March 18, 2004

desert metropolis of phoenix arizona is the dividing line the apostle peter commanded christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence our host is doctor james white director of alpha omega ministries and an elder at the phoenix reformed baptist church this is a live program and we invite your participation if you'd like to talk with doctor white call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll -free across the united states it's 1 -877 -753 -3341 and now with today's topic here is james white and good morning and welcome to the dividing line my name is james white we are sort of live this morning just flying in at the seat of our pants uh...

i was running late but uh... somebody else is running later so we just barely made it that's the fun of webcasts that's why i was just mentioning a channel there's some folks who wanna uh...

we've been contacted by some folks and hey it would be great to broadcast that thing and i'm like yeah right that means we'd actually have to do it regularly all the time at the same time and uh...

anyways hey you know last week uh... or tuesday and we're thinking about changing the times again because too many of you have been figuring out when it actually is again that's how you keep the servers from ever getting overloaded is uh...

you just keep changing the time and you keep people confused and so people have to listen to the archive and that way your live servers don't get overwritten that way uh...

well um... one of the reasons is i've never really liked the time schedule we're on we were forced to it by other reasons because tuesday night thursday morning is only one day in between basically and uh...

uh... so uh... you know that there's five days on the other side basically of of the dividing line and and so you've got you know intense period and then nothing for like five days and that's just not the way to do it so we may end up eventually uh...

going back to uh... where we were before which was eleven o 'clock on tuesdays and five o 'clock on thursdays which gives you you know at least a day and a half in between sort of spreads out a little bit more and and uh...

it's a lot easier on me and and uh... so on so forth so uh... but we're we're just talking about that we'll see what see what develops but uh...

four on thursday whatever but we we haven't decided to do that quite yet so uh...

we'll we'll we'll figure that out uh... on tuesday evening we responded to dave hunt and there's been a lot of uh...

reaction to that and uh... but there was i had i think i mentioned i had like twelve cuts i didn't get to or ten cuts or eight cuts or whatever and uh...

so uh... one of them i really want to get to i've heard sort of forgotten about it in responding to all the stuff about how i allegedly don't want debating calvinism in print which is why we we are selling it for uh...

what how much isn't isn't brian kahl still selling for like sixteen bucks or something along those lines i think they are that's why we're selling it for ten and encouraging people to uh...

to buy multiple copies uh... yeah that's uh... i'm sure i don't want this to be printed and it's we call it the world's biggest track uh...

it's the world's biggest track well by the way let me remind you calvinists uh... can cannot possibly be evangelistic uh...

of course no no we've got that's why that's why dave hunt's been in salt lake city the general conference uh...

since nineteen eighty something i'm sure and out in mesa i see dave out there in mesa all the time sarcasm folks no never seen out there uh...

but uh... uh... well of course you know i was being told last night that uh...

that i need to be more ironic on the program i should do a politically correct or a theologically correct program sometimes like lydian hill do here locally uh...

the politically correct theology it that is that you feeling today doctor white i don't feel really good i'm very much in the spirit today how are you i'm doing very well you see the beautiful picture of the pope in the newspaper today all it wasn't that it was all i felt so warm didn't you outstaffed uh...

yet that you know blistering help help uh...

i'll give grief uh... what roles i thought i had a day of uh...

anyway uh... i just got so into respond all that stuff that i uh...

i forgot this one it's it's really weird to watch the channel because the the responses to it are always like thirty two seconds to sixty seconds after you know whatever it is he said so it's just uh...

it's fun to watch it hey folks you know some of you calvinist have no sense of humor whatsoever and you just figure were a bunch of nuts and we shouldn't we should always just be completely serious about everything and you should look like those pictures of the puritans will appear to the actually had fun you know that we've got really had them grossly misrepresented to us even as calvinist of had a grossly misrepresented to us they actually like color and uh...

they they danced yes and they did they were they were they enjoyed life and uh...

we try to do something anyway back to the subject dave hunt uh... was doing his thing and i i had recorded this one i just forgot about it and so after the program went oh i forgot this one so we're going to crank this baby up i think i've got the volume up uh...

to where pretty much where it was uh... on on tuesday uh... but uh... this one is in the section on uh...

john three sixteen was discussing john three sixteen which of course is where his uh...

one of his favorite passages not really to engage the subject but if you have read my open letter today but you know that i that's about two -thirds of three quarters way through this long open letter very long large file i'd go into all sorts of issues on john three in the book uh...

uh... ishmaq uh... oh oh by the way by the way by the way don't forget i think that i post this afterwards before i think it posted i think it posted before with the hope of posted before uh...

there is a uh... a scripture index now on the website if you go to my blog you will see that there is a uh...

a connection there uh... it's down under the a true advil experience and if you go to that you can scroll down and find whatever you're looking for you can print it out do with whatever you wish uh...

put the back the books you can find stuff you'll notice there's a lot of discussion of uh...

john chapter three verses sixteen seventeen eighteen actually when you start back at fourteen there's uh...

whole section here of discussion if you read in the book you'll see that it was in this period uh...

in this discussion of uh... on john chapter three that that dave hunt made another one of his many many many errors uh...

and one of his many many many errors had to do with the subjunctive he doesn't understand the purpose of the subjunctive in the greek language but that doesn't stop him from making comments on it and so i caught him on this is one of the many issues that if we're to do an actual debate during cross -examination he would actually have to answer too but he won't do that and he knows he can't do that that's why he won't do the debate as simple as that this isn't an issue of i've said everything i need to say no he said everything he can say but he knows that he'd have to say a whole lot more than that if you would actually do a debate let's just be honest that's that's what it's all about and uh...

so you know he will talk about greek but when he does he since he doesn't know it and admits it but then talks about it he makes horrific mistakes and uh...

we put a uh... an excellent uh... quote up on it was provided by uh...

michael nevar sent me a quote from spurgeon let me read it to you it says because sometimes a learned minister ventures in all honesty and discretion to give a more correct translation of the original can this justify a foolish unlettered man in altering the original itself and perverting the sense of the passage there is an end to s...

there is an end to scripture altogether if license be given to alter its teachings according to our will to teach perfect wisdom how to speak is too great a task to be ventured upon by any but the presumptuous and foolish when our version is incorrect that it is a duty to present the proper rending rendering if one be able to find it out but to give translations out of our whimsy heads without having been taught in the original tongue is impertinence indeed one can only think of mister uh...

hunts supporting of the new world translation acts thirteen forty eight at a point like that all of this goes back to the fact that dave hunt uh...

has called me an elitist for daring to discuss the original languages and all the rest of stuff now you want to hear what dave hunt says when he is talking to quote -unquote his folks his audience here's dave hunt listen and listen to the audience and listen to his mocking tone here from springfield illinois this was february twenty second just a few weeks ago we have some problems john three fifteen they said you know the greek well i said you know if it depends upon knowing the greek uh...

then uh... i think the wiklipible translator has been wasting their time for decades they're going around studying these obscure languages and trying to translate the bible into this obscure language of each of these tribes and when they get the bible in their own language they still don't understand it because they don't know the greek i think what we ought to do is teach all of these tribes greek and hebrew and then give them a greek and hebrew bible well jesus explains john three sixteen doesn't he how does he explain it how does he explain everything else from the old testament how does it begin i haven't found a calvinist who admits that verse sixteen is preceded by verses fourteen and fifteen he hasn't found a calvinist who admits put me under the glare of the lights oh chinese water torture okay i admit verse sixteen follows fourteen and fifteen i give up what is this oh why doesn't someone in that audience stand up and go excuse me but what are you talking about you mean your assertion is that mister hunt that calvinists ignore the context of john chapter three is that what you're talking about is is that your assertion why don't you say that and then why don't you demonstrate that i can't find a calvinist that admits that verse sixteen follows verses fourteen through fifteen uh...

goodness gracious and of course he goes on to say well debate the the serpent was lifted up in anybody who looked was healed that's true anybody was within israel his whole old testament thing is this offering it wasn't just for an elect within israel no it was just for israel and even he would have to admit then only the remnant actually benefited thereby who's the remnant today good question for a lot of folks anyway did you hear that the the laughter of the people we've got a look at the great so that's how he avoids dealing with the biblical taxes he discovered that trying to discuss the subjunctive when you don't know subjectivist doesn't really help a lot and so instead of even trying that when he's out on the road when he's out amongst his own people uh...

that we we won't even bother i don't know if any of you noticed but in debating calvinism there's none of this elitist stuff instead there's a number of attempts on the part of a man that i've heard of my own ears quoted in in the book uh...

i think someone in channel right now eric nielsen uh... was there so he could uh... verify this uh...

at a uh... i hope he doesn't mind my mentioning him uh... at a conference in uh...

indianapolis i listened as dave hunt said straight out without equivocation well of course term equivocal can be redefined by dave too but without equivocation he says that i do not read greek it might as well be chinese but i can read english that's what he said and so if you look at debating calvinism however there's a number of places where he tried you know he parses it and what hate you know uh...

that there it is uh... eric display on their uh... no we don't have one thing saying that that that was a quote that i wrote down my palm pilot and and and that that's actually gone to units now that was in i wrote that down in my hand spring it went to the palm tungsten now the tungsten t three so just keeps moving along anyway uh...

uh... in the book he's using a computer program obviously or someone that he contacted to throw out some parsing things to make it look like he actually knows this time he doesn't have any idea what it means but he throws it out there anyways uh...

nothing about elitism nothing about that kind of stuff and yet if you go back and read his initial response my open letter that's all it was all this elitist stuff and what you just heard here so which one is it speak with one mind you know if you're gonna if you're gonna say that studying biblical languages is elitist and it's not relevant and you don't need to do it and it's not relevant to the interpretation of the text of scripture then just say that consistently yeah they're pete just put in the channel uh...

something from the book uh... the greek word translated ordained is tetsugmenoi actually i bet you that's m -e -n -o -i is that how it's spelled in the book pete give me the uh...

give me the uh... page on that because i want to check that because if that's how it's spelled in the book it's spelled incorrectly tetsugmenoi a nominative case perfect tense passive voice participle of taso ordained eternal life's translation found in all major translations yet none of the seven other usages of taso in the new testament connotes a divine decree from eternity past had that been what luke meant he would have used pra or ridzo predestinated uh...

as if dave knows anything about that uh... anything at all page one oh three thank you sir do do do do do do do do do musical interlude while we turn to page one oh three because i'm not going to sit here and shake paper uh...

like certain well -known uh...

people do let's listen to that section again for decades they're going around studying these obscure languages and trying to translate the bible into this obscure language of each of these tribes and when they get the bible in their own language they still don't understand it because they don't know the greek i think yeah there you go uh...

you know does that uh... am i being unfair to say that this is a mocking voice in their own language they still don't understand it because they don't know the greek i think what we ought to do is teach all of these tribes greek and hebrew and then give them a greek and hebrew come on guys where have we heard come on guys before oh goodness eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one uh...

hey you know if uh... if you happen to think that dave hunt's right uh...

feel free to call in you know i i don't know why it is for some reason folks don't won't don't call in other than pierre anyways and he's not defending dave hunt so much as dave hunt's theology which let's face it synergists defend synergists and uh...

dave hunt and mormons and roman catholics and uh... jehovah's witnesses and a whole wide group of evangelicals all agree against me on the subject of synergism versus monergism that's the issue and uh...

if you'd like to uh... if you'd like to address that that's that's great eight seven seven seven five three i didn't mean pierre specifically you know pierre calls all the time thank you pierre for calling but i'm not saying pierre needs to call in i'm simply saying if you'd like to defend dave hunt i mean we know that we have people listening to this program who would not exactly agree with what we're saying and uh...

therefore if you would like to call in and uh... voice your opinion hey uh...

there's the there's a number give us a call and uh... we'll be glad to put you on the air discuss uh...

you know if you'd like to defend what dave hunt has had to say defend his performance in debating calvinism defend the idea that i don't want the book in print he he he all the lines are open at eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one now two quick things and i'd like to talk about some mormonism today uh...

we now are putting out working dvds yes i think we've beaten the dvd problem and uh...

i've mentioned the past that were you know we videotapes get eaten videotapes do stuff that videotapes shouldn't do and uh...

videotapes are are going the way of of cassette tapes and of lps and all the rest of that stuff and uh...

so we now have the dvds of the greg stafford debate and we're not talking just raw material here we're talking dvds with menus you can go from section to section and the whole nine yards now we haven't quite gotten to the the making of stuff yet hey do you think we should start doing some outtakes that'd be so funny uh...

do some outtakes and we could do some very humorous stuff uh... we've actually been thinking about uh...

putting together some humorous stuff but then again we have people who actually i don't think any of them support us anyways but we have people who don't think that you should ever smile or be happy or do anything like that at all life's bad it's always bad and we should always be sad anyway uh...

we have the uh... stafford dvds out those are on the website the bryson debate is being uh...

is is being copied even as we speak right now we're doing all this in house by the way uh... this is this isn't where you're uh...

you know going off and and having we're not spending money on having other people do this this is stuff that uh...

that disembodied voice that you hear once while the program does when he's not a disembodied voice in the program and uh...

so the bryson debate and stafford debate are on dvd and then as uh... time the october mary debate is next okay so that the debate with uh...

jerry matatix back in october remember the program we had november as a result of that uh...

is going to be out maybe we ought to package that uh... mister ailman person with the uh...

dividing line that we did with their expense in it and check it out ticket uh...

that would not be a good idea i think that the excellent idea put the the the uh... cd uh...

of the dividing line in with the uh... with the uh... video debate uh... i'd be an excellent idea uh...

personally actually i think i could uh... get real magical and uh... and actually just do like a freeze frame at the end of the dvd and then just do the whole thing and then you and then a picture of eric going on and on and on and just put it at the end of the dvd and could we put could we put angels cartoon uh...

i don't think eric angel has done a cartoon of eric yet though no but he did no i'm talking about the one he did of jerry from that very debate that i think that should be on the cover what do they will do the cartoon of jerry in the cartoon of you and then a cartoon of eric yeah well maybe angels listening he can do a cartoon of eric get that pen going angel there you go you all are right now listening in on the inside discussions of the very leadership of alvin and megan ministries and and it really gets a whole lot deeper than that yes the conspiracies are beginning as we speak oh yes uh...

speaking of conspiracies uh... i don't see the phones ringing off the hook so i think people are pretty much given up on us on this trip uh...

doctor william hamlin of brigham young university was one of two byu professors that i did a radio program with i wasn't aware we're doing a debate but hey you know some people are very very loose with their use of terminology uh...

many years ago i don't remember what it was this is back in the late nineties out of ninety eight ninety seven somewhere around there i don't know we did a uh...

maybe even before that i'd i'd i can't remember all i'd i know that uh... that disembodied voice was with me that night and uh...

we did a radio program on ktk k radio in salt lake city uh...

for the south side of salt lake city down there out in the middle of nowhere really is where it was and uh... we uh...

we're in studio a very tiny hot studio and it was three mormons and mormon callers versus me which is one of the reasons that you don't put uh...

the term debate on this because there was no thesis uh... we're supposed to be discussing their book it ended up being a discussion of my book but uh...

never got to anything more than that there was no moderator because the quote -unquote moderator the host of the program uh...

was just as much a participant uh... as anybody else and and you're right uh...

mister ailman man uh... of the of the people who were there including uh... people who weren't on the program but who were very much involved uh...

with uh... oops thank you george uh... sound off uh... sorry about that uh...

though that actually is somewhat relevant to the what what happened during the day there are people there who weren't on the radio program but uh...

one of whom for example had written uh... the first nasty review of letters to a mormon elder for the farms review of books and uh...

they were there as well so it was just massive numbers of of uh... other folks and and just me i was the only one who spoke for my side anyway it was a good program we still make it available i think the mp3 is available or it's available straight it wanted to i've i haven't been picked on look and as mister ailman man says uh...

doctor hamlin of the ones we spoke to uh... the host of program by the way was made debated was that last year the year before last because october two thousand to maybe anyway martin tanner was the host and um...

he was very much participant uh... he was not moderating anything but uh... we we had this discussion and uh...

that was where doctor hamlin pulled out a book that he had written uh... co -authored i believe and uh...

said that uh... they did have swords in mesoamerica i'd said that they had not in i'd never seen this book and so after the program is over start looking through this stuff discover that what doctor hamlin was saying is that the ancient uh...

inhabitants this hemisphere had wooden war clubs with obsidian rocks embedded in them and that this somehow is what the book of mormons talking about when it talks about a sword made of precious steel with a hilt that you pull out of a scabbard uh...

out of a sheath uh... with which you can run people to try running somebody through the war club hello uh...

that you can scout people with that i mean it was just so it's just to this day all you gotta do is you can go to the uh...

uh... c r i website i wrote an article at the request of c r i on these kinds of tactics uh...

that were used by farms uh... got me in a lot of trouble some other folks because i actually did what the the publisher requested me to do it they felt i should've done something else and now they've these particular folks uh...

uh... make it their their uh... uh... mission in life in essence to uh...

uh... uh... make my life miserable but anyways it's uh... yeah it's equip dot org slash free slash d m that's capital d m seven fifty five at h t m is the article thank you brando i was looking at that just today in fact uh...

and so that that led to that c r i article and uh... ever since then that remember doctor hamlin is the one who did the uh...

uh... metcalf is butthead joke uh... spelled out by putting the letters the beginning of each paragraph of review of a book by brent metcalf that message and it actually got the point of printing before they pulled it and uh...

there was a big brouhaha about that and it just it's a illustrative of the attitude uh...

of uh... of farms foundation french research and mormon studies uh... out of the y u and uh...

so i was well i i get love letters of out of uh... out of these folks and i was well for some reason uh...

some of these people are you scholars just want to send me some kind of a note well i got one yesterday uh...

on the blog i had mentioned uh... i talked about the dave hunt situation and i had uh...

put on there this will note about a true advil experience listen a couple hours dave hunt railing calvinism gave me a royal headache last evening but you'll benefit when you listen to the deal this afternoon uh...

i was simply grieved to hear dave repeat falsehoods upon which has been corrected over and over and over again without even trying to get it right is simply sad very sad when he sent that to me took dave hunt's name output mine in and change calvinism mormonism and so it started i think about a five -round correspondence yesterday and uh...

the irony of this is that uh... doctor hamlin was challenged to debate me uh...

on the subject of temples do new testament christians build temples and practice temple ceremonies the way he had responded to a little track that i've written uh...

called temples made with hands that we uh... we wrote for the uh... that the new the rededication salt lake city temple and he had declined uh...

in fact we had two mormons decline uh... to debate that subject we will be debating against uh...

richard hopkins in just a couple weeks up there in salt lake city uh... but he declined to do so and so it began this correspondence and when we get a chance i'll fill you in on some of that i i even contacted a publisher though and said what would be the interest in a published debate similar to debating calvinism uh...

between myself and a b y u professor uh... but since then for some odd reason once we really start getting down to actually seeing if doctor hamlin will put something more behind uh...

his words than just bluster and emails uh... doesn't seem like he's really interested in doing that but we'll find out uh...

see what develops out of it but i was going to as we have time to make some comments on what he he feels that he's asked me some questions i cannot answer he has has just refuted me on the subject of temples and i was gonna take a look at some of the things he said and just give you a sample of the kind of quote -unquote exegesis or lack thereof the b y u professors promote and that they that they uh...

put out there uh... however we uh... we come back will be going with a phone call some of the like to uh...

defend uh... mister hunts and so we like to talk about that and take your phone calls eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one will be right back under the guise of tolerance modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality even more disturbing some within the church attempt to revise and distort christian teaching on this behavior in their book the same sex controversy james white and jeff neal right for all who want to better understand the bible's teaching on the subject explaining and defending the foundational bible passages that deal with homosexuality including genesis leviticus and romans expanding on these scriptures they refute the revisionist arguments including the claim that christians today need not adhere to the law in a straightforward and loving manner they appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to god's plan for his people the same sex controversy defending and clarifying the bible's message about homosexuality get your copy in the bookstore at alman dot org answering those who claim that only the king james version is the word of god james white in his book the king james only controversy examines allegations that modern translators conspired to corrupt scripture and lead believers away from true christian faith in a readable and responsible style author james white traces the development of bible translations old and new and investigates the differences between new versions and the authorized version of sixteen eleven you can order your copy of james white's book the king james only controversy by going to our website at www .aomin

.org what is dr norman geisler warning the christian community about in his book chosen but free a new cult secularism false prophecy scenarios no dr geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called calvinism he insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant in his book the potter's freedom james white replies to dr geisler but the potter's freedom is much more than just a reply it is a defense of the very principles upon which the protestant reformation was founded indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate james white masterfully counters the evidence against so -called extreme calvinism defines what the reform faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the reformers is the very one taught in the pages of scripture the potter's freedom a defense of the reformation and a rebuttal to norman geisler's chosen but free you'll find it in the reform theology section of our bookstore at alman dot org the phone welcome back to the dividing line my name is james white and we're talking uh...

about so well about stuff today and i just been playing uh... dave hunts the comments that uh...

evidently the wickliffe bible translators just uh... are wasting their time by providing translations into vulgar tongues and uh...

pointed out that that's a convenient way of getting around mister hunts misapprehensions and misapplications of of uh...

the bible especially when those uh... particular misapplications run directly contrary to the grammar of the original text we had an interesting conversation in channel uh...

couple of days ago uh... with uh... someone actually armies rollback appear hasn't come back since then uh...

but uh... in essence was uh... misunderstanding first on five one uh...

and understanding the english in a way that is directly contradictory to the underlying greek grammar and so we pointed out to him that uh...

that's an inappropriate uh... thing to do that when the english translation uh...

can be understood in more than one way that what you have to do is you have to look at the translation what what is it translating what is what is the original saying if the original gives you a clear indication then you go with it so um...

he didn't seem to accept that particular argumentation but anyway we're gonna go ahead and start taking our phone calls and uh...

let's go ahead and uh... head back to uh... place i used to well i didn't live in in this particular place but i lived in harrisburg in camp hill pennsylvania for six years and so let's talk with diana hi diana hi how are you pretty good so what's up uh...

well dave hunt uh... seems to be saying that the english version or any translation from the original language should be sufficient and i would agree with that well actually what he's saying in the context is uh...

he was dealing with john three sixteen and i have pointed out to him that his understanding of the english translation is in error he understands the english word might as carrying a particular meaning that the original language does not substantiate and instead of dealing with that he chooses instead to mock the learning of the original languages and to uh...

end up defending a misunderstanding of the translation that is contradictory to the original language and so it is one thing to say uh...

that's a a person who simply wants to know the truth has adequate resources in the english translations to do so but it is something completely different to say that an english translation without reference to the original uh...

is the final court of arbitration because it isn't the english translation didn't exist uh...

when jesus said the words of john three there was no english language it was an english language for another thousand years and hence obviously any english translation uh...

has to be uh... subservient to and under the final authority of the original that it is a translation of would not be the case i completely agree with that in addition though dave hunt was uh...

in his uh... mocking way discussing uh... was talking about not translating the uh...

original into all sorts of other languages and said we should be teaching them hebrew and greek and my contention is that that is not necessary of course what you've also said that there is truth to be found there my problem with dave hunt saying that english is enough or that you don't have to go to the greek is that he seems to be reading john three sixteen and ignoring himself the fact that it is followed by quite a few more verses well i don't just mean the context of john but uh...

i'm surprised that his bible has romans in it when i uh... first read the new testament as a whole uh...

i've just been saved i was twenty four years old ten years ago i had been an atheist for at least ten years prior to that had never had any bible study before that i had uh...

grown up in the episcopal church but at least the episcopal church i went to did not have any kind of teaching that was reasonable that i had ever learned anything i didn't know what they believed i just pretty much knew the name of jesus and nothing else and i read the new testament and despite the fact that my niv bible has john three sixteen in there i came out of calvinist english is enough the entire new testament to be a calvinist you don't have to start out an armenianist and have somebody else go no no let's twist these scriptures around again and let me show you how the greek looks to become a calvinist i agree it's there dave hunt is really the one who's missing and he doesn't have to know greek to come out of calvinist he's deliberately misreading everything in the entire context of the entire new testament i understand which is uh...

the function of the tradition uh... that he's very very deeply believes in and and that i would say is he is actually elevating to a higher authority than the bible itself uh...

the problem that we face here is uh... i remember years ago talking with an an atheist on a secular radio program i was a guest on it and and it was fascinating because he's a published atheist author and he himself was saying uh...

that in reality uh... anyone who reads the bible with an open mind recognizes that it teaches that god is in control of all things and and he saw that it was most definitely a reformed document in the sense that we would call it today uh...

so i don't have any question that's just reading the english translation will give you that that indication the problem is when you start dealing with uh...

situations of apologetics of debate uh... where people are bringing in external authorities the only way to recognize an external authority uh...

is through exegesis and exegesis does require us uh...

to ask of the biblical text questions that only the original language can answer that is what was the intention of the original author in using these grammatical forms and in doing this type of thing once we get past the just what you know you approached it with with a willingness to hear what it was saying when you bring in an external authority which is always what happens when you're dealing with either traditions or when you're dealing with false teachings in the form of say the traditions of of the roman church the traditions of the extra scriptures of the mormon church or or that the uh...

authority of the jehovah's witnesses or whatever group it is that's when you have to start addressing the issue of uh...

the original languages because they will say well what this actually means is this and you can then demonstrate that in reality that's that's not what the term means is that what the word means uh...

that's not what uh... the author consistently uses the term as an and that's why it's important to get into those aspects at that point once the claims reach that level but uh...

i would agree with you that a person who simply wants to read the text uh... is is able to determine these things and and indeed uh...

uh... does not there been many many wonderful saints of god who have lived their lives reading the bible in only one translation and they never learned the original languages but there is i think a uh...

a responsibility laid upon for example the elders of the church to be able to refute those who contradict and to be able to handle the word of god a right in teaching uh...

that has at least amongst uh... protestants for a long time uh... resulted in the fact that our seminaries require for a master's degree uh...

the study of the original languages so that one can at least utilize the tools that are available even if one cannot go to the point of actually just reading that the language themselves and so uh...

that's what i was simply saying is that his mockery of the reading the languages was uh...

completely inappropriate especially because he was using it as a shield to avoid dealing with the errors that he himself has made errors that you're right you could you can demonstrate by the inconsistencies that that creates with other passages of scripture uh...

with romans nine and and other passages in john remember mister hunt will go to those other passages in john and he will say well uh...

actually doesn't mean that it means this and he'll go over here and he'll connect it to something else and and frequently uh...

make errors in the original languages there too so once that level of of uh...

of uh... debate and dialogue is reached then you know i'd personally believe we need to go to whatever level the enemies of the faith or those twisting the faith of those promoting a tradition go to uh...

to defend the for the the faith and that's what i was that's what i was referring to uh... i'm not saying a person has to uh...

take my greek class to uh... to be a good christian uh... but i think uh... that mister hunter should not be going around telling people that it is a great you know in essence a waste of their time uh...

to learn those biblical languages i would think in light of the constant attacks upon the scriptures that were experiencing today in our society that there would be even more of a desire the part of layman uh...

to master the the scriptures in their original tongues uh... when i think of people in secular society who learn other languages just out of their love for a particular author for example someone who loves a particular german author or a uh...

particular french author russian author uh... who will actually take the time to learn the original language in which they wrote just so they could greater appreciate that particular author's writings uh...

that should i think uh... give us some indication maybe some of the pursuits that we pursue in our lives are not quite as important in the long run and especially in light of the fact that there are these constant attacks upon the faith that are being launched by the jesus seminar and with the with the great aiding and abetting of a bc and other national uh...

media outlets uh... that uh... we if we want to give an answer for our faith uh...

might to very well consider in light of all the things we do uh... whether that would not be something that would be good for us to do because i can assure you when people ask me when they listen to me doing the bible answer man broadcast or or doing this program we're doing debates or and in any context in which i'm seeking to defend the faith they say what classes that you took in in college or seminary were the most important to you i was tell them uh...

two classes uh... greek and church history those were for two to me doing apologetics those are the two areas that have provided me with the greatest advantage and providing a consistent and meaningful response whether it's standing on the sidewalk in salt lake city or mesa uh...

or standing before an audience in new york or california wherever it might be depend you know debating whatever those are the uh...

the subjects that have been the most useful to me so that's what i was attempting to communicate and regards to what mister hunt was saying i think you're right uh...

you can certainly determine these issues on the basis of the excellent translations we have available to us today uh...

but mister hunt has taken it beyond merely that by making claims in these areas and i think he's greatly inconsistent on one subject to say hey uh...

actually uh... here's the greek and it means this it means that and then when we dare to hold him accountable for what he says we're elitists and uh...

then he goes out when he's talking to folks that he knows don't know those languages then he can mock the learning of it that's that's an inconsistency alrighty alright thanks a lot god bless thanks for calling 877 -753 -3341 i hope that was uh...

uh... helpful and uh... useful in discussing that uh... i don't see anything else on the screen in regards to uh...

other callers let me go back to uh... doctor hamlin uh...

if you recall i was talking about a little tract that i had written uh... that uh... was called temples made with hands i'm gonna read that uh...

and uh... you'll notice it's not long it was a very short little little thing just meant to begin conversations with people outside the temple and said many of the world's religions focus their worship upon a temple or temples often the deity that is worshipped is said to be physically present in the temple while at other times the deity though dwelling somewhere else visits with the people at the temple under the old covenant the one true god of israel jehovah allowed his people to build a single temple located in jerusalem the first temple uh...

uh... the first temple was built by solomon was destroyed in five eighty six bc by the invading babylonians second temples built by his rebel and was expanded greatly by herod in the years prior to christ ministry this temple was destroyed by titus and roman legions in eighty seventy never did god allow his people to build multiple temples such as those the pagan religions that surrounded israel further the temple in israel had one primary function the worship of god through the offering of sacrifices there were no secret ceremonies no endowments no ceilings in the temple in jerusalem the highest act of worship took place in the day of atonement when the one high priest offered the sacrifice of the sins of the people the high priest would on that day go through the veil into the holy of holies and thereof the blood of the sacrifice before god all the actions of the priest in the temple including the one high priest were mere shadows of the reality that god provided in the person lord jesus christ the epistle of the hebrews in the new testament makes it very plain that the old covenant including its temple ritual and its priesthood pointed away from itself to a greater reality in jesus christ hebrews chapter ten verse one uh...

ring ring the early christians did not seek to build a temple in jerusalem or anywhere else for that matter christians have never built temples why the reasons are to be found in scripture number one jesus christ phil fulfilled the law including both the priesthood as well as the function the temple in jerusalem when jesus christ died ill stop reading eventually uh...

or someone will stop it for a while so i cannot reach it when jesus christ died at the veil through which the high priest entered into the holy of holies once a year uh...

was torn from top to bottom matthew twenty seven fifty one lay was open forever for the people of god to approach the throne of grace not through a mediating priesthood is in the old covenant but through the shed blood of jesus christ he was chapter nine and ten since it was the function the priesthood offer sacrifices and since there is no more sacrifice for sin he was ten eighteen the priesthood has been fulfilled in christ since it was the main function the temple to be the place where the sacrifices were offered its role in god's plan to has been fulfilled this is why christians have no enduring city and are able to continually offer sacrifices not of blood the covering of sin but of praise to the confession name of christ he was chapter thirteen verses thirteen to fourteen secondly the temple of christian church of the body of believers both collectively and individually the bible says no you know that you the temple of god the spirit of god dwells in you first corinthians six nineteen the body of believers is god's temple and well by his spirit just the body of individual believers the temple of god what know you not that you are the body that your body is a temple the holy ghost which is in you which you have a god and you're not your own first corinthians six nineteen christians do not seek to build temples made by hands because they have temples made by his spirit just as the lord jesus had promised on fourteen twenty three in the old testament god spoke of his name being in the temple first kings eight twenty nine cetera today god's people offer the sacrifice of praise to god giving thanks to his name he was thirteen fifteen not a temple made with hands but in the living body of christ the church do not be led astray by those who direct you back to the old ways god will not be worshiped in ways that are contrary to his revealed truth christians worship god in all places not in temples made with hands rather than engaging in rituals or endowments supposedly bestow authority or power christians worship god in spirit and in truth john four twenty one to twenty four that i had mentioned a footnote that there was only one high priest at a time under the law only one high priest today jesus christ he was seven twenty four three eight six so there was a little tracked uh...

that i had uh... that i had written and doctor hamlin made some responses to that and uh...

i guess i just have to make a note to myself that uh... uh... well i've seen you know that this the problem going from one topic to another back and forth no one can ever follow exactly what we're going to talk about so i think with this one pat uh...

in massachusetts are you have to use callback uh... we can talk about some more the original languages another time by by go to another topic we're not going to really get anywhere as far as this one's this one the doctor hamlin wrote uh...

some responses and here's here's the kind of level of of reply uh...

offered to my tracked in here by a a leading brigham young university professor number one white informs us that god generously quote allowed his people to build a single temple located in jerusalem but that never did not allow his people to build multiple temples uh...

i'm not sure where the word generously came from and actually what i had uh... specifically said uh...

was that under the old covenant the one true god of israel jehovah allowed his people to build a single temple located in jerusalem and then i said never did god allow his people to build multiple temples such as those of the pagan religions that surrounded israel so there's the context what am i referring to well god did not say build one temple in jerusalem build one temple uh...

on mount gerizim he did not command there is no command in scripture from god uh...

to build anything other than the tabernacle and then the tabernacle is done away with and fulfilled in the building of the temple in jerusalem so you have one place of worship the law had the people of israel going up to jerusalem to worship one time one place uh...

this is very clear in the reading of the old testament and so with that in mind uh...

listen to and that's very clear and i think anyone who's familiar with with old testament theology with christian theology would understand that doctor hamlin says whites use the word allowed to describe god's command to build temples is a serious distortion temple building is one of the premier commands from god to israel as the vast portions of the old testament focusing on temple building and worship clearly demonstrates i'm assuming the functional equivalency of tabernacle and temple which i also assume white will not dispute temple building uh...

there aren't any passages given here i wonder why uh... because the fact that we're only talking about how many temples yet one uh...

one temple and that temple is rebuilt after being destroyed but it remains one temple mormons have what over a hundred right now uh...

the time the writing this track that had fifty or sixty and even building all the smaller ones uh... since then and so isn't there an obvious distinction between a single temple and many temples well maybe not because number two doctor hamlin says here's a list of the major israelite cultic centers, shrines, locations for the tabernacle and temples which were in operation during biblical times based on archaeological and or textual evidence mosaic tabernacle, gilgal, ebal, shechem, shiloh uh...

kirjath, jirim, gibeon, megiddo, jerusalem arid, lakish, dan, bethel, birsheba uh...

elephantine, aswan, shechem, mount gerasim uh... leontopolis, tel yahudia uh...

by onias near heliopolis which replaced uh... united several other jewish temples in egypt there's the list it is quite clear there's more going on here than whites' simplistic claim that never did god allow his people to build multiple temples would lead us to believe god certainly did allow it since it clearly happened i want you to hear that again just so you can hear this kind of argumentation it is quite clear there's more going on here the whites simplistic claim that never did god allow his people to build multiple temples would lead us to believe.

now what did i mean when i wrote that I meant God only commanded the building of one temple. He did not command the building of multiple temples.

The tabernacle is replaced by the temple. When the temple is destroyed, it is rebuilt, but there's one temple, one place of worship.

Unlike Mormonism that has many. So what does he do? He mentions various places that the tabernacle went.

Is that relevant? Not to any logical or rational person it isn't. He mentions all sorts of things that have nothing to do...

Mount Gerizim, was that commanded by God? No. Of course it wasn't commanded by God. So is it relevant to what I said? Nope. Completely irrelevant.

So why mention it? Don't know. Don't know. Did Dr. Hamlin get away with this in his doctoral dissertation?

Making this kind of of completely irrational connection to things that were not a part of the original citation?

Obviously not. Well anyways, whether he commanded it or accepted their worship as authentic or tolerated apostate temples unwillingly or viewed them as abominations is a different question.

No it's not. No it's not. That's exactly what I was talking about. I said

God did not command his people to do as the pagan nations did.

The whole point of the tract. Anyone who wants to even show the slightest bit of fair reading knows it's what

I was talking about. But many, if not most, Israelites apparently believe that multiple temples were possible.

So what? They also went up on the groves and worship the bales and everything else.

Irrelevant to anything I've said. So far the first two points from BYU scholar

Dr. William Hamlin irrelevant logically or rationally to anything that I said. Completely.

Number three. When White writes there were no secret ceremonies, no endowments, no sealings in the temple in Jerusalem, he is hardly informing the

LDS of something new nor contradicting one of our cherished doctrines. He had to go out with me to a Mesa and talk with folks out there who do believe that in the

Jerusalem temples, Jerusalem temple, that there were these secret ceremonies going on.

Which they were not. I'm glad that he admits that that was not anything that was relevant. And why does he say?

Because the Old Testament temple Jerusalem was run by the Aaronic priesthood and thus could not have performed LDS style temple ritual which required

Melchizedek priesthood authority. Of course there is no basis for any of that in the Old Testament nor in the

New Testament. This distinction of the priesthoods on this idea of ceremonies and things like that is completely unbiblical and I would be glad to debate

Dr. Hamlin at the University of Utah on the subject of the LDS priesthood and is the

LDS priesthood biblical. I would like to openly challenge Dr. Hamlin to debate that subject against me at the

University of Utah in October and we will videotape this and we'll provide him with an unedited video master that he can show to his classes because he certainly feels that that he has just absolutely driven me from the field with his insightful exegesis and therefore we did this for Martin Tanner.

He can contact Martin Tanner. Did Martin Tanner receive an unedited videotape that he could distribute? He certainly did. We would challenge

Dr. Hamlin to do this on the subject of the priesthood since we're doing the temple debate this time around.

Right up there at the University of Utah, Dr. Hamlin, it's not far from Provo and we will pay for your gas.

We'll buy you dinner. We'll even pay to put you up at a hotel there in Salt Lake City if you don't want to drive back home that night.

We will pay for all those things for you sir if you would like to engage in this debate. So he says that this would require

Melchizedek priesthood authority. This is not to say that such rituals are necessarily unknown in Old Testament times. This is another question.

Only that such rituals were not performed in the Aaronic Temple of Jerusalem or at least were not part of the public cultus.

Well if he's going to say that they were performed, where were they performed? What temple were they performed and where were these Melchizedek priests?

Also White's exposition on the body as temple metaphor is hardly damaging the LDS position since we believe the same metaphor though we understand somewhat differently.

The real question is, is the body the only temple? Well the point being of course that in the New Testament the

Christians do not build temples. That the temple metaphor is in fact applied to the church as the body of Christ and that Christians did not go out and seek to build their own temples and ironically he's going to contradict himself here very very badly and that is he is going to, and I'm going to ask that we keep going for just a couple minutes because I'd like to finish this because I would like to be able to contact

Dr. Hamlet and let him know that he can listen to this and that we have publicly challenged him to debate yet again in light of his own correspondence to me on these issues.

He's going to contradict himself here because he's going to go on to say that the Christians worshipped in the very temple he just said did not have the

Melchizedek priesthood and yet did not the Apostles have the Melchizedek priesthood according to Mormonism.

Allegedly they did and so why would they be worshipping if this is their worship why would they be worshipping in a temple that does not have the ability for them to do the ceremonies, the secret ceremonies, the sacred ceremonies, the

Melchizedek priesthood, the endowments and eternal marriage ceremonies. They couldn't do that in that temple so why do we have no evidence of them going out and building their own temple in which they could then do the

Melchizedek priesthood ceremonies. We're not told. Number four, he also asserts without the slightest pretense of evidence that the early

Christians did not seek to build a temple in Jerusalem or anywhere else for that matter. Christians have never built temples. Then precisely how is the

Antichrist to enter and sit in the temple of God in the last days, 2nd Thessalonians 2 .4, if there is no temple of God?

Well again, fairly easy response here. If Dr. Hamblin would like to assert that Christians were temple builders then

I would like to ask him show us the Christian temples that were built by Christians in Jerusalem and the environs around Jerusalem or anywhere else for that matter in the first hundred years.

Remember Dr. Hamblin believes there is an apostasy. The Christians lost the priesthood authority after the second generation, after the

Apostles and so you need to find Christian temples in that period. Where were they?

If you say well they were persecuted so they couldn't do it, well the early Latter -day Saints were too and they still built temples, didn't they? That doesn't follow.

Secondly, as to the temple of God in 2nd Thessalonians 2 .4, well even if you were to take a particular interpretation of that, that indicates it's some eschatological physical temple and it has nothing to do with false teaching the church or anything along those lines, even if you were to do that, why did

Christians have to be the ones who built this? Why couldn't some other group, Jews or something like that, even pre -millennial dispensationalists would say it's not the

Christians who built the temple. So that doesn't require the existence of temple building

Christians to answer that question at all. Continuing with number four, unfortunately for White it is quite clear the

New Testament Apostles continued to worship in the Jerusalem temple after Christ's ascension. Acts 2 .46, 3 .1

-10, 5 .20 -42. Unfortunately for me, did the Christians build the temple in Jerusalem?

No they didn't. Did they continue as Jewish Christians to meet there in the book of Acts until they were in essence driven out?

Yeah. How is that relevant to me? It's not and yet we're going to have an entire paragraph here that has nothing to do with anything

I said and is completely irrelevant to the position that I espouse. There's no question that says even

Paul worshipped there. Yep, he did. Paul is explicitly said to have performed purification rituals. Yep. Prayed in the temple.

Uh -huh. Claims that he was not offended against the temple indicating he accepted sanctity. No problem.

Indeed Paul also offered sacrifice in the temple. I wouldn't be saying sacrifice for sin at that point, but a very odd thing for him to do at the temple had been completely superseded after Christ's ascension.

What do you mean completely superseded? There's a difference between the people meeting there, praying there, and the vow that Paul takes, and the idea that they were engaging in the temple rituals.

Because again, even from Hamblin's perspective, how could they? This is only the Aaronic priesthood he's claiming, not the

Melchizedek priesthood. Weren't they supposed to be in their own temples doing the Melchizedek stuff?

Weren't they supposed to be sealing people for time and eternity? Weren't they supposed to be receiving the priesthood? I don't know.

We're not told. Finally and most importantly, Paul had a vision of Christ, the just one, in the temple paralleling

Old Testament temple theophanies, and strongly implying a special sanctity in the temple where God still appears to men after Christ's ascension.

Interestingly enough, as a result of that, he is driven out and taken to Rome, where God says he must go, which could of course be taken as an indication of God's final abandonment of that place and its destruction in AD 70.

But the point is, none of this has anything to do with what I said, and that is New Testament believers are not commanded to build temples.

They're not commanded to have a Melchizedek priesthood, because Christ is the only one high priest.

Mormonism has many high priests. Christians have one. The Melchizedek priesthood, Christ holds that.

That is not passed on to anybody else. I'd love to debate Hebrews, the book of Hebrews, on this subject.

Dr. Hamblin, let's do it. Let's slap the Nestle 27th edition down there.

Let's go at the exegesis. Let's do it in front of everybody. Let's invite all your students up from Provo.

I mean, if I am just such a horrible scholar, if I have no scholarship, if my position is so easily refuted, come on,

Dr. Hamblin, let's go up there. Let's do it right there in Utah. They don't have to go anywhere. You can have the tape to show in your classes for generations.

How useful would that be to your students to see for generations how those who oppose

Mormonism cannot answer the questions, just think of the cross -examination on the very basis of the

Greek text that we would be able to have. It would be wonderful. I'm looking forward to it. Let's do it in October.

I mean, that would be a great thing. Don't you think, Dr. Hamblin? Let's do it. I think that would be a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Continuing on, the books of Hebrews and Revelations are filled with descriptions of God's temple in heaven. Hebrews 8 -9,

Revelation 15, and numerous allusions throughout for more details from an LDS perspective, and then we're given references here.

Why the prominence of these descriptions of a heavenly temple if it is such a transitory and superseded institution in Edifice?

Well, because according to the book of Hebrews, the earthly tabernacle, and in fact, interestingly enough,

Hebrews refers to the tabernacle, not the temple. I wonder why that would be,

Dr. Hamblin. But anyway, these were just simply pictures of the reality of Christ, and the reason for the prominence is that Christ has entered into the

Holy of Holies in heaven where he ever lives to make intercession for his people, and that we are to be heavenly -minded, our minds to be focused upon where he is, seated at the right hand of the

Father, and that's why the prominence is there. And Mormonism takes us back the other direction to looking away from that.

Mormonism undoes the newness of the New Covenant, reestablishes priesthoods and ceremonies and everything else that were undone in Christ.

The Melchizedek priest is able to save the uttermost. Dr. Hamblin would claim to be a

Melchizedek priest. Dr. Hamblin, can you save to the uttermost those who draw nigh unto God by you?

Let's ask that question publicly, Dr. Hamblin, so that we can give an answer, not just this monologue back and forth, but let's have a dialogue together in front of video cameras so everyone can see.

Historically, many medieval Christians, going back to the track, explicitly going back to his response, called their great basilicas and cathedrals temples.

Woohoo! Medieval Christians, well that has a lot to do with what I said, isn't it? Medieval Christians did a lot of odd things, including

Crusades and killing of Muslims and all sorts of stuff.

Constantine's Holy Sepulchre, Justinian's Hagia Sophia, Leo's Basilica in Rome. Of course, the

Christianized Dome of the Rock was explicitly called Templum Domini, the Temple of the Lord by the Crusaders, and the monks and priests serving there were

Templars, the Priests, the Orders of the Temple, and from their perspective, the ancient Israelite temple sacrifice continued in the

Christianized form, the Mass, as can be seen in the allegorical mosaics of Ravenna. To give just one example,

Baptists may never have built temples, but Christians certainly did. Well, of course,

I am very consistent, having identified the Mass as a blasphemy against the Lord Jesus Christ for many years, and would be glad to defend that again, though I would be a little bit surprised if Dr.

Hamblin would actually try to defend Rome's particular defense of those things.

Again, irrelevant to what I said. Number five, I'm gonna need to wrap this up pretty quick here, but we're almost done.

Number five, White makes the, again, unsubstantiated claim that the priesthood has been fulfilled in Christ, and that Christians do not need a mediating priesthood.

In this, he is flatly contradicted by both the New Testament and early Christian writers. This is what we'd love to debate. Dr. Hamblin, let's do it.

Why, if Christ has removed all need for human priesthood authority, did Christ order the lepers he healed to go to the

Jewish priest for purification? Mark 144, Luke 1714. Um, because that's before the cross, maybe?

Apparently, Christ believed that his miraculous powers of healings did not negate or supersede the priesthood authority of the Jewish priests.

Never said he did. The law was still, in regards to what they were to do, was still very much what they should have done, and Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill the law, and hence this is irrelevant to the position of the church, which had not yet, in its

New Testament form, been founded with elders and deacons, and be glad to debate that issue as well, because it's relevant to priesthood authority.

The entire LDS concept of priesthood authority and church offices wholly unbiblical, from a meaningful exegetical perspective, be glad to address that as well.

I suppose White could argue that Christ has not yet ascended into heaven and replaced Jewish high priests. If so, why does Peter speak of post -ascension holy priesthood, 1

Peter 2 .5, and royal priesthood, 1 Peter 2 .9, among Christians? That's because that is not the Melchizedek or Aaronic priesthoods.

All Christians, male and female, Dr. Hamblin, are a member of the holy priesthood.

They do not do their worship in a temple with sacrifices or with secret ceremonies, but as Peter himself says, these are the people of God, a special people of God, a royal priesthood, a people peculiar and created by God himself.

This is not some priesthood that you are given by laying on of hands, as is seen in Mormonism.

Likewise, John Revelations, should be Revelation there, Dr. Hamblin, speaks of the saints as priests to his

Christ God and Father, and priests to our God, 5 .10. In the resurrection there should be priests of God and of Christ, 26.

What odd statements for an infallible book to make if White's understanding of priesthood is correct? No, Dr. Hamblin, you just have no idea what my understanding of priesthood is.

I've addressed this in a book called Letters to a Mormon Elder, and in reality, again, a kingdom of priests is exactly what

Peter was talking about, but that was males and females, all believers, no such thing as a priesthood passed on by laying on of hands that you have in Mormonism.

You would have a hard time demonstrating that, and that's why we'd like to demonstrate that in public, Dr. Hamblin, since you're willing to make these statements,

I'm sure that you will take up our invitation to do so, and it would be very, very useful for everybody.

Last paragraph, last two paragraphs, very quickly. Some of the earliest Christians also explicitly disagree with White's claims.

The author of the Didache, one of the earliest post -New Testament Christian documents, late 1st and early 2nd century, states explicitly the prophets are your high priests.

Yes, he does. However, if you read that in context, he is using an Old Testament analogy there.

He is not identifying them as Melchizedek priests in an LDS context. This is another one of the many examples of anachronistic insertion of LDS concepts into the reading of these texts.

I was just teaching a class right now for Golden Gate on the development of Tristic theology. We just did the Didache. I pointed that out to the students as we went by.

Note the plural here. The prophets are the Christians' high priests. So early post -New Testament Christians had prophets, a thing

White believes Christians shouldn't have. Of course, he's misrepresenting me there. I'm talking about the Mormon anachronistic reinterpretation of what prophet means in regards to their own leaders over against the

New Testament use the term prophet or even the Didache's use thereof.

Who were high priests, a thing White believes Christians shouldn't have. Well, actually the book of Hebrews indicates that there is only one high priest.

We could debate that. And there were apparently simultaneously more than one high priest. See also 1st

Clement 40 -44. The article in Ferguson's Encyclopedia of Early Christianity provides references to other 2nd and early 3rd century

Christian sources mentioning Christian priests. If you'd like to see my response to that, then see the debate that I had with Father Mitchell Pacwa on the subject of priesthood just last year on Long Island.

Something obviously that Dr. Hamblin has ever looked at. Unfortunately and not untypically, White has misunderstood and misrepresented the

LDS position scripture in early Christian history and temples. Well, Dr. Hamblin, you have a standing challenge right now.

Dr. Hamblin's information is linked on our blog site. I know of at least one

Christian who has already contacted him, offered to help set up this debate. Dr. Hamblin, if you're going to have the temerity to publicly make these statements, then

I challenge you, sir. Have the courage of your convictions. Do what other

Mormon men have done, like Martin Tanner, like Mr.

Hopkins, the other people that we've debated, Dr. Potter. Have the courage of your convictions.

We have demonstrated beyond all question that we are able to do scholarly, fair, moderated debates there in Utah.

If you're going to run around and say that you have refuted me and the like, then, sir, have the courage of your convictions.

We will see you in October. Let's do it. Okay? All right.

Well, we will be back again for right now. Do we want to make some time change right now or what?

I mean, you know, now would be the time to do it, I suppose. If we're going to make a change, now would be the time to do it.

What do you think, Mr. Ailman man? No? Okay. We'll be back next Tuesday afternoon.

What? Four? What are you doing four? We're not on a four. You're contradicting me now.

Okay. All right. We have time. We've got... Not much, because I've got a dental appointment. Hurry up.

How about we do... we just go back to the old deal except on Thursdays.

Okay. So we go back to the old schedule, which was Tuesday morning at 11 and Thursday at four.

At four, yes. At four o 'clock. Which is four o 'clock Mountain Standard Time, three o 'clock Pacific, and six o 'clock

Eastern. At least we're getting a bunch of whiners and channels. Sorry. That's, you know, nothing we can do about that.

Okay. That works for me. This Thursday at 4 p .m. Today is Thursday. Hello. Well, then next

Thursday at 4 p .m. But before then, it's next Tuesday at 11 a .m. Hey, no attention to the man.

Hey, you didn't even know we were doing a program today until two minutes till the hour. So what? I'm DVDing, man.

I can't stand it anymore. All right. So the next dividing line. I will vlog this.

Next dividing line. Thursday... Tuesday morning at 11 a .m. That way we'll lose everybody once again.

But hey, that's what archives are all for. So you can start the music, Mr. AOMN. We're wrapping this baby up. I'm just gonna, you know, we'll go blank air here.

Dead air here if we don't get the the closer started here. It's not running.

I don't know why. Well, you can fix it in post -production. Thanks for listening to Dividing Line, folks.

We'll see you Thursday at 11 o 'clock. Bye. Line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries.

If you'd like to contact us, call us at 602 -973 -0318 or write us at P .O.

Box 37106, Phoenix, Arizona 85069. You can also find us on the

World Wide Web at aomin .org. That's A -O -M -I -N dot O -R -G, where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks.