Happenings in Rome, Acts 15, and Provisionist Rhetoric

Okay, he's welcome to the dividing line. We're a little bit early today a little bit earlier than we normally go, but that's because My little

Dini is at the vets and I'll need to be going to get him in a little while His voice will be a little higher.

I imagine It's that time of life. We don't want a bunch of little Dini's running around the neighborhood anytime in the near future.

So Doing our part and keeping Bob Barker happy in the afterlife

You might might say but anyway, I'm sure somebody will probably complain about that, too

That's sort of how it how it works More wild and crazy stuff happening in Rome We're gonna be starting a sermon series at Apologia on Roman Catholicism that Jeff and I will be taking different parts

Over the next couple of months. Well, obviously I I leave early February so My parts will be done by that that point in time,

I guess but The stuff going on with Fernandez And the books he's written of really questionable character

If you're not familiar with all this For many years

Joseph Ratzinger was known as the German Shepherd He was the head of The congregation now that now it's called something else the

Dicastery for the doctrine of the faith or something like that it's the old Inquisition, it's the It's the part of the

Roman hierarchy that's responsible for enforcing doctrine basically and And That's one of the reasons that people were really surprised that he ever became

Pope was You don't make friends influence people at that particular point in time, well you do influence people but not quite in that context anyway

Last July, I believe it was Francis removed the head of the

Dicastery the the Inquisition and replace him with a

Obviously a buddy it was nepotism in a sense Someone who had a sport him for a long time and from the same background the same area and stuff like that I've had some people tell me he's a

Jesuit other people said there's no evidence of that You would think there wouldn't be a problem in being open and clear and honest about this type of stuff

But but this guy has said he's way to the left of Francis that he holds more radical views and Francis doesn't

Francis is obviously a liberation theologian and everything else So if he's to the left of him he's way out there and he's a ghostwriter

For Francis and so this is really troubling to a lot of people There's already been at least two

Papal pronouncements that pretty much this guy wrote They're not really coming from the Pope. He's just rubber -stamping what this guy is writing and He's written books on Kissing and other stuff that I might even go into That you know people starting to find out about and and it's like How does this guy end up where he's ended up I mean, he's the guy behind the recent statement that many many bishops and Cardinals around the world have said nope ain't doing that of the in regards to fiduciary supplicants,

I think it was what it was in regards to the possibility of Blessings same -sex relationships as long as it doesn't look like a wedding as long as it couldn't be confused the blessings you give for a regular wedding and Again, everybody knows what this is about you don't

I Look I feel for you guys. I I I Honestly feel for people that are trying to hold on to stuff when it's obviously coming apart

But everybody knows this is how it's been done everywhere else it's been done

It's a it's a little step here and a little step there and then a bigger step and bigger step and bigger step and By the time you get to the the fifth six seven step

Everything that you were warning about in the first step has now come true and it's the exact same game plan

It's how the left works. It doesn't matter if it's in the United Church of Christ or the

United Methodist Church or the ELCA or PC USA What whatever it's the same process and it's happening right before our eyes in Rome Where we've been told forever that can never take place because we have the infallible magisterium and we have the doctrine of the infallibility of The Pope and the

Pope cannot teach error to the church and and again the most worthless doctrine on the planet because the way that it function is

The Pope cannot teach error to the church except when he does

It's just but and you never know when you don't you don't know if the current living

Pope Is telling the truth and you're not going to know for generations afterwards

That's that's the only way you can explain Honorius and it's the only way you can explain all of the the doctrinal changes that there have taken place and are taking place and Are accelerating and they're taking place within Roman Catholicism and So this is why right now

The you know This I know I'm well aware of the fact that there has been a huge change

Since The late 1990s, okay, let's let's say over the past 20 years 20 -25 years, you know, we've been dealing with this subject for a long long long long long time and if if we had challenged

Catholic answers in 2001 To debate is

John Paul the second the infallible vicar of Christ on earth. They would have jumped at the opportunity

But You you can't find anybody to defend Francis in that way because the only people who would have to be theological leftists and liberals and as a result

Uh They're not interested in debating anyways, they don't debate is outside of the realm of what they think is appropriate that sheep -stealing and All that kind of proselytization stuff that Francis has spoken against for the past 10 years

So you you it's so obvious to those of us who've been watching

Rome for a long time how much change has already taken place and It's just sad to watch people, you know going well, you know he might end up being an antipope and you know, but you know the ship will right itself and everything's gonna be fine and and they they just they just can't bring themselves to admit just how much of a radical this guy is and You know it and the same thing happens within politics you you see these

Truly radical individuals that are out there and and people just When you look in the past you can you can see oh,

I would have opposed that person that person that person But when they're actually alive when they're right there in front of you

You just can't believe that certain people would be as radical as they are but but they are that's why

Biden's in the White House is The radicals that are actually running the country

Had to had to remain hidden and you had to have a empty suit a

Someone who's just not even there It's hard to get It was a it was a it was possible to get angry with Biden when he did that insane red light background screeching

Speech that he did a couple years ago But other than that you even watch the man walk

He walks like the little senile old men at at the old folks home, and we all see it

He doesn't he doesn't know what day it is. He doesn't know what's going on. We know he's not in charge we and and that's the way

It has to be I mean the leadership at the highest levels in The military and everything else has been so utterly compromised the only way it could happen is to keep it hidden and that's what they've done and Just as fundamental

Things within the American government are being changed outside of the view of people that's what's happening in Rome and We just we just can't we just can't believe that it's happening during our lifetime.

We're right in front of our faces but it is and I feel for people within Roman Catholicism that just They see it.

There's a part of their mind that realizes what's going on and the other part says no I can't accept any of this and so they're they're left in this strange world and and that's why

Conversion right now just strikes me as so odd and strange You're you're converting to a very confused system you and so when when people convert and they say it's because solo scriptura is not true and And you just I sit there and go.

Okay. All right, so solo scriptura is not true and what you've got which is producing massive confusion and division and Massively wide range of expression

Within what's called the Catholic Communion So that you can and and yeah, you know, we've we've had the liberals at Boston College for a long time

And and I keep pointing to them and saying why doesn't Why doesn't the papacy do something about this?

You want your infallible leader? But why? What's going on? And Now those radicals of Boston College are pretty much in charge

And And you want to say that the

Pope somehow keeps everything unified or You need the teaching magisterium in the church except right now the magisterium is telling you something different than the magisterium told you 20 years ago and you literally have bishops that there's a there's a

Synod going on sort of in fits and starts right now and And if it had if you listen to what's being said the people that are representing

Francis and the magisterium and the direction they want things to go You know what they're saying and you know what they want to have accepted within Roman Catholicism And you've got all sorts of bishops.

They're just being honest and saying this is where it's going and then they get kicked out or they get silenced or whatever else and It's it you just want to go so so this is your your solution this is

You you will you will stand there and say scripture is insufficient, but the magisterium is for producing what?

What what's it sufficient for producing? You know,

I mean, let me give an example I Got to see this 1946 movie finally.

It was exactly what we expected to be. It's 99 % emotion. It's it's 0 % meaningful scholarship the argumentation is just as vacuous and bad as Expected it to be it's the standard

You know, you look at Arsene Koytai and you know, the sibling oracles say this and you know hundreds of years later and And you know ignore the actual

Origination of the term. It's it's everything we've said it would be it's it's it's really nothing new It's just another

Emotional way of getting around to deal the dealing with the reality of what scripture says about homosexuality and so a

Roman Catholic might say well We don't have that you you Protestants have that that's what that's what soul scripture results in But it's not

You you have to if you if you're a Roman Catholic and you think that the leftist quote -unquote progressivist

Impulse is due to soul scripture Then you don't understand soul scripture and you do not understand what progressivists believe about scripture.

They don't believe in soul scripture They don't believe they don't even believe in a script or a let alone a sola Their view of scripture is so low so secular that to even even

Include them in the conversation is to not have the conversation at all So I Hear people saying stuff like that and I go no and in fact sola scriptura allows us to stand firm even when the society and The winds of cultural change are blowing the opposite direction

We can and must stand firm in what scripture teaches Because it's the sole infallible rule of faith the church and the church does not have the right to become its its its own guiding voice and These denominations that have

Abandoned that do not practice solo scripture. They do not believe in solo scripture and those denominations that do are holding firm and Up till recently you could at least try to make an argument

Well, so is Roman Catholicism, but you can't make that argument anymore No matter how hard you try you had a bishop at the

Synod when asked a question About LGBTQ issues and LGBTQ inclusion.

What did he do? Maybe you didn't catch this part but he made reference to the change in the

Catholic Catechism on Capital punishment as an example of What could be coming and the teaching on capital punishment has been reversed for hundreds of years you could look at the 1592

Catechism of the Council of Trent and its description of capital punishment as a gift to the state a an unpleasant gift a

It's sad that God would have to do this, but the state has to be able to Create order and there are certain crimes

That are so heinous That the only possible Just punishment is execution.

Well That was the doctrine for a long long long long long long time and it's not anymore.

It's been reversed. It's it's never right according to the Catholic Catechism now and He pointed to that in Answer to a question that means there are people in the hierarchy of Rome That's the direction their thinking is going and here's the question if you reject sola scriptura, how can you stop it?

You can't You can't you can't do the ball we a council will stop it that that the days that passed

Can't can't do it anymore Council of Constance Healed the papacy but very quickly the papacy

Stamped out any kind of conciliarism and the elevation of an ecumenical council of the ultimate authority and Vatican one then

Drove a stake through the corpse of that whole thing You you can't read back and one

And you know and I I see you guys out there. I see You know, there was a there was a guy in Was it

Nigeria, it was one of the one of the African bishops Was saying we're not we're not

Going with this statement with this Papal statement. We're not we're not going to do it

But we're not opposing Pope Francis Yes, you are

Yeah, you can you can pretend that you're not opposing Pope Francis But I can guarantee you one thing he knows you're opposing him

You know, you you may try to you know, do all the political stuff and well, we're not really doing this or not yes, you are and That's what you're stuck with That's that's where you are, sorry

I'm not going to not utilize this information if you're going to deny sola scriptura

I'm gonna say look what the option is because You're not the only option out there you've got

Eastern Orthodoxy you've got all sorts of people who will say You're right

Scripture alone is not sufficient. Therefore. You need the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses You need the

Council of the Twelve and the first presidency of the Mormon Church You need all these other external stuff

And when you put all those groups together and compare what they believe they can't even figure out where there's one

God or not the churches and denominations that actually understand solo scriptura and seek to live in light of it have

Tiny differences in comparison to the groups that say scripture plus an infallible authority

And I know you y 'all don't like that comparison, but that's the proper comparison

Um what y 'all like do is just well, we're only going to compare us and Even then you'll sort of trim off the weirdness on the outsides.

We're only going to compare us to all solo scriptura believing Protestant denominations and normally you don't even worry about that you just Throw the

Gnostics in and all the rest of stuff just to get the numbers as big as possible so There's a guy and I have

The only way to really do this. It's it's an 18 -minute video You know I could just play the 18 -minute video, but it would take too long

There is a guy on YouTube called Reformed to Rome so he's a former

Calvinist Who has gone who has converted Roman Catholicism and Whenever you challenge him on stuff

He just goes well look You've got a deal with this video that I did

That proves solo scriptura is not true now. I don't I Don't know if he really thinks

That having a video where he argues that acts chapter 15 is the reputation of solo scriptura is a sufficient argument

To go and that means Francis is the infallible vigor of Christ. It's just by default

I'm not sure if he actually believes that and I I do wonder honestly if once Francis goes and The only options left, and I and I don't know if if he has actually

Made the changes that are being rumored that he's working on as To how his successor is going to be selected to where a quarter of the votes gonna come from outside the

College of Cardinals including laypeople and women But I I can guarantee you if there is a group of laypeople and women that are being chosen

They're probably not Conservatives, okay, just just a wild guess that who knows

And and so it makes it makes me wonder Will it take one more

Pope that's to the left of Francis Could you imagine a

Fernandez as Pope Oh Even I get go. Whoa at the very thought

I wouldn't want to see that though. It would certainly lead to massive disruption and schism pretty much immediately

But I can't see how The next

Pope is not going to be at least as far to the left if not farther than Francis and If that continues so you keep

Choosing Cardinals based upon agreement with this new narrative the Synod and the synodality keeps pushing the

LGBTQ inclusion stuff and We just know where that ends up going how many

Popes? moving marching leftward Will it take?

before conservative Historically Orthodox Roman Catholic Catholics go it's done.

It's been hijacked. It's finished You know, what will it take how much does it take

I don't know so It really it really does, you know when you place it within that within the context of what's happening right now

And then you look at this argument you realize Wow talk about straining at Nats But we need to look at what the argument is

So since he used it looks like PowerPoint Same Same layout

I've used for a number of my presentations actually Here's here's the here's the fundamental argument, okay

But let me just summarize that then we'll read through it The Quote -unquote

Council of Jerusalem the the meeting that takes place in Acts chapter 15 where you have

Paul Peter By the way,

Peter is not quote -unquote in charge He's not functioning as a Pope Read it yourself and You'll see it.

This is the case So that's a problem in itself Is that the early church does not have any concept of Peter needing to be in charge of this particular meeting

But since they gave out a quote -unquote decree since they wrote to the

Gentile churches and Of course what they wrote was this is how we believe we can keep peace

Because there was a real threat. I mean, I would say That for Paul When you realize how much of a threat he considered that division to be that is the idea of a

Gentile Christian Church and a Jewish Christian Church dividing this is what

Antioch was about in Romans chapter 3 For all have sinned and fall short the glory of God the context that is all

Jews and Gentiles This is central to his concern all along and so When when you recognize that when you see what's going on there then

This desire for unity and and the place that Paul places the emphasis

Paul places upon this this this letter is meant to Provide a means for keeping peace in the early church.

The argument is it's an infallible Doctrinal and it's an infallible source outside of Scripture, even though the only way we know about it is in Scripture the argument literally is yeah, but it existed before Luke wrote

Acts and Therefore it is something outside of Scripture that has infallible authority and therefore there's no soul of Scripture right now and He's aware of this.

He's aware of the fact that Most of us just look at this and go you converted over this

And in fact, I asked him On Twitter. I never got a response or if I did

I never saw it which unfortunately is Sort of how things can happen on Twitter But I asked him, you know honestly

If you you claim to have been reformed and hence to have been trusting in the all -sufficient

Merit of The imputed righteousness of Christ and you're willing to trade that away because that's what you have to do

You can't you cannot believe That You have imputed to you the righteousness of Christ in Roman Catholicism.

They don't believe that That's not a part of the teaching of the church You can't have that with the

Roman Catholic doctrine of the mass. You can't have that with the Roman Catholic doctrine of baptism sacramental forgiveness all that stuff is based upon an utter denial of The blessedness of the blessed man of Romans 4a to whom the

Lord would not impute sin the entirety of the doctrine of purgatory vanishes into thin air

When you ask the question, who's the blessed man? So I asked how does that work?

How did what what and I didn't get an answer and like I said

If if something was written I didn't see it So, let's let's

Back to the point. He knows what the answers are and specifically

That solo scriptura is Not a valid principle during periods of giving the scripture.

How could it be? You can't you can't even have the the issue is

After revelation has ceased. What is the infallible rule of faith of church? That's the question and Both sides at least in you know, not when you're talking with Mormons, but when you're talking with Roman Catholics, we believe revelation has ceased that there are no

Apostles today now I Have talked to some Roman Catholics and some former Roman Catholics that would go, you know, the only way really to to really substantiate something like the bodily assumption is to sort of fudge on that and Come up with the idea that maybe there really is continuing revelation

That's sorry. The only way to only way to pull it off But we allegedly agree on that issue.

And so the question is the church After the Apostles, what is the soul infallible rule of faith?

And so acts 15 is a recording of the work of the

Spirit and So much of what we see in Paul's epistles and there in acts is dealing with the church is coming to wrestle with The gospel going to the

Gentiles and the nature of what the new covenant is going to be And how it's to be applied and all of this kind of stuff and so the idea that a

Council that we only know about and we only know about what what the conclusion of the

Apostolic conversation was because it's found in Scripture that that somehow demonstrates that solo scripture isn't true

Makes all of us go, but that's just silly, but he does try to say well

It can't be true at one point and not true another one. Yes, it can Yes, it can

We're talking about after The events of redemption and the establishment of the church what is the church to look to as Its soul infallible rule of faith or are there going to be lots of infallible rules of faith?

That is the question and it is not a definitional part of the claim of solo scriptura to say that during periods of time when

God is Revealing Scripture when he is revealing the scriptura that it exists somehow

To the exclusion of Revelation no revelation is taking place right now The issue is after the

Apostles are gone. What does the church look to and Acts 15 does not answer that question and To convert over something like that tells me that's probably not why you converted

That was just your way of getting around what you really want to get out of conversion Okay So let's take a look at this real quick because I have some other stuff to get to So it says the decree of the

Jerusalem Council is the decree infallible We can only know the decree as it exists in Scripture now before we can answer the question of there being an infallible source outside of Scripture We need to answer the question of the

Jerusalem Council decrees infallibility acts of teen Affirms infallibility the content of the decree assuming infallibility of Scripture to which proponents the soul script to generally hold

The important question is was the decree infallible before Luke record in Acts 15 Was it made infallible by Luke's recording of it?

No, it's both both are irrelevant The only only reason we know it is it is in Scripture this is a part of redemption history that is recorded for us and For edification and for the guidance of the church, it's not the setting up of some external

Paradigm where the church can call councils and create infallible

Well again, it would have to be revelatory stuff This is revelatory because it's found in Scripture, but once there aren't any apostles

There's no revelation so any Now the some

Roman Catholics have argued argued that if you can have this council in Acts 15 that therefore whenever the church calls a

Council in the future. It has the same level of infallible authority. In fact, it's interesting if you read

Where is it? Yeah perspectives on church government B &H

Robin Holman, um, if you read the exchange that I had with Robert Raymond I was defending plurality of elders.

He was defending the Presbyterian ecclesiology they looked at Acts 15 as foundation for Sessions and presbyteries for a

Ecclesiastical organization above the local church and so you'll see that when we did our

Response to somebody else. I know that they had to ask him to cut his back because he went way over his limit

Because it really at that point devolved down to a debate between he and I and We both used our maximum number of words

In our in our rebuttal But only of each other When when we were when we were rebutting other people

They just hadn't made enough of an argument to really have to invest a whole lot of time in it

But when we respond to each other it was max because that's where they're trying to come up with this external stuff

Um, but the fact is there is nothing in The council in Acts chapter 15 that indicates that this is something that's going to be repeated in the future

It doesn't establish some kind of conciliar paradigm You don't have you know, just just look to both 2nd

Timothy which Progressivists can't look to as being Pauline And neither can

Trent Horne given what he's said about the meaning of the autostas But 2nd

Timothy and Acts 20, so only a few chapters after Acts 15 in Acts 20 when

Paul's with the Ephesian elders He doesn't say to them just just call councils when you have any questions

He he commends them to the the grace of God and the message of the gospel

That's that's what he commits them to same thing. He does for Timothy in the 2nd Timothy chapter 3 So we continue on here at senses the video

I have to there we go if I skip something is because I just Hold the thing too far

Now The important question was the decree infallible before Luke record it in Acts 15

Or was it made infallible by Luke's recording it if the decree was fallible when issued that it is a fallible section of Scripture.

Well This obviously is applying categories exceptionally

Anachronistic categories back upon an event in the early church that was

Primarily Jewish in Context and it had to do with the fact well, you know

Acts chapter 10 Sheets coming down from heaven Rise Peter Kelly.

No, no, don't call what I've called unclean clean unclean and blah blah blah blah This is going on for chapters.

This is a major major major issue in the early church And It is all about the fact that there's can be only one way

To be in right relationship to God and that is in Jesus Christ His righteousness imputed to us is what makes us all one and So It's not so even even asking questions about fallible infallible.

It's not meant to be a Decree it is meant to be this is how we need to have peace as We are affirming that the gospel is going out into the

Gentile world we are affirming that this is what God is doing That the

Judaizers are wrong in Saying you must become a part of the Old Covenant before you can become a part of the

New Covenant And so This is the the the

Apostles Affirming that what God has done first with Peter and Cornelius And now with Paul Going out, you know the

Apostle of the Gentiles That this is God's purpose. This is what God's doing in the church So the idea of fallible infallible is irrelevant.

This is what the church did And it was a part of the spirits working in the church during period of inscripturation

That's what You know, that's that's like Asking there's a number of things in the book of Acts That show the evolution from a completely

Jewish group in Jerusalem to People in Caesar's household by the time the history is wrapped up and The church has always struggled with people that try to make some of the most primitive periods normative for everything else

So, what do you make normative do you make the first ten chapters normative do you make the last ten chapters normative what

Exactly. How do you how do you handle these things? It says since the

New Testament recognizes decree as an infallible source of doctrine never using terminology like this

It's the Apostles teaching the church. We know the decree itself is infallible the authorize the the authors recognize the

Holy Spirit as a source Yeah, they recognize the Holy Spirit source. It's not something outside of Scripture However, because Scripture is still being written.

There are still entire books the New Testament that have not yet been written This is during apostolic ministry

Since the decree was not issued as Scripture doesn't have to be that's like that's like saying well since Since Luke didn't issue acts as Scripture Luke didn't write the gospel

Luke as Scripture Paul didn't write Philemon as Scripture.

I mean this it's just that's why it's sort of hard to deal with this because it's so silly It was outside of Scripture being recorded

Scripture doesn't make a Scripture beforehand same as scriptural citations of secular writings, etc. No Just so many category errors in this fellow's thinking it's it's sad.

And by the way the only person I can think of That used a similar argument to this and all that and I've debated

Sola Scriptura with a lot of Roman Catholics and It wasn't in a debate on Sola Scriptura.

It was in the debate on the bodily assumption of Mary and it was Bob St. Genes and St.

Genes used Acts chapter 15 in a sort of similar fashion to try to Come up with the idea that You know and like I said, you've got to give

Bob credit He's one of the few people that's even had the guts to debate this vast majority Roman Catholic apologists won't touch with the 10 -foot pole

Because they know the only the only defense for it. It's not you can't defend it historically You can't defend it biblically.

The only thing you can do is say well the church has said it therefore That's it doesn't work real well in in debates at least he tried

I think failed miserably, but he did try and used Acts chapter 15 as as as a mechanism, so Obviously every sermon

Every sermon and acts was outside of Scripture when it was preached But this is this is supposed to be relevant

This this kind of reasoning is why you now submit to Francis Seriously, you you've seen

You've seen the pictures of you know, as soon as it came out of a priest blessing a same -sex couple and You don't see that that's the end result of the twisting you're doing here

Okay That's ugly so he goes on So he says since Scripture uses the decree as an infallible source of doctrine

That's affirming its fallibility at the decree wasn't a self -issue to Scripture We see that we do in fact have an infallible rule of faith that was outside of Scripture Really I It's sort of My hope and prayer

This is what I'd love to see happen, I would love to see this individual Watch what happens with the election of the next

Pope who will be to the left of the current Pope and Realize I've made a mistake

I've I Need to I need to be humble enough to realize I I Traded away the imputed righteousness of Christ and true

I reign a with God for the endless treadmill of penances and sacramental forgiveness indulgences and everything else on the basis of a and and I used and grabbed on to not necessarily because I Can think of like I said in the vast majority of debates

I've done this has not been the direction they went but I glommed on to an argument and That argument doesn't work and that there would be sufficient humility to go

I'm going to abandon it and I'm going to Seek true peace with God in the way that Scripture has said to To do that this infallible rule of faith outside of Scripture was distributed to all the faithful and bound them to the decree issued again taking

Ecclesiastical Formulations from a thousand years later reading it backwards

And again every every sermon in the book of Acts Was preached before it was written down in Scripture This kind of I'm gonna

I'm gonna force during periods of relation a standard after periods of relation

Doesn't make any sense and so he does try to say Success, but now we have succeeded in technically refuting the definition of soul scriptura

Which he didn't give and and violated clearly because soul scriptura isn't talking about periods of relation

That Scripture is the only infallible of faith since the decree was an infallible rule of faith circulated outside of Scripture But critics still have a few avenues left to try and salvage their position

You get the feeling that this guy already sort of had his conclusions laid out beforehand and now it's just what can we cobble together here?

Can claim soul scriptura was only for periods without ongoing ascripture ratio Oh, so he does know and new revelation and not the norm for the people of God throughout the ages, right?

Can claim soul scriptura was only intended to be true and applied after all the Apostle died Uh -huh, and I compiled it a positive faith in the scriptures under the inspiration of the

Holy Spirit. All right Okay, so how do you how do you get around that? Well This is problematic in application well only if you're anachronistic because in theory

Protestants view all periods outside the intertestamental period and the post -apostolic period as When the process of new revelation and scripturation was occurring so it almost leads the next recourse by fault

Even if you tried to parse it beyond that broad approach saying it was intermittent periods of alternating soul scriptura and revelation and scripturation

This shows on a whole soul scriptura was not not the norm again. What's the real issue?

The real issue is for the Church of Christ After the Apostles have gone. How do you hear the voice of Christ?

What do you have? You have Francis You can't get away from him.

I Have scripture I'm in the better position by a long shot by a long shot

Don't don't sit there and tell me that Acts chapter 15 is sufficient basis for a

Jesuit priest blessing two guys holding hands The only blessing that is to be given to someone in that situation is repent

And that's not what Francis or Martin or Fernandez are saying

That's not and you know it and you're stuck with it And that's just that's just one

Could you put a screen up for a second, please just a second

Hello Dini's fine

Look look, it's live guys and my my kitty had surgery and When the vet calls you, you know, you still got that little thought back your mind that Things happen, you know, and you want it you want to know so I'll be picking him up Question is will he ever forgive me?

I Was holding another one of my cats we have a 15 year old Who does not like any of the new additions the family 15 year old who we had fixed as well

And I was sort of just chatting with him if you can chat with a cat You don't really remember that do you have never really held that against us?

As he's purring in my lap. And so yeah, no, I It might take a week, but eventually he'll

He'll get past it and all will be well. So hey, I'm We're only so what was the

Piper book Brethren, we're not professionals or something like that. Well, we we prove that every every program that we do so anyway, um

Where were we? Okay, so He says even if you tried to parse it beyond that broad approach saying it was intermittent periods of alternating souls return revelation and Scripturation this shows on the whole source which was not the norm.

Okay Irrelevant We're talking about after the last

Apostle has died. What does the church have? Rome says we've got this oral tradition.

We never have to tell you what it is We don't have to demonstrate that anybody in the first thousand years the church believed it, but we can

Force you to believe it and that's what you Reformed to Rome.

That's where you are You believe things that have zero connection to the

Apostles none and You seriously want anyone else to believe you seriously want to believe you want to lead people to believe these?

ultimately Obviously non -apostolic teachings as if they define the faith itself day -to -day on the basis of this

Redefinition of the soul scriptura shame on I Hope God convicts you.

I really really He goes on to and just keeps building on this but it there's the error

It's a fundamentally misdefined doctrine of the soul scriptura and Once you recognize the anachronism of it, you just go.

Well, okay. There you go enough for that. Thank you. Mr Pierce for that. You can pull that down.

I Just take pulling things down when it's still up on the screen. It looks As unprofessional as me taking phone calls from the vet, but hey, we can avoid that okay a number of statements

Okay select why can't why won't you move? Oh, thank you. Ah A number of statements some latent flowers that I Want to address that You know rich always wants me to be addressing latent flowers

Rich would rather come in here and do it himself. I think it would be very short.

He said okay him troubling statements You know, there's been troubling statements for a long time, but it seems to me that they're coming fast and furious these days.

I I'm wondering if the impending debate has something to do with that probably does probably does

Here's one a provisionist says something like the few who are elect in Jesus wedding parable are

Those who came in response to the invitation Clothed in his righteousness by faith the wedding garments

We are chosen only in so far as we are clothed in Christ the chosen one

Now I just want you to to hear what's being said there

Because yes, I think it's appropriate to think about Wedding garments show submission to the standards of inclusion in the wedding and so the the whole point of the rejection of The individual because remember the the king had sent servants out come to the wedding come to the wedding

Because a number of people have made excuses and weren't coming remember And Yet the parable points out that one came without a wedding garment and was cast out and are out of darkness

So you don't get to determine what that is. You don't get to determine what the standards are but We are chosen

Only in so far as we are clothed in Christ the chosen one. So that seems to indicate to me

Now, of course again, this is the standard misreading of Ephesians chapter 1

Christ is not the direct object of the choosing in Ephesians chapter 1 we are

Christ is the realm in which and the exclusive Realm in which we are chosen

The Ephesians 1 is the death knell of any Inclusivistic concept inclusivism is dead on arrival unless you find some way around Ephesians chapter 1

Which is by the way that that is the text that I have been asked to preach on in Houston The Sunday Yeah, the

Sunday morning after the debate on Purgatory with Trent horn, I think you have to double -check that but I'm pretty certain

So that's next month Yeah, a little over a month from now

I'll be preaching there in Houston at Votie Balcom's old church on and they've asked

I do Ephesians 1 3 through 14, so There we go. Anyways, we'll be doing that but we are chosen

Only in so far as we are clothed in Christ. So we clothe ourselves in Christ by our free will act we have that capacity and Hence the only way we can said to be be chosen is

Because we have chosen to be in him. It's our choice. It's not God's choice God's choice is only the big category stuff but the actual

Application and fruition it's our choice. That's that's what provisionism is. It's that's what they hate is

The idea that it's God's choice. It determines who is going to be in Christ and who is not it's totally up to us

That's that's the the the important part there and you can see where that ends up leading.

So the next one Was stop that just drag and there we go

Calvinists assume one must be better in order to believe in Christ Now, of course that's absurd and We don't believe that We believe you have to be spiritually alive and given the gift of faith and repentance

You have to be a new creature in Christ we take Romans 5 seriously, so they affirm pre -faith regeneration ie

They affirm that a spiritually dead person Must be made alive by the

Spirit of God to do spiritual acts such as faith and repentance

When you when you put it that way, it's like well, duh But they have their they're developing their own

Lingo Which changes a lost person to someone better ie with a new heart?

No, not better different Spiritually alive. That's like saying, you know

It's better to be alive than dead Okay but What they're reacting against is our saying to them as we rightfully do if you're saying that there is no divine decree if you're saying that there is no decree of election that God does not select a particular people in Christ Jesus if you're saying everybody has the equal capacity to believe in Christ and that God is

Trying equally with every single individual which is so obviously not true it's the

Bible is a Massive refutation of such thinking isn't it?

Isn't it a massive refutation of such thinking are you telling me that God gave as much light to someone living in South Egypt as He did to Moses and the

Israelites Don't even try don't what are you talking about? It's absurd

But that's provisionism. So God's trying to save everybody equally. Everybody has equal capacity so The question that we ask is all right if God's trying equally and We're we are all receiving equal light from the proclamation of the gospel or whatever else it might be which isn't true, but Okay, we run with it.

Then if you and your next -door neighbor A guy who's gone to school with you all the way through high school

You all heard the exact same messages Maybe even went to some young life things after after school a couple times, whatever

You're a Christian They hate the gospel Why are you a

Christian and they're not a Christian God's trying equally with both of you So the only answer is in you it's not in God it's in you you were more humble you were more sensitive and There's where language of better would come in Because it's compared with someone who's under the same amount of conviction

God's trying just as hard with them as he is with you. You can't say he tries harder with anybody else because that becomes election

So you can't have that so it's equal attempt with everybody and If you accept and someone else does not

Then you are better Than the other person more sensitive more spiritually insightful whatever terms you want to use

Because we're not talking about spiritually dead spiritually alive. We're not talking about need to need to be resurrected

Regenerated you've you've done away with all that stuff You're playing with the term responsible in Latin and English has given you the the ground to say we're all able to respond

And therefore this is now your question. It's not our question. We don't have to answer it because we don't believe it

We don't believe we don't play those games No, man is able who doing it.

I'll take that over you're playing with Latin Forever so You keep putting better in square quotes as well

You should because it is a there there is no crossover of categories to making this a meaningful comparison

Which changes a lost person to someone better I you with a new heart and then they project their assumption on us by asking

What made you better so you'd believe so I just explained that's not a projection assumption

That's a recognition of the fundamental differences in our anthropology Our doctrine of sin our doctrine of capacity and ability the whole nine yards what regeneration is everything

They are question begging by assuming a person must be better in order to believe no

We are not question begging we in our system a person has to be spiritually alive to exercise spiritual gifts and capacities in Yours, that's irrelevant.

And so the question is valid everybody is the same point everyone's receiving the same light from God and Therefore, why does one believe and one does not it's a relevant question to you?

It's not a relevant question to us When the truth is that God created in such a way that anyone can put their trust in Christ for salvation

So there again, there's your anthropology The Bible can directly say no one is able and you go, ah, it's just about the

Jews You don't need to be turned into a better person in order to believe in Jesus well again

That is using the term better in a confusing and misleading fashion

It's confusing better with spiritually alive And you've always struggled with categories,

I think you've always struggled with categories I think you always will But there's a clear obvious thing. So various people responded to that Resulting in a lengthy one that I think was this morning says 855

On the 9th. Yep. That was this morning. That's when I screenshot anyways, so he decided to try to unpack it further

I'll try to be brief here You know what

To be Since yet when I respond to Calvinist who asked the common last question

What makes you better? That you believe in someone else didn't and I use the Calvinist own word the word better to respond that I'm accused of gross

Misrepresentation. Yeah, you know what? I I don't need to go through this because I just demonstrated all this. Yes it is gross misrepresentation because it's not a matter for us of Betterness goodness or anything like humility any of those things

Regeneration doesn't make you better. It makes you alive. It makes you a new creation in Christ Jesus and So you don't believe because you've been made better You believe because you've been recreated in the image of Christ and it's natural for one thusly created

And in top of the Holy Spirit to believe in the one who has redeemed them and brought them to spiritual life

It's not a matter of better You're the one who does not believe in spiritual death or have so minimized it that you will not allow it to mean what it says in Scripture and so When we ask the question, it's again it's back to if if God's doing the even thing if he's trying with each person evenly and You believe and the other person doesn't why?

What makes you you fill in the blank you fill in the blank what what turn do you want to use? but just be honest about what's being said and Why the term better is irrelevant when when you try to back apply it to us

Do I do this last one, you know,

I think it I think it'd be worthwhile Briefly to go ahead and do this because I Know five ten minutes at the most

Here is a a quotation again, Leighton flowers When you pray for the unconverted people you do so on the assumption that God desires that they come

Not on the assumption that he destined most of them to be unable to come because he chose to reprobate them

Before they were born for reasons beyond their control. Now again, it's not a matter of whether you believe or not um The the the poisoned pill terminology is just so so bad

That it's it's it's it's astonishing When you pray for unconverted people

You do so on the assumption that God desires that they come No, I don't

When when you go out to I didn't get to go out to Christmas lights didn't work out sickness -wise, but We'll go out to the

Easter pageant Hopefully get to do so here I'm not even sure when

Easter is this year now. I think about it. Let's find out what that is I don't be interested. No, um,

I Pray that God would be glorified in the proclamation of his gospel And that what that's good.

That's good. That that means Yeah, that means we can definitely get out there

You know who you know who's heading up the Mormon outreach for apology

Eric my son -in -law I try not to say a whole lot.

I mean everybody knows How proud I am of summer and the worldwide ministry that she's developed through sheologians and Just the tremendous job she's doing and homeschooling and all the rest that kind of stuff but you know,

I don't want to get Eric into trouble, but Pretty pretty proud of that young man. She she found she found a gem.

She really did and You can already start telling We really wondered what would a the offspring of summer and Eric be like Because they both have really weird sense of humor and we're we're getting an idea that that may be the happiest boy.

I've ever seen Now, I know he's not always like that. I heard Saturday night was pretty ugly.

It's got molars coming in and And that a bunch of them are hitting all at the same time so yeah, not not overly happy during during that time period but Generally, he is the smiling us happiest little booger you ever see.

So Yes, anyways back to what you're saying when we go to when we go out to witness to the

Mormons in In Mesa at the Easter pageant, which is hard to do now that they have it backwards

They flip that whole thing over it just it just there's something wrong It's just this is how do you do that?

How'd they do that? Um, anyway, I pray that God's truth be proclaimed that God would draw his elect into himself and that God would be glorified even in the rejection of his message

By those that he passes over And this is this we've been rich can tell you this this falls out on very and Really really obvious basic thing

We'll be walking back to the cars After a night of passing out tracks or when we were in Salt Lake doing the same thing before the

King James only wackos showed up And we'd find a track laying on the ground

Frequently stomped on Footprints all over it and we early on early years developed a term for that for that tract and we'd pick it up and we'd throw it out and we call it a fallen warrior and The reason being that we did not believe that it was wasted

You see from a provisionist perspective it was wasted you you wasted your breath you wasted your time

We don't believe so We believe in God's sovereign decree that he is glorified even in the judgment of those who prefer the darkness to the light and So when that Mormon guy at the

South Gate of the temple in Salt Lake same year That I handed a track to Senator Orrin Hatch and he took it because I was wearing a

Rush Limbaugh tie and so was he My son was wearing a 14 -inch kids

Rush Limbaugh time and when that Mormon guy walked up to my son and Pulled His pocket open on his little white shirt and Stuffed the tract into it.

I was already moving. I was on my way there and Then turned around walked away and I remember

Josh turned around looked at me Like did I do something wrong? You know, and I just pat him on the shoulder.

It's like well Once you get the first rejection done Doesn't really bother you much after that, you know

That was not a wasted track That man will be held accountable for the truth that he chose to reject and so I start off with with a different understanding because I recognize

What and you know? What is Layton's actual job title?

director of evangelism for Texas Baptist Boy if you don't if you don't have a theology of rejection,

I Don't know what you're doing. I don't know what you're doing But it goes on to say not on the assumption that he destined most of them to be unable to come

No, I recognize that I do not know the identity of the elect and so there's there's two responses and by the way

There are times when the elect will respond negatively because it's not the time for them in God's providence to come to see the truth.

They so I can't tell you how many people I had a lady within the past year and a half in Utah young lady came up to me and said

We mocked you I Walked by you at the general conference and me and my friends we mocked you and It was years later

That through the continuing faithfulness Alpha Omega Ministries Apology a studios you and Jeff Durbin I'm a

Christian today, but when I first met you I Mocked you

Now when I see those young ladies Walking by and mocking me and I don't remember don't remember that particular isn't but There were lots of incidents like that that I knew we were being mocked

Do I go huh, they're all reprobate no, I Don't know.

They're gonna probably outlive me So God may be gracious to him 30 40 50 years down the road.

I don't know that. I've got one calling be faithful and And trust that there's no power in heaven and earth that when

God chooses to draw his elect into himself he will do so You don't have that and you're not going to be doing what we do for long periods of time

So not an assumption he destined them to be unable to come that's just means that they're in Adam Because he chose to reprobate them before they were born for reasons beyond their control

That's provisionist hoo -ha For God has to be gracious to everybody equally

That's what it's that's what this is about. God's grace cannot be free. He cannot have the choice.

We must have it. That's the angry Provisionist language just flowing out, but that's what it's saying.

God can't be free. Uh -uh We are the ones who are free not

God not God and then again misuse of verse 72 3 through 4 ignores the preceding two verses the categories of people that are talked about there and then obviously

The reality that Christ intercedes only for his people if you don't read it that way then you have universalism

I I would love to see a provisionist try to debate a universalist. It would probably be

Be pretty ugly There are universalists out there a lot of people just are not prepared to actually deal with them

You raised your microphone long time ago. I did you know, I I listened to to that and I didn't see that post

Before you put it up there and you know, I think about back in the old Arminian days long long time ago

And for it buddy and I think well I'm thinking back in the days when we were at North Phoenix Baptist and the altar calls and you know 25 stanzas of just as I am and And all that and I just remember praying and not even thinking not even knowing about reformed theology

Calvinism or any of this yet and Praying that God would convict people of their sin

Send the Holy Spirit. I was praying and convict people of their sin that they would

Convert that they would come forward that they these were the things I wanted and when I finally started processing

What the issues were I suddenly realized that prayer was entirely inconsistent with what

I believed Because I was asking God to violate their free will I was asking

God to invade them and to convict them and to change their hearts and There is nothing within Arminian thought or latent flowers system that can allow for that.

It can't and I I just knew so when I hear him talk like this,

I think how do you pray for the lost latent? Because God's not allowed to do anything about it

Or he's already done everything he can do about it. He's just oh, I sure hope yeah I hope the choice meet realizes this choice today.

Yeah Yeah, I know. I know I know Well, anyways, all right

There we go. And oh so much stuff going on so much stuff going on in the world and Yet we're we're talking about well stuff that'll be relevant no matter what happens in all the political elections and everything else

We've got to have a clear understanding of what we believe and why we believe it so that's why we're here thanks for supporting us and Thanks for being there.