White & Durbin Respond To Trent Horne on Sola Scriptura

Apologia Studios

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

00:06

I would say if the authorities didn't want us involved in the public square, they ought not to have crucified

00:11

Jesus in the public square. Use humanistic principles. Well, I would say the same idea. I would say that.

00:17

I would say what's the problem with stardust bumping into stardust? In the cosmic picture, none.

00:22

There's no problem. In the cosmic picture, it won't matter. No, Mr.

00:29

President, you are not protecting reproductive freedom. You are authorizing the destruction of freedom for one million little human beings every year.

00:49

I'm sorry, my friends, but I am tired of seeing Jesus presented as a weak beggar.

00:57

He is a powerful savior, and the gospel is not a suggestion.

01:03

It is a command. Reverend Moller, don't you sympathize with that?

01:13

I sympathize with every single human heart wishing to know the one true and living God, but I believe there's only one way that that can happen through Jesus Christ, and the gospel is about repenting of sin, not celebrating it.

01:26

Right now, you're on the threshold of an amazing adventure. We will explore the spiritual abyss.

01:34

You have not experienced this before. You're gonna love it.

02:11

You notice that we are sans the bear. He is sick right now, and he's got that awful flu that I had, and a lot of people have across the country right now.

02:20

Actually, it's a bad one this year. So he's out today, but I have a very special guest, and that's Pastor James.

02:26

Pastor James, you guys can get him at Alpha Omega Ministries, aomen .org, or Alpha Omega Ministries on YouTube.

02:33

You guys all know who he is, Pastor James, elder at Apologia Church. That's right. And that's now officially updated.

02:39

As a result of the confusion. As a result of the program we will be discussing today.

02:45

That's right. That's right. So just a quick update so everyone knows what's going on. If you would, go to Apologia Studios on YouTube and check through the feed.

02:54

You're going to be seeing over the next couple of weeks all kinds of content related to what we just recently did in Oklahoma.

02:59

We were just in Oklahoma with Free the States and Operation Save America and other ministries and organizations working for justice for the pre -born in Oklahoma and some good stuff we were able to put together from what happened there.

03:11

Be in prayer for Senator Joseph Silk in Oklahoma, who is working for a bill of equality in Oklahoma for the pre -born.

03:19

And it's a consistent bill of equality. And so be in prayer for him. Be in prayer for SB13. And again, if you guys have questions about what is that all about, just go look through our feed.

03:28

You'll see a lot of the videos we've recently done on the subject. So just pointing in that direction so you know what's going on. And for all of our friends and brothers and sisters in Christ and supporters and ministry partners that are in the

03:40

U .K. and the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Scotland, we're coming. We are coming to Northern Ireland, the

03:49

Republic. I have to make sure I say it right so I don't offend anybody. That's right. You'll still offend somebody. Yeah, okay. As much as I can,

03:56

I'll try to be all things to all people. So Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, and Scotland, the

04:02

U .K., we are going to be there starting Monday. We're flying out.

04:07

And so we are connected to some great churches out in that direction. And we've spent a lot of time out there actually trying to help to keep the criminalization of abortion alive in Northern and in the

04:19

Republic. But, of course, in God's sovereign control of the world, he didn't allow that to happen.

04:25

And so now we're going back to those places to meet with those churches to teach on how to do abortion ministry, how to save lives, preach the gospel in this context, and hopefully work the way back towards criminalization and ending abortion in those countries.

04:41

And so that's where we're at. So we're today on the show going to do a response to a response.

04:48

Right, right. I mean, this is the best you can do aside from direct debates,

04:53

I think. But what's interesting is Trent Horn of Catholic Answers did something similar to what we both do, but I do a lot, where he actually decided to respond to specific portions of the sermon you did about a month, a little bit more, maybe, at Apologia on the subject of sola scriptura.

05:20

And, of course, I was there for that. And, in fact, I think you referred to me a number of times. I think I did, yeah. Motioned over toward where I was.

05:28

But it must have made enough of an influence as to warrant a response.

05:36

And it was a very interesting response because it was very different than what the response would have been 20 years ago.

05:46

And the reason for that is 20 years ago, and even more than that, when

05:53

I first started engaging Catholic Answers, some of the primary people, obviously the founder of Catholic Answers, a guy by the name of Carl Keating.

06:03

And Keating had been encountering a lot of anti -Catholicism from what we would call today an

06:10

IFB -type perspective, an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist -type perspective. And so initially,

06:16

Catholic Answers was focused upon providing responses to that. But then something interesting happened. The vice president for a long time there was a fellow by the name of Patrick Madrid.

06:25

He's still on the air, but he's, I think, a cradle Catholic. And I think Keating was as well.

06:31

But then they ran into someone named Jerry Matitix. And Jerry Matitix was

06:36

John Gerstner's personal assistant. And if you're not familiar with Gerstner, he was a mentor to R .C.

06:42

Sproul. So Matitix was the first ordained

06:47

PCA minister to convert to Roman Catholicism in the history of that denomination.

06:54

And he was all but dissertation at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. And right around that same time, you have

07:02

Scott Hahn, who is still one of the biggest names in Roman Catholic theology in the United States today,

07:07

University of Steubenville, who came out together with Jerry.

07:15

And Jerry started working at Catholic Answers. And for a while, he was their poster boy.

07:20

I still have copies of this rock where there's this big picture of him, and the background is a church and stuff like that.

07:26

And he says, I'm the one that used to bring your loved ones out of the church, etc., etc. Now, we don't actually have any evidence he was actually involved in any of that before his conversion, but that's another story.

07:35

But as it may, the point is they're both reformed. And then Robert St. Genes came out around the same time, and he had had some experience as a

07:44

Presbyterian as well. The point is there was a reformed understanding on the part of these people who had become

07:49

Roman Catholics. And so a number of the debates that I did, for example, with Jerry, more than once on solo scriptura, these people had an understanding, not necessarily an accurate representation of, but an understanding of a reformed theology and worldview, which understood how we see

08:09

Scripture as being sufficient to inform an entire worldview because of its nature being theanustos, being

08:19

God -breathed. And there is nothing else that the church possesses that is theanustos.

08:25

And therefore, if it is God speaking, then on an epistemological level, on the authority level, then everything else has to be seen in light of its ultimacy.

08:36

So a reformed person understands how it is that we do not say that Scripture is true because this warrants it, and that warrants it, and that warrants it over there.

08:50

Because once I say its truth can be established by appeal to a higher authority, then

08:57

I'm saying everything I've referred to is actually a higher authority in Scripture, which can't be if it's

09:02

God speaking. That's an epistemological point. Exactly. And it's one that reformed people understand because you can't read

09:11

Calvin, you can't read anyone who came after him without recognizing just how very important this is.

09:18

Well, the reason I mention all this is that flavored the debates that we did with Catholic Answers back then, but that was a long time ago.

09:26

Right. I can't remember exactly when the last time I debated

09:31

Catholic Answers. We didn't do that many. I mean, we did one debate with Trent Horn at G3.

09:37

That was on a completely different subject. Right. That was on could a person lose their salvation, basically. But those old debates were literally back in the early 90s, early mid 90s.

09:48

Available on your channel. Yeah, they are. Well, the ones that got videotaped and stuff like that, yeah. That was a long time ago.

09:55

So what struck both of us in listening to Trent Horn's response is

10:01

Trent Horn clearly is not formally reformed. And so it is interesting to see how a

10:09

Roman Catholic would hear what we were saying. And it surprised us more than once.

10:15

We were like, oh, that's interesting. How did he come up with that understanding of that?

10:21

And again, it's because it is the Roman Catholic listening to the reformed person, and they just, there is no, the closest parallel to our understanding of how scripture functions would be the full magisterium of the church and the papacy in the sense of ultimate epistemological significance.

10:40

But even then, that's not there because that's not God speaking. I mean, for some people it's pretty close, but that's not

10:46

God speaking, and it's not a record of what God did with his people over literally a millennium and a half with all these different people.

11:01

He has given us this revelation. And so there's just nothing, there's nothing that is a true parallel.

11:08

And so when we heard all this, we're like, we've got to respond to this. And I did respond to one section, which I think we're skipping.

11:15

I think on Augustine? No, on the Apocrypha. Yes, you did. Right. Also, you did some stuff recently on Augustine.

11:21

Oh, that was different, but that wasn't really in regards to this specifically. But yeah, I did. But I specifically responded to comments that he made about the deuterocanonical books, as they would call them, the

11:31

Apocrypha, as we would refer to them. But the rest of it, I sort of left so that we could generalize things together.

11:37

Yeah. So for those of you guys who are watching right now and you're wondering, what do you mean when you say epistemology? When you talk about epistemology, you're talking about knowing.

11:45

How do you know? It's the theory of knowing. And this is something that is not just in the

11:51

Christian realm. This is something that you study in philosophy. You study, how do I know something? How do

11:57

I know something to be true? There's different theories of knowledge in terms of certainty, whether you can have certainty at all.

12:04

There's theories of knowledge that have to do with, you have to study it, to see it, to reason, to touch it, to taste it, to smell it.

12:12

Some of it is very personal or subjective theories of knowledge. But it goes down the line.

12:18

This is not just a conflict between Protestants and those who would align themselves with Rome.

12:26

This is a very important discussion. And when we talk about the importance of epistemology, I want to just start this at the outset because it was the grounding from which

12:36

I was talking about in that one stand -alone sermon. It was sort of the grounding of it all that I had touched on and I did explain.

12:45

And I explained that we were approaching it from a biblical and philosophical perspective. But we're talking about the issue of how do you know something to be true?

12:52

How can you have certainty about something? Now, I want to just say this at the outset. The Bible doesn't give us all information about everything.

13:01

And so there are certain elements of life and the world that we live in and how we live and move and operate in this world where we don't necessarily have a direct answer from God.

13:12

But we can, I believe, appeal to principles in Scripture and say, well, here's a principle in Scripture I have certainty about.

13:18

And I think that applies in this situation. So there will be instances in life where we're like, well, I don't really know.

13:23

Is the Bible really sufficiently clear on that point? Can we address this issue? And can we have real certainty here?

13:31

But there are other issues where Scripture is abundantly clear on where you can't have certainty on.

13:37

And that's an epistemological certainty that we would claim as Christians. We would say, no, I'm certain about that.

13:42

I know this to be true. And that's the standard because God says. So, for example,

13:48

I'm to love my neighbor as I love myself rather than eat my neighbor. And it's funny because when we talk about the conflict between, say, us and a materialist or a naturalist, a humanist, someone who believes in macroevolution and that sort of worldview and perspective of origins, you can ask that question.

14:07

You know, ought I to love my neighbor or ought I to eat my neighbor? Or can eating my neighbor be an expression of love for my neighbor?

14:14

Exactly. And can I live for hedonistic principles? Can I live for pleasure -seeking?

14:19

There's lots of sick people, disturbed people, evil people, that do this and they're pleased by it.

14:26

I was just watching just recently. I came to my feet. I was like, oh my goodness. I don't know why I was watching it, but I was like, this is fascinating.

14:31

It was the BTK killer. Bind, torture, and kill killer. They caught him after many, many years.

14:38

And the things that he did to people was, it's hard to even imagine. So, I'm watching him because he finally came to court and he just confessed.

14:47

Rather than go through the trial process, he's like, yeah, I did it. So, in order to actually bite down, the court biting down on the issue, they had to actually hear his testimony for each individual person in charge.

14:58

So, he's in court. Basically, the judge says, okay, here's this woman. You've been charged with her murder, with malice, a forethought, and everything else.

15:06

And so, he says, so, please explain. How do I know that you really did this? And he had explained details of everything he did to these women and children and men, and it was horrific.

15:15

But this is the point of epistemology. And this gets down to the issue of Sola Scriptura and what's underneath it.

15:21

How do I have certainty and how do I know? That's the issue. And I'll just end it on this. He was very happy, cold, calculated, fine with it.

15:30

He acted like an accountant as he talked about what he did. He's like, yeah, I walked in and at one point, she was really upset that I was there in her house.

15:38

And so, I tried to calm her down and give her a glass of water, tried to make her comfortable. And then I put a bag over her head and I suffocated her.

15:46

And it was just cold, calculated. So, the question is, in terms of an epistemological question, are you certain that was a moral evil?

15:52

So, I would say from a Christian perspective, only the Christian worldview can provide epistemological certainty on that issue of, is that absolutely morally evil?

16:02

Because God has spoken to the issue. Because there are people with competing ethical systems and competing epistemological issues.

16:12

The issue of Sola Scriptura is not just about, by the way, what's in this book.

16:18

It's about what God revealed in history, whether in Scripture or whether it was oral, right?

16:25

And we're going to address this. Trent Horn brings up spaces where the apostles are speaking, giving divine revelation.

16:31

It's not written down. The question is, it's an epistemological question. What's the reference point?

16:37

It's the voice of God versus the other. And where is the voice of God? That's one of the major issues between ourselves and those who are in subjection to Roman Catholic claims.

16:49

Because that voice of God, we would say, has to first of all, that's what theanustos means, breathe out by God.

16:57

But there is a distribution of that authority. Because remember, this is the written tradition.

17:05

From their perspective, there's an oral tradition. So that's just a part of a larger tradition that must have the same level of authority.

17:12

If that's a part of something, then the whole has to still have that level of authority. So you have a diminishment in essence.

17:20

And of course, in the modern world, with everything going on with the papacy, and who knows what the current pope actually believes about almost anything, in that kind of a context, there has been a tremendous erosion in the ability to have any kind of meaningful definition of what

17:35

Roman Catholicism actually teaches. Right, yes. So that is another of the things that has changed since the years when, on a regular basis, every six months or so, we'd be having these debates with Roman Catholic apologists.

17:50

That was back with John Paul II, and there was a lot of stability as to the papacy and issues like that.

17:58

That's no longer the case. You've got two living popes, and they obviously don't believe the same things. That's right.

18:04

Yeah, it's a totally different situation. So there's differing factions within what people would refer to as Roman Catholic.

18:12

Oh, the divergence of perspectives has only grown since I was initially dealing with Roman Catholicism.

18:20

They had their liberals then. I mean, obviously, ever since Vatican II, you have a massive contingent of liberals within the magisterium of the

18:28

Roman Catholic Church, but they have, I think, in essence, taken over. And so you still, today, you just have a massively wide expression of beliefs within Roman Catholicism.

18:38

Well, thank you so much for having an interpreter define for you what's the truth. It hasn't helped much. How's that working out for you?

18:44

Yeah, because the issue is epistemological, and it really comes down to what's your reference point? A word is principium.

18:50

That's a word that comes across in all kinds of different discussions. But we need to get to this. So I have broken this up.

18:56

I hope we get to all of them. We're going to do our best. We talked. We had lunch this week, and we did talk about we're going to try to stay as concise as possible.

19:03

It may be an impossibility for us. I'm not sure if I can reach your knee. Yeah, kick me from there. Just throw something at me, or just throw your hat at me.

19:11

Okay, so here we go. Let me go ahead and start moving through here right now. This will be the first one right here, the first clip we have.

19:20

We may or may not play through all of it. So by the way— Before you start that, by the way, he's going to say at one point, and this is important to clear up,

19:27

I think, at the beginning. Even when we were talking about other groups, he kept thinking that any discussion of sola scriptura had to be relevant to Roman Catholicism specifically, as if we were attacking

19:36

Rome. Well, we're not saying you should worship another god, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. What we're going to be starting, probably have to start right from the beginning here, is emphasizing sola scriptura is not for us an attack upon somebody else.

19:48

It's first and foremost a definitional, foundational thing for us. It's a positive thing.

19:55

Yes. And we recognize that there are many people that from Trent's perspective would be non -Catholics who do not hold to sola scriptura, and they can't hold to sola scriptura because they do not have a sufficiently high view of Scripture.

20:10

You have to believe that this revelation is self -consistent to be able to believe in sola scriptura in any meaningful fashion.

20:17

That's right. And so I realize he probably encounters a lot of people who have all sorts of different perspectives, but it's important to recognize that sola scriptura requires the highest view of scriptura, and we obviously believe also not only just in sola scriptura, but in tota scriptura, all of Scripture, which means we have the highest view of Scripture.

20:40

It is literally God speaking. Not everybody outside the Roman Catholic Church actually believes that, obviously.

20:45

That's very important to define right at the beginning. Okay. All right. So here we go. This is the first clip.

20:51

I'm just going to focus on those parts related to the question, does the Bible teach the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura?

20:57

So in this part, Pastor Durbin talks about how sola scriptura distinguishes Protestants from Catholics and Mormons and Muslims, but then he takes it further than I've actually seen a

21:05

Protestant pastor ever do when it comes to what the Bible alone teaches us. But how about other questions that sola scriptura actually does connect to?

21:16

How about the claims of Alcoholics Anonymous? How about the claims of Alcoholics Anonymous? Is addiction a disease?

21:25

Is it merely a brain disease of addiction? They make all kinds of claims in Alcoholics Anonymous. Sola scriptura does actually relate to that as well.

21:32

Do I listen to the voice of Dr. Bob about addiction ultimately, or do I listen to the voice of God in his word about our nature, what the problem of addiction is, how do we define addiction, how do we get free from addiction ultimately?

21:44

We have to also ask the question... I would be really concerned about someone taking this advice and doing something that's unhealthy for them.

21:51

I agree that sometimes people justify certain sins by just saying, well, I'm addicted and I can't help it.

21:57

No, you are a human being. You have a rational mind. You have a soul. You have free will.

22:03

But at the same time, we can do things to mess up our brains, the neurochemistry in our brains, to become physically or chemically addicted to something.

22:12

And if we don't recognize that, that sometimes we might need medicine, we might need kinds of treatment that were not available in biblical times in order to no longer become addicted to certain substances or even to certain behaviors.

22:27

So this is a good example of where some prior study of Apologia Church or myself and what we believe in this area would have helped

22:41

Trent out a lot. And it wouldn't have taken long to sort of work through things, to just look up Geoff Durbin addiction.

22:50

And this might just help Trent. He seems like a really humble man who's willing to be corrected in some areas. And so our church actually was born out of me being a chaplain at a hospital.

23:00

I was a pastor in another church at the time, but also I was a chaplain at a hospital, a drug rehab hospital, nurses, doctors, medical detox.

23:09

I mean, it was a hospital facility. And so I did that four years full time as a chaplain at the hospital.

23:14

And that's really where Apologia Church came from. So many people came to Christ at the hospital that we needed a place to care for them and shepherd them.

23:22

And I was sent by the elders of my church, laid hands on me. And so that's where Apologia Church came to life.

23:28

And it would have helped to do some, just a little bit of study on us and what I believe on this issue. First, when

23:34

I talk about the issue of Sola Scriptura as something that matters in the context of the discussion of Alcoholics Anonymous, I'm talking about epistemological issues, first and foremost.

23:47

How do I know what the problem of drunkenness is? Right? Is drunkenness a sin?

23:53

Or is drunkenness a brain disease? Because really this is a fairly recent comer.

23:59

The term alcoholic is a newly coined term in fairly recent history that was a specific attempt to move away from a biblical worldview approach to the issue of drunkenness and addiction to move to the brain disease model of addiction.

24:16

Alcoholics. That's why you hear alcoholics and AA saying things 25 years after not touching a drop.

24:22

They'll be sitting in a group on a Wednesday and they open up, Hi, I'm Jeff and I'm an alcoholic. The reason they're doing that is because the worldview.

24:29

That Dr. Bob, Alcoholics Anonymous, H -A -N -A, wherever you go, has a worldview as to what the problem of addiction is.

24:36

And what they say it is is that it's a brain disease of addiction. And once an addict, always an addict.

24:42

You have two quotes. And these are just famous quotes. Fake it until you make it because you are never not going to have the brain disease of addiction.

24:48

No matter the neurological issues, no matter the toxicity issues that may be overcome through medical detox, it's a brain disease of addiction model.

24:58

And it is fundamentally at war with the biblical worldview in terms of what addiction is, drunkenness, those sorts of things.

25:06

So again, this would be something I think Trent might want to look into to get a little more details and a little more history, not only from us, but also the area of the world of addiction.

25:14

But one of the things you'll always find in probably any lecture or message I've ever given on this issue, and I know you've heard me say this a number of times,

25:21

I know you have experience with us in terms of us talking about we have this person struggling with addiction.

25:27

They've come in. What's the first thing we say we're going to do with them? Take them to detox. Because you can have a biblical worldview that defines the issue biblically.

25:35

This is sin fundamentally. Drunkenness is a sin. The pursuit of anything in place of God as an idol is a sin.

25:41

Ultimately, those sorts of things we're addressing. But we recognize that we're not just have a spiritual essence, but we have a physical essence.

25:49

And we recognize that the problem of addiction is a problem that also actually impacts our physical body and our brains.

25:56

And there's an issue of toxicity. And by the way, I will say that this is not something that wasn't known by people in history.

26:03

Pastors and Christians, for the longest time, even before medical detox, used to have like a bottle of whiskey or alcohol they would keep with them if they had ministry in the area of addiction.

26:13

Because they recognized that if somebody, if you want to minister to somebody and say he's been drinking a bottle of whiskey a day, you can't just simply say to that person, repent and believe the gospel.

26:25

Maybe God does open their eyes and that moment opens their heart and they believe in Christ. But they'll die if you just take the bottle away from them.

26:33

You can physically die from detoxification of alcohol. So pastors and missionaries in this kind of a context would actually taper people down using shots of whiskey or other alcohol to help them to sort of come down.

26:47

And so we recognize fundamentally at Apologia Church the physical aspects of addiction and we try to address those first and foremost as we're getting a person through this.

26:56

But we recognize that the Bible defines the problem of addiction as an issue of sin, not disease. Not disease.

27:03

Are there chemical issues involved? Absolutely. But it's not the brain disease of addiction. That is a secular, a very humanistic model of the issue of addiction that is fundamentally not compatible with the

27:14

Christian worldview on the issue of addiction. Like if you walk into a room and I've been in hundreds of them with doctors and nurses and professionals and therapists and you ask the question, is addiction to alcohol sin?

27:28

Right. No. It's not even a category that they function in. It's a disease issue of the brain. So when

27:33

I'm talking about this, I'm talking about how Scripture, God's revelation, provides the definitions and the foundations as to how we even approach the issue of drug addiction.

27:47

Is it a brain disease? Or is it actually sin? So that's what I'm addressing there when

27:52

I'm talking about it in that sense. I'm not saying that God has a discussion in here about the 12 steps and whether Dr.

27:58

Bob was off his rocker. I'm saying that it's an epistemological issue of how do I have certainty about what the problem of addiction is.

28:05

Well, it's defined as a sin and it's defined as a sin people go to hell for. God's Word gets to tell you about the person you're seeking to assist who is addicted.

28:15

Right. First and foremost. You have to start there. You don't start with an external theory and then religiositize it with a few verses here, there, where you can fit it in.

28:27

Yes. And that's one of the biggest problems in Roman Catholicism is that's exactly what you do have happening today.

28:33

There has been such a diminishment in the view of Scripture. Because, I mean, the hierarchy of the Church. You look at the people on the

28:39

Papal Biblical Commission and stuff like that. These are not people who have a high view of Scripture. Yeah. So what you're talking about just simply wouldn't make any sense to the people in the hierarchy and that filters down into the whole factor.

28:51

And it comes down to also there's apologetic issues in here in terms of what's the foundation of how

28:58

I even approach these issues. Is it just human reason, plainly? Do I start there? Or does

29:03

Scripture, does the self -attesting Word of God provide the grounding for all these questions?

29:10

But see, even the phrase self -attesting would not be something it would have a place within Roman Catholicism because of its elevation of tradition.

29:17

Yes. That's right. And the whole issue of reason, the secular perspective, these all go back to what really is primary.

29:28

And from a Reformed perspective, which I don't think Trent really has studied or has access to, from a

29:33

Reformed perspective, there is something about the very nature of Scripture and God's purpose in giving it that he has placed it within the church to function in a certain way.

29:42

Since Rome does not allow it to function that way, it wouldn't even cross his mind to even interpret your words in the way that you just explained.

29:49

Right. And I think it gets a little deeper here and we'll go to the next clip right after this. So, yeah, I'm just concerned here that people say, well,

29:55

Sola Scriptura, what is Sola Scriptura about? What is it fundamentally about? Some people say, well, it's the

30:00

Bible alone. About what? Is it about how I get to heaven? Is it about all Christian faith and doctrine?

30:06

Is it about now beyond Christian faith and doctrine to the science of addiction? Or here's some other topics Pastor Jeff brings up.

30:13

Question related to other issues, like how about the Constitution? Is the

30:18

Constitution ultimate? How do we know what's right about the Constitution and what may be wrong about the

30:24

Constitution? How do we know how to properly define those things? Sola Scriptura actually relates to that as well in terms of how do

30:30

I know the truth? What's ultimate? How about the issue related to Roe v. Wade? How do we define life?

30:37

Is it true that we can execute a child in the womb? Is that the image of God or no?

30:42

Do we see that as ultimate or do we obey God rather than men? Two things. One, a lot of Protestants in the 20th century justified their pro -choice position by saying the

30:53

Bible doesn't explicitly condemn abortion, so therefore it's not a sin. Much the same way that many Protestants today will say that the

31:00

Bible does not explicitly condemn contraception, so there's nothing wrong with contraception.

31:08

So I'll start with this. There's an extended discussion here in terms of how does this relate to even issues of like the

31:15

Constitution. Now what I would impress upon Trent and I would try to be as gracious as possible to him if I was in front of him and try to love him and respect him to have him try to think through some of these things.

31:26

He already does this all the time. I hope so. So for example, in the issue of the pro -life issue,

31:34

Roman Catholics are known for being pro -life, for being big fighters in the pro -life arena and those sorts of things, but I think

31:41

I would say Trent is of course pro -life and he would identify as that, but if he was to get into discussion or debate with somebody over the issue of life and the pro -life issues,

31:51

I'd imagine that in the back of Trent's mind, he's thinking about the biblical worldview context that he got from verses like Psalm 139, right?

32:02

I knit you together in your mother's womb. You're looking at a biblical worldview perspective about humanity that that's the image of God specially created by God having meaning, purpose, and dignity as a human being.

32:18

Why? Because this says so. So I would think fundamentally that's a starting point, but at the same time this also gets to, this is really interesting,

32:26

Pastor James, some of the problems in the pro -life lobby and industry over the last 40 years have moved away from Scripture as the grounding of this fight to go to more human reason and rationality to say natural law arguments which ultimately will fall apart along the way.

32:44

It's not only that, but see, I've not heard Trent do this, but I've heard Patrick Madrid, Carl Keating, the preceding generation make the direct statement that we could not know the

32:54

Trinity if all we had was the Bible. We could not know the personality of the

32:59

Holy Spirit if all we had was the Bible. And I just have to wonder if Trent would agree or disagree that we could not know this issue in regards to the sanctity of life if all we had was the

33:13

Bible, because for many Roman Catholics it is these, Humanae Vitae, for example, was an extremely important papal document that is really the foundation stone of much of Rome's position on this subject for many, many years.

33:31

And I think just many of these people have the idea that, well, yeah, you know, you can look at Psalm 139, but you need the clarity that is provided by the papal commentary, by the commentary of tradition over time and the development of theology that comes from the living church reflecting upon the body of tradition and all the rest of that type of stuff.

33:51

The danger of that is, of course, that you may have had one pope that put out one paper, but then you can have another pope that puts out another paper.

34:01

And whoever is getting to choose the cardinals and the bishops and who is getting to choose who is going to be sitting on certain commissions gets to have a huge impact as to how all these things are now being interpreted by the church.

34:14

We now have a Marxist as the pope. And that Marxist, I think, is not nearly as focused upon the unborn as he is upon issues, social issues of immigrants and social justice issues and things like that.

34:30

Now, when he then appoints people, then are you going to see a shift over the number of decades, even generations, to a different perspective?

34:41

When you don't have an unchanging revelation that is supreme, but you have this interpretive grid that's placed on top of it.

34:50

Because, like I said, we believe in sola scriptura, that is, God defines, he speaks, and by his actions he defines the canon of scripture.

35:00

He doesn't inspire all books, he only inspires some books, therefore the canon comes into existence as an artifact of revelation.

35:06

From the Roman Catholic perspective, you have sola ecclesia. They do not use this terminology, but every time they try to get around it, it only proves that this is exactly what they believe.

35:14

Epistemologically speaking, it's exactly right. And what do I mean by sola ecclesia? The church alone.

35:19

And what do I mean by that? Well, they say, no, no, no, we have a three -legged stool, you've got the magisterium, you've got tradition, you've got scripture, all that kind of stuff.

35:27

Here's the thing to always keep in mind, and no matter what Roman Catholic you're talking to, unless they're going to abandon papal authority and infallibility of the church, they will end up having to agree with this.

35:38

Rome defines what is and what is not scripture. She has the ultimate authority.

35:43

Even though Trent will say she didn't define the canon, she tells you what the canon is.

35:49

Maybe not by her own coming out from her, but still, she has the authority to define the canon of scripture.

35:55

I would say that we're wrong because we reject Rome's definition, which came 1 ,500 years after the time of Jesus.

36:02

So she defines what scripture is and she defines what scripture says. Even though there are almost no infallible interpretations, almost any verse in the

36:10

Bible actually provided by Rome, she does claim that capacity to do that. So if you can tell me, if you can say,

36:16

I can tell you, and only I can tell you what the Bible is and what it says, you're the ultimate authority over that.

36:22

And she says, as far as tradition is concerned, oral tradition, we get to tell you what is and what is not oral tradition and what oral tradition does and does not say.

36:32

Who's your ultimate authority? The ecclesia. Yeah. The church. That's right. So that is the epistemological conflict is sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia.

36:41

That's right. And that's what we're dealing with here. That's right. So we'll skip ahead for time here. I think we've pretty much covered everything in there that we would need to, that was ultimately meaningful.

36:50

It might actually provide some help to Trent to understand the issue a little bit better in terms of the epistemological issues that he seems to be missing.

36:56

So this is next part of the clip. But standalone message, we need to answer the question biblically and philosophically, biblically and philosophically.

37:05

Now, a quick definition, if you haven't written it down, if you don't know it, a quick definition is sola scriptura is the claim that Scripture alone is the sole, listen closely, very important, don't lose this, because people that apostatize away from the faith and fall into other areas seem to always miss these specific words.

37:24

Scripture alone is the sole, infallible rule of faith and practice for the church.

37:31

The sole, infallible, without error, rule of faith and practice for the church.

37:36

Now, if you've been at Apologia Church for really any bit of time, you know that at Apologia Church, we do our catechism every

37:44

Sunday. We're a confessional church. 1689, all the way, baby. 1689, London Baptist Confession of Faith.

37:50

We have a rule of faith that we actually go over every Lord's Day before the message itself.

37:56

We talk about catechism, question, and answer, but we always go back to the Scripture and memorize Scripture together. So, we know that there are actually other rules of faith.

38:04

So, when this claim, I've heard this before, the sola scriptura is just the claim that the

38:09

Bible is the sole, infallible rule of faith. But I always ask, well, what does that mean for the

38:16

Bible to be a rule of faith or the only infallible rule of faith? Does that mean, as a Christian, you are free to believe whatever you want as long as it does not contradict the

38:25

Bible? Then, in that case, Catholics could subscribe to sola scriptura in that sense, that most

38:31

Protestant apologists, when they criticize the Catholic faith, on justification and salvation, they'll try to say it contradicts

38:37

Scripture, which it doesn't. We could get into that in another video. Usually, what they'll say is, you know, where's the

38:43

Pope? Where's the Mass? Where's the Assumption of Mary? Where's Purgatory? Where is that in the Bible? So, it's not just the rule of faith is you cannot believe things which contradict the

38:53

Bible. I think it's something bigger, which is this. A Christian can only believe in that which is explicitly taught in Scripture.

39:03

We only believe that which is explicitly taught in the Bible. And Christians must believe what is explicitly taught in the

39:09

Bible. I think that is what Pastor Durbin and others mean by Sola Scriptura, whether it applies to faith and morals or even beyond that.

39:16

Like, we can talk about the science of addiction or legal theories of constitutional interpretation, I guess.

39:22

But once again, okay, fine, if that's basically your definition of Sola Scriptura, where is that in the

39:28

Bible? There was a lack of clarity here. And it doesn't sound like Trent's familiar with— there are differences of opinion.

39:39

For example, in the Reformation itself, Luther was much more on the side of you are free to believe and practice something as long as it is not contradicted by Scripture over against someone like Zwingler or someone like that would say, no, you can only do that which is commanded by Scripture.

40:00

And so there's, even to this day, if you have conversations with even our good -believing

40:06

Anglican brothers, the conservatives, you'll find differences as to where people come down on an issue like this.

40:13

But what's missing in Trent's understanding is the idea that what we're talking about is where do we get the definition of what we are to believe for salvation itself, for who we're going to worship as God, for what the purpose of the church is.

40:32

In other words, it's not where do we get the information on how to repair, as an old friend of mine used to say,

40:41

Borg -Werner 325 automatic transmission. The Bible will not give you those instructions, but it does give you the worldview to understand why those instructions would work anywhere on earth.

40:57

Because there are established principles that will mean that that's going to function the same way whether you're in the

41:04

Sahara Desert or in the Arctic or wherever else it might be. That's right. So those categories don't seem to be functioning in his hearing what it is that you're saying.

41:14

And he sees contradiction because he's not hearing that we recognize that there are definitional truths and that there are adiaphora.

41:23

Even in the adiaphora, the things that do not define upon where there can be disagreements, even then, if we're talking about something that is going to impact the life and worship of the church, where do we go for that?

41:33

We go to that which is Theanostas. That's right. We go to that which is God breathed. Only when you get past that into other areas that are just not even...

41:42

No one could really make a meaningful argument that scripture even intends to address those things. Are you in an extended area where you're simply applying principles or things like that?

41:51

And then you eventually get into automatic transmission repair which isn't...

41:57

You can look for that in the court of accordance all day long. You're not going to track it down. That's right. And it's interesting too because on this particular point,

42:04

I'll just say as briefly as possible, we just had a recent, fairly recent debate with two atheists at the

42:10

University of Utah. And it was... It's an interesting point, I think, to bring out here that it was a view of Sola Scriptura and the

42:18

Bible and God's revelation as a reference point that gave us a basis to refute the atheists' constant appeal to evidence and to science and those sorts of things.

42:28

Because what we were saying is from a revelational epistemology, a perspective of God speaking, we have a basis to make sense of science.

42:37

Now, does the Bible give me all the instructions necessary to do particular scientific labs and those sorts of things?

42:44

Absolutely not. But isn't it interesting that because I have the certainty that I have from God's revelation,

42:50

I'm able to actually approach the world of science in a meaningful and coherent way? Isn't it interesting that actually modern science got its pop and its big explosion not in an atheistic worldview context but in the context of the

43:04

Christian worldview? And why is that? Because God talks about how He's the creator. There's a creator -creation distinction that He orders the universe, that it has purpose, that He decrees the end from the beginning.

43:14

He's the sovereign over creation, that He's given to creation a fixed order, right? And so that got people, of course, going,

43:21

I can actually examine this and study this and it's ordered. The atheist doesn't have that. Why?

43:27

Because he doesn't have Sola Scriptura or the epistemological underpinnings that are really there when we're saying

43:34

Sola Scriptura. We're saying that God's revelation is supreme and grants certainty where He speaks.

43:42

But in Roman Catholicism you don't even have that level of... and, of course, this is one of the main things that Van Til points out in the

43:50

Christian Theory of Knowledge and his discussions in there, and that is in Roman Catholicism you do not have this fundamental supremacy of revelation over the natural order.

44:02

Right. So within Roman Catholicism the natural law argumentation, which is fundamental to most of what

44:11

Roman Catholicism says in the pro -life area as well... Very much so. ...enters into all these other areas.

44:17

And if that's all Trent's been exposed to, then, you know, if he's not read Van Til or any of these individuals along those lines, then it's very, very understandable why what you're saying in making these broad applications would not seemingly have any foundation.

44:33

But it's also important. What he's saying is, okay, it's one thing to say this is an infallible rule of faith, but he's seeing rule of faith as Rome would define it over against rule of faith as we would define it.

44:48

And so he's going to make the statement, he hasn't made it yet, but he will make the statement. No, it's still... you're getting to pick and choose in all of this.

44:58

And he still wants to present the idea that, you know, you may talk about the church and you may talk about church history and you may talk about the councils, but you're still picking and choosing.

45:10

He's also picking and choosing, but he's letting somebody else do the picking and choosing for him, which is allegedly the papacy.

45:17

He hasn't escaped the problem. He hasn't escaped the problem. Rome does not have any answer to the same problem that she presents to us.

45:23

She just simply wipes the line out and steps one line back and go, ah, fixed. It's not actually fixed. You know, that's the...

45:29

How do you know that Matthew wrote Matthew? Well, the funny thing is the papal biblical mission says we don't know who wrote Matthew.

45:34

So, so much for that idea, but that's one of their... But they, you know, our canonical authority trumps your canonical non -authority.

45:41

Yes. And again, so how do you know that the authority you have chosen to invest, they can't get around this particular aspect.

45:50

So I'd rather go with what Jesus himself said was the very speaking of God rather than extrapolations that come along centuries and centuries and centuries later that end up subjecting what

46:03

Jesus said was God's very speaking to the interpretations of people who very often had their own political purposes in how they interpreted things.

46:12

Yeah. And I would just say a very... I think from a practical standpoint and even in thinking about these issues of having a reference point and a foundation, an area of where you say,

46:23

I have certainty because God has spoken here, and in the conflict with Rome where we're saying, we need this interpreter that defines and explains.

46:31

Again, like you say, that becomes the final arbiter. At that point, that becomes the reference point, not God. I just want to point out in these discussions,

46:38

I find it always so interesting on a practical level that Trent here doesn't have somebody standing next to him while he's doing this video.

46:45

Well, it's exactly right. Every single time he makes reference to a scriptural passage, I want to just go, wait a minute, you don't actually have an infallible interpretation of that passage.

46:54

So how can you even make reference to it and then turn around and say, it's just you and your Bible under the tree, which you're saying, you know.

47:01

So they recognize that they're on one end of the spectrum, and we recognize there are people who it's just them and their

47:08

Bible under a tree. Right. I was just yesterday criticizing an independent fundamentalist Baptist preacher because when he does exegesis, it's just he and his

47:16

Bible, and he could care less what anyone has ever come up. He doesn't care what anyone else has ever seen in his passage.

47:22

He's the ultimate final authority, he and his Bible. Well, those are your two extremes, but in the middle, you have pretty much all of church history outside of once Rome became extremely powerful that recognizes that you have to see that God has worked in building his church, but then you also have to recognize that not everyone has agreed.

47:44

Once you start investing in infallibility in these individuals, that's right, now you've got major problems.

47:49

So, yeah. You're in big trouble. Yeah. Yeah, and I think it's a powerful, again, practical point to notice that in a discussion like this where you have anybody, it's not just Trent.

48:01

It's not just Trent's issue. I think his actual name is Trent. I'm always, when you're saying Trent, I'm going like, counsel?

48:07

No, okay, the guy. Okay. So, it's not just Trent's issue or Mr.

48:12

Horne's issue. It comes across in a lot of different areas. There are competing epistemological claims of authority that try to say, well,

48:20

I'm sharing it with the Bible. It goes with Mormonism, the Watchtower, and all the rest. I just find it, again, practically interesting that in a discussion like this,

48:29

Trent doesn't have someone standing next to him interpreting for him his words for us to understand completely.

48:36

He believes that as a creature, he has the ability to communicate as a creature in a way that can be understood.

48:45

He's not doing his videos with someone standing next to him giving the full and final interpretation of Trent's words.

48:51

He actually believes that he can communicate as an individual and be understood but it's amazing to me, again, practical as you look at this, that the attacks often come towards the creator that no, no, no, he needs the infallible interpreter.

49:07

The creator can't speak alone in such a coherent way that he can be understood as he speaks.

49:15

He needs the person. He must have an authority next to him authoritatively defining this is what he means.

49:23

No, we can't really understand. You need us to help. We're the authority to understand him. Creatures over the creator?

49:31

I always find that interesting. Well, this is why, and I'll be very brief, this is why at the end of my debate with Mitchell Pacwa in 1999 in San Diego.

49:39

How old were you in 1999? Never mind. 22? Okay. 21?

49:46

Were you in Bible college? Yeah, I had been. Independent fundamentalist separated

49:52

Baptist. There you go. 1999, I debated Mitchell Pacwa on Sola Scriptura, and I finished that debate by dragging out, and I still got this bag.

50:02

It's a big, huge, silver metal book bag that you can pop open. It's a big briefcase type thing.

50:09

And I brought all these massive works of Roman Catholic theology and dialectics. I remember this, yes.

50:14

And so the Canon of the Decrees of the Council of Trent and the Compendium of Scriptures referenced in the

50:19

Second Vatican Council and the Canon of the Decrees of the Vatican. And I stack all this stuff up, and I say, what we're being told tonight is that when you look at Romans chapter 5, verse 1, therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our

50:35

Lord Jesus Christ, that you can't understand those words apart from what's in this pile of books.

50:45

I'd like to suggest to you that when you look at modern Roman Catholicism, that has not clarified the meaning of Romans 5 .1.

50:50

It has utterly muddied the meaning of Romans 5 .1. That's right. And that's really what you're dealing with here.

50:57

Yes. Next one. Here we go. Again, this is broken up, not all of it. I hope we get to all of it. We're on clip number three. We have 14.

51:03

So we're probably going to have to have a part two, I'm thinking. I don't know. We'll see. There can be rules of faith, like the 1689

51:10

London Baptist Confession of Faith. Yeah, there can be other rules of faith, but they're always subordinate to the one infallible rule, which is

51:18

Scripture. So while Protestants like Jeff Durbin are going to say, well, yeah, we have other rules of faith.

51:23

They really don't, because here's my question. Which rule do you pick? Which one do you pick? Do you pick the, which ecumenical councils?

51:32

I'm sure they'll pick some of the earlier councils on Christology. Will Pastor Durbin take the

51:37

Council of Ephesus and its rule of faith about proclaiming Mary Theotokos, God -bearer, the mother of God?

51:43

How about the later? You want to address that? Really quickly, because I'm a little surprised. He obviously hasn't read my books on Roman Catholicism or my book on Mary, because I have an entire section in my book on the movement to have

51:59

Mary defined as co -redemptrix and co -mediatrix of Christ. I have a whole section on Theotokos, and what it meant originally when that first, when that term first appears in church history, it is a

52:11

Christological title, not a Mariological title. In other words, what it was asserting was that the one who was given birth by Mary was truly the

52:23

Christ and was truly God. And so it was about Jesus. It wasn't something that elevated Mary's nature to an intercessor, a mediator, whatever else it might be.

52:35

It didn't take long for that to happen. And when the emphasis shifts from who

52:40

Jesus is, when it shifts from the Theos part to the Tikto part, which is where Takas comes from, to give birth, when the emphasis moves from the one to the other, then it becomes erroneous because it's saying something about Mary that it wasn't intended to.

52:56

But the Christological title has to do with Jesus, that is, he was truly

53:02

God when he was born. There is a, that the hypostatic union is a necessary aspect of Jesus's existence.

53:08

That's obviously completely orthodox. Now what this tells me is Trent's not used to dealing with Protestants who have,

53:14

A, any knowledge of church history, or B, utilize these terms themselves. And, of course, the vast majority of Protestants would naturally reject, if they don't know church history, they would reject

53:27

Mother of God. Why? Because they've only heard it being abused by Roman Catholics, turning it into something about Mary about Mary rather than about Jesus.

53:37

Right. Exactly. So that problem is their problem, not ours. But we recognize.

53:43

Now, there's all sorts of other stuff at Ephesus or Chalcedon, canons that were attached to early creeds and things like that, which we would not accept as authoritative.

53:54

And so they're saying, you don't really believe any of those things. And we're saying the stuff that they actually gathered to talk about that was important and definitional, yes, we do very much look at what they said, but we look at what they said in light of the higher authority of Scripture.

54:10

I don't think that Trent is in a position where he can examine any of those things on any basis.

54:18

So when the sixth canon of the Council of Nicaea limits the authority of the

54:24

Bishop of Rome, then how is he supposed to deal with something like that?

54:30

I can look at that, and when I look at the early church, when I look at any of the councils, when I look at any writer, I can allow them to be who they were.

54:37

And I can take the good and leave the bad. But what's my ultimate filter on that? That which is

54:43

Theanustos. They do not have a Theanustos filter. They have a sola ecclesia filter.

54:49

They have the Roman filter. That's exactly right. Later, councils of Lyon, Lateran, ecumenical councils of the first Vatican, the second

54:56

Vatican council. Oh, we don't take that. What about other creeds or confessions from more

55:03

Armenian theologians, those that are not Reformed or not Calvinist? Well, we don't take those.

55:09

So what ends up happening is which rules, which creeds, which confessions, which councils do we...

55:15

But why don't we? Because we have an ultimate standard, and these are all subordinate.

55:20

He's almost trying to say you can't have subordinate standards if you have an ultimate infallible standard.

55:26

That means it's the only standard you get to have. No. When we, you and I primarily are the two that do the catechism questions.

55:34

Right. Basically, since I've been on board, if I'm there, I've been doing the catechism stuff.

55:40

Those are my little teeny sermons. Yeah, you have about 20 minutes at the beginning of every sermon. I try not to take up that extra time.

55:46

No, it's fine. We're fine with it. But when we are presenting that, it is a true standard.

55:54

It is a true statement of faith because it is explained to people what it is we believe. We are not elevating it to the point of Scripture, and we're saying it is only true insofar as it is consistent with Scripture.

56:05

So it sounds to me like what he's... Since they don't have that kind of, hey, we all believe the same thing, so Rome is our ultimate authority, and so we don't need to be differentiating ourselves from anybody else, then it's sort of like they don't even understand why we would want to have that, why we would want people to really understand exactly where we're coming from.

56:24

But man, anybody who walks into our church, if they're serious about wanting to know where we're coming from, there's no reason why they can't find out.

56:32

Yeah, and it is interesting here because this is more near the beginning of his discussion. He...

56:37

I just want to make a note. I hope we get to it a little later, or at least some point, maybe on another episode. I don't know if we'll ever get through this.

56:44

He acknowledges here and engages with the fact that we say there are... that you have the ability to have other traditions.

56:54

Like we're not... We're not... Sola Scriptura does not say tradition is bleh, like no tradition, ever.

57:00

Right. And so it's acknowledged here at this point, and it changes later as he tries to engage a bit with the discussion, that we have a tradition, that we recognize you can have other traditions and standards that express doctrinal truths.

57:17

They're just not ultimate. They're not the ultimate authority, but he acknowledges that here, that we do have a commitment to, yes, you can have a healthy, biblical tradition that's obviously not

57:28

Scripture itself. Pick whichever one lines up with our personal interpretation of Scripture. So these other rules of faith, you're not subordinate...

57:36

Do you want to respond to that? Yeah, I do. Our personal interpretations of Scripture. I'm sure

57:42

Trent does not intend this, but I'm sure he has just imbibed it. It is a part of Roman Catholicism, however.

57:48

The idea that Scripture is so vague and so unknowable

57:55

Right. that all it can yield are just contradictory personal interpretations that have no, that there's no personal interpretation that's better than any other personal interpretation.

58:10

And so, and part of this, part of this does go back to the fact that within Roman Catholicism, as within liberal

58:17

Protestantism, the idea that there is a consistency to this body of revelation has been abandoned by minimally 90 % of every theological institution of whatever denomination,

58:35

Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, whatever. 90 % do not believe that there is a supernatural coherence and consistency in that revelation.

58:48

And so, I would say the majority, the vast majority of the

58:54

Roman hierarchy does not believe that. I don't believe for a second that Pope Francis believes that. There is, there is absolutely no reason to believe, given his theological background and perspective, that he has anywhere near as high a doctrine of Scripture as you and I have.

59:09

Right. That doesn't make us right, it just simply is something that needs to be recognized. Yeah. And so, given that, then this, well, it's just your personal interpretation, really is basically saying you can apply, you can learn the biblical languages and you can apply consistent rules of exegesis or hermeneutics that are specifically intended to help you identify exactly what the original author intended in his context, writing to the specific audience he was writing to.

59:37

You can do all of that, it's still just you and your Bible under a tree. Right. That's really what underlies a lot of this.

59:44

Right. You just pick the rules that correspond with your previous personal interpretation of Scripture, whatever they may be.

59:51

William Lane Craig is a great example of this, he's a great evangelical theologian, philosopher, he's also a monothelite, he believes that Christ had only one will, even though that was a heresy condemned at the third council of Constantinople.

01:00:03

Here's what Craig says about it, he says, no earnest Christian wants to be considered a heretic, but we

01:00:08

Protestants recognize Scripture alone as our ultimate rule of faith, therefore we bring even the statements of ecumenical councils before the bar of Scripture.

01:00:18

So they may say they have other rules of faith, but it's really only one, their personal interpretation of Scripture and then finding support for that.

01:00:26

That was really, that was really, really bad, and I take it you want to respond. Oh no, I'm hiding. Oh. Were you...

01:00:35

Dr. Craig. What did you think when you first, when you first heard him use

01:00:41

Craig in that way? It was, it's interesting, it's interesting because Dr.

01:00:47

Craig is such a mishmash of different perspectives philosophically, theologically, spiritually,

01:00:54

I mean, he's a huge fan of Aquinas, and, you know, his starting point in terms of human, of epistemology and reasoning and apologetics is, it's in line with...

01:01:06

Oh yeah, it's definitely not in line with us. No. Much more in line with Rome. And so that, that becomes interesting in itself, but then you also have the other issues that Craig has gone off the board with, so it's...

01:01:15

Where he is a monothelite, where he has said that, but here's, here's what struck me, and that is what, you've listened to me for years,

01:01:24

I have been criticizing, hopefully accurately, and not as an unbeliever, by the way,

01:01:31

William Lane Craig's perspectives for a very, very, very long time. Right. And what have, what has been the primary argument?

01:01:38

That in his situation, his philosophy determines his theology.

01:01:44

That's right. Rather than the other way around. That's right. That his apologetic perspective is what tells him what he should believe, theologically speaking, rather than your theology absolutely limiting what you can do in both philosophy and apologetics, based on your, on your assertions.

01:02:01

Can you just hang on, I want to hear the rest of that, but that, that was the point I was making there in terms of the mixed bag, and that was the point

01:02:07

I'm making about where he's starting from. He's not actually starting from a position of solo scriptura.

01:02:13

He's not. And he tells people as he's talking about the issues of apologetics and foundations and foundational issues of epistemology, no, no, no, you don't start with scripture, you start with philosophy and human reason.

01:02:23

Exactly. So, Trent, you're actually incorrect here. If you listen to Craig, and as he talks about these issues... But he's quoting

01:02:28

Craig. Yeah. He's quoting Craig, but the fact of the matter is that Craig is misusing solo scriptura at this point.

01:02:37

Yes. And does not act in accordance with solo scriptura on a consistent, regular basis in any way, shape, or form.

01:02:46

On a number of issues. On a number of issues. Yes. On a number of issues. On original sin and all sorts of other things like that.

01:02:52

So, many times in this, what Trent would do is he would quote somebody out there, even someone who's non -reformed and we've criticized many, many times, but we are all accountable for all these other people.

01:03:06

But evidently, does that mean that Trent is accountable for the wild -eyed, liberal, feminist lesbians at Boston College?

01:03:15

He's going to say no. Or for Frankie? He may want to say, I ain't accountable for them either.

01:03:22

That's the problem. Will we admit that there are many, many, many, many, many people who would go under the general rubric of Protestant who do not practice, know, or honor solo scriptura?

01:03:39

You just recently said this, I think yesterday, and I thought that's a good way to encapsulate that.

01:03:45

There are Protestants not because of conviction or reform, not because of conviction, because of culture, because of tradition, because of community.

01:03:54

This is my taste. Like, this goes more with my taste.

01:04:00

It's not because of conviction. It's taste. Right. Most definitely. And so he needs to recognize, and the earlier generations did recognize the difference between myself and a

01:04:12

William Lane Craig. Early generations of Catholic answers Roman Catholic apologists, yeah. But I think we haven't been having enough interaction for them to really realize that we present,

01:04:23

I think, a much more consistent argument. And pointing to someone like Craig isn't actually an argument against us because we're doing the same pointing.

01:04:33

Right. Also, Craig isn't reformed. By any stretch of the imagination. Which is, you know, kind of important in this discussion when you're talking about reformed issues.

01:04:40

So, okay, here we go. Next one. If you believe that Scripture alone is the sole infallible rule of faith and practice, then you go to that Bible, and what does it say?

01:04:49

By the way, I hate hearing myself at high speed. I sound so aggressive. I was hearing the same thing.

01:04:54

I was going, wow, his voice is much lower than yours. I sound so aggressive. Like, Trent, you sound so much better to me right here and more appealing.

01:05:02

And people are like, this guy is an animal. He's up there just... Okay, here we go. Jesus did.

01:05:08

He created a church. And what did he give? He gave apostles. What else? He gave teachers, right? What else?

01:05:13

What else? He gave administrators and people who are evangelists and all the rest. God gives us the church. He gives you pastors with authority, local authority, not ultimate authority, in the church.

01:05:23

You see that? So when we say Sola Scriptura, we do not mean, and this is by the way, let's make a confession as people.

01:05:28

Wait a minute here. He gave us the church, pastors with authority, with local authority.

01:05:35

Where is this church? Where did the pastors get this authority? I think in the

01:05:40

Protestant world, it's common for you to either go to seminary or not. You just hang up your shop, you begin preaching, and if you acquire a congregation, you're a pastor.

01:05:49

It's on par with kind of how the rabbis were able to have authority in Jesus' time, people who saw them as being learned teachers of the law and being willing to follow them.

01:06:01

Will we admit that that's probably the majority of what he has encountered? Mm -hmm. He probably has not encountered many who would honor the idea that a church, in the best situation, a church should begin under the oversight of the elders of an established church.

01:06:22

Mm -hmm. And there should be order and there needs to be consistency of belief. And you talked about how the apology has started because another church sent you out and you're meeting a specific need in a specific place.

01:06:34

So planting churches and things like that, I'm not saying that there aren't solid churches that have begun because there wasn't anything else out there.

01:06:44

I'm not saying that. And I'm certainly not saying that the formalistic concept that ended up developing within Western Christianity of the necessity of some kind of bishopric succession context that even, you know, eventually just leaves any type of concern about whether that person is even a true believer.

01:07:05

That's what you... We won't get into sacramentalism, but that's what ex opera operato versus ex opera operante was all about.

01:07:12

Anyway, the reality is that we have a much higher view of the church than probably most of the people that Trent runs into because that is a common view.

01:07:24

You know, if you can get your... If you can get on TV and get your program going and get your church going,

01:07:30

I mean, there's... How often do we actually open our mouth to say that's not wise?

01:07:38

We don't, because we just don't want all the hassle that's going to come in. You're hateful and you're all this and you're all that.

01:07:45

How dare you question how God might want to work in this situation, that situation. The fact of the matter is the

01:07:51

New Testament does, in 2 Timothy, Paul says, you know, pass these things on, which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, to trustworthy men.

01:08:02

And there is to be that kind of concern that when a church begins, it has a solid foundation.

01:08:10

It's not some radical new thing. It's gone off. But part of this, also, is because Rome says, hey, you know, as long as we were in charge, you didn't have all this stuff.

01:08:19

Well, you did. They just hunted those people down and burned them. That's a little bit of a different situation, but it's real easy if you accept the myth of Roman unity to then point over here and say, look at all the disunity and all the wackiness.

01:08:39

But the fact of the matter is there is no Roman unity. This is really critical. Isaac, do we have a moment for a commercial here?

01:08:47

We'll take a break and decide how we're going to finish this up. But I want you to finish that thought. Isaac, are we good with commercials? Well, he can't hear me right now.

01:08:55

Yeah, we should be good. Okay, good. Okay, so in a moment here, we'll go to commercial and then we'll do some discussing how we're going to finish this up.

01:09:00

But just finish up this thought, the myth of Roman unity. This is huge. Because it's used so much

01:09:06

Oh, constantly. as an apologetic against a reformed theology, the reformed church.

01:09:12

This is a critical point that I hope everybody hears. I would love to see if there would be some way to go with Trent Horn to Boston College and to walk into the theology classes and to listen to what is being taught and to recognize that what is being taught in those classes is so far removed from anything you would ever hear on Catholic Answers or anything you would have heard in almost any

01:09:44

Roman Catholic parish 150 years ago anywhere in the world. The breadth of liberalism, the breadth of feminism, pro -choice

01:09:55

Catholics, pro -homosexual Catholics, these are being taught in Roman Catholic schools without anyone being disfellowshipped or disciplined.

01:10:08

The breadth of expression within Roman Catholicism today is just as wide as outside of Roman Catholicism today.

01:10:17

In the very places where Pope Francis came from, liberation theology,

01:10:23

Marxism. Marxism and Christianity do not get along. Nope. The very essence and heart of Christianity has to be cut out to make it fit into any type of Marxist category.

01:10:35

And I'm not just talking about economically, I'm talking about view of man, view of the world, view of anything that would be definitional of the cross or anything else.

01:10:45

That's why the cross becomes a symbol of class struggle and liberation. Not liberation from sin, but liberation from the upper class and so on and so forth.

01:10:54

So, within Roman Catholicism today, you have a huge range of expression.

01:11:01

The Pope knows it. The cardinals know it. The archbishops know it. The bishops know it.

01:11:07

They do nothing about it. And so, they want to sit here and say, we have this unity because we all go to the same building and do the same thing on a

01:11:18

Sunday. Well, except when you have a brave Catholic priest that won't let a democratic presidential candidate come to mass because that democratic presidential candidate is supporting infanticide.

01:11:32

But, the church won't stand up and say that. And in fact, that guy is probably in more danger than the liberals who would give the mass to all those people that are doing all those things.

01:11:45

So, the point is, this idea of unity is simply a myth. It does not exist.

01:11:50

And I will say this as well. On an epistemological level, what they need to recognize is that generally, what

01:11:56

Roman Catholicism does is force us to compare apples and oranges. They will say, look at all the differences amongst these people who practice

01:12:06

Sola Scriptura and the unity we have within Rome. What they should be comparing is how close together are the denominations that actually know what

01:12:17

Sola Scriptura is, say it's biblical, and try to live in light of it. That's right. Versus all the different religions that say, we honor the

01:12:25

Bible, but we have an external authority outside of it. Let's think about that. Who really practices

01:12:31

Sola Scriptura? Well, the old -line Presbyterians, the old -line

01:12:38

Anglicans, the GAFCON Anglicans. You've got us

01:12:44

Reformed Baptists that believe it and seek to practice it. And where do we all differ?

01:12:50

Well, we differ on the mode and objects of baptism and certain issues of ecclesiology as in a presbytery above the local church, etc.,

01:13:00

etc. We're all Trinitarians. We all believe in the Resurrection. We all believe in the infallibility of the Scripture. We all believe in justification by faith.

01:13:07

Down the road, core issues were lockstep. Now look at the groups that have the

01:13:13

Bible plus. Roman Catholicism, wide variety of expressions. Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses.

01:13:19

They all say the Bible is the Word of God, but you need to have something else. And they don't even have the same God. That's right.

01:13:26

They can't even get on the same page with the same God. So the reality is Sola Scriptura is not, as Patrick Madrid has said for decades now, the blueprint for anarchy.

01:13:37

It is adding to that which is Theognystos, which is the blueprint for anarchy. And that's what's illustrated within Roman Catholicism.

01:13:44

That's right. All right, guys. Quick commercial break here. ApologiaStudios .com is where you guys go to get more.

01:13:50

Also go to aomen .org to get more from Dr. White. And I highly encourage you guys to check out even some of the

01:13:56

DLs from the last two weeks. Very informative. They'll bless you. Alpha and Omega Ministries on YouTube and on Facebook.

01:14:02

Don't forget to sign up for All Access, guys. When you sign up for All Access, you make everything, literally everything we do possible. Whether it's trips to Ireland, that's supporting that, making sure we can get the message there.

01:14:12

Whether it's on the street evangelism, the stuff we posted this week when it comes to conflict with the atheists of the capital, the pro -choicers, all that stuff, all the teaching, all the instruction, everything.

01:14:22

Whether it's on ApologiaStudios .com or on other platforms, it's because of our ministry partners that partner with us for All Access.

01:14:29

You can start that at ApologiaStudios .com. And when you do, you get all the TV shows, all the after shows, and including the

01:14:36

Apologia Academies that teach. We have lectures on apologetics, on the Trinity. We've got lectures on math, church history.

01:14:44

Yeah, actually, amazingly, math. Math is only possible because of the Christian worldview.

01:14:49

And we use the word of God to establish a meaningful approach to mathematics and arithmetics. So all that's there.

01:14:56

Check it out at ApologiaStudios .com. We will be right back. At the

01:15:01

Runner Academy, we arm and train emerging leaders to live out their calling in a way that truly honors

01:15:08

Christ as the Lord of all things, especially in areas like medicine, law, politics, education, the church, business, and the arts.

01:15:19

The Runner Academy is hosted at the EICC Center for Reformational Culture, an environment that provides a healthy balance of work and rest and that stimulates creative discussion for engaging with and shaping culture to the glory of God.

01:15:34

On this 24 -acre farm and retreat center, delegates can expect to find challenging teaching, but also fun and fellowship with like -minded

01:15:43

Christians who are concerned to recover a vision of God's glory and who are committed to think through what it means to live the

01:15:50

Christian life in all its fullness. Apply today and get equipped to face the critical issues of our time with a deep, rich, and joyful confidence in the

01:16:01

Lordship of Jesus Christ over all life and culture. I want their faith to not just be something that stands, but something around which culture can be built.

01:16:23

We want students who can think critically about arguments, but also about the culture around them, that can then speak clearly to it, and that also have the ability to influence and shape because of the power of their message, because that's really what the gospel does.

01:16:37

The gospel throws down all the arguments against it. It speaks to the hearts of people. It influences, and it changes.

01:16:51

The goal for New St. Andrews College, as it trains its students, is not to make people who will be able to go out and just get jobs, people who will just be bricks in the wall of our society.

01:17:04

The goal for New St. Andrews College is to make students into men and women who will really impact culture.

01:19:06

Alright, everyone, welcome back to Apologia Radio, gospel heard around the world. That's Dr. James White, Alpha Omega Ministries, A -O -Min,

01:19:12

M -I -N -dot -O -R -G, Alpha Omega Ministries on YouTube and Facebook. You guys can get more from us at ApologiaStudios .com,

01:19:20

A -P -O -L -O -G -I -A -Studios .com. Go there, get hundreds of radio and podcast episodes, actual radio station episodes.

01:19:29

Yeah, I know. You're going to tell everyone about how I treat my Bible. I want to tell everyone that the fact that there are pages crinkled down into and pages torn in this beautiful Jeffrey Rice rebind has absolutely positively nothing to do with your actual view of the

01:19:50

Word of God. No, no, no. That does not. And that you recognize that the printed edition is not to be confused with the actual

01:19:58

Word of God. But I, at the same time, I know that Jeffrey Rice loves your stuff, and so if he's watching,

01:20:05

I just want to go, Jeffrey, I'm very sorry. Jeffrey, I need a new one. That's what he's saying.

01:20:12

There's no indication of my view of Scripture. Nope. It's that I have children, and sometimes it gets put places and then squished and stuff like that.

01:20:21

Mm -hmm. You were holding that up earlier, and I almost started crying. And I'm sorry.

01:20:27

I'm sorry. So, all right, here we go. What we're going to do is this, guys.

01:20:33

We want to make sure we have a solid, meaningful teaching tool online in response to Trent Horn on this issue.

01:20:39

And so, what happened there? Okay, there we go. And then he'll respond to this. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, this could end up being 47 episodes long if you just keep going.

01:20:48

You can't do that, but yeah. That's right. So what we're going to do is we're going to do a final clip, a response, and then we're going to do an episode two when we get back from the

01:20:56

UK at some point. So we'll do an episode two to make sure we get through all the points. Again, the point here is we want to make a solid teaching tool and a meaningful response to Trent.

01:21:05

We're actually grateful that you did the response. It gives us an opportunity to talk about this. So here we go.

01:21:11

Last clip, and then we will do an episode two later. Second Timothy 3 .16.

01:21:16

Before we continue, I want to add that many Protestant apologists, I notice this, when they make a case for sola scriptura, they will pile on top, pile over and over praising scripture, noting how scripture is invested with authority, that it's divinely inspired, that it settles disputes.

01:21:36

And as a Catholic, I would say, amen, amen, amen. But I need the word only in there, that the word of God is confined only to the written word, that all

01:21:47

Christian doctrine is explicitly found only in scripture. Just because something has divine authority, just because God inspired it, does not mean it is the only source of authority.

01:21:58

That's the hurdle the Protestant apologists need to get over, and they really can't. We've been over that hurdle for a very, very long time, and it goes back to the beginning.

01:22:08

What is the one thing in possession of the Christian church since the death of the last apostle that is the

01:22:17

Agnustos? And I illustrated this in the debate with Mitch Pacwa, the one

01:22:23

I referenced before, which is available online from 1999. I asked Mitch, during the cross -examination,

01:22:31

I said, can you tell us a single word that Jesus ever spoke that has been dogmatically defined by the

01:22:40

Roman Catholic Church that is not found within the pages of scripture? And he thought about it, and he said, no, there's nothing.

01:22:47

I said, can you show me anything that any of the apostles ever spoke that has been dogmatically defined by the

01:22:54

Roman Catholic Church that's not found in the pages of scripture? And he said, no. So what we know of what

01:23:00

Jesus taught, what we know of what the apostles taught, is found to us, is brought to us in scripture. Now what

01:23:05

Rome says is, ah, but there's an oral tradition, and I think he gets into that in the second part where he quotes from Thessalonians, 2

01:23:16

Thessalonians, and, well, he actually quotes from both because there's another passage, both in the second chapters of each.

01:23:21

But he will quote from those, and he'll talk about the oral tradition. What you need to understand is what, in the

01:23:29

Roman Catholic mind, that's the written tradition. Then there is an oral tradition that the apostles preached that, and here's the key, this is, this is, you will be light years down the road if you will hear this part.

01:23:44

There is an oral tradition that differs in substance but not authority from the written tradition that the apostles taught, for example, to the church at Thessalonica and then commanded them to hold to their traditions whether it had been by written letter or word of mouth, orally.

01:24:06

Because if the, if what was preached and what was written is the same, then we don't need the oral because it's the same, it's the same revelation.

01:24:17

So the only way you can have a traditional basis for the definitions of theology that Rome has created in the last dogmas, the

01:24:27

Immaculate Conception, Bodily Assumption of Mary, and the Infallibility of the

01:24:32

Papacy in the past 200 years, these are the infallible doctrines, dogmas that have been defined, is you have to have a source for that.

01:24:41

Historically, everybody knows there is nobody who believed these things for a very, very, very, very long time.

01:24:48

And so you cannot even begin to demonstrate that Paul actually taught the

01:24:54

Thessalonians about papal infallibility or that Mary was going to be bodily assumed into heaven or any of the rest of this kind of stuff.

01:25:03

This is just not there. So in their mindset, though, the oral tradition, vague as it is, undefinable in the early church fathers as it is, is the origin and source of the church's ability to define these dogmas at a later point and say, ah, we're just following the apostles.

01:25:23

So when they hear us talking about Scripture as theanoustos, what they're not hearing us saying is the only thing we have that is theanoustos is

01:25:34

Scripture. They will, when pressed, admit, yeah, I can't point to anything else specifically, but functionally they have to say that oral tradition, which they cannot define, no generation ever has, but that oral tradition is likewise theanoustos, which they can then draw from to define new theology.

01:25:55

And what we're simply saying is your assumption has always been that when Paul preached to the

01:26:02

Thessalonians, what he wrote in the letter and what he preached contain different truths.

01:26:09

Now, there's no question in my mind that Paul covered a whole lot more in his preaching to the Thessalonians than he did in 1

01:26:14

Thessalonians because it doesn't take long to read any of that. That's right. But the issue is, what they're saying is he also delivered things to them that is found nowhere in Scripture.

01:26:24

And those have then now been passed down through the episcopate. That's where apostolic succession becomes so important epistemologically within Roman Catholicism in the ancient world.

01:26:33

I don't think Francis could care less about that. But in the more orthodox forms of Roman Catholicism, that kind of concept of apostolic succession was not just the laying on of the hands, but also the passing on of that tradition.

01:26:46

Tradition that wasn't released till later. That wasn't... No, it was given from the start, but no one knows about it until later.

01:26:54

Publicly. Yeah. Yeah. It's this secret thing. Sort of like a whispering, hey, just so you know.

01:27:00

Hang on and hang on to this. Got it. And there's no way to demonstrate that. And they know that.

01:27:06

And that's exactly why John Henry Cardinal Newman developed his thing called the

01:27:12

Development Hypothesis is because he knew the big thing in his day was papal infallibility.

01:27:18

He had opposed it. Then when it gets defined, he has to find a way to say, okay. And so that's where he developed the idea of it's like the acorn and the tree.

01:27:27

Okay. It was there in seed form, and then it grows up into this big, huge thing that we see today.

01:27:34

Very creative. They've abandoned the historical field of battle at that point, is what George Salmon said at that very same time in English history.

01:27:41

And it's true. But that's what's in their mind. And the vast majority of fundamentalists don't know that.

01:27:48

And so they're not challenging them on that and saying, well, you need to demonstrate that what you're claiming as tradition was actually delivered to the

01:27:55

Thessalonians if you're going to use those texts. And the other thing, to ponder before the next episode, to ponder before the next episode, is they also do not recognize that for sola scriptura to be true, what are we saying?

01:28:10

The Church today only possesses that which is the Anustos in the form of Scripture.

01:28:17

We're not saying that when Paul preached, he wasn't preaching the Word of God. That's right. Sola scriptura is a valid principle when you have a scriptura to be sola.

01:28:28

Yes. What Roman Catholics want to do, and Trent Horn will do this, especially in the next few clips.

01:28:33

Yes, he moves along. This is sort of introductory. Yes. Is he is going to try to say, well, that doesn't work when

01:28:39

Revelation is still being given. And we're like, no duh. But that's not where the conflict is.

01:28:44

And that's where he misses the epistemological point. Right. It's the Revelation that's central. That's the foundation. And when

01:28:50

Revelation is still being given, then they want to say, well, for example, in 2

01:28:57

Timothy 3 .16, what was Paul talking about? He was talking about the Old Testament. The Old Testament. Well, see, that's saying too much because that means that would be enough.

01:29:04

You don't need the New Testament. They're not catching the fact that what Paul is saying is if it's theanustos, it's of ultimate authority.

01:29:13

He's not saying everything that's theanustos has already been given. That's right. But that the Old Testament is, in fact, theanustos, which would not have included the apocryphal books that they then canonized later on.

01:29:23

Way later on. That's the faulty, quiet assumption he's making as he works through this.

01:29:29

But it's missing the point. And it's not just him. No. I mean, absolutely not. It's part of the system.

01:29:34

Yeah, it is. And that was why, I think you and I, as we were discussing this and like, you know, trying to make sure this is a meaningful response, kept coming back to the point,

01:29:42

I don't really feel like he's engaged with... Warfield or... And you can't hear it.

01:29:48

No. And you could hear it in a lot of the other guys. No. You can't hear it in Trent. No. So what I'd say to Trent is, if you expect us to read

01:29:55

Eves Congar on tradition, which I have, if you expect us to read through the relevant papal bulls on these subjects, then my suggestion would be, drop us a line, we'll send you some recommended reading.

01:30:11

Because I really believe that reformed apologetics in regards to Roman Catholicism is the only consistent apologetics in regards to Roman Catholicism.

01:30:22

That's right. Those people who stand with you on certain foundational elements of man's nature, for example, are not going to be overly consistent in then denying your authority.

01:30:33

But I think it's reformed apologetics that is consistent on these things. That's right. And I just don't see that he has really done a lot of interaction.

01:30:39

Doesn't sound like it. No, no, he's missing a lot of points. And yeah, drop us a line, we'll send you some resources.

01:30:45

But we're getting to actually, so part two is going to be really good in terms of the interaction, because that's where you start going to the text and engaging with some of these issues a little more.

01:30:54

This is sort of the build -up, I suppose, as we get to this point. But now we're getting to the point of, again, as a standalone message,

01:31:00

I told everyone, it's just one message on one Sunday. This could go for six months or a year. But it was just a one -time message for our church body, 50 minutes long or whatever the case, it was like an hour probably, however long it was.

01:31:14

And what we're in here was this, I would say, making two points. One, the nature of Scripture is

01:31:22

God -breathed. And so second, he was saying, where's the Bible verses? Well, we're building from Scripture.

01:31:28

Number one, Scripture says, all Scripture is God -breathed. That's the nature of Scripture. So it's from the mouth of God. So that's the nature of the revelation itself.

01:31:36

That's what makes it distinct, right? It's God -breathed. That's the nature. The next point

01:31:42

I made was from the Apostle Peter, where he says, the holy men of God spoke as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

01:31:47

So the nature is God -breathed. The origin of Scripture is the Holy Spirit of God carries people along to write what they wrote or to give the revelation that they gave.

01:31:55

And so we're building in terms of what is Scripture, what is this revelation, what sets it apart, what makes it distinct, over against other claims or other appeals to authority.

01:32:06

And so that's what we're getting now, and we'll do it in part two. We'll get into some of the Scripture. We'll respond to some of what

01:32:11

Trent says on these issues. I think it's going to be good and hopefully a really good resource, a longstanding resource for people to start engaging these issues themselves.

01:32:20

What would be, Pastor James, what would be a good book that you would recommend or books that you would recommend for other

01:32:29

Christians to start really digging into these issues because they're vitally important issues? Yeah, they really are. Obviously, I've attempted to address them in both the

01:32:37

Roman Catholic controversy, Scripture Alone, two books I've done on that. We've done numerous debates, not only the ones with Mitch Pacwa, but Jerry Matatix and Robert St.

01:32:46

Genes and Patrick Madrid and so on and so forth. So all those are still available, and none of those issues have changed except that the other side probably is much more embarrassed about their current pope than they were back then.

01:32:59

Right, right, right, that's for sure. And the pope that they had then was significantly more Orthodox from a

01:33:04

Roman Catholic perspective than the pope that they have right now. So that does sort of change a few things. But there have been excellent works written in the past on these subjects.

01:33:13

The first one that I ran into is by George Salmon. He was a contemporary with John Henry Cardinal Newman in the

01:33:19

United Kingdom and it's called The Infallibility of the Church. That's really good.

01:33:25

If you want a Lutheran source on this, Martin Chemnitz's examination of the Council of Trent is very interesting.

01:33:32

The only problem with it is he didn't source his patristic citations as well as he should have. But still, it's excellent.

01:33:39

But then, of course, Turretin's Institutes of Atlantic Theology goes into depth on a lot of these things.

01:33:45

And then you have Disputations of the Holy Scripture, Whitaker's work, that is, I think, currently being published by Ligonier, I think.

01:33:53

Yeah, it is. It makes that available. And so, obviously, most of these are not sitting on the shelf of your local

01:34:00

Christian bookstore if you even have a local Christian bookstore anymore anyways. So you have to track them down online.

01:34:07

Some of them are available for free because they're very, very, very old. But often what you're buying is a reprint from somebody.

01:34:13

But they're well worth having. And then, of course, the three volumes set by David King and William Webster, Holy Scripture, The Pillar and Ground of the

01:34:21

Catholic Foundation. You've got to get that one. Yeah, you've got to because the first two books are argumentation. The third book is all quotations.

01:34:28

And who knows, maybe there'll be a fourth someday. I know David King is still, whenever I run into him, he's still reading and collecting all those citations.

01:34:38

Oh, good. That's great. Excellent work. So, all right, guys. Thank you guys for joining us and watching. Be in prayer for us if you would.

01:34:45

Again, go to ApologiaStudios .com. Partner with us through All Access. Help us to make all this content possible.

01:34:51

And, again, be in prayer for us as we move forward on the mission, particularly on the area of End Abortion Now, to help our brothers and sisters in the

01:34:59

U .K., Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland, Scotland.

01:35:05

We're bringing that message. We brought it to Australia, to New Zealand, all of the United States of America. It's in Canada.

01:35:11

And so be in prayer for that mission. Be in prayer, again, for Joseph Silk, Senator Joseph Silk in Oklahoma. SB13, a lot that's happening there for equality for the pre -born.

01:35:19

So that's what's going on. Again, go to AOMN .org to get more from Pastor James, Dr. White. We'll catch you guys next time right here on Apologia Radio.