they won't take the time to do so which is incredibly arrogant on their part of course

To go. Hey, you know God GSA has been building this church for almost a 2 ,000 years now

But we don't need to worry about anything anybody else ever said because we've got the Bible and that's all we need

Well, it is the only infallible rule of faith and morals for the church.

There is no question about that But do you really really think that you're so much smarter than every generation has come before you that you can't learn anything from them

Um when Paul told Timothy to entrust what he had heard from Paul to faithful men, you don't think there's a

Wisdom in this you just get to you have to invent the wheel all over again every generation, huh?

Yeah, well that definitely is what results in such a royal mess So he's talking about the

Greek Septuagint. Now. What is this? Well in the days of Jerome and Augustine late 4th century

AD There is a Greek translation of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint.

Okay, and Augustine Believed that this Greek translation of the Old Testament that was available in the 4th century

Called the Septuagint that that is the Word of God. It's inspired translation

That's the Old Testament that we ought to be using and we don't need the Hebrew at all We need to just forget about the Hebrew Bible and just make this

Septuagint our final authority now Augustine of course never said anything like that, but Augustine could not read

Hebrew and The Bible of the early church there is no question about this

The Bible of the early church was the Greek Septuagint. There is no there is again

Anderson has already said well, we don't say that kind of stuff. Well, he says he claims to well, I'm sorry He even says he's reading the

Greek Septuagint again I'm I'm highly skeptical, but bit as it may that if he is then he has no excuse to the ignorance that he's demonstrating here you look at Not only apostolic citational usage in the

New Testament But you look at the early fathers and You ask yourself a question

What? Scriptural platform are they utilizing and When it is at all identifiable It is almost uniformly the

Greek Septuagint. I mean that Reflects the reality of Alexander's having spread

Koine Greek all around the world it was still the lingua franca and So if you wanted to communicate over long distances there is one way to do so in writing and Hope that the person at the other end would know what you were saying

That was in Koine Greek And so the translation of the scriptures which at the time of the

Apostles did not include the New Testament Obviously because it hadn't been written yet Or is in the process of being written during the apostolic period

That's not around yet, so we're talking about the Greek Septuagint. Secondly, there is absolutely no question

Amongst any serious scholar any serious scholar that the

Greek Septuagint predates The New Testament this includes all of the

King James Translators read the introduction to the readers by the translators

They don't call it the Septuagint when they're talking about specifically talk about the Greek version The 70 they even make reference to the 70 as I recall

I looked it up just last night was reading what they had to say about it. And though they criticize it for having errors

Very plainly they did not view it in the way that Stephen Anderson does

Stephen Anderson calls it a corrupt 4th century manuscript. That's not what it was

But It plainly is the source of the majority of New Testament citations from the

Old Testament That's the reality. That's the fact you can't get away from it

It's just how it is. And there you go on the other side of this argument is

Jerome Who believed that we should go back to the original language? He says well, no, you know, we need to actually go back to the original

Hebrew and you know We're gonna translate into Latin We need to translate from and by the way

Jerome Likewise did not hold Anderson's view on this on this topic either the Hebrew because the Old Testament was written in Hebrew it was not written in Greek so we need to go back to the original

Hebrew text and Translate that into Latin and cut out this middleman of the Septuagint not only that the so -called

Septuagint this 4th century Greek Bible that they had there is Something that is so corrupt.

I mean it is it is filled with so much error It's hard to believe that anybody takes it seriously, okay

Including evidently the King James translators who did take it seriously I've got a copy of it right here the

Septuagint with Apocrypha and I haven't read the whole thing. I'm working on reading it And let me tell you something.

It has a lot of problems. First of all this so -called Septuagint You know it tampers with the numbers in the genealogy leading up to the flood in the days of Noah and The numbers are so ridiculous that it literally has people like outliving

The flood so people are like living beyond the flood, but they weren't on the ark with Noah But I guess they just treaded water all that time and they just continue to live on so the numbers don't even add up They don't even make sense.

Okay Which is why modern Bible versions Don't use those numbers because those numbers are ridiculous

And In the Old Testament, there are a number of places Where the

Hebrew numbers do not add up either the reason for this

The Hebrews had did not have a numerical system they used letters and the problem is when you use letters in your alphabet, they end up looking like words and Very frequently they can end up being transmitted incorrectly over time.

There are numerous many Number issues in Both the

Hebrew and the Greek and there are some places Where the Greek seems to have the best possibility of having communicated that number issue rather than the

Hebrew and vice -versa they are two streams of the transmission of the literally the most ancient text a

A body of literature that has been in use for the longest period of time amongst mankind.

I mean there may be Some people might identify some Babylonian things as being older than Moses, but as far as being in continuous usage and reading things

There's nothing that I know of that can come close to the antiquity of the oldest portions of the

Old Testament and so the very fact that what we're arguing about is numbers in the handwritten transmission of documents that are certainly amongst the oldest known to mankind

Says a lot about how good the text actually is But the point is once again as is so often the case to King James only as they can not have equal measure

They cannot Fairly analyze Arguments on two sides of an issue.

So in this case, we're going to have one standard for the

Greek Septuagint a completely different standard for Well, which Hebrew text because there's more than one.

Oh, yes, there's the matter at Masoretic stream But there are differences within the Masoretic stream Qumran indicated that is it generally unified there is a clearly identify identifiable stream

No question about that that comes from Qumran, but there are other streams too. That's where the problem lies

It does all kinds of other crazy things It removes just multitudes of verses from the book of Job It takes out like half of the

David and Goliath story like half the chapter is gone Okay has all kinds of nonsense and garbage in it tons of omissions.

It does not match the Hebrew at all It's completely different folks. It's not like oh, there's a translation of the

Hebrew, but no, it's Dramatically different. Okay Way different now once again you're not talking to someone who is overly concerned about accuracy and language and so he exaggerates everything and Again the early church

Proved The mission and the nature of the person of Jesus Christ from the text that he says is completely different than Hebrew Well, it's not now

The septuagint that we have today and again, there are variations in the transmission of the septuagint as well

But the septuagint we have today Very clearly the

Pentateuch was very well translated very well translated is an excellent translation of The Hebrew and was it's

Plainly there he himself will admit a small number of Greek fragments have even been found in Quran That means it was completed before the days of Jesus.

There's no question about it He goes into well, there's just so little it doesn't matter.

It's irrelevant shows no knowledge whatsoever of How ancient documents trends transmit zero the man knows nothing about this doesn't care anything about this

We know that the septuagint pre -existed the days of Christ that's not even an argument

Are there better and worse? Sections of the septuagint accuracy wise, of course

I've pointed out that there's major differences in Jeremiah and there's a reason for that Jeremiah himself gives the reason for that But these are historical realities they can't they cannot be dismissed by as well as just completely different So James White is basically trying to use this as an illustration and saying well, you know

It's just like these King James only people. It's just that they don't want to change They're just emotionally connected to the

King James and it's sentimental and they just have this attitude of just don't change just stay with it

Yeah, in other words people adopt a traditional text and Will not apply equal standards and analysis of that text that happened with the

Greek septuagint That then happened with the Latin Vulgate. That's the whole point He just doesn't want to admit it and compare them to the septuagint crowd

You know the Augustan crowd that says hey, we need to stay with the septuagint. It's an inspired translation

It ain't broke don't fix it But that is a totally unfair comparison because the septuagint says something completely different From what the original

Hebrew says now most people at the time didn't know that because as James White points out in the chapter Most Christians at that time did not speak

Hebrew and had a hard time with getting the resources to learn Hebrew And so that's not what

I point out. I point out there is a sad Disjunction between the synagogue and the church and a

Horrific attitude that developed between the two that led to an unfortunate ignorance of The Hebrew Old Testament and the

Old Testament as a whole especially with origins Allegorical interpretation of things that came from that no clue that their

Greek Septuagint Old Testament was so messed up in the fourth century that You know that they didn't know how bad it was or unreliable

So to compare that to King James only ism is ridiculous because we've got the King James But then we've got this right here

We got a Greek New Testament and you know We got a Hebrew Old Testament And so all we have to do is just compare these things and look at them and we can see that the

King James Matches up with the original language and says the exact same thing and what happens when it doesn't

What happens like I said in Acts 5? What happens when you have? Translational issues which one becomes the standard

I would argue that that functionally I Could not possibly see how

Stephen Anderson could ever correct a King James reading anywhere no matter what the underlying language said and And and so you can document specific mistranslations where the

King James missed it Now anybody can defend anything I Mean look at the

Texas Receptus guy and his his lifelong Tilting at windmills to defend

Revelation 16, but I mean what a life Anybody can defend anything but the reality is that the

King James translators did not claim infallibility and They mistranslated things. They did not understand things.

They were not perfect. And so Which one takes precedent? The English translation or the underlying

Greek or Hebrew? Functionally, I cannot possibly see how Anderson can avoid making the

Hebrew or the the English to final authority So we've got an English King James that says the same exact thing as a

Greek New Testament That I can pull off the shelf and read and look at and there it is folks. It says the same thing

Okay. Yeah, and if that's the TR as we said last time that's because it's based in the

King James It's it's the Greek rendering of the

King James So yeah, it should say the same thing because it came from the King James, which is really not much of an argument, is it?

No fourth century Septuagint and you say well, why do you keep saying fourth century? You know, the

Septuagint was translated, you know, BC before Christ Here's why because there are no copies of the

Septuagint from before Christ and until Qumran The oldest

Hebrew manuscripts we had were for 900 years after Christ and this means absolutely nothing

This is empty air Pure verbiage that simply meant to promote a perspective that has no scholarly foundation to it whatsoever once again unequal scales circular reasoning

It's the essence of King James only ism The copies of the Septuagint that they're actually using are corrupted manuscripts from the 4th century

AD and later Okay, so just like there are all kinds of corrupted New Testament manuscripts from the 4th century and beyond Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, etc.

Okay, so this so -called Septuagint this 4th century corrupt

Greek text that is just ridiculously different from the Hebrew Old Testament They're using it in the

NIV. They're using it in the New American Standard. They're using it in the ESV so They're using the same translation that the

Apostles cited from and that's terrible Yeah, that that that little part won't end up in his presentation

Oh that you know, the Septuagint is legit because of the Dead Sea Scrolls they found, you know

BC manuscripts of the Septuagint folks That is not true Go on Wikipedia and look at the list

Wikipedia of all of the Dead Sea Scrolls You can go on there and it lists all the scrolls.

I you know on top of my head I think there are 939 of them. Okay that were found in Qumran in the 20th century

And here's what you'll find the so -called Septuagint that they found in the Dead Sea Scrolls contains

Fragments from Leviticus Numbers and Deuteronomy That's it, which means that it existed before the days of Jesus That's all it means and that's what it means to anybody who takes history

Seriously has any knowledge whatsoever of the study of antiquities Ancient manuscripts anything like that at all.

That's what it means, but that's not what it means in the NIFB I guess Greek New Testament, obviously little

Aramaic sprinkled in the Old Testament So anyway, he's trying to use this as like well, you know people just don't like to change, you know

They were hung up on that Septuagint. Yeah, but they were wrong That's the difference and they were demonstrably wrong Because no one would ever try to claim that the

Septuagint and the Hebrew Old Testament both say the same thing They're not even close. Okay. No, they are very very close actually and in fact with a few exceptions, it's it's useful if you have the

Septuagint on your on your phone if you're learning Greek to read along when the

Old Testament is being written out the problem is the chapter like Psalter Frequently chapter divisions are are messed up and unless your electronic program corrects that for you

Sometimes it could be hard to find but will you find differences? Yes, you will but will you be able to read along?

I've done it a million times and if he as he claims is Reading the

Septuagint He would he would well know that So Jerome's Latin translation eventually became known as the

Vulgate, but that's deceptive though Because here's the thing what's known as the so -called Vulgate like, you know part of just by the

Vulgate. Okay This is not Exactly what Jerome translated this no and he seemed to miss the again

Did he miss the point or is he just being obscure or what? I don't know I Told the story and in fact, he reads the story of Lorenzo Valla Discovering through the comparison with Jerome's commentaries the changes that had taken place in the

Vulgate and stuff like that But he's missing my point my point in the chapter was that traditional

Texts will be defended and they will be defended by utilizing different standards then you apply to anything that's come along since then so This happened with the

Septuagint and the Vulgate This happened with the Vulgate when

Erasmus challenged its preeminence with his Novum Instrumentum in 1516 And it has happened with King James only advocates who make the

King James Translation the standard and when a new translation comes along then they use different standards to analyze the one than the other

That was my point and the fact that he has to keep avoiding it sort of makes my point for me

Since he was unwilling to wait for papal approval. He took a big risk and dedicated now check this out he's reading from my book and I'm talking about how was it the given that Cardinal Jimenez's Completentian Polyglot was already published.

I was already printed waiting papal approval Why would it matter if Erasmus rushes his to print?

Because he's got to wait for papal approval to write a lot of people ask that question. So he's reading from my book

Since he was unwilling to wait for papal approval He took a big risk and dedicated his work to Pope Leo the 10th the same man who excommunicated

Martin Luther Hoping that the dedication would deflect any reprisals for rushing his work to press The gamble worked and Erasmus had the first published

Greek text on the market Not gonna say anything about that Pastor Anderson The fact that the very first edition of Erasmus the very first edition of what becomes the

TR Was dedicated to the Pope Who excommunicated

Martin Luther For believing in justification by fit not gonna say anything about that Because I can guarantee you if the shoe was on the other foot you'd preach 47 sermons about it, but no no

Doesn't fit the narrative doesn't fit the narrative. We won't talk about it This is not relevant, okay, because Erasmus's first edition was immediately followed by a second edition

Fixing the earth. Yeah, he was in a hurry. I don't blame him for wanting to get it out the door You know when everybody's in the dark and when the

Catholic Church has their corrupt Bible, that's not Erasmus's view That wasn't Erasmus's view

Erasmus was saying that all the Roman Catholic Church. He was a Roman Catholic Pastor Anderson. He was a

Roman Catholic priest He believed in transubstantiation You're trying to turn him into a into a

Baptist He was not a Baptist. Okay, not there and doesn't work wrong

So what he got something out the door and he corrected it and purified it and purified it and they had almost a hundred years

To purify it by the time the King James came out So any errors in the first edition of Erasmus are not relevant to the

King James Bible because that stuff was all corrected over many many Decades to follow sounds like Ruckman's theory that when it's pointed out to him that no one's carrying around a 1611

They've got a 1769 Blaney revision, but then there's the Oxford edition There's a Cambridge edition and and so Ruckman came up with the idea that the finally purified text

Was the what the Oxford Schofield reference edition or something that there had been this purification process?

so now you've got the purification process of Erasmus and then

Stephanus and Beza So you got all these Calvinists that God is using to purify the biblical text because both

Stephanus and Beza were Calvinists Pastor Anderson, what are you laughing at?

You just described textual purgatory textual purgatory Purified and purgatory.

Yeah. Yeah, that's that's that's what's going on Yeah, so I mean it's just a hoot to listen to this

Oh, there's this purification process being done by Calvinists that eventually led to you know

And the problem is Pastor Anderson that your TR is not

Beza It takes from all that purified process quote -unquote purified process so again the study of history is

Is an important aspect of knowing the truth and Given that Pastor Anderson admitted.

Yeah, we don't really do that very much explains These so there is his response briefly to the second chapter

And so it's gonna we're gonna press on from there Into chapter 3 and then

I'm gonna have to listen to 4 5 & 6 and and so on so forth but hey, I think aside from the

Head poundingly Great frustration of the incoherence and inconsistency the issues do need to be addressed

It's good to talk about what the Greek Septuagint was and and stuff like that. I think that's it. That's important to do so with that we've gone for an hour and 15 minutes and I've got to get back to work.

So I appreciate you listening to the dividing lines today Lord willing we will be back on Thursday and I bet you something will happen between now and then that we'll need to talk about If not, we'll talk about something old and important.