Worship in Spirit and Truth, Totalitarianism, Robert Spencer Retreads

Greetings and welcome to The Dividing Line. My name is James White. We are once again having to record the program, not able to do it live as yet.

Don't know when that's going to get fixed. Just right now, we can't get to YouTube and we've talked to the

ISP folks and they don't seem to understand how to be ISP folks. So we're working on it, but you never know.

Maybe Open Lines is never going to happen again or we have to do it only audio. I don't know. Maybe there is somebody out there specifically blocking us.

I don't know. I'm not an internet guy, so it's beyond me.

Worked fine until two weeks ago and then it stopped working. So there you go.

We do speed tests and one hour, great. Next hour, 120th of what it was the hour before.

Who knows? Who knows? But until then, we can record and then slowly upload and do what we can do.

And the day is coming when they're not going to allow us to do any of this anyways, at least as in some of the programs or some of the articles we're looking at a little bit later on in the program.

That is the case. On the Lord's Day, I continued my series that I'm preaching at the

Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. It is interesting. Most of the people in the audience are wise enough not to listen to my sermons, but I am doing an interesting series of sermons at PRBC based on Papyrus 45.

Has everyone noticed, by the way, the change in the background? We are moving.

I moved my textual criticism books. I've got a place to put them now in my office.

Actually, no one should have any issues at all with the

Claymore. Some of you might recognize the sword underneath it is the

Maximus sword from the movie Gladiator. It's obviously not that one, but it's facsimile thereof.

And you shouldn't have any problems with those, because if you watched, people actually call it the debate between myself and Steven Anderson.

We didn't do a debate. That was an interview for a movie of which they used,

I think, 90 seconds of the 2 hours and 20 minutes. What? That wasn't an interfaith?

I can't hear you. That wasn't an interfaith?

That might have been an interfaith dialogue. Anyway, good interrupting me.

If you saw that non -debate interview, actually going right through Steven Anderson's head was the same sword.

It was sitting on my desk before we put up a divider, I don't know, a couple years ago.

So that's where that's been sitting all this time. So yeah, it's been around for quite some time.

Yes, it is a full -size Claymore. It is not, well, the point's sharp. You could run somebody through with it, but it's not sharpened on the sides, so it's not razor sharp or anything like that.

But it's heavy, man. I've seen the real Wallace sword and it's much bigger than that. And how you could swing that thing around for more than about 10 minutes before you're just completely out of it,

I have no earthly idea. And then the papyrus there was over on the wall over here, and I had a real difficult time getting it up there.

It was very tricky, and it may not stay up there. And if it doesn't, it's all my fault.

But that is the Good Shepherd passage from P45. That's the papyrus

I was just talking about. And that section of John, that page of John is the fullest page of the entire manuscript that we possess.

That and the backside of it would be the fullest of any of the pages that we possess from P45.

So that's what that is, and that's the Enterprise D. E, I'm sorry, right there.

Enterprise E, for anyone who's interested in that kind of thing. Didn't change anything over on the other side.

We've still got the lava lamp for people who just have to have the lava lamp there. And I did make that little terrarium myself, though, with the little

Indian paintbrush flowers in it, and a cactus there, obviously.

Those are real Indian paintbrush flowers. Those are the dried ones. So I haven't changed anything more there.

But for those who need explanations, because you like things, I'm known for liking things just the way they are.

So changing stuff. Now over here, where the papyrus was, I now have this darling collage of pictures of my granddaughter

Clementine from a couple years ago that were taken in Georgia, and they were just the best pictures ever.

So that's now on the wall, and it looks like it was supposed to be there, like it was actually designed to work that way.

So I'm very, very happy about that. But you don't get to see that part. Not even this camera gets to see that,

I don't think. Anyway, as I said, I am doing this sermon series on P45.

And on Sunday, well, for a couple Sundays now, I've been in John chapter 4. And I did

Sunday evening, you know, sometimes people say you reform folks, you don't, you know, you're never self -reflective, you never really bring the heat against your own side.

But it's not true. We actually do engage in self -reflection.

And I could not help but notice in John 4 .23, we certainly know, you know,

John 4 .24, everybody knows John 4 .24, God is spirit and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

But focusing on that phrase, spirit and truth, and numeti kai aletheia, which also is found in verse 23, in identical form, worshipping in spirit and truth.

Now, it is interesting, just for those who like details and want to be prepared to give an answer, this is the

Greek term proskuneo, to worship. And if you've had lengthy conversations with Jehovah's Witnesses, you know that they will very often point out that proskuneo does not necessarily mean worship.

In the fullest religious sense, a soldier can bow down before a higher officer or something like that, and that proskuneo can be used in that context.

But the meaning of proskuneo obviously is defined by its context. And in this case, we're obviously talking about the highest form of religious worship.

And so this high form of religious worship is described in the beginning of verse 23,

This is right after the conversation with the woman concerning where worship is to take place, the

Samaritans in Mount Gerizim, Jews in Jerusalem. And Jesus puts that whole many hundreds of years of controversy to the side, and he does affirm salvation is of the

Jews. He didn't just simply say, well, it doesn't matter. But the point was, an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the

Father in spirit and truth, for such people the Father seeks to be his worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

And so these conditions of pleasing worship to God certainly made me think about the fact that for many of us, our first thought when we think of this text is apologetic.

God is spirit. So if you're talking to Mormons, this is a text that comes up.

God's an exalted man or whatever. God is spirit, and he desires worship within that realm and all the other apologetic issues.

But while those things are valid and need to be addressed, we need to recognize that it's fairly rare for us to think of ourselves and categorize ourselves as worshipers.

Have you thought about that? When was the last time you thought of yourself, categorized yourself as a worshiper?

If someone were to ask you to give categories that would be descriptive of who and what you are, would a worshiper of the true

God be one of the categories or descriptions that you would give?

And isn't it interesting that in the last phrase of verse 23,

For such the Father Zetai, he is seeking, zetao, to seek after.

It's the same term that's used in Romans 3. There are none who seek after God.

Ukag zeton tantean, same root. But here the Father is seeking such to worship him, to be his worshipers.

And so we talk about sanctification, we talk about holiness, we talk about having an obedient heart, prepared for worship, all the rest of these things.

But here is language that speaks of us as worshipers and that this worship is to take place in the realm of spirit and truth.

Now, obviously, the modern concept of worship as primarily focused upon man, as primarily an external type of thing, no.

And what's fascinating in this text is that the point that Jesus is making is you're all focused upon where worship is to take place geographically.

The hour now is when those who worship God will not be concerned about the geographical location.

They'll be concerned about the realm in which this worship takes place.

It will take place in the realm of the spirit and in the realm of truth. But all of that aside, and all that is true, those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

Since he is spiritual, then the realm of that which is pleasing to him as worship must be in the realm of how he himself exists.

It's spiritual and it is truthful. And how can you even define?

It would be an interesting question to ask most, well, most ministers actually, but believers as well.

What is the relationship between truth and worship? What is the relationship between truth and worship?

A lot of what is called worship in the

Christian church today, there isn't much of a relationship at all between the two.

Especially if you're talking about doctrinal truth. How else would you define truth here?

In other words, when we talk about worshiping God in truth, that means we need to know who

God is. Over against pagan worship, where you worship unknown deities, where the unknowedness of the deity is part of the worship, that type of thing.

God reveals himself. He reveals how he wishes to be worshipped. He reveals why he wishes to be worshipped in this way.

There's a consistency as far as the holiness of his name and hence the things you're to do to reflect that.

A lot of this comes out in the law and all that kind of stuff. So we need to know who he really is to worship him in truth.

But one of the points that I made was there needs to be amongst reformed people an understanding that you don't worship doctrine.

You don't worship the truth, you worship in the truth. In the realm of truth. So truth is vital and important just as having the spirit is vital and important.

The spiritual aspect, you can't worship unless you're spiritually alive. But you also can't worship unless you have truth.

But you're not worshipping the spiritual realm and you're not worshipping truth.

They're vitally important, but they're not God. And they're not the object of our worship.

And maintaining and finding that balance, it's real easy for us to sit over here and look at these people that just show no concern for truth, no concern for what

God has revealed about his own purposes and all the rest of this stuff. It's real easy to lob bombs that direction.

But I just asked those who are listening to that sermon, who would tend to be reformed individuals, where's the balance as far as we are concerned?

How often have we excused the lack of fervor and passion and spiritual connectedness?

How often have we excused that on the basis of, yeah, but I've got my theological

T's crossed and I's dotted. That's worth something, right?

And that balance is something that God himself said that for such people, the

Father seeks to be his worshipper. So here's the question, are we the kind of worshippers that God is seeking?

That really convicted me anyways, that so often in so many places, worship is so defined by the individual.

And it's limited to music. Now that the worship's over, we're going to have the preaching of the word.

No, no, no, no, no. So much to think about, but it just struck me that in this context of what was pointed out to me in my research for the sermon, probably the longest one -on -one conversation in an evangelistic context that Jesus had with anybody.

It's even longer than with Nicodemus. Well, it depends on how you interpret the

Nicodemus one, where you stop the red letters, basically. This was a long conversation, and it's with a

Samaritan woman. For us, we're so used to the story that that doesn't mean anything to us.

But it meant a lot then, as you'll see when the disciples come back and are like, what are you doing?

You're having a theological conversation with a Samaritan woman? What's going on here? But there's much to be said to Reformed believers concerning the need to worship in spirit and in truth, as we see here.

In John chapter 4, you can find that sermon series, if for some reason you should be interested in it, at sermonaudio .com

in the section PRBC. And you go down to the sermon series, and you can find it there.

A couple of items. I was noticing a frightening phrase out of London.

A group called Stonewall, the UK's largest

LGBT lobby, utilizes a phrase over there in their taglines and things like that.

I want you to hear it. Acceptance without exception. Acceptance without exception.

What's fascinating, even as Australia is now dealing with redefining marriage, and as much as I hope and pray that Australia will do the right thing, call me jaded, but I don't see the evidence yet that God has put the brakes on the mad rush of Western society.

And I would include Australia in Western society, obviously, despite being hanging off the bottom of the earth, as they do.

So, if it doesn't happen now, the left knows. You just keep bringing it up.

It's like dripping water on a solid rock surface. It'll eventually wear it away.

It may take a long time, but it'll eventually wear it away. And the methodologies being used by the left, the totalitarian left, this is

London. This is where Orwell published his works. And yet, acceptance without exception, that's 1984.

That's an Orwellian category of thinking. It's totalitarianism.

And they no longer even hesitate to make it clear they demand total acceptance.

And we know what acceptance means to them. It's not just acceptance. It's not just tolerance.

It is celebration. For them, acceptance is not enough.

You must celebrate homosexuality. You must celebrate the overthrow of every aspect of Judeo -Christian ethical thought on sexuality and marriage.

In fact, I was listening to Al Mohler this morning. It is interesting when he reads from obituaries.

And he was reading from the obituary of one of the leading radical feminist scholars that died at 81, 82 years of age.

And she was, early on, one of the people just trying to overthrow gender normativity and marriage and everything that would come from a reading of the scriptures.

And he noted that she lived a miserable life.

Attempted suicide and all sorts of stuff like that.

But that's what she pushed. That was her life. That was what defined her.

And that acceptance without exception, that's what she wanted. That's where she wanted things to go and she accomplished it.

Didn't give her any joy because it can't. But that's what she tried for.

That's what she wanted. And she lived a horrible life as a result.

Acceptance without exception. And you see this when you look at the academy especially.

I had another story here about Amy Wax, the

Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at Penn Law School. And the fact that she just simply made observations concerning the degradation of the social order in our society.

And because it did not fall into the parameters of political correct speech and the totalitarian mindset.

Again, the totalitarians are not even attempting to pretend to make argumentation anymore.

Not even trying to. We simply condemn as hate speech, as inappropriate.

We will not engage the fact that this is a factual statement or that this position is self -evidently true.

Doesn't matter to us. We don't care. We don't care. We simply condemn it. That's where we are.

That's where we are now. And every day brings you further evidence that that's where we are amongst the elites.

And where the elites go is where the society goes. Because there's a lot of people who've listened to me talking about this for years.

They go, well, you know, James, this stuff is interesting and it is troubling.

But you know, I just have faith in the American people. And there's just this, there's the great middle class common sense man is out there.

And so I'm just not really going to worry about it. And what you need to understand is that these people are the future judges.

And we've come to a point where what the wording of the Constitution is irrelevant. It's what any individual judge thinks it means is what it means.

And so we see fundamental moral and ethical principles being thrown out the window by judges because there's no such thing as objective meaning in wording or anything else any longer.

So these people are taking over and there is very, very thin protection.

When you start thinking about just how far the next generation is willing to go. It's truly amazing.

It really is. So there's that. Then I had a couple things here.

Yeah, well, we'll go for this one. This was posted in a channel about an hour or so ago.

So I appreciate someone who put that up there. But it's from WindyCityMediaGroup .com.

Marchers protest Nashville statement at Moody Bible Institute. And this is from yesterday.

And you've got a bunch of leftist, ultra -liberal folks marching around outside.

About 40 of them. Half of them are quote -unquote women clergy, which tells you a lot about where they are.

And, whoa, salvation by faith alone.

Something about not through heteronormativity. Now that may be the longest word

I've ever seen printed on a liberal protest site. You brood of vipers,

Matthew 23, God made me gay is the next one we've got here.

Lots of rainbow stuff. And like I said, women with clerical collars on.

God loves lesbians. No homophobia, gender, essentialism, misogyny, and racism too.

Yeah, okay. Salvation by faith, not faith plus heteronormativity. That's okay. I can see the sign sort of on the side of another one of these pictures that's up here.

Due unto others, etc., Jesus. This is some of the stuff that they've got here.

And the article is talking about how some of these people were, they denounced several

Moody officials' participation in the so -called Nashville Statement. Moody president

Paul Nyquist and other Moody principals were among the 150 signatories of the Nashville Statement. And so among those protesting

September 11th, there were several individuals who called themselves Moody heretics. Well, at least they've got the word right. And it wasn't

Moody. Graduates of the school who nevertheless disagreed with its policies.

Well, it's not policies. It's actually its theology. Reverend Elizabeth Jones, a pastor at St.

Luke's Christian Community Church in Morton Grove, was one of them. Well, you know, I don't know what

Moody's stance on women in ministry is any longer, but I can guarantee what it was in the past.

I'm not sure what it is now. But she called the Nashville Statement abhorrent.

It is abhorrent to me. Well, given it's just really nothing more than a basic restatement of biblical categories of sexual ethics, yeah, it tells you a little something about them.

After attending Moody, Jones did chaplain work, a time during which she learned more about serving the LGBT community.

I served anyone, she recalled, etc., etc. Well, we had someone from the

Ravenswood United Church of Christ. Well, that tells you a whole lot there, too. And let's see, another

United Church of Christ guy down here. And United Methodist Church. So when you've got the

UCC and United Methodists out, you've got a pretty good idea of what's going on there.

So these are the folks, the Moody heretics, showed up outside of MBI. And I recognize the location, because in one of these pictures is the archway.

And I think it says it's on 820 LaSalle Street. And I just remember from my youth, my dad talking about, because I got to speak at MBI, I was at 95?

Somewhere around there. And I took my dad with me, because he went to Moody Bible Institute back in the 50s. And I had grown up hearing these stories about the wind in Chicago during the winter.

And it didn't matter what kind of a coat or anything you had on, that wind would just slice right through you.

And it would come whistling through that arch. And so we went over to see the arch. In fact, the pictures are cycling through.

And so there's the arch right there in the picture. And they had gotten smart.

They had sealed it off, not with a wall or something, but with plexiglass or something. There's a big old door there now.

Probably it was just for security, not for warmth. But it did sort of change the old, you'd go through that thing and just get cut up by the cold winds.

So I don't think any of them are going to be out there in their little rainbow outfits come

January. That wind comes off the lake. That ain't going to be happening.

So if some of your profs or something sign the Nashville Statement, then expect these folks to be outside your doorway at some point or another,

I guess. Well, I suppose I need to address this. I want to thank, I want to give props here to...

I've got some folks who are giving some comments about the book, the debate with Doug Wilson, which is available on Amazon if you want to pick it up.

Where'd it go? How come whenever I try to find...

There it is. Oh, well, no. Actually, someone else had told me about it.

Now I discovered that Robert Spencer won. Make sure that I saw he had taken a shot at me too.

So there was somebody else that had mentioned it, and I was going to give a shout out to him, but I... Oh, there it is.

Chris Powell. Thank you, Chris. But lo and behold, you're actually beat to it by Robert Spencer himself. I hadn't seen

Spencer's thing. But there is a article. And what is this?

All right, hold on. Live, live. Well, of course, I'm not live. Someone just sent this to me.

So hold on just a second. We'll look at the Spencer thing in a second. Dr. Oakley1689, I saw this on my

Facebook. Please share your thoughts on this. Okay, I'm just doing this. Which, where am I? I'm over here.

Yeah, so people can see that the Warp Core is still going and the Borg Cube is still here.

There has been so much of a change. Okay, all right. The memes?

The swords? Oh, okay. There is that one of me with the sword and the kilt from Glasgow from, wow, 2006.

About 11 years old, something like that. Okay. How Dr.

James White and Jack McElroy are alike. Both are apologists, a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial, and both are salesmen.

Let me tell you something, folks. Yeah, go back over here. Let me tell you something, folks. No, no.

I'm the world's worst salesman. I really, really am. But here is how they differ on the

Bible version controversy. Dr. White is pitching a position. McElroy is promoting a product.

Dr. White's position is that it's impossible for any Christian to know with certainty all of God's words. He sells uncertainty.

And then he quotes from the King James Only controversy. The desire for absolute certainty plainly lies behind KJV -only materials.

It is argued that unless we embrace KJV as our final authority, we have no final authority at all, and hence all this subjectivity and uncertainty.

KJV -onlyism is by its nature anti -intellectual, anti -scholarship, and anti -freedom. Too many dot, dot, dots in there to put all those together.

Jack McElroy's product is a book, the King James Bible. McElroy sells biblical certainty.

Although the Lord preserved His holy words through an assortment of manuscripts of the ages, He has certainly gathered all of His words, and only

His words, and placed them in one book after the invention of the printing press. Anything less doesn't fit the

Lord's character. Anything less means textual critics care more about His words than He does. And unfortunately, oh, okay.

All right. I had to click on it there a second. And I believe that that book should be easily recognizable by His children, and it is.

His words are certainly found in a book, both capitalized. Even the A is capitalized. Why would you capitalize

A? King James Only folks love the capital, the shift button. It's important.

A book that is 100 % error -free scripture. Therein the world's best -selling, most -published, most -read, most -memorized, most -believed, most -trusted

Bible in the history of mankind, the King James Bible. Available for only $19 .95. That doesn't say that.

I'm sorry. And then Proverbs 22. Know the certainty of the words of truth, which evidently has something to do with a 17th century

Anglican translation. So, yeah, I don't know where that came from.

Who posted this, or where it came from? I don't know. I don't know. But I'll tell you, the

King James Only folks, they just love me. And I never even saw it. Oh, and by the way, they used a lot of underlining and yellowing.

You know, the outline yellow thing? That proves it was done by a believing

King James Only -ist. So, there you go. Thank you, Cisco. My thoughts are, well,

I wrote a whole book. That totally blew all that away. And I don't tend to respond to actually what it said.

So, what can I say? Jordy LaForge would be ashamed.

I guess he's ashamed at the fact that we're not live. You know, Jordy would have fixed this.

And, you know, they've got a point. I think Jordy might have used his visor or something to figure out the trace thing, and the server thing, which you haven't been able to do.

So, your glasses ain't cutting it. Sorry. What can I say? Anyway, back to important stuff here.

Folks, let me just tell you what's going to happen for the foreseeable future.

I've figured out how this works. There is a realm of conservative...

Well, actually, it works on both sides. So, people whose primary business is political action type stuff, they sort of operate on a cycle.

You know, when I come in here, basically, I don't have a staff.

I saw a video today on how Al Mohler does the briefing.

And he does have some folks who help him. Some Southern students that bring him resources and stuff.

That's great. I'm glad he has folks like that. I guess the closest I get to that is the chat channel and Twitter.

Like I said, a couple of things I shared today were posted in channel, appeared on Twitter, you know, whatever.

But other than that, if it comes across my feed, I think it might be something worthwhile.

I throw it in there. But basically, it's stuff that I'm working on right now and preparing for.

I actually thought about, as I was driving in today, I was thinking about doing something about Luther because a week from today, my wife and I start our trip over to the

Reformation tour. And really looking forward to that. Those of you who are going, please be praying that we would have a wonderful time together as a group.

That it would be very God -glorifying and not just focused upon how much fun we have or how much we learn, but that the

Lord would be glorified in our time together. But, so I was thinking about maybe doing something from the studying

I've been doing in preparation for the various places we're going to be going, the Vartburg Castle or whatever else it might be.

But I don't have a cycle of topics or anything like that.

I just don't. It's just not my thing. When I got up this morning,

I didn't know what I was going to be doing in the program today. I put it together. I don't have a staff to do that.

Rich does his thing. I do my thing. The topics for the program, pretty much my thing.

And how much time I can invest and stuff like that, all depends on what's going on in the life.

That's what happens when you have a two -person ministry. It sort of works that way.

So, we don't recycle topics and stuff. Stuff will come up because I've written books.

And because I've written books, certain issues will come up over and over again. I was looking at a

King James Only video before the program started, and I didn't go with it because it was too diffuse to be able to do quickly, to be able to get to the key issues and stuff like that.

I didn't really have time to work on it, try to edit it down or anything like that. So anyways, what you'll discover is, on a lot of websites, you'll have a topic or an article that'll get retreaded.

And it'll get a little bit of an update, maybe a few editorial changes, and then you throw it back out there again.

And it may have gotten so many likes the first time around, and you're hoping for maybe 85 % of that the second time around, and then maybe 70 % the third time around before you finally retire it.

Or roll it into another subject and try to give it a whole new life, whatever else it might be.

So, what you're going to see over time is, you're going to see the

Memphis Dialogues, Yasir Qadhi stuff recycled over and over again.

You can't just keep it going forever. It went for a long time. You have to give people a break, and then try to make it look like something new has come up.

And then you can recycle it, and then you can go for it again. And basically, that's what we've got on Jihad Watch.

Robert Spencer, September 12th, so today, Memphis Imam Yasir Qadhi raises money for Islamic charity linked to Hamas and the

Muslim Brotherhood. So, there is a specific... What I decided to do, since I was mentioned in it...

Let me go ahead and read the specific material toward the beginning. Yet, despite...

For example, Yasir Qadhi is an Imam in Memphis, and is Dean of Academic Affairs at the

Al -Maghrib Institute. He is a Hafiz, that is, he has memorized the entire Quran. He has also called

Jews and Christians filthy, in accord with Quran 928, and said,

The life and property of a mushrik, one who worships others besides Allah, holds no value in the state of Jihad, which means if they don't say, their lives and property are halal, that is, permitted to be taken by the

Muslims. Now, of course, anyone who listened to the dialogues, or who has listened to Yasir Qadhi's...

The rest of Yasir Qadhi's stuff, knows that Robert Spencer has no interest in taking him in a balanced fashion. He wants to present the worst possible spin that he possibly can upon everything he's said.

And we talked about this before. We talked about what it means to call someone filthy. And we tried, even with Janet Mefford, to try to say, okay, let's apply

Christian standards here. But we're talking about Robert Spencer. Robert Spencer is a Melkite Catholic. And even when he contacted me a few months ago, which should have given me a hint that all this was going to be coming.

Even at that time, one of the first things I did, and I wonder how many other people... I wonder if Janet Mefford, or David Wood, or any of the others that work with Robert Spencer regularly, how many of them have raised the issue of the

Gospel to him? Or is it just like, well, that's just that Catholic stuff.

We don't worry about that. So I did a... Well, let me finish reading this, and I'll tell you what

I did as a search. Yet despite this open espousal of Jihad violence, he has won the admiration of Evangelical Christian preacher

James White. I wrote here about how White is credulously allowing himself to be fooled by Qadi and letting the

Imam peddle egregious falsehoods about Islam to Christian audiences without challenge. And you can see here

Qadi continuing his standards against me and White's eager endorsement. White and his followers justify their coddling of Qadi and enabling of him to spread soothing lies to Christian organizations on the basis of the claim that White has, in the same context, been afforded an opportunity to preach the

Gospel to Muslim audiences. They don't realize that Qadi is far smarter than they are and playing them for the purposes of dawah,

Islamic proselytizing. Well, I just want to stop for a moment and say, we said that in the actual dialogues.

We are well aware that they're presenting their stuff to us, and we're presenting their stuff to us, and that's called dawah, and we're well aware of that,

Mr. Spencer. Their objective is to lie to the Christians and mislead them about the motivating ideology, nature, and magnitude of the jihad threat.

And they know this will not be difficult because most Christians are woefully uninformed about Islamic texts and teachings and the pervasiveness of the jihad ideology of the

Muslim world. I wonder, is this the same Robert Spencer that agreed with so much of what I said in the dialogue that we had on Michael Brown's thing?

He actually didn't say that. That's strange. Anyway, they don't care what White says to Muslim audiences because the

Quran itself contains many responses to standard Christian theology. Catch that.

Catch that. This is what happens when politicians are allowed to address Christian theology and are not challenged by the

Christians who coddle them. Who coddle them. What you just heard is a denial of the gospel.

I'll explain to you in a moment. This man doesn't know the gospel. He needs to know the gospel. He needs to recognize what he's doing here.

But how many people would even read this and even recognize it? Because the

Quran itself contains many responses to standard Christian theology. No, it doesn't. It contains misrepresentations.

But the author of the Quran did not understand solid Christian theology.

Mr. Spencer, author of books who should know this, I wrote a book that exposed this.

I bet you didn't read it, did you? I've read yours. Hmm. The difference between us is our motivations,

Mr. Spencer. Christians generally don't find them convincing, but Muslims do, and they act as a kind of inoculation against Muslims taking seriously the statements of an evangelist.

Yes, many Muslims do convert to Christianity, but this usually happens as a result of a lengthy process, not due to hearing the word of one speaker at one event.

Catch that. It's in the article below.

So that was the added part. This was the all -personal, this is, Robert Spencer's been behind most of what's gone on here, and we've known that all along.

But there's so many problems here that it's amazing, and we need to spend the last bit of our time together taking them apart.

What I decided to do was the first thing I did is I put in the search function of Robert Spencer, and it was in the context.

The enabling of him to spread soothing lies to Christian organizations on the basis of the claim that white was in the same context been afforded an opportunity to preach the gospel to Muslim audiences.

Isn't it amazing? See, the gospel is not the focus of Robert Spencer. So I just simply need to sit here and say what needs to be said.

Because of Robert Spencer's immense study of violent Islamic jihadi groups, we'll give him a pass on theology because they haven't done that amount of study themselves.

And so, because he will denounce the Muslims, they will not bring the issue of the gospel up to him, and they will not hold him to a gospel standard.

They will not prevent him from being involved in any kind of interviews on national programs,

Janet Mefford, whatever else it might be. Because if you listen to this, what you're hearing is a man presenting the idea that Islamic propaganda is more powerful than the gospel of Jesus Christ itself.

That's what he just said. That's what he just said. The gospel is not central to him presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Not once. Not once. So, when it says they don't realize that Qadi is far smarter than they are, well, maybe

Yasser is, and playing them for the purposes of dawah, fully recognize,

I fully recognize, every debate I do, Mr. Spencer, are you being played the fool in every debate you do because they get equal time to do their dawah?

You didn't know they were doing dawah? I've always known they were doing dawah. And they've always been known that I'm preaching the gospel.

But theologically, Mr. Spencer, from the Islamic perspective, doing dawah, there is nothing in dawah that has power in and of itself.

If you understood the theology, do you know what the mitzah is? Do you know what fitrah is?

Do you understand how from the Islamic perspective the appeal is to my rational nature?

I have the capacity in and of myself to accept the reasonable nature of Islamic arguments.

That's not the Christian view of the gospel, Mr. Spencer. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation.

So you've got the Muslim presenting a work salvation system, a scales system of salvation, no mediator between God and man, no mercy and grace that can be consistent because of the fulfillment of God's law.

I know these are not things that you address. I understand that. But you have them presenting that.

On the other side, we are presenting to them the very thing the Spirit of God uses to draw

His elect people unto Himself. And we even do it with an eye to winning the specific

Muslim person. And so we are seeking to utilize language that will be understandable to them.

Knowing what the objections are, knowing the understanding the Muslim has of Iman and the

Surat, the bridge, and judgment, and all the other things that are part of the Hadith, and the

Sunnah of the Prophet, and all the rest of that type of stuff. And so, which of the two has power in and of itself?

It's the gospel. But you see, for Robert Spencer, there's no power in the gospel.

It's just another message. And they've got their message, and they're going to fool their people, and we've got our message, and so on and so forth.

We go on from there. Their objective is to lie to the Christians and mislead them about the motivating ideology, nature, and magnitude of the

Jihad threat. And they know this will not be difficult because most Christians are woefully uninformed about Islamic texts and teachings and the pervasiveness of the

Jihad ideology in the Muslim world. And once again, long before Robert Spencer ever heard of me, or I ever heard of Robert Spencer, I was addressing,

I think it was 2007, is when I was playing portions of Yasir Qadhi's lectures on Jihad and Shirk on this program and responding from a

Christian perspective. Got no misgivings whatsoever. Now, I also recognize that Yasir Qadhi's perspective has, he would say, matured.

Other people would say, changed. Use whatever language you want.

I think it is necessary as Christians to show some level of respect.

And if a person says, this is my position, okay, I'm going to deal with what their position is. And if they say, you know, for example,

Yasir Qadhi said things in his 20s about the Holocaust that in his mid -40s he has rejected.

He said, I was wrong about that. I was in error. Many Christians, including

Brandon House, will not accept that. Once it's said, I guess he can't change his perspective.

He can't grow. He can't learn. Nothing. Once it's said, that's it. You're stuck with it.

Something tells me that kind of perspective will come back to bite you at some time or another. But anyway, well aware of what

Jihad is. Also well aware of the fact that from Robert Spencer's perspective there can be no other way of looking at Jihad other than the worst violent person blowing people up type stuff.

I mean, yeah, I have 320 page books, fatwas saying that's wrong, but from Spencer's perspective that's just all lies and we're all just being lied to right, left, and center.

They're all hiding AK -47s behind their back. They don't care what

White says to the Muslim audiences. So in other words, from Spencer's perspective, who cares if you get to explain the

Trinity, the deity of Christ, it doesn't matter because the Quran itself contains many responses to standard

Christian theology. No, it does not. Christians generally don't find them convincing.

See, do you hear the mindset here? This is a worldly mindset. It is a worldly mindset because this is how the world speaks about,

I don't find that argument convincing. Do you find that argument convincing? I was watching a BBC thing and they had that young woman,

I was talking about it on the program last week, and they looked at this audience of people who have absolutely no training in anything.

Well, do you find that convincing? What people find convincing is irrelevant. It's the spirit of God that makes the

Gospel come alive in people's hearts. And there is no spirit of God to make the

Muslim message to come alive in the hearts and minds of anybody. So, the whole point is that the author of the

Quran did not understand, did not have access to the New Testament. There is no refutation of the tremendous message of the

Book of Hebrews in the Quran because the author of the Quran had never heard the Book of Hebrews, had no idea what was in it.

So, there is nothing in the Quran that can give a response to a full -orb, true, biblical, spirit -anointed presentation of the

Gospel. Nothing at all. This is why this is a Gospel issue, folks.

And it is such a tragedy that so many who have been so deeply influenced by political influences have no interest whatsoever in the

Gospel -centeredness of the people they are interviewing in regards to these issues. Has Robert Spencer been unfairly targeted?

Has Robert Spencer been unfairly silenced in his criticisms of Islam? Completely true.

But every single one of you Christians who has sat down with Robert Spencer and you kept your mouth closed about the

Gospel, shame on you. He will tell you the first time he wrote to me, when

I responded to him, one of the, I ended the email with saying, be honest with you though, what you and I should be discussing is the

Gospel. First thing I said to him. And if you have interviewed him 47 ,000 times on your radio program and never witnessed to him about justification by faith, shame on you.

Christians generally don't find them convincing, that is the Quran's responses, but Muslims do. Until the spirit of God changes their hearts, not a part of this man's worldview.

And they act as a kind of inoculation against Muslims taking seriously the statements of an evangelist. Of course they do.

So I guess that means we shouldn't have any of these conversations. We just, just, just nuke them, huh?

You know, drone strike? Is that, is that the new evangelism here? Yes, many

Muslims do convert to Christianity. How? But this usually happens as a result of a lengthy process.

Yeah. And how does it start? How does it start? At some point or another, they're going to have to hear the truth.

They're going to have to meet a Christian who actually cares enough about them to stop calling them liars all the time.

To actually accept they believe X and here's why you shouldn't believe X. I understand that you believe

X and I understand you really believe X. But here's why.

That's the next letter. Here's, here's why and it's better than X and this is why you should abandon

X. And yeah, it frequently takes a long time but it always starts eventually with someone who has the willingness to lovingly say you've been misled.

And that's exactly the whole point of having these debates, these dialogues, whatever it is, as long as we have the opportunity of being able to speak the gospel, it is a message of power.

It is a message of power. But this usually happens as a result of a lengthy process not due to hearing the word of one speaker at one event.

Who has ever even suggested that? You see, you see the false dichotomy?

No one has ever suggested all they need is one speaker at one event. Our statement has always been we want to open that door.

That's what, isn't that what we've been criticized for? Oh, you just want to open doors of conversation.

Yeah, that normally means there's going to be a lengthy period of time. So we've talked about the meaning of dialegata, we've talked about Pytho, we've talked about Paul's utilization of these terms of convincing people, dialoguing with people, talking with people, reasoning with people.

That's obviously something that takes time. You've got it. It's got to start somewhere. How are you starting it,

Mr. Spencer? How does any of this start a loving, respectful, gospel -centered presentation to a

Muslim? Why is allowing yourself to be manipulated and played for a fool by Yasir Qadhi whose allegiances you can see in the article below?

So obviously, very clearly, what he wants to do here is another hit piece at Qadhi, which, again, what it partakes of is if you associate with other

Muslims, as long as they're associated with somebody else, associated with somebody else, you can connect them all together. If you're seen in public at a mosque, you're part of the

Muslim Brotherhood. I mean, there's no way to defend yourself against this. There really isn't. I mean,

I've seen this for a long time, but I've never seen it more clearly than the past six months. It is just this whitewash.

Throw it all out there. Everybody's associated with everybody else. It's the easiest way to shut down thinking and to say they're all conspiring to get us.

That's the mindset. So you throw that out, but then this is just simply the re -primer.

Let's try to re -prime this. Let's keep this thing alive, and I guarantee you there will be a response to this, and then if there's nothing more said, then between three and six months later, three and six months from now, it's going to happen again, and then it's going to happen again.

That's how this stuff works. That's how this stuff works. But once again, what makes the difference?

If you're a Christian, and again, outside the United States, the Christians outside the

United States, they're going, you've got to be kidding me. You've got to be kidding me. They recognize the gospel is the power of God.

Let the gospel go. Let it do its thing. Let the spirit of God make that message to come alive in people's hearts.

It's this American narrow -mindedness that allows people to go, well, we've got to give a safe place to the gospel.

It's just even -steven. Them smart Muslims, they're deceiving people, and so...

Wow. Wow. It's all... It's all about the gospel. Always will be.

Always will be. Always will be. So there you go. And nice picture of Yasir Qadhi and I from the video.

And... It would be too bad there... Well, you know, you probably, if you follow some of the links, would eventually find the dialogues.

And hey, as long as someone can eventually find that, I bet you, dollars and dollars, people end up getting saved.

Not because of this, but because they eventually run into that material there. So thanks for letting me know about that so we can give a response to it.

So we are hoping that we can find somebody at our ISP who will eventually be able to figure this whole thing out and we can start doing live programs again.

You know, it was the first day. The first day that the warp core, you know, starting to...

Huh? Plasma leak. It could be... Well, no. If it was plasma leak, I would be a skeleton. So you need to understand your

Star Trek physics. At that point. Anyways, how long have we gone,

Mr. Show Producer Man? That's pretty close to a normal -sized dividing line.

I didn't know exactly when we got started, so that's pretty good. We'll call that good.

And someday I'm going to have to pick up that sword and swing it around a little bit and destroy one of the cameras or something in the process.

But I've always wondered what it's going to look like once we got the opportunity to get the swords back there.

I've always thought it'd also be good if we ever had, like, Antifa guys storm the property.

You only get the Maximus sword. It's the... Actually, in a crowd, that's the better one because it's shorter.

You can do more with it. But I get the long sword and I wouldn't want anybody swinging at me.

No. No, no. No way. It's heavy and it may not be sharpened, but that tip is...

Mm -mm. No. Mm -mm. Not going there. Not going there. Anyway, you know what would really freak somebody out?

Is if we did a program and instead of having the swords there, we had some rifles. Can we limit...

Could we do one where only people in Texas could watch the program? The dividing line with weapons.

No, no. The Texas dividing line. The Texas dividing line. Oh, we've got better laws here.

The Arizona dividing line. That's what we could do. Let me tell you something.

It would not be the Massachusetts dividing line. No, no. Not the Washington State dividing line. No, no, no.

The left coast and... No, that's not going to happen. Anyways, thanks for watching, folks.