Pope's Leftist Commentary, Leftist's View of Andy Stanley's Conference, On Attacks on Presupp

Well the timing was just right.

Oh by the way, I have no monitor in here.

I'm not sure why but The timing was just right some of the gentlemen that are Assisting me with preparation for February which I need to get started quickly I'm February's could be honest before Even know what's going on Mentioned a resource Here it is It is entitled the drone biblical commentary for the 21st century Third fully revised edition now the drone biblical commentaries been around for a long long time This is a one volume commentary from TNT Clark What's interesting about this one is that it has a forward by Pope Francis so it is promoted by the Pope as As The best example we have of modern Scholarship it has a Neal up stop That is amazing.

I just look as a Neal up stop and imprimatur from Reverend, mr.

Daniel G Welter JD Chancellor archdiocese of Chicago September 10th 2020 and An imprimatur for most Reverend Ronald a Hicks vicar general archdiocese of Chicago September 10th 2020 Look at that That used to have a particular meaning As to accuracy so on and so forth But so here's this is a Very large collection of the current Scholarship of the Roman Catholic Church And I'm gonna read you some stuff from it.

I was just reading First day I did it literally arrived less than five minutes ago.

So the timing was spot-on.

I Have some quotes from it.

I had already gotten some quotes from it earlier this morning before the hardcopy arrived But the first I turned to was Matthew why We're all working fine Okay, I just don't Well You know you turned off my camera during apology radio and now I don't have a monitor So I'm not sure how well you're doing today, but we're gonna have to have a little talk about Yeah, that's okay don't worry about um First I did was I turned to Matthew now, why would I turn to Matthew? Well, let's You know Saturday is our big 40th anniversary.

I should probably today should be talking about all that stuff, but I'm not I did on apology radio so you can go watch that We're continuing to do what we do on this program and that is deal with what's going on.

That's relevant to the church today.

Um People like Algo and all of Algo's acolytes around the world Know exactly where I'm going in 1993 John Paul II visited Denver for World Youth Day and Rich and I drove up and I debated Jerry Matatick's three and a half hours two nights in a row on the subject of papacy first night was on the New Testament second night was on church history and While we were debating Jerry Carl Keating and Patrick Madrid debated two fundamentalists Ron Nemec and Jackson Pastor Jackson, I've got was first name was anyways they are fundamentalists And It really wasn't a fair debate as far as that goes, but One of the things that I have commented on now for 30 years Was 30 years ago Was the fact that When Carl or Patrick or both? I don't remember what was asked the other side.

How do you know Matthew wrote Matthew? First of all the answer they gave was You know, well, it says in my King James Bible, so that's not the way to do things But the point was that There was an assumption being made on the part of the Roman Catholics That they know that Matthew wrote Matthew and yet the vast majority of Roman Catholic scholarship today Scoffs at the idea of an apostolic authorship of Matthew and Here is the commentary that the current Pope says you should read first thing I did was look up author and Matthew and it wasn't written by an apostle Huh now, I'm not sure what the drone biblical commentary said in 1993 But this is nothing new but this has Pope Francis's Forward in it.

It has a Nehal Abstadt imprimatur and Rome doesn't know who wrote Matthew Hmm Interesting interesting Um By the way just quickly my thanks Again to everyone who not only makes it possible for me to be traveling around you see me looking over like this.

I'm There's a camera focused on the truck It's not my truck.

It's a ministry truck, but it's truck.

I drive pulling that fifth wheel and We are only Two and a half hours from the border which is wide open and we're being invaded over it millions of people have entered our country illegally and so Things get stolen very often.

So when you see me looking over there It's I'm just keeping an eye on things because someone did try to steal Rich's car once or at least get into it I'm not sure.

They're really trying to steal it, but they Well, they broke the door.

They broke the door lock.

I know that but whether they're gonna try to break the Yeah, anyway, and I saw it and and jumped on the phone and Scared I think somebody had to do some laundry that night.

Let's just put it that way.

Okay anyway, sorry about that, um little little bit of a Consciousness thing got out of there off into things.

Um Let's let's look since I've since I'm there let's look at a couple of the quotations from This particular commentary, I'm sure there would be many more that we will share in the future But but this gives you an idea of the best of current Roman Catholic scholarship in commenting on Leviticus chapter 18 verses 22 through 23 Leviticus 18 22 to 23 similarly prohibits sexual practices that do not produce offspring for the community I'll skip over the graphic there Leviticus 18 22 does not speak about the modern concept of homosexuality or homo eroticism Which in general was not known as a possible sexual orientation in antiquity That's not true.

By the way, just In fact, it's laughably not true But it's commonly repeated The penetration of a male by a male was a way to denigrate the penetrated one To humiliate strangers or the inferior party in warfare.

See for example, Genesis 19 and Judges 19.

Oh, that's that's actually true Thus the Bible does not speak about same-sex love as one does today This is the Jerome biblical commentary The major interest of Leviticus 18 22 in 2013 is to assure that males procreate offspring for the community Hence, it is hermeneutically inappropriate to use these verses and similar passages in the Bible to ostracize homosexual males This isn't biblical commentary.

Okay, first of all, this has nothing to do with exegesis.

This is woke propaganda Masquerading as biblical commentary and scholarship and Are we just gonna say the Pope didn't read this part or is there a consistency in the Pope? Supporting Those who are seeking LGBTQ inclusion and Having just released a letter giving pastoral freedom in Certain circumstances to bless same-sex unions.

That was Monday.

It's only Thursday Hmm interesting Very very very interesting.

How about Romans chapter 1? Okay Because the Pericope in Romans 1 24 to 27 has been used as a clobber text like That it literally says as a clobber text in quotes so I mean The only people who use that terminology are Gay affirming writers.

All right has been used as a clobber text to denigrate persons with same-sex orientation It is worth reminding the reader That such a use strips the text of its social and historical context and brings it to bear on an issue Paul's own audience would never have imagined or understood Paul's contemporaries would have been familiar with multiple types of exploitative sexual relationships including pedophilia Prostitution and slavery in each case such relationships reveal and inscribe abusive power structures catch the power structures This is as woke as the day is long it's as leftist as the day is long and Pope Francis says This is one you need to be reading In each case such relations revealed and inscribed abusive power structures they have nothing to do They have nothing to do with loving sexual relationships between consenting adults.

This was written by By everyone every single one of the pro-homosexual Organizations out there.

This is on every one of their websites and This is now the Jerome biblical commentary forward by Pope Francis Whatever contemporary moral arguments one wants to mount about same-sex relations.

It is ethically Irresponsible to use this passage in Romans 1 to close off contemporary exploration of the issues This is leftism writ large This isn't exegesis, this isn't biblical commentary This is woke propaganda with forward by the Pope Nihil Abstadt in impromptu Mm-hmm.

That used to mean something what it meant in the 1950s is not what it means in the 2020s.

Is it? Oh, no, it's not and Here's one from I think it's first Timothy Decorum in prayer the instructions for men focus on a suitable frame of mind for women The restrictions are more stringent.

Not only must they be modest and simple in attire, but they must keep silent during instruction Presumably in the assembly This is justified by the man's temporal priority in creation and the woman's priority in sinning With a grudging concession that a woman can be saved by child bear child bearing and modesty such relegation of women Agrees with the surface meaning of Paul in first Corinthians 14 34 35 see the commentary there But it's hardly consonant with the important part played by women in the Pauline communities The deacon Phoebe carried the letter to the Romans Romans 16 1 Priscilla played her part as a catechist with her husband Romans 16 3 acts 18 to 18 through 26 and Several other women in the Roman churches are congratulated for their hard work for the community Romans 16 6 through 15 Such prominence of women was not abnormal in the Jewish communities in the diaspora for several funerary Inscriptions this period exist on which women are named as president of the synagogue the author Catch that the author is here considerably more repressive of women than the Paul of the earlier letters The instructions are not the last word For the changed social environment of today Did you hear what's being said? Make sure you understand The drone biblical commentary saying Paul didn't write that.

Oh, huh Well Trent horns telling us that Paul maybe didn't write or at least promoting someone Who doesn't believe that Paul and then going on to talk about that and later follow-up Paul didn't write the honest us the second Timothy 316 either Well, there's a consistency here the consistency here, isn't there? Yes leftist progressivist consistency is what we have and the Pope says hey, this is What you need to be reading right there.

I mean it's and it's a beast.

You'd see that It's big big thick waste of paper, but um, yeah There it is the Jerome biblical commentary for the 21st century third fully revised edition with afford by Pope Francis and Filled with all of the leftist tripe that I had to deal with in seminary long long ago There it is there it is so is imprimatur Nihil Abstatt nothing objectionable Like I said in the 1950s that meant Here's something that is faithful to the teaching of the church.

What does it mean in 2020? Well, when you got the Pope writing the forward, what does it mean? What does it mean? That the Pope's in 1950s believe what's in this? No, but the Pope does now What about the next Pope? That's the whole point folks that's on the last program we're talking about the fact here's here's the Pope and he's you know, someone Let's try to give him the best Let's spin this the best we can he doesn't want to see a schism in the church No Pope wants to be the Pope when there a schism happens in the church.

I mean look what happened to Leo the 10th He's not exactly remembered well by history of the Pope at the time of the Reformation Excommunicated Martin Luther Exerge Domine all that stuff.

Remember we were all we were all up on that Goodness five years ago six years ago.

Wow coming up on six years the end of this month.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah Where did those six years ago? anyway So, so let's say he's just trying to be a good leader And you've got the German bishops and they've got a lot of they got a lot of pull you know German theology Ratzinger was a German and So he doesn't want to see a schism take place.

And so He's throwing a bone and look John Paul the second did this and hey, he's been sainted So John Paul the second would put on the cyclical one year that was extremely conservative next year It would have liberal stuff in and then back to the conserves and he's thrown He's throwing bones, you know, he's he's trying to keep I mean if there's a Wide wide variety of everybody who say it says, you know, we're we're all united is living in a fantasy world living in a fantasy world there is a wide variety of perspectives in In in the magisterium not as wide as maybe under John Paul the second Francis's pack things out while the conservatives old older men.

They've died out I mean you look at the College of Cardinals today if Francis resigns tomorrow there's a 95% chance that the next Pope is going to be just as Progressivist as Francis's if not more if not more so What what does this mean to To the Roman Catholics that are listening and they're going How could the how could the Pope allow for? How could only two years ago in 2021 the Vatican say you can't bless sin and now you can bless in How does that work well Look if if Pope Francis is reading this commentary and it's woke progressivist Argumentation on key texts like Romans 1 and Leviticus 18 and 20.

Do you think he doesn't hold those same views? I'd say there's every bit of evidence that he does And if those are his views on Leviticus 18 and 20 and Romans 1 And I haven't looked at 1st Corinthians 6 yet, that'll be interesting to look at If that's his perspective Then is there any question about what the future is going to hold a and B? Is there any question that's not the perspective? That was held for long before that I mean, all right You can look at you can look at the pornography The utter degradation in the 10th century of the bishopric of Rome bought and sold brothels in the Vatican well in Rome Just you can look at that and and you can look at the broad wide self-admitted history of homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood and Go well, there's there's all your reasons right there, but Officially and this is what apologists always say.

Oh, it's one thing that you know, there's bad stuff happening back then But the Holy Spirit wouldn't let them mislead the church in official dogmatic teachings.

See so they make the distinction The official position of the church has always been consistent in regards to the sinfulness of homosexuality even if they were Rampantly engaging in it.

Anyways, are you sure it's gonna be that way in 20 years? I'm certainly not No logical person could be Not not not what you see here not what you see here, so How many red pills does it take? before you wake up and you realize What I've been taught all along About this being the firm foundation It's unchanging foundation It's just It doesn't work It we're seeing it right in front of our eyes and So I think you're gonna see more and more of these Senevacanus groups growing because Conservative Roman Catholics who have fought against Protestants like myself They don't want to they don't want to even consider the possibility that we've been right all along and so It's time to sort of buy into the Well, there's gonna be a period where it's gonna be great confusion and you know, there's all sorts of stuff out there already You know and I I would imagine if Jerry Matito is still traveling.

He is now He's now got more material.

He's got more material Than he's ever had before for his meeting with a dozen people at the Holiday Inn Which is what he's been doing for what 20 years now Something like that.

I mean, I really don't know what he's doing anymore.

I've lost track.

I I've admitted the last time I saw Jerry Matito in any form was when he lost on Jeopardy That was it I honestly don't know what he's done since then I feel for the guy But I'll be honest with you I bet if if we got him on the phone He'd still be in debate mode from Boston College in 93 just be right back Pick right back up.

It's true It's just Wow Yeah, that's that's the way it would be These eyes been driving all day long always had a diet Pepsi and and yeah, that's that's you know, that's that's what would have so I Wonder how much more is going to come out between now and February Because When I when I debate Trent Horn on solo scriptura We can't pretend that Francis doesn't exist.

I can't get these guys and Even even less now to really Deal with the reality of Pope Francis and The fact that he is changing Roman Catholic Church teaching he's changed it on on on capital punishment and He is plainly Purposefully intentionally Changing the moral and ethical teachings the Roman Catholic Church on the subject of the LGBTQ Revolution he is wake up You know it you're seeing it right in front of your eyes What will you do about? What will you do about that's? That's the question.

All right We also on the last program talked about Andy Stanley and The conference that they did plug this thing back in here.

Sorry.

There we go USB ports are not all that large.

Um, I Was recharging my my thingamabob either so I can find my keys since I'm old and I lose them It's true, you know, it's nice to be able to go where my where are my keys? Oh, there they are.

Okay We talked about Andy Stanley and the unconditional conference and We listened to some of his comments and that's I guess that sermons out now, so, you know 48 hours later high-quality sound now available But There is a fellow on Twitter.

Everyone's to walk all all the conservatives on Twitter, there's two guys Zach Lambert and Kevin M young okay, they're both wild-eyed progressivists just some people think they're not real accounts, they're just Troll accounts to get conservatives angry no, I think they're real and because I know that there are this kind of these kinds of progressives are all over out there and most of us live in our little Enclaves and we don't run into these folks.

And so we don't Really interact with them So Zach Lambert went to the conference.

He's not a part of Andy Stanley's church but he Well, I'll just read what he said I was at the now infamous unconditional conference last week at Andy Stanley's North Point Church put on by embracing the journey I went to be with some dear friends more than that I want to see if this conference would be yet another bait-and-switch a Space that claimed to be safe and supportive of LGBTQ plus folks But was actually all about telling them they need to leave behind their sexual orientation and or gender identity to fully follow Jesus Y'all it was not a bait-and-switch it was safe supportive and affirming They explicitly communicated they were not trying to change anyone's theology and they didn't But every speaker video book and breakout I saw fully affirmed LGBTQ plus folks I saw pastors advocating for inclusion Parents welcoming their children's same-sex partners into the family trans folks sharing their transition stories and queer people leading at literally every level on Sunday Andy preached a sermon explaining why North Point hosted the conference.

The sermon was compiled of one minute I completely disagreed with he said North Point still teaches that biblical marriage between one man and one woman This gives you an idea of how apostate this man is He has no connect Zach Lambert has no connection at all to any kind of biblical theology Historic Christian faith nothing like that.

He's abandoned all of it and 48 minutes of advocating for full inclusion for LGBTQ plus folks in the church Andy said this is an issue where they don't want to draw lines that exclude but circles that fully include everyone married gay folks trans folks and everyone else And if you have quote-unquote married Gay men speaking at the conference.

Well You know you can You can sit there all you want and say biblical marriage between a man woman, which is what Jesus taught of course But if you're then pointing to the great example of these people you are Contradicting yourself so plainly So clearly so Fundamentally that no one is going to believe a word you have to say about anything else ever again and nor should they you you don't understand that you can't define the word truth without reference to terms of consistency and You are being wildly inconsistent.

You cannot do those two things That's why none of these churches.

None of these side B folks remain side B folks They end up going to side a becoming fully fully affirming and that's what's gonna happen with North Point to They can sit around all day and say we believe in biblical marriage No, you don't you just allowed the biblical marriage bed to be defiled right in front of your own people and You're gonna say but we believe in biblical marriage.

No, you don't No, you don't it's right there right in front of everybody I don't know how you've you've got to just really Practice a lot of self-deception To end up at that point.

You really do I Go on we still have a long way to go But I am hopeful.

I am grateful for this conference and the amazing people who made it happen I believe it will save lives restore families and make a positive difference for the full inclusion of our LGBTQ QQ plus siblings in the church.

So in other words that gospel stuff We're getting rid of it We've got more work to do But it's not the gospel that will save lives.

It's not the gospel to restore families It will not be the gospel to make a positive difference for the full inclusion of blah blah blah blah It's this kind of stuff.

That's it's it's not Christianity.

It's this new religion as My friend Sally Gary wrote this conference was a gift a costly gift Risking reputation and safety and status and yes, potentially livelihood and security of family Well, if that's what it costs for apostasy, that's a good thing.

Apostasy should be costly really should be Really should be that is certainly true But our LGBTQ plus siblings are worth the risk Their lives are infinitely more valuable than whatever status security or financial costs may come I pray that every pastor and Christian in the world would come to believe the truth that Jesus loves LGBTQ plus folks and they should be fully included in every part of the church This was a step in the right direction.

Of course, these people do not believe in repentance because they don't know the gospel They'll never use the term repentance Jesus loves every repentant LGBTQ plus person and will include them in his church because he will change them Such were some of you not such are some of you so Zach Lambert and all these false teachers false prophets They will receive their reward They will You you do not pretend to be a Christian and lie about the gospel in this way.

You just don't do it There is a price to be paid and before the judgment seat of Christ But the point is here is a wild-eyed leftist progressivist and he's like the whole thing was affirming And it was It was that's that's what it was all about.

So when we when we looked at this when we Saw this coming we tried to say but you know, you look you look at all the people you've got speaking You got gushy and all the rest is but it This is not a middle-of-the-road this is not a mediating position and Here someone way over on the left goes it wasn't It was fully affirming of all the aspects and you got to understand it's one thing to be affirming of Homosexuality but to then go to redefining marriage and then go to transgenderism, I mean How anyone can pretend I'll go orange today anyone sort of colorful.

Anyways, anyone can pretend to hold this in her hand And say this doesn't tell you That God made men and women good grief.

Did you notice that? Did you see the Hindu Prime Minister of the United Kingdom within the past week? Stood in front of microphones and and and I could play it I saw it on Twitter just reason just a few hours ago and said don't be bullied into being forced to believe That men can become women and women can become men men are men and women are women and that's all there is to it Not even Trump could say that it almost makes me go might there be a Smidgen of sanity left out there.

Oh I just thought it was hiding in the woods but you can't hold you can't hold this in your hand and and defend any kind of Transgender Ideology you can't So Where where will Andy Stanley be going from here? I don't know.

I Don't know.

I think he's I think that was the last floodgate and any last semblance Is just gonna be washed away.

He can't he can't stop it.

He can't stop it.

I I Think he's gonna kind of kind of pretend.

Okay, we got that done.

We're gonna do other stuff now he's gonna try to pretend but It's just gonna be too much Too much pushing on them to really really keep it from they're just gonna go all the way They'll end up going all the way and of course, there's a network of churches.

I I Saw folks on Twitter Talking about just how widely Distributed their materials are and how they influence so many others I Forget which year it was.

I think it was 2017 28 maybe even 2016.

I was I started talking about the tsunami of apostasy and And we're seeing it.

We are most definitely seeing it taking place Speaking of a tsunami of apostasy, of course, dr.

Kevin.

I'm young who I've challenged a debate, but he will not Especially when he claims to be an expert in biblical languages in church history I figure I can hold my own in those areas myself far more published than he is in those areas, but Kevin M young Tweeted recently and I'm gonna keep calling them tweets What am I supposed to say? He X'd recently or just posted Posted posted is what we did on BBS is in the 1980s.

Okay It's a very boring word So he tweeted recently the original sin was certainty Saying the Bible clearly says is to pick fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and bad again Each day we are tempted to believe that we can sit in God's seat at the table.

Don't bite.

Well, you got to give him props for Ease of expression, I guess You know that fits real nicely.

It sounds real nice and remember I did the debate last year with the guy and and I'd actually have to have the shirt in here to Remember his name, but he had written a book About What was it called a Sola uncertainty or something like that.

It was it was all about this same idea that If you say that God has made any revelation that is clear Then you're playing God and You don't understand the nature of Scripture and the purposes of Scripture and things like that And of course they can point to people because people make all sorts of dumb statements all the time About You know, you know a Kenneth Copeland.

Okay, you know, he'll make he'll make absurd statements and blame it on the Bible all the time and so it's easier than to point to that kind of stuff and the Paula White's and the Kenneth Copeland's and the Kenneth Hagin's and the Jesse Duplantis's CCC's and all the rest of these people It's real easy to point to people like that and go say hey there.

There you go as If what that means is That when Luke said I've written these things so that you might know for certain you might have certainty That that means that You can't actually have certain That's where they're that's where they're going so good old Kevin I'm young I don't follow him any longer because it's just But every once in a while somebody will retweet something and that's where this came across.

I am Thing here, um well once again Has any is this happening to anybody else? I you know, I started using tweet deck last year They keep changing it obviously and and a lot of the changes have been good Okay, I like being able to edit stuff.

I can't do it in tweet deck I've got a I've got to put it into regular Twitter and then edit it Um, right, you can't edit replies either And but recently starting last week I'll look over at my main column and I'll start reading something and It'll actually be of interest.

I want to continue reading it and then all of a sudden it disappears and Something new appears in its place and I'm just like and I've wasted time trying to find it But it's gone and you're halfway through an interesting sentence you really wanted to follow up on it and it's just gone It's a Little frustrating But but there you go I'm Noticing a bunch of stuff that has appeared since I last commented Oh There's a tweet saying someone is nominating me for speaker of the house That's um Well given I don't think they changed the dress code for the house like they did for the Senate So I'm not sure I'd fit in the house Yeah, I heard I heard about that yeah Because I I'm thinking I'm thinking the house representative filled with coogies would be pretty Pretty epically wild what are you doing? Oh You you put you put that high dollar value 4k camera on yourself and Then you don't use it.

I don't understand why but Of course, I can't see it because someone can't get the monitor working in here.

Yeah, but Yeah, yes, so That should tell you something about the nature of coogies and the fact that they would probably fit right in With that group, that's a that's just putting that that is a really bad argument.

I'm sorry that that's a Kevin M Young level argument He he was really thinking oh, I don't think so Okay white for speaker of the house, all right Bible care and share put that one up there there you go Yeah, there's gonna be a lot of stuff that I'm gonna be having to look at here I see somebody talking about John Cooper's book What Woke wimpy and weak.

I think woke weak and wimpy or something along those lines Yeah, that's gonna be we're gonna have him on like I said, November 16th On the program.

He's gonna be joining us to talk about all that stuff.

So and he goes after all these things, too Okay, let me switch over to The last topic here, I am glad that that's a commentary showed up I I'm gonna have some and I I can't spend too much time with it But it is since it is relevant to the upcoming debates.

I let me just mention something There's there's all sorts of people who are suggesting.

Well, you need to bait this third person you debate that person Between now in February I I'm sorry.

I Have the next two Sundays at Apologia My sermon topic this week is going to be very difficult dealing with a church discipline issue and then I Have a we have a leadership thing the next week and then that puts us halfway through October That gives me only three months For five debates and I have to have for example One of the ways we one of the things I had to agree to do to get Dale Tuggy to even debate Was to give him my opening presentation by February 1st, I never put Keynote stuff together that early never You know, he's he's a completely a manuscript guy he is completely based upon reading Stuff and I that's not me.

So Just so much on such a wide variety of topics That I just have to be disciplined and go no I have lined out an Amazingly wide variety of topics and soul scripture to purgatory to is Jesus Yahweh to to on Calvinism with from completely different perspectives and If I Give in to the temptation To be going all sorts of other direction and we're gonna continue doing this program and I'm not just gonna talk about those topics though You can sort of guess There will be more discussion of quotes.

Like I just gave you from the drone biblical commentary and things like that and For those of you who are new new or newer If you go back to 2009 2000 well pretty much is 2009.

There were all sorts of programs Where we listened to Bart Ehrman lectures Bart Ehrman debates and Respond to things why because I was preparing to debate Bart Ehrman and we did that debate in 2009 Spent at least six months in Preparation for that.

He spent zero time in preparation for that.

I Because Well, we don't want to go into all that So we've done this in the past and if I'm wise I will be Looking at these things and dealing with this that doesn't mean we're not gonna address any other topic We will keep talking about what's going on, you know with You can't help but Be looking at the weaponization of the legal system in the West especially in the United States and what that could mean We've got to deal with all this Christian nationalism stuff And I find myself very much in the middle getting bombarded from both sides Because I'm very much with the commitment that Secular worldview Cannot maintain a culture it is a commitment to the culture of death and will destroy human life and human flourishing and So no, we cannot continue in a system that allows drag queen story hour.

That's abusive It's abusive children.

It is based upon a rejection of Man as creating image of God, so I'm totally online there My post-millennialism tells me that there will be a day When according to the promises of Scripture the coastlands will seek for his Torah his law What would cause that to happen a massive work of the Spirit of God a massive work the Spirit of God and So People assume that if that's where you are and you agree.

Yeah, we can't keep going the way we're going right now.

Okay that secularism has eviscerated the foundations of the Constitution United States the founders themselves said this is a document for a religious and moral people and when you make Irreligion or anti-religion and immorality the new good Okay, I get it but at the same time I push back against Stephen Wolfe and I push back against a form of sacralism So much that all he can do is mock the term sacralism.

That's just 20th century garbage Okay, I'm not impressed really not impressed at all But I've been talking about sacralism for decades.

I don't care where Stephen Wolfe has been I've been talking about it for decades as have other individuals and I Push back and go look If you don't have that massive change that comes from The Puritan hope ever seen the book Puritan hope It's about post-millennialism.

It's about the Puritans.

Hope and Why they did the things they did and why they were willing to not See the accomplishment of those things, but look to the future for those things.

You might want to look at the book Without that work if you're talking about trying to Christianize if you're talking about trying to Rule from the top down.

I mean, I'm I am literally seeing people talking about having a a What was what was the guy they were referring to wasn't Hitler thankfully, I'm sorry yeah a Christian Franco a Christian Franco We need a strong Christian leader that will in essence essence whip everybody in line and I go You know, we've been there and done that and we've gotten the t-shirt and especially my forefathers did I'd like to ask a question of all the Stephen Wolfe Christian nationalist type guys Okay, I'd like to ask you a question You've probably never heard of Fritz Erba But look him up and find out what happened to him and And answer me honestly Was it right or wrong? that Fritz Erba was imprisoned and Kept there till he died If it was right, I'd like to know the principles because I know what Luther thought Luther was a sacralist Calvin was a sacred Calvin laid the foundations of the destruction of his own sacralism, but he was still a practicing sacralist in his life so Luther Knew exactly where Fritz Erba was he had been there.

He hid in that castle.

He had he had looked down that hole He knew it was there He knew where he was and he felt that it was right for him to be there Because Fritz Erba threatened Christendom The social order Luther had a you know, go listen to my lecture on the two Luther's Luther had a deep and abiding fear of chaos breaking out and Chaos is not a Christian virtue.

Okay, no one's saying that it is But he had a deep and abiding fear that he would be blamed For chaos breaking out and So he could make a political argument as to why Fritz Erba should not be allowed to spread his poison in the society of Germany in the 1530s and He could argue that they need to be fighting the Muslim invasion and that this weakened the the ability to do that and There's lots of things that could be argued but Answer the question was it right for Fritz Erba to be stuck in that Hole in the ground for seven years till he died for not baptizing his babies For believing the New Testament.

This is a Christian man.

No one was questioning that he was a Christian man It was just what he believed the New Testament to teach which had been translated right there by Martin Luther the decade before Which is the irony of all this if it was right Upon what basis was it right if it was wrong Then what is the basis of saying that it's wrong? for a Christian prince to do what the Lutherans did with Fritz Erba That's a that's a question.

I'd like to hear the answer to Because you see sacralism involves the fundamental violation of the differing spheres of sovereignty between the state church family it is a Destruction of those distinctions and The history of sacralism from say the days of Augustine onward is A constant back-and-forth where the balance between church and state changes So there are periods of time where the state predominates the the church is utterly under its control There's a serious degradation there and Then you have periods of papal supremacy where the church can make the Emperor stand in the snow outside the papal residence Seeking mercy from the state from the church, but it's an inevitable Constant back-and-forth that you can't you can't stop and I've been saying look and Until there is that tremendous work the Spirit of God even arguing about how to avoid that kind of stuff.

It's just silly There's no reason to be doing it.

All it does is create division It's not going to accomplish anything no one's taking over Right now it seems to me this system is going to collapse and take a lot with it And so the question is What's going to come out of the come out of the ashes of the current secular failure? the demonstration of the rebellion That is part of man's Situation so along with this Stephen Wolfe and others From like American reformer expressed really dismissive Attitudes toward Cornelius van Tilt, Greg Bonson, Scott Oliphant, John Frame Everyone who has practiced presuppositional apologetics for quite some time and I've said more than once It's been cool to be a presuppositionalist for a while but There is there there are certain commitments that have to be pretty deeply Grounded for you to remain true to that perspective and And No Thomist can be a presuppositionalist Anybody who's read Van Til? Knows that he was no fan.

No, no fan of Thomas Aquinas and of course the big thing today is for people who have Read very little of Thomas and very little Van Til to be very confident that Van Til didn't understand Thomas And Again when it comes Thomas you can you can pick and choose from such a wide variety of Thomistic scholarship You can always find somebody to say what you want to say anyway This You know someone had said well, you know, here's the things he's saying Stephen Wolfe is saying about biblicism Presuppositionalism You need to debate him Well, there are a number of topics I would be more than happy to debate Stephen Wolfe on That he will not debate on And it's because we come at this from completely different perspectives a Stephen Wolfe book is Almost when it comes to biblical argumentation is almost a vacuum and He says from the start this that's not what I'm intending to do.

Okay, great There's nothing that I address that that's not the direction I come from So I don't I just cannot imagine how any of this would ever work because you have a Self-professed reformed biblicist and he thinks biblicism is foolishness Of course how he's defining it.

Who knows I Mean most of the definitions we see floating around out there so ridiculous that it's difficult not to laugh when you read them But my argument would be I'll be happy to debate Stephen Wolfe on Presuppositionalism and its biblical nature All he wants to do is say well, but it's new and it's novel so secularism Don't you don't you get that don't you guys get this all of that just even will but all you anti-vantillian anti-presuppositional Sit down and shut up for a second Okay, just sit down and shut up for a second.

Stop with all your babbling and listen for a moment The world that John Calvin I believe if John Calvin were alive today and he was he would read deeply in the secular perspective I Believe given the things that he says about scriptural supremacy and the nature of man and the Institute's He says all sorts of stuff.

That's very very Consistent with a presuppositional perspective, but he's in a sacral context He's not dealing with atheists in fact no one until the 19th century was dealing With the world that Darwin created you need to understand the watershed that Darwin If you don't get that then you're not even You're obviously not an apologist.

You're obviously not dealing with these things.

You haven't thought these things through Darwin kicked open a door Up until that point Any Christian apologist was dealing with some kind of theistic system? it might be radically wild and and The the nature of the gods minimized, but they still had to explain the existence of life Once Darwin comes along all of a sudden.

Hey, hey Look what we can do now It changed everything It changed everything it changed the level in the human mind At which we are having to engage with the rebellion of man it's at a deeper level now than ever was before and so true full-on secularism an Antitheistic perspective That is what is being fed What's being injected forcibly into our youth today in pretty much every? public school classroom I Was I did a walk yesterday morning instead of a ride and I saw these two kids come out of their house and Walking toward the local school, and I'm just sort of like well There they go to be conformed to the image of the state Yep, nothing nothing going into the head there then but anyway This is what we're dealing with today and that is a completely different context a completely different context than the Reformers were dealing with there anybody was before Darwin and so if you don't see that what what has to be done is is to have an Epistemology based upon the certainty of God's revelation and that's a grant to man the autonomy That is absolutely necessary within Thomistic theology That's absolutely necessary within non Presuppositional apologetics to say to man it's up to you to make these decisions You're not understanding the centrality of the biblical teaching that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom That all the treasures wisdom knowledge are hidden in Jesus Christ You don't understand those things you're not going to be able to deal with those fundamental levels of rebellion in the anthropology of man from a biblical perspective Now obviously those are not reformed this isn't even this isn't even relevant to you your your anthropology is Unbiblical So we can't even go there.

But for those who claim to be reformed claim to be good Westminster men well, even the Westminster was written before Darwin and if you can't see how Darwin has completely changed the very context in which language is being used I I don't know what to say to you than to try to point you to the obvious realities of what's going on around you So again, what would what would a debate even be? I mean, I Don't think he's going to debate is presuppositional ism consistent with biblical revelation Because everything he's been saying is all this is just all modern Modern stuff and you're not really reformed I mean reform I've got reformed orthodoxy as if there is a single thing of reformed orthodoxy But again, that was formed before Darwin we're talking about today.

We're talking about right now We're talking about taking this Bible and making it Applicable to where we are now not by changing it But by being consistent with what it teaches about who God is a new man is how do you do that now that we're dealing? With a world that starts with the idea that they are an accident with no meaning and That language can be changed right left and center whatever you've got to deal with that at a level that's Classical apologetics cannot deal with you can't go there.

So I don't even know what the debate would be but you want to debate that If the thesis is presuppositional apologetics is consistent with biblical revelation on Nature of God nature of man defend that one easily easily or if you want to turn around Thomas's Theistic proofs Are consistent with biblical revelation, I'll deny that It'd be also easily is inconsistent with reforms Soteriology and everything related to it as well, but the the boogeyman down at the bottom of the page is I don't reject the term biblicist and I'm not going to I'm reformed biblicist.

I've already defined what that is.

I can give you plenty of examples Calvin was one too.

I can prove that I can prove that It's not that difficult to do so There you go Some things to be thinking about so that's the last program before our celebration next week I would assume Since I leave I think Thursday for this thing.

We'll try to get at least one program in next week.

Probably have a Rundown on What happened over the weekend? I'm sure there'll be lots of things to talk about and be thankful for and all the rest that kind of neat fun stuff but then like I said, I have the next two Sundays as far as preaching and apologia and At least this coming Sunday's gonna be a challenge it really It's gonna be a challenge.

And so for those of you who are friends and supporters pray for that That particular presentation as well.

All right.

Thanks for listening to the program today We will see you Lord willing next week.