Responding to ERLC on Religious Exemptions, Creating Variants, Hank Hanegraaff and Church History

Well greens welcome to the dividing line. We've got a lot to get to today. I've even noticed people that pointing out that I say that a lot but Yeah, it normally means we do have a lot to get to today and a lot of stuff to talk about.

I hope it will be of benefit and edification to you. I have on the screen a Quotation that I saw this morning. I don't think this was the exact meme, but I was able to track it down eventually and I thought it was an excellent citation well worth.

Reviewing the day after the Biden regime or as Doug Wilson is now referring to it the Biden cartel I think has some merit to it. Did its thing we had? Elderly Joe Biden. Saying they're wagging his finger at us saying telling us warning us his patience was wearing thin and And actually all of our patiences are wearing thin we're.

I'm personally struggling with the amount of lies that the regime is dependent upon but Anyway, you'll notice what CS Lewis said in God in the dock essays on theology the making of modern theology. Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims May be the most oppressive.

It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber barons cruelty may sometimes sleep his cupidity may at some time at some point to be satiated. But those who torment us for our own good Will torment us without end for they do so without with the approval of their own conscience the quote goes on to say.

They may be more likely to go to heaven and yet at the same time likelier to make a hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult to be cured against one's will and cured of states.

Which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason. Or those who never will to be classed with infants imbeciles and domestic animals. I Thought that was a rather appropriate citation given the Attitude that is now being displayed by the Australian government the government of New Zealand United States, Canada Germany all across Europe.

This is the tyranny that we are now facing a tyranny This is sincerely exercised for the good of the victims. I would say personally What we have here is a mixture. I think we have in many of the bureaucrats Many of the even the police officers they may sincerely think Because they've been lied to and they've bought the narrative that they are Exercising that tyranny for the good of those that they are oppressing.

But I don't think that's the case of the people at the top I think they are well aware of what the end result of all this must be and So they just they just use other people as useful Useful tools of their of their seeking of oppression, but it's true That those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end.

For they do so with the approval of their own conscience certainly seeing that a lot these days and one must Consider I think Some of the facts to which we must Make reference on the last program. I Responded to a man from Duke University Duke Divinity School.

I'm sorry Duke Divinity School well associated obviously Who was arguing that there is no such thing as? a Christian a Christian basis for Seeking to not follow through with a vaccine mandate specific in regards to this particular issue and that is Kovat 19 or really kovat 19.

Is that that's not even a relevant SARS kovat 2. We need to come up with a less year attached Name for this thing, but Yesterday I was linked by the troublemaker from Texas I believe to a Statement from the ERLC now Russell Moore has left the ERLC the Democratic operatives have left the house As far as being in charge of it.

But That doesn't mean that the ERLC is going to change unless the ERLC has a change in leadership and When you've had the same kind of leadership for over a decade Then almost everybody you have in the organization is going to be holding the same kinds of views and so as Michael Fallon has Repeatedly told me this was the operational preparation of the environment.

In other words, you got to get your people in and prepare things if you're going to be effective at accomplishing Your goals and that's exactly what they did. So in looking at the ERLC statement in essence what it what it boils down to is This statement after talking about the JWs and the Amish at least having a basis for Refusing vaccination, but no one else really does because we haven't done it in the past.

So in other words just like the other fellow The idea that there is something specifically about these genetic Experimental and I don't care what the FDA did. They're still experimental. They'll be experimental for five years minimally.

At least any rational person will will recognize that We have no long-term safety data. So these are experimental genetic vaccines without long-term safety With a great deal of evidence of short-term Difficulties and problems in regards to pregnant women and Heart issues and so on and so forth.

In fact out. There's been many people who have argued that Prior to 2020 if you had had the level of reported problems with these vaccines Any previous vaccine would have been pulled like that Would would have back to the drawing boards but these are just being dismissed as coincidental Not having to do with it, etc, etc and We'll talk a little bit more.

We've talked about why that is but looking again at the ERLC article In our experience the reasons appealed to by some evangelicals by some evangelicals For refusing vaccinations are not strictly speaking religious, but personal philosophical or political.

Now I would point out that one's Worldview if it's a consistent Christian worldview will impact one's personal philosophical and political perspectives. I Don't I don't know how these both these individuals are Ethicists, I'm not sure how you separate those things out like that.

This includes objections that invoke religious beliefs in general terms. But upon further scrutiny appeal to other factors some say for example. Some may for example express concerns about infertility.

So I stop right there. So fertility is not a religious issue. Having children. It's not a religious issue. Well, I suppose in some forms of evangelicalism. It isn't the in fact if you hold To certain forms of Evangelical Christian theology from the past 40 50 years Whether you have children family all those things would be completely separated out because Christian theology is just a spiritual thing.

It doesn't have anything to do with real-life stuff. But if if you for example believe that it is your responsibility as a parent to protect your children's ability to likewise have children That's not religious.

That's not a part of the creation mandate. There's no there's no basis that really. Oh, that's interesting hmm. Express concerns about infertility or the lack of longitudinal studies. You mean safety studies?

So your own life your own health I've pointed out more than once. I take heart medications. I have not seen a single study and anywhere That even begins to look or could even possibly begin to give any kind of long-term safety data in regards to the interaction of these vaccines with the single drug that I take Because I had cardiac ablation in 2011 not not a one but that's so fulfilling the command not to because at least historically anyways people have indicated that The command not to commit murder is a foundational broad Command to honor life and To not take other people's lives To not endanger other people's etc, etc.

So that has a long history long history minimally I know in reform theology for at least 500 years goes back to Calvin but it goes back earlier than that and That's that's not a sufficient ground to go.

I have sincere concerns That these vaccines may unnecessarily take life. I mean a study just came out was published in the UK for teenage boys and This was a bit of an argument for a while. It's not argument anymore for teenage boys.

It is more dangerous to take the vaccine than to get COVID Significantly more and the study is there now the study would be ignored. The study will be censored. The study will be suppressed and That immediately makes you go.

I wonder why well No I don't wonder why hundreds of billions of dollars is a more than sufficient reason for why in almost everything we're talking about right now Nobody wants to talk about that. No one wants to recognize that.

This massive transfer of wealth has taken place and continues to take place all across the globe. But there it is so The Paragraph completes with but none of these reasons are overtly related with the individual's religious beliefs.

Well, only if you have an incredibly shallow view of Christian worldview issues. Can you make such a statement? How does that how does that even Process there are undoubtedly people of faith with relevant moral and or theological concerns that could merit religious exemption.

Thank you. This is why when appealing religious liberty as the basis for an exemption Christians should proceed carefully seeking a religious exemption should very clearly rest on apparent and applicable religious beliefs as.

Well, it should but once again those Real solid foundations aren't addressed here goes on thus a strong religious exemption would be based on recognized scriptural precept. Okay, save life or a particular church or traditions confession or teaching.

Well That needs to be biblical from my perspective, but I get what's being said In its most robust form such an exemption might rely on a provision within a church's confessional statement explicitly forbidding vaccines or other medical Interventions.

Well timeout. Here we go again. What we're what we're what's being ignored here is the unique clear documented nature of the experimental genetic vaccines that are being forced down our throats by armed governmental entities.

We this is not the same thing the vast the vast majority of the hesitant quote-unquote vast majority of us Have taken all sorts of vaccines in the past. So you might say well, you're being inconsistent.

No, I'm being very consistent those vaccines had long term Medical studies behind them. They had been approved over not at warp speed but at space normal speed for those of you the Star Trek universe and And they had a tremendous amount of evidence behind them sort of like ivermectin Been prescribed hundreds of millions if not billions of times and it works and So take that anyway.

That's different. We are in a different situation here. And in fact, we're in it. We're in a situation Where The Variants that are coming out are coming so fast That the current vaccine that we're currently being mandated will be irrelevant.

In fact may already be irrelevant. I Was looking at an NPR article. Yeah NPR. Okay, NPR is not exactly On the side of people that are hesitant here, okay. But NPR admitted Let me let me see if I can if I can pull this up here.

NPR admitted. Yeah, here we go looking at Israel. They they do want to say that They Remember the goalposts keep moving the goal put the goalposts today is not on the same football field. That it was on when we started would you not agree?

I mean, I can't see how any rational person would would disagree with that statement a two weeks to flatten the curve. That's it. That's different County. It's different state the goalposts move daily and the initial goalpost for the vaccines is.

It has now been reduced all the way down to well, yeah, if you get the vaccine you can still get kovat. You can you'll actually pass it on to others hundreds of times more effectively than you did before and You can still get hospitalized and you can still die but Not quite as badly.

Okay, that's where we are now. That's we've gone from oh, they're safe and they're effective to. They'll still tell you they're safe. But now safe means our models do not predict anything rather than we have five or ten year safety studies.

I Prefer the old-style definition of safe personally. I think most people do. But the effective thing is now well You won't get quite as sick. But you'll pass it around a whole lot more. Okay, great.

So they're talking about For example The rate of serious cases among unvaccinated people in the under 60 crowd. Was it a little more than double the rate amongst vaccinated people in that age bracket?

So cuts it by half don't know what its long-term safety effects are but cuts it by half. That's that. Can you imagine if that had been the initial? Presentation of stuff would anybody have gotten it.

The bad news I'm quoting again doctors say listen to this is That half of Israel's seriously ill patients who are currently hospitalized were fully Vaccinated at least five months ago. Most of them are over 60 years old and have comorbidities.

The seriously ill patients who are vaccinated are mostly I'm sorry. The seriously ill patients who are unvaccinated are mostly young healthy people whose condition deteriorated quickly half of Israel's seriously ill patients Fully vaccinated at least five months ago.

So what you're being told there is you've got a half-year shelf life and it's going to get shorter and shorter in fact eventually. I Would predict personally by the time boosters are rolled out later this month in in the US Two months maybe two months of any relevance to them and the reason for this is the Prevalence and the rise of variants.

We'll look at here in a moment. I want to try to get through this because I want to get to a completely different subject before we run out of time today so As it as I mentioned they said The Amish Jehovah's Witnesses, I'm back to the ERLC statement The Amish Jehovah's Witnesses are examples no such direct prohibition exists within wider Christian theology.

But these religious groups are able to appeal to a unique teaching wholly adopted by their specific faith tradition again the this argumentation is fundamentally Either you are against all vaccines or you're against none.

You cannot make a case against this specific vaccine and I say to you you better believe you can and you should and you must and you must. Now I would love to play this whole thing. I really really would.

But I think it would get I don't know YouTube would have a hissy fit or something. And it'd end up getting this taken down faster and it'll get taken down anyways, but I saw someone claim and I've not verified this.

I saw someone claim that Joe Rogan has Three and a half times the number of listeners and watchers as Fox News. Oh, it's huge. I don't watch it not for any particular reason. I mean suppose profanity, but My understanding is that he tested positive for COVID -19 and crushed it using ivermectin in like five days just just Yeah, and he took the as they said horse dewormer.

So there's a video that came out yesterday just mocking and properly so ripping to shreds on a Factual foundation the horse dewormer narrative which we talked about on the last program how you take a Drug that is listed in In every meaningful human drug catalog as just almost a wonder drug Nobel Prize winning hundreds of millions of if not billions of doses just a extremely wonderful thing and all of a sudden Because of vax only ism and vax only ism the idea that the only way to deal with COVID -19 is vaccine vaccine vaccine vaccine Genetic vaccine genetic a vaccine genetic.

That's what we are being told. We've never done this with anything else. If it's really necessary then mankind shouldn't have survived this long. But the whole idea is just laughable horse dewormer. So I guess on the same program.

It looked like the same episode as far as I could tell there was an excellent Clip. Let me see if I can at least. Yeah, and Here's Okay, this is this is a fellow being interviewed by Joe Rogan. He's the guy from that.

What's the university you got kicked out of? Had all that rioting and all the rest of stuff. The names escaping me at the moment. I apologize anyway. He has interviewed this Particular individual who predicted a while back.

I'll be able to show that so people could see it. I made reference to it. So people could people need to see it if we're gonna Put it up there. He interviewed a fellow who there we go. He interviewed a fellow who predicted exactly what's happening right now and In brief form.

He was a little clearer than I was on the last program when I tried to and I hadn't heard this then but when I tried to Communicate similar concepts. Let me try to Be brief and to and just look it up it look up look up.

Joe Rogan. A Virus variants, I'm sure it'll pull it up if it hasn't been removed already if and if it is up my suggestion to you download and store Put on jump drives hide them in the basement. Whatever, so maybe someday we can document everything that happened in this crazy insane revolutionary time, but here's Here's what the guy said was going to happen.

The vaccines that have been developed are very narrow there they they are they focus upon a Subset of what's called the spike protein. It's just one portion of the spike protein. There are specific Complex numbers that identify exactly what protein subset it is of the spike protein and And Because they are extremely narrow this creates What we might call genetic pressure they use the term evolutionary pressure.

I Don't object to that. It's natural selection pressure. It is not something that is in any way opposed to a creation model. In fact, it's predicted by the creation model better than it's predicted by the evolutionary model.

But the point is that when you are vaccinated for Measles rubella mumps, whatever polio. When you are vaccinated for things like that, the assumption is That you are not going to be immediately exposed.

You're not in the middle of a pandemic and We are vaccinating into a pandemic Into an explosion of these cases or at least that's what we're being told there has never been any Vaccine that has had the kind of global not just national but global push behind it That we've we've seen for this there have been other vaccines have gone around the world, but this has been unprecedented.

So we are vaccinating into an infectious cycle and so what this does is it places a Massive amount of natural selection pressure upon the virus and The natural result of that is going to be the proliferation of variants lambda mu.

Already who knows what's next on the on the docket after that lambda and mu will probably be off the radar for these vaccines don't know that for certain but in all probability and so We are in essence Causing the rapid creation of variants By not encouraging natural Immunity because natural immunity is much much broader.

That's why it's minimally 13 times better than anything that the vaccine can provide and I can guarantee you once you get boosters. It'll be even more than that. It'll just get Better and better and better in comparison to the vaccination as time goes by as the vaccine becomes less and less and less relevant.

Which is why The only future for this methodology for vax only ism is Constantly untested new genetic vaccines literally every few months. Because there's no way around it. We've never treated a respiratory virus this way not once.

And now we're in the middle of it and it's not working. It's not working but we can't admit it and as even he pointed out if we Started going another direction if we started going another direction This would interrupt the heavy flow of financial resources into big pharma love of money is the root of all kinds of evil and so Here here is Here's where we are and If this was about health if this was about science if this was about any of this stuff Then people who've been raising red flags and waving them around and then getting cut off of YouTube and Facebook for so doing These Individuals would have been listened to and we'd be changing the direction that we're going we would be Recognizing the need to alter our path.

But instead what are we getting? Vaccine mandates useless vaccine mandates that are turning into the most tyrannical methodology of absolute government control over a populace we ever seen and we can all remember and They're already putting out there and nobody cares.

They were already putting out there the quotes from Joe Biden saying no. No, no, we can't do that. We can't mandate vaccines that it does now we do it and The the Canadians said the same thing and all around the world.

You're gonna I remember January February. All the political leaders were oh, that's right. No, we know it that that'll never happen. But we're just gonna hope that everybody does this and now. You unvaccinated pigs you You are killing all the rest of us.

Well, that's simply not true. And in fact by Promoting vax only ism. I Would say far more people have died because of vax only ism. Then if this had been treated in a balanced and meaningful fashion. But that's where we are so You can make a very strong case Against these vaccines on a very rational level.

The problem is Who's being rational today? Who even has who who can even have a conversation with people today. The stuff that I'm seeing from the left? Absolutely shocking. What what is out there the things that are being said, but there you go now, he's not on the left.

Last Weekend I drove down to Tucson and had a great time with the brothers down there and well up until almost getting washed away by a monsoon storm anyways and On the way down I listened to a Video that had actually been recorded at least a year ago.

I We're shifting gears by the way those of you who were doing the rah-rah-rah. We're shifting into a theological thing those who are going I don't want to think about this anymore. We're shifting into something logical.

So you might be more interested now. Or if you were just scanning through real fast to see when something changed this is where it where it changes. I listened to this and I may have heard it. I may have even thought to myself.

I I need to respond to that. I Don't know. I've seen a couple of these ask Hank videos where he's talking about he's promoting Eastern Orthodoxy and and Dealing with issues of sola scriptura, and I am pretty certain that I did see this.

I just don't believe that I made any comment on it. And if I did well there you have real evidence that my memory is definitely failing me. And the next number of years is going to result in you hearing a lot of things more than once.

It's sad anyway Rich is gonna have to start taking up the mantle and Listening carefully and going yeah cut it. You already talked about that. But then again if it was a year ago he'd forget about it too, so.

Yeah, you're older but Anyway We especially I have especially provided responses to Hank in his attacks upon Sola scriptura for obvious reasons. Having defended the doctrine in the studio of the Bible Ants Man broadcast many years ago more than once.

With Tim Staples and Jimmy Akin and phone callers and all sorts of things like that. So there is an element of you know We addressed this with Hank and He agreed and maybe he wasn't listening. Maybe as mine and other things don't know.

But you know here we go again, so let's let's address it, but this is there's Francis Chan there you can see Francis Chan and Metropolitan Ioannis I think is the guy's name that Meanders around toward the end and and eventually says something that I thought about responding to but it's Hank's response to Francis Chan's and again Chan.

My recollection is graduate of master's. Clearly When he was there Did not have the advantage that I had in seminary and that is I already understood the importance of apologetics and hence had Really focused.

I focused in very much in my seminary education on the topics that would be most important in what I already knew I was going into and I recognized that a lot of people who take church history and things like that Are just trying to survive they're just trying to get through and many of them don't really see how this is gonna be relevant to their ministry and A lot of church history professors aren't good at communicating Why you should be passionate about church history and why you should study these things.

But be as it may he you know sort of just throws it out there and and Basically says well, I've just always viewed it as just a symbol a memorial. You know Using the terminology of the Zwinglian understanding which I don't I Understand.

When someone refers to Zwingli. Well, I'm gonna hold off on that because Hank gets to it. Anyways, so I'll just hold off on that and then we'll get to it. I I want to listen to what Hank has to say and I want to respond to it because it needs to be responded to and And You know could certainly hope to see Hank Recognize the error of his ways, but This is not really for him.

It's for everybody else in the process I don't think Hank would debate these topics. I can't see that happening but Be it as it may this is for the edification of everybody. So this is where Hank starts responding to Francis Chan and starts Talking about church history.

It's interesting in the years that I knew Hank and the many times I was on the Bible Answer Man broadcast That was not his area at all I Still don't think that it is to be perfectly honest with you as we will see with the comments here.

So let's.

Church History, the Church as the Pillar of Truth, and the Authority of Scripture

Let's start. With respect to church history, I think that we have to first of all look at the centrality of the church. In church history the church was the epicenter of everything.

Now I want to Point out as we go through Various imbalances that lead to errors or just straight-up errors. It is very common for people to say things like in church history this now. Anyone who is a church historian? Who has read widely in church history?

Knows that that kind of a statement is Highly questionable and easily abused different people at different points in time or in different geographical areas will have differing emphases and Differing understandings of phrases and terminology and while you can generally say That for example in the first 500 years of church history Schism was considered a tremendous scandal that in comparison to what we experience all the time in Western culture where you have all sorts of different churches on all sorts of you know, three churches on a street corner.

And I'm not even talking about what you can get down in Georgia where you'll have three Baptist churches On a street corner first second and third and they've all split off from each other. I'd even mean that But during that time period the idea of schism of a disruption of the unity of the church Was considered a true scandal hence the Novation schism the Donatist controversy Both by the way produced by how the church responded to persecution.

It was more it was it was not theology that caused divisions. It was not the color of the seats on the pews That caused division back then. It was how do we respond? to Persecution and specifically how do we respond to people who want back into the fellowship?

After a period of persecution where there was compromise on their part in some fashion. Don't have time to go to that right now. I'm just using as an illustration. And so you can make general statements that in general in the church in the second century There was a strong emphasis upon unity due to this understanding but to just Broadly say well the church is the epicenter of all things.

Well, what do you mean by that? Do you mean the local church? Do you mean the Universal Church and Is that not actually something that develops in some areas at a later period of time that one could say that you could certainly make an argument that Christ is viewed as The epicenter of all things that the the risen Savior Is seen in that way and and hence The church as it is his body then you could At least try to do that but this kind of broad Generalization is just really easily abused and will be abused.

Here, unfortunately, it was the epicenter of the universe and Why is that. It is because Paul in his didactic epistle? 1st Timothy chapter 3 says that the church is the ground and the pillar of truth.

The problem of course is that 1st Timothy chapter 3 verse 15 Actually is referring to the local church. It's not referring to the Universal Church. I I don't see the people who continuously Abuse and misuse this text ever dealing with the fact that when you walk through 1st Timothy 3 Paul is talking about how Timothy is to behave in the local church.

He's dealing with local church issues he's talking about the Qualifications for deacons and elders and he's talking about how the older women are to be treated in the young. That's all local church stuff folks.

That's not Universal Church stuff. That's the local church and a lot of people really really really struggle With the idea that you could ever look at The local assembly as the pillar and ground of the truth until you think about what pillar and ground means a pillar and a ground Hold something else up.

They don't define what that is They don't give rise to what that is. They hold something else up And so it is in that God ordained local assembly where the Word of God is being preached Where the ordinances are being practiced the supper is being taken people are being baptized.

Those are the only ones That is where you have the truth of God being proclaimed Amongst the people of God where the where that church then is existing. It's proclaiming the kingdom of Christ to the world now, I know Hank did not have That kind of ecclesiology When he was still a Protestant and so if just as with Roman Catholic converts There's very very many parallels between Converts to orthodoxy and converts to Roman Catholicism.

They may try to argue that point, but I've seen too many of them and In in that context I frequently find that people that did not not that they hadn't heard it But did not practice Appreciate have a passion for a meaningful biblical Ecclesiology will be glad to throw it off and embrace a Hyper-ecclesiology an ecclesiology that goes beyond what the pages of Scripture would give to us and that's what you have with this use of 1st Timothy 3 15.

So That's just allowing the scripture to speak for itself Against a an abuse of the text and an over generalization on Hank's part.

It is the church if you look at early church history that gave us the Bible. Without the church, we would not have the Bible now.

We have already refuted Hank's abuse of this error as well. So I'll be very very brief. The early church was a faith of the book You start with the earliest? Documents that we can identify outside the New Testament and they are documents that are soaked in reverence for Scripture the Constant confusion on the part of Roman Catholic converts and Eastern Orthodox converts Between Bible and New Testament.

Bible and Old Testament is a demonstration of where the problem here lies. Because there is no question that there is a period of time just as there was in the Old Testament between the writing of the last book and The recognition of that book by the entirety of the people of God.

It's about a 200 year period Between Malachi and the laying up of the Old Testament books in the temple during the intertestamental period. In the Old Testament and Muratorian fragment about 175 200 similar time period.

Interestingly enough in a moment, maybe even next moment Hank is going to amazingly say that it was Bishop Athanasius That defined the New Testament Canon. I am sure that Bishop Athanasius Would stand there aghast at such an assertion.

He never made any such claim like that. His 39th Festal Letter Does not say I hereby define these books. I have the authority to do this as a bishop of the church. Blah blah blah blah blah. That is not what he was doing.

It was a recognition of What was already the practice of the Orthodox churches at that time. It was not thereby a definition of any quote-unquote infallible sense. The Orthodox may have more of a Willingness to go this direction than for example Roman Catholics.

Roman Catholics can't do Athanasius this way. Not only Does Athanasius not have what Trent eventually defines dogmatically in 1546? But their much stricter standards of evidence would preclude a Festal Letter as being a Sufficiently clear definition shall we say but there is a Recognition that there is a period of time Where the New Testament books are being distributed copied.

There are some New Testament books that are Resisted in certain areas Revelation being one of them and there is a period of time Where that that takes place, but that does not mean that during that period of time the church was a bookless organization.

The Church from the beginning knew that God had spoken in Hagia Grafe Hagia Grafe the Holy Scriptures and And Never ever Questioned the centrality and authority of the Grafe That which is written Gegrepti final argument and Doesn't matter what early source you look to this will be seen in all of them and all of them from the beginning are likewise quoting from Gospels Paul.

Are there some books aren't quoted really early on. Yeah there are. But you have a very early recognition That there are covenant documents outside of The old covenant documents because this is now the New Covenant Church and those old covenant documents are still God speaking.

So the idea of a church that has ever been her own voice. This is you need to understand when we talk about the Reformation this was one of the key issues and very very few of Us stay aware of this. This is one of the key issues From whence comes the scripture?

Does the church come from scripture. A scripture come from the church, and he just said it's the church and produces scripture and Hence the foundation for a denial of sola scriptura.

Both in word and indeed. But people think that the Bible fell out of the sky, you know. Many people think that the King James Version 1611 is an autograph. It fell out of the sky hot off the port. Same for used.

Yeah, exactly, but the truth of the matter is there was no Bible in the early church.

Fallacious on an inexcusable level. There was. Anyone who Studies those documents knows That the Old Testament not again. This is where he may be equivocating. There was no Bible in the church as in all of The Old Testament.

New Testament collected into one volume. Well, duh, but that proves nothing. That's just a historical observation. About what took place in history. No one's saying otherwise. No one is saying that the Bible did float down out of heaven on a on a pillow.

But again Hank. Hank never really meaningfully interacted with serious Christian scholarship. Reformed Christian scholarship. And so dealing with a war field. Dealing with a modern scholar like Kruger.

These just weren't things that that Hank did before his conversion and it comes out in just amazing statements like this. The early church was a church of the book and All you've got to do is read them.

Read the early fathers to see it. Do it in such a way that you see when they are quoting from Scripture and from where they're quoting and.

It's obvious. In fact, the Bible was not codified as the 27 books of the New Testament. Now, did you catch that? There's the there's the equivocation.