Sam Harris and Bart Ehrman Chat Christianity, Open Phones on Many Topics

We're gonna try this again. Welcome to the dividing line, I guess, you know we use

Windows computers and we hadn't reset one I guess in a couple days and Yeah, it's just how how it's supposed to work.

I guess I don't know But hopefully this is understandable and doesn't sound like a 500

B's Flying against a fan or something. I forget what the description was

In regards to what it was supposed to be sounding like so Hopefully it is it is understandable to everybody and so on and so forth.

So last program tough program Two very very different topics

And I said, well, you know, we're not going to have time to Take calls or anything on this

So we will open up the phone lines on the next program and so that's what we will do at 877 -753 -3341 877 -753 -3341 to get your to get in line

Anyways, I I do want to talk about a little something before we take the phone calls

I Just started to look something up actually when I realized that everything was

Messed up actually, and I guess I should have taken the time to during the break to Continue that but I was sort of thrown thrown off the the trail there but To just very briefly this item.

I want to play a little something from Sam Harris and Bart Ehrman Which will give us some interesting material to discuss later on and then we can get to your phone calls at 877 -753 -3341 you can call in on other subjects other than what we talked about on the last program

Of course, some of you didn't listen to last program. That's that's fully understandable. So You know open phones in that sense though.

Once again, this is primarily a Christian apologetics Ministry so it's always good to try to stay somewhere in that that realm

But Just briefly on the last program

I spent quite some time reading some quotes from the late

James Hal Cone James H. Cone. Dr. James Cone and I was sent a

Summary of an article by Jim Wallace of Sojourners The title why

James Cone was the most important theologian of his time now those of you who listen to the program and Listened to what was listen to the quotes listen to what was said

Just just just one that I that I I have here If there is one brutal fact that the centuries of white oppression have taught blacks

It is that whites are incapable of making any valid judgment about human existence The goal of black theology is the destruction of everything white

So blacks can be liberated from alien gods the God of black liberation will not be confused the bloodthirsty white idol

Black theology must show that the black God has nothing to do with the God worshipped in white churches

Whose primary purpose is to satisfy the racism of whites and to daub the wounds of blacks?

This is James Cone a black theology of liberation 40th anniversary edition and Jim Wallace is

Telling us that James Cone that that author was the most important theologian of his time And as he says here if racism was and is

America's original sin and repentance is the only sufficient response to sin James Cone was The most important theologian of his generation to white

Americans. He said repentance means dying to whiteness I've never had anyone defined whiteness.

There is no such thing as whiteness. It is a it's a myth It is it's one of those words that people use when they want to accomplish something

But they don't have an argument to actually be able to get around to doing so Because it can be filled with anything

Same with blackness or or yellowness or brownish Ness or any of these other

Terms obviously completely unbiblical terms non -revelational hence

How any of these things could be made normative within the church be made a basis of our relationship to one another?

That's why this is so divisive. That's its whole intent and purpose. I don't know but anyways repentance means dying to whiteness

Widely considered to be the founder of black liberation theology reverend, dr James Hal Cone died on Saturday April 28th talks about some of his book

Cone up ended the theological establishment with his vigorous articulation of God's radical identification with black people

United States Yeah, I'd say so as Union Seminary's obituary states his most recent published book the cross and lynching tree won

Cone the 2018 Grauermeyer award in religion a joint award from Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary in the

University of Louisville Just last week days before dr. Cone passed away. He was elected the 2018 class of the

American Academy of Arts and Sciences He richly deserved these and as many other awards and hopefully more to come posthumously

But most importantly James Cone got the biblical message, right? Did you hear this? This is

Jim Wallace if you want to show see how far out in Complete Denial of all biblical categories of revelation all biblical categories of theology someone like Wallace is

Got the biblical message, right when it came to the most important moral issue in American history One that the overwhelming majority of white theologians have gotten wrong the sin and idolatry of white supremacy so Black supremacy and black racism is the right answer to white supremacy

No, neither one is that's the whole point But when you've got an agenda when you've got a political position that you're promoting all that stuff just just gets gets ignored amazing stuff amazing stuff, but anyway, just I know most people cannot probably believe that that anyone would defend what

I was reading, but They they will I was directed and my thanks again to whoever it was on On Twitter last night.

I was directed to a podcast. I'll admit I have not heard before I have

I've heard just a few debates with Sam Harris normally, he's been debating

William Lane Craig and I'll be perfectly honest with you. I've never been overly impressed

He's never struck me as an individual of great learning as far as knowing the position that he's debating against and You know behind the scenes, you know,

I've I've been told that You know as one of the four horsemen of the new atheism or whatever

Let's just say that his speaking fees are pretty amazing As are a few

Christian speaking fees, too Anyway, so I I don't I don't spend much time listening to to Sam Harris I've heard him a few times and it's like whatever so here was a conversation with Bart Ehrman his his

Thing is is called waking up podcast. This is number 125 a

Conversation with Bart Ehrman. I listened to it. There's a lot that's worth going over we already have too much to go over in the

Ehrman -Lycona debate to be adding too much. But what was fascinating about this is you have two unbelievers and You know when you get

Christians together You And they're talking with one another you're gonna use language you're gonna be less guarded

You know, I've for example, I've pointed out for a long long time Part of my study of Islam for years has been to listen to Muslims talking to Muslims Rather than just limiting myself to Muslims talking to Christians Because when

Muslims talk to Muslims, it's gonna be well, you know that this is why Muslims listen to this program

I'm primarily, you know, I do address them, but I'm primarily talking to Christians. And so that's why so it gives you a

More of an insight into where someone is is coming from and so here's two unbelievers

Chatting together and I was Now you could say that Sam Harris was asking questions

Merely for the benefit of his audience, but that was not the feeling that I got I could be wrong

But the feeling I got was that when Sam Harris was asking questions given Given some of the comments that he made he really didn't know did not know the answers to the questions

He was asking Bart Ehrman, which means the man is Incredibly ignorant of Christian history

Christian theology Christian belief Not sure how you get around to writing all these books and making all this money criticizing primarily

Christianity when you're clueless about most of it But that was what we were hearing.

So it's one thing You know as far as I know Sam Harris is not an apostate he wasn't someone who made a profession faith and left

I don't know. I think I heard his story once but I don't remember But Bart Ehrman likewise made statements and Again, he's in this context of you know, the guards down That were just absolutely

Irresponsible For someone who makes so much of his fame on the on the basis of well,

I was once a believer Well, then maybe you should accurately represent know something about what you're what you're saying

You once believed there are a number of times where he would give a half -truth and then five ten minutes later He'd get around to giving the other half of it

But by then all the context had changed stuff like that, but I was I was really amazed at at the

Misrepresentations and it was interesting at one point in the conversation when

He is when Ehrman is asked by Harris You know

What's the primary argument you use to get people to realize that the Bible isn't what it claims to be?

he uses the date of the dating of the crucifixion between John and and the synoptics the very thing we've gone through and I had

I even had Christians defending like Kona's collapse on that in Twitter Face face palm

But We went through that on this program went through as it said No Actually John saying the same thing if you just do a little background study and know what the

Passover was It wasn't just one day. It was an entire week There's all sorts of things in John that don't fit with that idea that he changed it

And this has been known for a long long time and it's just the echo chamber keeping people from recognizing

I've never seen Ehrman or anybody else even try to refute the information that has been known for a long long time on this subject that we presented in this program

But that's what he likes to present to people to demonstrate to see here's and if they won't hear that then I you know

I don't really need to You know Talk too much more about because they're not gonna be listening and blah blah blah

So that was a that was a fascinating aspect of it as well

And so I just wanted to play a little section here the The Well the arrogance

That filled this entire, you know, just the laughing at those those silly

Obviously unread backwoods low IQ low brow fundamentalists

You know the smarter the Christian is the less likely they are to believe in anything like like the resurrection or the crucifixion, you know

The smarter you get the less Christian you become is very plainly what both of them are.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah Yeah, we were the smart people. We've got all the brains. These Christians are a bunch of idiots

I mean, it's it's just listen to it yourself. You can there's no subscription or anything. Just look up waking

What was it called waking up podcast, is that what it's a Was here?

Yeah waking up podcast number 125 just listen to it for yourself. It's it just reeks with it It's not that you don't get the exact same thing sadly on the other side of people who will just dismiss anything that Bart Ehrman or anybody else will say without even knowing how to respond or ever having done any meaningful interaction with them it unfortunately goes both directions and I think it is a part of The digital age that we that we live in Who knows how much longer we're even gonna have to even respond to this type of stuff with what some of the stuff going on What was that thing?

I heard just today Oh on the way in Amazon smile has kicked off ADF Because Southern Poverty Law Center has identified them as a hate group

So you can no longer Have have money go to ADF when you buy stuff

It's Alliance Defending Freedom one of the most important Christian legal groups in the United States Southern Poverty Law Center is a leftist communist hate group period end of discussion their information is

Utterly unreliable they they're just so far out there. It's ridiculous But Amazon goes hey if they say so then we're not gonna allow you to Give your smile donations to to to ADF.

That's what's coming for all of us You know, we can still get smile stuff. We won't for long

You know, we just fly into the radar of some of these these folks, but the left cares nothing

Nothing of truth nothing of fairness. They do not want to debate. They cannot debate and they know it

They absolutely know it. I don't know what it's like. I cannot imagine what it's like to be one of these leftists and Know that you could never go toe -to -toe in a moderated debate with the other person because you know

The only way you're gonna be able to do it is to constantly change the subject yell and scream over people You can't go toe -to -toe

But I guess eventually you're just so you know could care less so much about truth that it just doesn't just doesn't matter

So Anyway, don't know how I got there but I remember there was something that I was gonna mention on the way in and there's just so much stuff going on the

Indiana thing with the LGBTQ stuff and and folks, you know just quickly

When I was when I was in the public school system It was that was that was a universe ago

It was universe ago. I'm glad I was in it a universe ago Not possible today just not possible today

It has become just the Unapologetic hand your children over to Caesar to be to be absolutely indoctrinated in Just look at what they're doing in California.

Look what they're doing in in in Illinois now, it's gonna it's it's gonna be everywhere We're gonna shove this stuff down your throat and we're gonna shove it down your children's throat and if you say no

We'll take your children away. That's what's coming these these totalitarians have no qualms whatsoever

About doing this kind of stuff none and you can see it today. You can see it today. It's it's there.

That's what's coming That's what's coming Hey Could I ask someone in channel

I'm gonna ask someone in channel to hop on Amazon and Tell me in channel if you can send

Amazon smile Donations if planned parenthood is listed as one of the

Organizations that you can give Amazon smile funding to I'd be really interested, you know, if you can kick

ADF out It would be really interesting seeing if if Planned Parenthood and see if if the

Southern Poverty Law Center SPLC is Is available to? Something would okay.

I'm being told Yes, it is and that's from algo. So Algo knows all things.

So there you go Yep Totalitarians fairness

Liberty freedom. No Toe the line. Anyway, what were we talking about?

Oh, yes SPLC is too. Thank you, Micah How shocking that SPLC would be there?

I say to Amazon I Say to Amazon Stop do not do not do that.

Oh great. That is a phone call. I really need to take and Unfortunately, I cannot

I cannot take it. I will have to call back on that one. Anyway, let's get to let's get to What we're gonna play here and I just want you to listen

I may go back over it. I may not well, let's just see here is Sam Harris and Bart Ehrman, I guess another principle here

That has always bewildered me Morally more than intellectually and it's this notion that the significance of Christ's crucifixion it is an endorsement of the moral logic of human sacrifice and the human sacrifice is something that has occurred in a wide variety of cultures and it's it was just Widely believed almost universally believed that our species lived in perpetual relationship to invisible gods of various sorts who could be propitiated with Human sacrifice and and then you know

You you get animal sacrifice beginning to stand in for human sacrifice in the

Old Testament and things like you know rituals like circumcision standing in for you get these more and more attenuated

Sacrifices but but human sacrifices is a virtual cultural universal and the logic of Christ dying for our sins and and redeeming them by his sacrifice is the logic of human sacrifice and so it's you know,

I've thought of Christianity as a In large measure an unwitting cult of human sacrifice.

It's not that it's not that you get some different moral order You just get this doctrine or this mere assertion really that human sacrifice is indeed important It's it is what

God wants and requires It's the whole story morally, but there was only one that was truly necessary and indeed it was it was effective

It was accomplished in the life of Jesus now at this point No matter what

Bart Ehrman believes anymore Bart Ehrman graduated from Moody Bible Institute Wheaton College in Princeton Theological Seminary now he didn't get a conservative education at Princeton and Not as conservative an education as we would like to think at Wheaton, but it wouldn't matter

Given all three of those he knows What the issue is he knows

That from the Christian perspective the atoning sacrifice of Christ is

God ordained It's God's self giving it's prophesied in the

Old Testament. It is it is the self giving of God It's not like human sacrifice where humans take another sinful human and give their life in place of somebody else's life

Because giving somebody else's life isn't gonna make any difference because they're under the same wrath of God. He knows all this

He's not a stupid man So if he doesn't correct All the ignorance that Sam Harris just spewed and Demonstrate he's never read a meaningful book on the subject of the atonement.

He's not interested in knowing what we believe on the subject Then You get set you get an idea of of what's going on with with Bart Ehrman.

So, let's see what happens, right? I mean as you know as somebody who's a Non -christian looking in this looks very peculiar indeed and and fairly ghastly and The the logic that you just laid out makes perfect sense to people who are not

Christians for people inside Christianity for some reason it that that logic just doesn't resonate

Because they just you know, I don't for some reason Like maybe because it completely misses the entire

Intention of atonement and the sacrificial system and what it was pointing forward to and the self -giving of God and and the very essence of federalism

Maybe it misses it because it was based on abject ignorance Bart, maybe

You know better You know better. I know people who sat in theology class with you at Moody Bible Institute They've told me you know better Amazing how the passage of time causes us to forget things.

No, they don't connect. They don't connect the dots But you know it it's a kind of a strange world where you think that God requires

His son to be tortured to death so that he can forgive people

What happened You know Bart likes to really talk about how accomplished he is in the

Greek language So Bart, could you comment, please upon the utilization of reflexive pronouns?

for example in the Carmen Christi in regards to the fact that Christ Empties himself that he humbles himself

That he gives himself Maybe you could comment upon this because that doesn't fit the paradigm.

You just presented that doesn't fit the language you just used But that's what's presented to us in the original language of the

New Testament that you claim to be such an expert on So why not bring that forward? Why not correct these things?

Well, there's there's obviously a reason. Hmm. Why can't he just forget people? I mean, you know when when my son does something wrong,

I don't you know Tell him I'm gonna kill his pet dog in order to make up for it. You know, I just forgive him but apparently

I What do you say I mean

There was a time When Bart Ehrman would have been able I would think

He was at least exposed to meaningful theological presentations on The triune nature of redemption the son working out the will of the father

The self -giving of the son the role the spirit in this the The reality of the holiness of God the wrath of God God's taking upon himself

This the sin of the specific people obviously maybe didn't get that part The Reformed doctrine of the

Atonement sure does help here. There's no question about that Maybe he never was exposed to that part

But even at that there still is is no excuse just absolutely no excuse for this level of misrepresentation

God requires. Yeah doesn't require the death of a dog He requires a death of it his own child and that is that you know

The thing is, you know sophisticated Christian theologians realize that the doctrine of the Atonement is the is

Something they just can't get around. I mean, it's just they don't have a good explanation for it Sophisticated See see the more the more you're like Bart the more sophisticated you are the less you're like Bart the less sophisticated you are because Bart is the definition of sophistication and Don't we all know it?

Now has Bart Ehrman ever read John Owen? No Does does he even know who

John Owen was? I don't know I don't think he would have been exposed to John Owen at MBI Or at Wheaton.

Should have been at Princeton would have been Decades and decades before but Princeton it has been well said you can learn more in the

Princeton Cemetery than the Princeton Seminary Today and having been to the Princeton Cemetery, I would say that's probably true

But be that as it may Just to show such ignorance

Remember Bart Ehrman is the one who said that never did any of the New Testament writers identified

Jesus as Yahweh That's just plain absurdity.

Just just plain ignorance. That's why it's why he won't debate it either. We've challenged him to do that for years

But That's Bart Ehrman was not trained as a theologian and that comes out very clearly in instances like this

Well, they don't really interact with anything. There's been no real discussion of they have never thought about any of this type of stuff right

Sure. Okay. Well done Bart But they you know, they try to but it's it's it's a pretty awful doctrine and it it's among several other points that Suggests that the morality of God is something that we would

Consider evil if it were the morality of a person It's like this is what sort of God is it that as you said requires the torture and death of his own son to to forgive the the flaws of Creatures that he created to be flawed right and when what sort of God is it who creates a scheme where?

Yeah, we don't we don't want to have anything about sinful rebellion no, no, that's it a federal headship about no, no, no holiness got no no, no, no, no the entire purpose of God the

Redemption of a particular people absolutely undeserving the extension of his grace is incarnation. No, no, no

No, let's skip all that stuff and present the most absurd

Simplistic these people are a bunch of morons view and then we'll all sit around and look like we're really really smart and make all

The atheists go. Wow, that's great Difference between eternal happiness and eternal torment is to be realized by Merely believing the right things, but he hasn't given sufficient evidence

So as to persuade people to believe the right things and just do you see the holes here that are big enough to drive?

multiple semi trucks through I Mean this man does not understand Anything about the faith he is absolutely convinced it's wrong, but he doesn't understand anything about it and Is very proud of not understanding anything about it it is

Like I said listening to this was truly and an amazing thing I could I could go on but that just gives you that just gives you a sense just a few minutes of What you're dealing with in?

in this particular thing and So what I'll look into him we might there might be some other stuff that I'll pull out of that To to respond to as we as we go along But that was

That was pretty amazing that was pretty amazing. All right, that's uh, I Need to find the there it is.

Oh That's right. You reset the thing only two callers after all of that Wow 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 is the phone number 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 everyone is scared to death to touch any other topic

Lots of folks that are willing to accuse me of being a terrible horrible nasty person on social media, but we open up the phones and So, let's go to Detroit and talk to Eric hi

Eric Hey, dr. White, how are you doing good? Very good.

Yeah, I Enjoy your show longtime listener You have the episode last week where you discussed?

Psalms 102 and Hebrews 1 not not I got I gotta stop you before I discussed what?

I'm sorry. Um Psalms 102 and Hebrews 1. Okay 1

I'm gonna pick on I'm gonna pick on you here brother and And I'm smiling I don't know if you can see me but I'm smiling it's never

Psalms 102 it is Psalm 102 You would never say turn to hymns 102.

You would always say turn to him 102 same thing with the Psalms now I realize it's the

Psalms the book of hymns But it's Psalm 102 so that I have two two pet peeves that it's my goal in life that by the time

I croak Everyone ever listen to this program. There's two things they will never do

They will never say Psalms 102 or Psalms 23 or whatever else and they will never say well, that's found the book of Revelations It's the book of Revelation Singular so those are my two pet peeves and you have given me the opportunity.

Thank you very much I will send you your $20 bill later on For being able to once again mention it to everyone and and continue my purging of the world of the miscitation of the book of Psalms How do you follow how do you follow that up, right

Right as you were saying correct to me I was like, well, I'm from Detroit we say revelations, too This is a universal pet

So Anyways, yes the the excellent The excellent relationship between the citation of Psalm 102 25 27

Hebrews chapter 1 verse 10 through 12, which I Have discussed numerous times with Anthony buzzard

We've discussed it on the unbelievable radio broadcast in depth very much in depth

On unbelievable if you haven't heard that I'd recommend it to you because we spent far more time than we can spend here and Then it also came up Obviously in the debate that he and Joseph good did against myself and Michael Brown on the

Jewish voice broadcast a number of years ago as well, so There have been a number of times we've gone in depth even into He quotes some

FF Bruce at one point and and I've gone into the fact that FF Bruce then said something in a footnote

That refutes his point. And so we've gone pretty pretty deeply Into his attempt to get around this because it is fatal to his theology

If Jesus is identified as Yahweh Which he is there and in John chapter 6 in comparison with Isaiah chapter 6.

I'm sorry John chapter 12 in comparison Isaiah chapter 6 that is fatal to his his entire his entire theology

Right, but I guess what I guess my question is when he when he says The the vows that they adjust in Septuagint right when it instead of having in Hebrews It's the supplicant.

That's why I'm sorry. It's Jehovah responding to the supplicant Which I guess in Bacon's article says that the

Septuagint is a Messianic or it makes

God talk to him a eschatological Messianic figure so instead of saying

Well, let me put it like this and in the Masoretic text Yes, it talks about when it's when we turn it to our

Bibles to psalms 102. It does talk about immutability Eternality, but when we turn to Hebrews and he's using the

Septuagint and he's talking to a Messianic figure It wouldn't be talking about those things it seems to me well

Not you you mentioned somebody else's some of some other Article there that you threw a name in and I can his name was a

BW bacon The Septuagint reading of Psalms 102 23

Not familiar with it. Nope. Yeah, it's like it's from 1902 Okay Not familiar with it.

So until I Hebrews commentary he mentions bacon.

That's what it is. So FF Bruce in the commentary He mentions bacon mentions the void the vowel pointing differences that that Septuagint reading has so it's like if we're saying that the the

Septuagint translators were Adjusting the vowel pointing and Have God speaking to a

Messianic figure it seems like if it comes from Second Temple Jewish literature or that Second Temple period when the

Septuagint was Written that they wouldn't have had in mind that the coming

Messiah would be eternal or Nor would he have had a share in The Genesis creation, but that's that's that's why he like I got

I got FF Bruce's Commentary and he did he went on to say well

Who else would he be talking to so III remember that the FF Bruce applied His own interpretation to what the writers of the the

Septuagint translators would have been intended Intending but it just seems to me that they couldn't have been intending that at all that they couldn't have intended that a coming

Messiah that God would be talking to a coming Messiah and saying you will be you were eternal in the sense of not having a beginning and You had a share in the

Genesis creation, but he couldn't have been meaning that and that's why they changed it Well, well, first of all, there's from the

Masoretic read When you say vowel pointing There there obviously isn't any vowel pointing in Greek.

So what you're saying is a Septuagint interpretation of the what what

What do you what are you referring to? Well, I guess it's the In in the in the

Hebrew it says something like Omar Ali I say, oh my god Where the

Hebrew and and say what at what verse I think it's 25

Okay, so so Or I'm sorry Hebrews 110.

I guess verse 23 I'm sorry verse 24 and the heap in the in the psalm

They would say I say oh my god in verse 24 But the LX changes the

Omar Ali to be more delay so say to me

You can say to me. That's that's what I'm talking about. So from the yeah, there's no vowel pointings in the

Greek, but I Don't know how they how they justified it, but they were doing something clever

The way they translated it, but they changed the meaning of it. So the C subtract

Go ahead well What you're giving me is Hebrew and then saying it's in the

Septuagint. So I'm not able to follow what you're saying Some I'm sorry.

Okay. Yeah. Yeah, there's no in the Hebrew would have would would have it would they have had vows? It was in the

Hebrew. They wouldn't have had vows. No vows vows would be supplied there They were not they were not written until they applied the vows.

Yes, and the Hebrew when they supplied the vows They took all they made it Omar Ali Who now when the centaur?

That's when in the Masoretic text the Masoretic text is the Masoretic text is 1100 years after the

Septuagint so there that doesn't fit or watch I guess I would say the whatever survive in an arm in the manuscript record, whatever our surviving documents that Reflect that Hebrew reading when we have our in the psalm in the in psalms

With no ass. I'm sorry in psalm in psalm 102 They supplied the vows and they supply as Omar Eli, so I say oh my god, but then the

Septuagint translators when they supplied the vows They supplied it.

He more he lay Say to me Well, that's the

Supplicant the the the Septuagint the Septuagint says cut our costs to Cody In verse 26, that's the beginning.

That's the actual address and Cody is consistent in Psalm 101 in the

Greek in the Greek Septuagint That's Lord I don't see as I scroll back here

Anything that is connecting with with what you're talking about anything that differentiates 101 24

His strength maybe I suppose I I Remember buzzard raising some issue that we interacted on.

I I don't remember the specifics and Without seeing the without being able actually be able to see what it is you're talking about We're pretty much wasting our time here because we're not

We're not communicating very well, unfortunately So I'm just not familiar with With what you're meaning when you talk about the

Septuagint and the Hebrew and there's a 1100 year difference between them Well, I guess what when when in Hebrews we know he's quoting the

Septuagint the the writer of Hebrews he's quoting a Septuagint and in in the

Septuagint I Guess what I'm what I'm without getting into the the technicalities of it the

Hebrew and all that that in the Septuagint God's talking to his

Messiah. He's talking to a Messiah Where the where the supplicant asks him

Does he answered him in the way of his strength? Declare to me the shortness of my days

Bring me not up in the midst of my day. Well, here's the problem the Septuagint says

You it says kat arkos su kuri At the beginning you

Lord. There's only one kuri in Psalm 101 and The interpretation of it provided by the writer to the

Hebrews is To take the exact same words and apply them to Jesus So whatever you want to play around with with the

Greek Septuagint the interpretation of the Greek Septuagint is being provided by the author to the

Hebrews and He has said back in verse 8 to the son. He says and Then he quotes from the

Septuagint and then Chi and then the continuation of a quotation from Psalm 101 the

Septuagint Psalm 102 in the Hebrew the application of verses 26 27 28 in the

Septuagint 25 26 27 in the in the Hebrew directly to the

Sun so Trying to to say well, he was talking to somebody else doesn't change the writer to the

Hebrews interpretation Which I recall was the whole point that Bruce was was was raising and that is the writer to the

Hebrews is the final authority here it reminds me of what buzzer does when he tries to make the vowel pointing of Adonai Adonai at Psalm 110

Absolutely the centerpiece of his theology and that is that the Masoretic text hundreds of years after the time of Jesus Knowing the use of the

Christians of Psalm 110 Val pointed it so that it would refer to a human rather than to a divine figure.

Well, duh So what there those those Val points are not in the

Dead Sea Scrolls They're not in what would have been being used in the days of Jesus So all that is is an observation that at some point later in time

The Jews produced a vowel pointing that would that was self -consciously opposed to Christian understanding of their text big deal

That's exactly what's to be expected in this instance The question is how does the writer to the

Hebrews apply these words? he applies them to the Sun in a context that has included identifying the

Sun as the instrument of all of creation the exact Express image of the of the father

The one who's be worshipped by all angels. He's I called him to us God and your role that together and It's pretty obvious.

What what the what the intention is? So I don't know what else to say at that point

Well, I Guess I guess it's Important to keep in mind that the writers of the

Septuagint Like you said, I agree with everything you said when they were planets the Sun But when they the vow in the beginning it lays the foundation of the earth they were taking that as a restoration of Zion or restoration of Israel That's what the

Septuagint writers were intending to convey. No, it's not the Septuagint. No, it's not. I'm sorry. You're wrong

That's that's not true if Can you read Greek? I?

Cannot read Greek. Okay. So let me try to get it. I'm actually I'm getting this from FF Bruce's commentary.

Well, he roots caught our costs. Sue Cody from the beginning you Lord Laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of your hands

Now that's what's cited in Hebrews. That's what you've got to deal with You don't know what the

Greek Septuagint translators believed neither do I You don't you don't know what their their theology was because there was no one set of Hebrew of translators the

Greek Septuagint. I Mean the Psalter was probably translated by multiple different people over time

So to say well the Septuagint Intended to say such and so is pure speculation.

You don't know that all you have are the words and The words are either going to be faithful in rendering the

Hebrew or not faithful in rendering the Hebrew there are textual variants and stuff like that that have to be dealt with and Interpretational things and sometimes the

Septuagint translators may not have interpreted things correctly, whatever whatever that might be That's not the point here.

The point here is in this particular instance The interpretation by the writers of the

Hebrews is to apply these words in their fullest form in a consistent text in demonstrating the supremacy of Jesus the

Son who is the one upholding all of creation by the word of his power over against the angels

Which is the beginning of his apologetic for the fact that there is nothing to go back to now someone has quoted

In the chat channel here From from that that text, let me look at it here

Prayer of one afflicted and he is faint Both he and Zion, I don't

I don't see what the I Have this book in the other room, but I think we've we've lost everybody and I'll I'll take a look at it and maybe on the next program comment on if I can find out what you're referring to we'll

We'll comment on it there Okay. Yeah So someone someone's actually posted is what you're reading

BW Bacon Hebrews 1 10 through 12 and the Septuagint rendering Psalm 102 23 Yes, BW Bacon and FF Bruce's Hebrews his commentary

Well, he talks about it. He's the one who originally mentioned or he mentions BW Bacon, right?

There's a footnote. I think it's footnote 102 in in the material here

So I don't This is God's answer the suppliant He bids him acknowledge the shortness of God's set time and not summon him to act when that set time

Has only half expired while he assures him that he and his servants children would perish but to whom?

Unfortunately, I can't read the rest of it because the footnote is is in front of it. I I believe

I have Yeah, I do have Bruce's Commentary in Kindle, unfortunately, that's why

I was I was actually looking for it, but I Have her in for it says and yeah, but I need to sit, but I need to see it because Okay, that that's that's not not gonna not gonna help help me out much at all

So take a look at it and we'll get back to it at the future point, okay

Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. God bless Folks there's there's some

I Wish I had every commentary written memorized

And I wish I had it all sitting around me, but I don't and nobody does so Please you know realize that there are questions that you it's best to study them out first and I know that there is a

Discussion of this and like I said, I think we went over this with Anthony buzzard but that was about five years ago, and I've preached a couple thousand times since then and so I I wish that you know, everything just popped right back into my mind, but that's

Doesn't work that way anymore. I don't know anybody that it that actually does work that way for anymore so Please forgive me if I have disappointed you with that, but that's the best we can we can do on that one for now

Let's try Tim in Virginia. Hi Tim. Hey, Dr. White. How are you doing today?

Doing all right. Yeah, I'm gonna switch gears on you a little bit and move to theology rather than biblical studies

Kevin DeYoung at his t4g talk talked about the immutability of God James Dolezal has put out his book on simplicity of God, which

I've not read and I've not kept up with it Oh, well, I was giving my question, you know, where you stand on the impassibility simplicity immutability issue going on in the reformed evangelical world

Yeah, I I Wish that especially in an area like that If we're if we're real close it probably would be be great to Extend as much grace as possible and to hear what someone else says and go.

Oh, okay. I Hear you I'm gonna disagree here.

They're everywhere I'm seeing but I have not seen the documentation of the idea that basically

We've been checking people out of the kingdom right left and center. I'm You know, maybe there's a reason to do that But I'm I'm concerned

Because as I have listened to Some of the discussions of these things from years past I could discern some differences

But the same time the the differences were not so radically huge That That it was worth dividing over But I don't know so I haven't read dollars all

I don't know What the what the argument is about I'm doing a PhD in text criticism Don't I can't keep up with everything.

So I'm just disappointing everybody today. Don't have any meaningful comment to make I Appreciate your your book.

Thank you very much. All right. Thanks. All right. God bless. Bye. Bye Yeah, this is that we should have figured out when the program started the way that started that we might as just you know

Put that one aside And not even not even bother Let's talk to Ian and see if Ian has a has a has something for us that we can handle today

So I Heard I listened to the stuff you did On critical race season and Though the one thing that made me think was

I think it was the guy's name is Kyle Howard. He said that he's more sure about Martin Luther King salvation than he is about Jonathan Edwards and another gentleman

George Whitefield George was okay, and I was thinking okay.

Well Okay, so But it got it got me thinking about got me thinking about You know when

John talks about people who walk in darkness and I've used the

The the I've used the comparison between slavery and abortion. I can't count how many times

I've used it trying to say to dehumanize people In this way is evil, you know, and it's darkness, you know so I would say an abortion doctor is living and walking in darkness and could not possible could not possibly be a

Christian oh And I've benefited from Jonathan Edwards writing.

We're really listening. I listen to it. I can't read through it but So that but that kind of got me thinking and I wonder what you would say because I said well

So would I not say that? Owning slaves and walking in darkness, so I don't really have a category to fit those two things in And it just got me thinking thinking about well, maybe the guy's statement has some validity to it but he just he the

MLK stuff, you know, so I would say orgies and adultery and That stuff is also walking in darkness, right?

So I wouldn't be I wouldn't end but and you know Not believing in the divinity of Christ or the resurrection the bodily resurrection

I believe that I wouldn't but then I looked at the other side and I say yeah, well these guys

Orthodox in their beliefs but Am I going to state so owning slaves is not walking in darkness and I I was just thinking about it

I have some thoughts. I wanted to throw that you see what comments you had on it. That's it. Well Like I said when

I addressed this the the issue is an abortion doctor

Knows full well the unique genetic makeup of the child knows has to study very carefully the

Development of the child to be able to identify possible Complications With the abortion procedure to be able to identify how old

The child is how far along the development is that type of thing? and so the abortion doctor lives in the blinding bright light of more knowledge of the nature of the unborn child

Than any preceding generation has ever had and So that individual has to be judged on the basis of The knowledge that they possess and when you compare that to the situation that existed in the early 1700s in the

United States. I don't see that it is parallel Specifically What you would have to have would be that it would be common knowledge of any educated individual

That there is no difference genetically There is no difference in any way between black and white men or women as to their

Capacities abilities participation in the in the human family, etc, etc.

Now remember this is a day They don't know anything about genetics anything along those lines Medical knowledge is exceptionally limited at this point in time and so Unfortunately, there were many people who believed

Various theories about Inferior peoples people who did not have the capacity to do what other people could do and If there had been a united Stand if it was just known by everyone that this was a horrific institution and it was wrong

If they had if there had been knowledge for example of black -on -black slavery in in North Africa, I Think that would have had a lot of impact upon how people thought

About the subject in the United States, you know, there was no CNN. There was no

Internet. There was no you know information like that if it even were to be published might not even be available to people if People had known about the slavery of Europeans Unfortunately there was

The assumption that all forms of slavery are the same so Hebrew slavery which was limited by the

Jubilee Year laws, which was limited in a number of other ways in the

Old Testament law Would be used to defend the American form of slavery

As if they were equal to one another Same thing with Roman slavery

Even though it differed both from the American form mostly and there were different American forms too, but American form

Roman slavery Hebrew slavery There's been slavery throughout the history of mankind.

There still is today in Libya, for example because No, there's no meaningful functional government in Libya right now.

There are slave markets in Libya and It Continues to this day and there are some places in in some of the outback areas of Asia as well where you have certain tribes that will sell the the

People they've defeated from other tribes and things like that. It continues on today sadly, but if there had been a universal knowledge amongst the people amongst the church

That this was a sinful practice that these were men made in the image of God Then very clearly what

Edwards or or Whitfield did would be the same would would be the same as an abortion doctor because they're there the well

If they killed the slave, yes, but in the sense of you know, it wouldn't be the same sin murder of an innocent person

But it would be stealing someone it would be it would be against God's law. There wouldn't be any question about that But that wasn't that wasn't the case and that's the problem is it's real easy to take the standards of what we know today but even when you look back at the people that opposed slavery in the

United States in those days and Then push a little bit more what they actually were saying and the reasons they were saying it were not the same reasons that we would

Use today, for example, it's well known that Finney opposed The the buying and selling of slaves, but he also strongly opposed anything like interracial marriage

So you know it It would be nice if it was a if it was a clear issue

If it was just cut right down the middle and you've got the clear heretics and the clear good guys But unfortunately history almost never allows us to have that and so the the question then becomes

When you when you make the comparison to what Martin Luther King did in his private life with his own ethics and morals in regards to sexuality

Was it a big question in the 1950s and 60s? concerning adultery fornication

Sex with multiple people was that was that something was up in the air and the church really well

We don't know man anymore. Sadly. It's starting to become that way with some liberal denominations in our day But it wasn't in the 1950s and it was very clear.

It was very open It was it was a direct rejection It was a living of a double life.

And so I would ask basically Was Edwards knowingly living a double life?

With his beliefs in comparison to MLK. The only answer that is no does that mean that what

Edwards did was right? No, it doesn't But it does place it in a meaningful

Historical context and these days trying to get anybody to put anything in a meaningful historical context is really tough

It's just really tough The same thing with dealing with with Luther and the

Jews, you know when you try to do that Man, you just get into a whole lot of a whole lot of trouble with people today because history is just sort of like Plato you get to form it in any form you want to Copy that.

Does that help at all? Yeah. Yeah, man. I just wanted to hear your thoughts on it. I don't have anything else to say.

Okay. All right. I hope that was useful All right. Appreciate it. All right. Thanks. God bless. Bye -bye Okay I'm not sure how far we're gonna go.

Why don't we close them off there? Which whatever whatever you've got But I did have the opportunity real quickly

Let me let me just point something out most

Most programs like this you have You have a staff of people you have multiple monitors you've got people in other rooms that You'll at least have one other person who is free because they're not speaking

To look things up and slide things over to you know Grab books and and slide materials over so like that.

I do not have that Closest thing I have are some rather odd people In my chat channel and maybe sometimes some people on Twitter But the problem is there's a delay there

Because they're hearing things at a later point in time and then they've got to look things up and it's not like we're

Paying any of them so And and no rich doesn't count because rich is is

Trying to hold The stream together with bubblegum and and bailing wire

And and trying to keep the lights on Lights on the studio today everything on that side was was flashing and then it would just turn off and and So he was up there with a screwdriver and I'm sitting here going.

Okay. Okay, how many breaths per chest compression? I'm trying to remember back to my

CPR qualifications from a long time ago because I can just see the Lights go out and the body falls and and I'm gonna be

Doing CPR while dialing 9 -1 -1 and and all the rest that stuff, but we got we got the lights back on So no, he's he can't be doing anything like that either.

So with with especially specifically technical questions Unless There is some mechanism of warning me ahead of time.

There's there's no way I can I can interact with stuff I've got books in the other room But I can't go get him and say okay, we're gonna take a 15 -minute break now and and so on so I can do so The question that was asked earlier

We spent a lot of time on it, but I'm afraid that it created a fair amount of confusion in the process So let me now that I've been able to grab the material let me bring up What was what was being talked about, okay

This is FF Bruce's commentary on Hebrews fine commentary on Hebrews. I'm not as good as Philip Edgecumbe Hughes, but fine commentary on Hebrews Verses 10 through 12.

The sixth quotation is taken from Psalm 102 25 to 27, which is Septuagint 101 26 to 28

The psalm which begins hear my prayer. Oh Yahweh is Truly described in its superscription as a prayer of one afflicted when he is faint and pours out his complaint before Yahweh So see immediately this is going all the way back to the superscription to the psalm

Rather than verse 24 or whatever it was and that's what I was asking about where this is coming from Both he and Zion his city have experienced a judgment of God But he makes confident supplication for mercy and restoration for himself and Zion that men and women may assemble

Where there once more to give praise to God He is oppressed by a sense of the brevity of his personal span of life with which he contrasts the eternal being of God in Comparison with his own short life heaven earth are long -lived yet heaven and earth must pass away

They had their beginning when God created them They will grow old and disappear one day But the God who created them existed before they did and he will survive their disappearance as one man in his lifetime

Outlives many successive suits of clothes So God has seen and will yet see many successive material universes, but he himself is eternal and unchanging the words in which the psalmist dresses

God however are here applied to the Sun as Clearly as the words of Psalm 45 6 and following were applied to him in verses 8 and 9

What justification can be pleaded for our authors applying them thus? First as has already been set said in verse 2

It was through the Sun that the universe was made the angels were about worshipping spectators when the earth was founded

But the Sun was the father's agent in the work He therefore can be understood as the one who is addressed in the words of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth and the heavens of the work of thy hands

Moreover in the Septuagint text the person to whom these words are spoken is addressed explicitly as Lord that is

Kuti Specifically using the vocative form of Kuti OS which is what I was referring to When I was asking about you know, where are we talking about this cot our costs sue

Kuti Lord? Kuti OS being the term that is normally used by the Greek Septuagint translators to replace the name

Yahweh And it is God who addresses him thus whereas the Hebrew text the suppliant is the speaker from the beginning to the end of the

Psalm in the Greek text his prayer comes to an end with verse 22 and the next words read as follows

He answered him in the way of his strength declared to me the shortness of my days Bring me not up in the midst of my days.

Thy years are throughout all generations Thou Lord in the beginning dislay the foundation of the earth

And this is where the this is where the footnote the Septuagint has treated the

Hebrew Omar Ali I say my God as a more a lie say to me

Again, the difference is purely one of vocalization. In other words what he's explaining there. What what's being behind that is vocalization is the insertion of vowels into a consonantal text and all

Semitic languages They have vowel letters. It's can function as vowels but Even when the

Quran was originally written the vowel pointing is a later addition

Spoken languages that's just frequently how how these things worked out. This is

God's answer to the suppliant he bids him acknowledge the shortness of God's set time for the restoration of Jerusalem and Not summon him to act when that set time has only half expired while he assures him that he and his servants children will be preserved forever

But to whom a Christian reader the subject might well ask could God speak in words like these and Whom would

God himself dress as Lord as the maker of heaven of earth and heaven our author knows of one person only to whom?

Such terms could be appropriate and that is the Son of God that our author understood this quotation

Psalm 102 is an utterance of God seems plain from the way in which it is linked by the simple conjunction and To the preceding quotation

Psalm 45, so as I said in Psalm in in verse 8 of Hebrews 1 but to the

Son he says then the rest of verses 8 and 9 is a quotation Psalm 45 and the application and Comma Then you have the citation from Psalm 101 and the

Greek Septuagint Psalm 102 in the Hebrew So that's what he's referring to here Both quotations fall in the same rubric

But to the Son God says if in the preceding quotation the Son is addressed by God as God in This one is addressed by God as Lord and we need not doubt that our author

That to our author the title Lord conveys the highest sense of all the name which is above every name No wonder that the

Son has ascribed to him a dignity which surpasses all the names angels bear Nor is our author the only

New Testament writer to ascribe to Christ the highest of divine names or to apply to him Old Testament scriptures which in their primary context refer to Yahweh Which is relevant to what

I said earlier about Bart Ehrman who said that no New Testament writer ever does that that is simply

Not the case. So my assumption Is that the

Discussion Was based specifically on footnote 102

Which in Bruce is Specifically at the end of the sentence and not summon him to act when that set time has only half expired while he assures him

That he and his servants children will be preserved forever. And then the footnote there is

CF BW Bacon Hebrews 1 10 through 12 and the subject rendering a psalm 102 20 23 from 1902

Bacon suggested that the Hebrew as well as the Greek text this psalm formed a basis for messianic eschatology

Especially its reference to the shortness of God's days ie of the period destined to elapse before the consummation of his purpose

He found here the Old Testament background of Matthew 24 22 mark 13 20 and the epistle of Barnabas 4 3 as Enoch says

For to this end the master has cut short the times and the days that his beloved should make haste and come to his inheritance so there is the material from from FF Bruce, so Bruce plainly states the same interpretation that I've that I've given my

Understanding is that what buzzard has done in the past is to try to say?

Well, that can't be a possible interpretation Because in the

Greek Septuagint, that's funny here. He would opt for the Greek Septuagint rendering whereas in Psalm 110 he insists upon the later

Masoretic vowel pointing to try to get around the deity of Christ a clear an obvious Problem at that particular point in time.

I don't remember if he brought this up in The Jewish voice broadcast debate maybe because he was sitting across from Michael Brown.

He didn't want to Bring up Hebrew. I Wouldn't necessarily want to do that either.

So maybe that's what that was all about. I I don't know but What I was saying was no matter how the

Greek Septuagint is this takes us back This is why I couldn't find it is The caller was saying verse 24 something like that.

It's back in the beginning of the psalm But the point is by the time we get to this point in the psalm the description of God's eternality and his immutability is

The basis for the promise whoever it's being made to It's his immutability and eternality that is in view and that specifically

Personally through the use of Su and Kodi is what the writer to the

Hebrews applies to the Sun in verses 10 11 and 12, so you can

You can try to throw some some smoke over the issue But the reality is that especially when you read

Hebrews chapter 1 in its context This is a perfectly consistent conclusion to the numerous references to the deity of Christ that have already been presented in Hebrews chapter 1 so There you go with that let's get our last two phone calls in here, sorry to Eric been waiting a long time

Eric in st. Louis. Hi Eric Hello, I've been long time two years.

I've been listening your program and I've got this question I'm a you know millennial and How do

I witness the gospel to my friends that have been growing up in a post -truth?

Society every couple of them went to quote Christian colleges where they studied liberation theology and barter men

And like it seems like they're almost inoculated against anything I could even try to bring up because like What what does it mean that you know the law came through Moses and grace and truth come from come through Christ Jesus?

When truth is my own little personal quantity. Yeah. Well, the the reality is that while While our educational system and the people on the left

Do their very best to Form our our thought in such a way as to inoculate us against God's truth

We continue to be creatures made in the image of God and we continue to live

Creatures made in the image of God, which means we are going to live Inconsistently when we try to live upon the principles that we have been taught

That there is no objective truth. So and so we will not be able to live that way and so this is where precept the presuppositional element of presuppositional apologetics is so important is

You begin and you have to always look at the person to whom you're speaking The way the

Bible sees them not the way they see themselves and some people are just terrible no, that's just that's allowing

God to be God and and and keeping man from from taking over from God at that point and so what you do is

You talk with them long enough And this this can happen in a single conversation it can happen in multiple conversations, but and if it's gonna be somebody that you're gonna be

Talking to fairly frequently maybe a neighbor or something like that. Then you want to build more of a relationship before you you know sort of pull the trigger on a demonstration of their inconsistencies

But sometimes you're sitting in an airplane seat and you're and the flights only so long So you have to be wise as to how you're gonna do this

But in talking with someone Eventually if you're you know spirit -led and insightful in your questions, you're gonna be able to bring out a number of places where the world's way of thinking is not going to line up with the person's experience in this world and Once you have one or more of those then that becomes the key

But that you use to open the door now obviously if the Spirit of God is not bringing any level of conviction or enlightenment or understanding in this person's heart

All you're gonna end up doing is demonstrating to them that they are inconsistent and they're gonna go. I don't care if I'm inconsistent

It doesn't matter Anybody I'm sorry Well, yeah, you've got that too but You know but the point is if they're what what we want to do is we want to be a sharp ready instrument in the divine doctor's hands to be used in in healing and so We put ourselves out there and we may get people who get angry at us and they might mock us and we might lose

Prestige we might lose a job But what we're trying to do is to be used of God to be able to bring conviction to the heart of an individual

And when the Spirit does bring that understanding When you talk to a person who goes, well, yeah,

I guess I'm I guess I'm inconsistent at that point I'm I'm not living consistent with what

I'm saying about other people. I'm not God can use that then as an opening for you to be able to present the objective reality of God's law of who we are and The Christian worldview based upon God's description of what man is is the consistent one?

And so what I'm saying is I would say the you know, the Holy Spirit has to give someone a thirst for consistency for truthfulness for Being in right relationship with him and what we do our job is is not to fake the

Spirit Our job is to present that in such a way that the

Spirit of God can use it to bring about that person's that person's confession of faith, so the the the the connecting point with the millennial is the same connecting point with someone in 17th century

England that was Surrounded with Christian theology and had read the Bible 13 times even if they weren't converted

It's just you know, it may have sounded easier back then in some ways it It was sometimes tougher because of the massive exposure to the

Christian faith It's always in any generation though Dependent upon the

Spirit of God working within someone's heart and bring them that understanding We want to be quick and and and used of him to bring them to an understanding of these things

So like is there any any hope like like left for you know

America seems things are just going so badly awry that it can't can't can the ship get righted or Has the sin of the

Amorites not yet reached its fullest measure. I I I hope that that that quotation from Genesis isn't applicable, but it probably is and The difference would be this the

Amorites had no light outside of the light of nature The this nation has had blinding light and if we apply

Jesus's own standard It will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgment Than it will be for Dallas in New York Yeah, most definitely most definitely so I you know,

I don't know we pray for repentance but historically Repentance normally comes as a result of great judgment and so Yeah, I'd agree with you on that You have any good and you like like entry -level resources on like presuppositional apologetic

Oh, yeah, get my feet wet on. Yeah, there are a number now. There are a number of introductory texts presenting

Presuppositionalism, you know, I should have a I should have that list just sitting here In fact, uh, you don't have a dozen people running around the library.

Yeah, I don't and besides that unfortunately My library is not nearly as well organized as it should be it from the time we moved here what in 2006

Yeah, it's we're 12 years and it's still not, right I've tried to organize it and and basically the organizational method is

I think I put it on that shelf And that's that's sort of the the extent of it. But there are

I have probably been sent at least two or three New books just over the past a couple of years on this so what you might

What you might be able to do is If you look up Pratt's taking every thought captive look up anything by Bonson and then look at the customers also purchased

Type thing that's frequently when you'll be able to to grab them There's a okay someone in chat channel, thank you

If you look at today, they're gonna get a real Jolt out of this one choosing hats org choosing hats org has a reading plan

Slash reading plan and so that would be a good place to start as well to where you could you know, grab that and There you go

Okay, Eric, thank you very much. All right. God bless All right last one

Let's talk with Nate Nate. Please don't ask me a question That's gonna require me to like, you know sit here forever looking stuff up for you.

Not a rough day. It's been a long one No, we actually we have a board meeting tonight, so it's not over at all

It's just keep going and go I'm gonna have a little discussion. However about rich and the beginning of the dividing line today.

So Well, my mind should be a lot quicker, but What I'm gonna do is ask the question and watch the answer on YouTube streaming.

So I've got to get going but my question is About X 19 to second blessings second baptism

Just wondering what the reform position is on that My background is Pentecostalism But newer to Calvinism and drawn to the doctrine of faith and I just come across things like this once in a while I'd like to know what the stance would be on that.

Okay. Yeah. All right. I appreciate I know you got a run So I'll just give you a excellent.

Okay. Thanks. I think Yeah, I probably made the man late for who knows what

I'm Going so long everything else Acts 19 is is is an interesting text and I would say that in Pentecostal circles it's been misused a good bit and the reason

I say that is acts 19 1 & 2 is in no way a

Normative situation. Let me read it for folks who don't have it up right now It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus and found some disciples some disciples

He said to them. Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed and they said to him? No We have not even heard whether there is a

Holy Spirit and he said into what then were you baptized and they said into John's Baptism and Paul said

John baptized with the baptism of repentance telling the people to believe in him Who was coming after him that is in Jesus when they heard this they were baptized in the name of the

Lord Jesus and when Paul had laid his hands upon them The Holy Spirit came on them and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying.

So what you have here there was a a major question in the early church concerning the status of the

Disciples of John and These individuals are not people who have been saved and Then get a second

Blessing they got the Holy Spirit the first time then they get a second blessing another point in time They don't even know what a

Holy Spirit is. They've not heard the gospel. They don't know who Jesus is These are folks that you know heard the message of John The forerunner but they didn't hear what the completion was.

So to build anything out on that because Here's a good situation where something in the book of Acts only has one period of possible relevance because there's nobody who's heard the

John the Baptist preach anymore. Okay, there are no disciples of John left Who haven't gotten the rest of the story and the rest of the story was the necessary part of the story the point here

And what also we get in the gospel John is John's baptism wasn't enough He was a forerunner.

He was testifying forward you need you need the fulfillment you need that that that Understanding who

Jesus is and understanding who the Holy Spirit is And so to take what was clearly an extremely unique situation that could not be repeated after what?

at most 50 -60 years You know, maybe if somebody was really young that heard John or something like that and Then expand that out to some kind of second blessing type thing

Just does not make any any sense whatsoever It is not what is being taught when you go to what the

Apostle Paul taught on the Holy Spirit It is constant and everything. He says that when he addresses

Christians He's talking to people who have received the Spirit of God. That is what is our oneness in Christ That's our profession our confession our forgiveness, but but the

Spirit is in all of us You don't have Christians who don't have the Spirit and then get the

Spirit later on etc, etc. So That's really important to keep in in in mind that becomes the basis of Paul's Interaction with all believers after that and to try to take unique Situations like when the gospel first goes out of the

Gentiles or here John the Baptist disciples in Ephesus of all places

And then to try to extrapolate something like that out That's one of the issues I get into with my charismatic friends is they'll take

Stuff at the early part of Acts and try to extrapolate that out If it doesn't have a basis in the epistolary literature and in Paul's letters to the churches and things like that Peter's letters to the churches things like that be careful of taking something in Acts and and Saying what was really unusual here at the beginning needs to be normative at a at a later point in time

You got to be really really careful about that whoo,

I Think it's time to order a pizza and You're Up for that.

Yeah, you've been you've been fighting to get the thing restarted and I'm sitting here going We went almost an hour and four and 40 minutes

We didn't because we started at 10 after so we're right at an hour and a half right now. So Right 10 after yeah, so I said so so we're right there.

So alright folks. Hopefully that was useful to you sorry to those of you that I Haven't read, you know certain things and stuff like that right now.

I'm just gonna tell you straight up straight up There are certain theological conflicts going on right now that I'm just I'm going you all you all have fun with it out there

You know, okay. Yep. Well, well, we're right behind you. Don't worry It's just the way it is and Not much you can not much you can do about that anybody who says they can keep up with all of it

Okay Smarter than me a lot smarter than me. There's a lot of smart people's there's a lot smarter than me

Hey, guess what a new version of Java is available That's I'll just go ahead and click install update watch the whole thing explode that would be fun.

Yeah. All right Well Lord willing we will be back next week. I don't leave for South Africa and all other places three weeks

Please be praying about that. I'm really I'll be honest. I'm really concerned About some of the medications and stuff.

I've got to take Because I'm going to Zambia and so you gotta take malaria stuff and get shots and things like that And some people don't react real well to stuff like that So your prayers would be would be appreciated about about all of that.