- 00:02
- I do a podcast. I'm not interested in your podcast. These are these are wolves
- 00:11
- Truth be told that I often times lay awake at night trying to figure out how I can get rid of wolves in the church
- 00:23
- We are unabashedly unashamedly Clarkian and so the next few statements that I'm going to make
- 00:29
- I'm probably going to step on all of the Vantillian toes at the same time and This is what we do at simple riff around the radio.
- 00:35
- You know, we are polemical and polarizing Jesus style I would first say that to characterize
- 00:50
- What we do as fashion is itself fashion. It's not hate.
- 00:56
- It's history. It's not fashion. It's the Bible Jesus said woe to you and men speak well of you for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way
- 01:11
- As opposed to blessed are you when you have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness? It is on we're taking the gloves off.
- 01:23
- It's time to battle All right,
- 01:29
- I want to welcome everybody to the show this is Semper Reform on the radio and my name is Tim Shaughnessy not to be confused with Tim Hurd or Tim Kaufman both very recognizable names on the
- 01:41
- Bible thumping wingnet network I am going to be hosting an interview today and Carlos Montijo and Joe Lanza were supposed to be here
- 01:50
- I don't know. We set a time. I don't know what what has transpired
- 01:55
- I can't get a hold of either of them, but I'm just letting you know, they may pop in to participate in this interview
- 02:03
- Discussion and so if they do that would be great if they don't then we'll just move forward but Very excited about today's guest
- 02:13
- We've known him for a long time. We've we've interacted with him for a long time and this is the first time that he's been on our show and he is a
- 02:26
- Solid brother in the Lord and he's also a Clarkian. So very excited for that reason
- 02:31
- So, let me just go ahead and give an opportunity for our guests to say hello I want to welcome to the show
- 02:38
- Jason Peterson. Thanks. I'm honored to be here Well, Jason does he has a ministry and I want to draw some attention to the ministry so Jason, what is you have a website you write quite a bit for the website and You know,
- 02:53
- I was actually looking at it right now It looks like you've revamped the website and it looks pretty good.
- 02:59
- I've got to say I like the the format It's rabid Clarkian .com is the
- 03:05
- URL and the name of the website is the rabid Clarkian blog so Jason tell us a little bit about your ministry what your focus is and What your area of expertise is and what you try to?
- 03:19
- What you try to put out on your website sure first off I'd like to start off by giving my testimony because not everybody knows about it.
- 03:26
- So basically I grew up in a Christian home I grew up as a Southern Baptist and was also and also went to Independent Baptist Church as well
- 03:35
- My parents really pushed me going to church. I accept I prayed the sinner's prayer at the age of nine and At that point
- 03:47
- I was I was I felt assured of my salvation Although now
- 03:53
- I do not really Condone the sinner's prayer because I think it brings about the danger of soul and face place in their faith in the prayer
- 03:59
- They said instead of in Christ himself But I did pray that prayer and that's whenever I started identifying myself as a
- 04:05
- Christian So I was raised and brought up on biblical principles by my parents.
- 04:11
- I was a very Calm kid. I didn't get in a lot of trouble. My sister's a different story, but I didn't get in a lot of trouble
- 04:19
- I didn't ever get written up at school. I Didn't really I rarely got in trouble with my parents and it was even rarer that I got in big enough trouble with my parents to be grounded or score something like that and You know,
- 04:31
- I like to think that I I may fairly well when I got older in my early 20s
- 04:36
- I kind of started drifting away from the faith of it I had a lot of doubts a lot of it was due to how
- 04:41
- I saw Christians acting You know people who identified as Christians seeing how they acted I Always knew deep down that there that the
- 04:50
- Christian God was was real, but I tried to ignore him for a while I even was still going to church, but deep down, you know,
- 04:56
- I was playing the orchestra But deep down I had a lot of doubts about my faith well, this all turned around in 2010 whenever I was
- 05:07
- Diagnosed with cancer. I had a cancer in my eye. It was called ocular melanoma I had no idea that it was even possible to have cancer in your eye up until that point
- 05:15
- Obviously, it was a pretty big shock to me. I wasn't exactly sure what was going to happen I've heard, you know, I've known a lot of people who have died to cancer
- 05:23
- The doctor did say that it's possible it did spread he didn't know if it did spread But he said it could spread but commonly when it does spread it spread somewhere like to the brain
- 05:31
- So it was a pretty scary thing. I went to UAB and Was had surgery on my eye by a doctor named dr
- 05:38
- Callahan when I was in the waiting room for the first appointments I was reading in a book called creationist astronomy by Donald a young and I was reading this stuff and I would just you know
- 05:48
- I was just amazed and I was really I was looking into stuff already, you know when I found out that I was You know, I was facing on mortality
- 05:54
- I started thinking about the big questions in life and I started one seeking answers for it I was reading this book and I thought man this is
- 06:00
- I said I have I'm based on my mortality and I know I Have I have repented of and I have come back to the flock and I knew that my salvation was assured but There are other people that face my situation
- 06:14
- They don't have this hope that I have and then that really that was like the first time I really considered, you know
- 06:19
- Going out and it's you know doing ministry and apologetics. So I Started getting into William Lane Craig I was very encouraged by the arguments he offered at the time and it just really helped bolster my faith even further and then later on I ran into an interview between Eric Coven aside to brook and Kate and Then I was listening on talk and he was talking about how some
- 06:41
- Christians put the Bible on trial and out and and I was like Yes, that's true. And he was talking about how we needed to stand on the authority of Scripture I agreed with that emphatically and so I sort of became a presuppositional apologist shortly thereafter
- 06:55
- I became a reformed Baptist and then I later became a Presbyterian So it kind of really led me towards a reformed faith now at this point, of course
- 07:04
- I and I have some disagreements, but we are friends and we do talk on occasion We're both pretty busy people, but that's kind of how
- 07:12
- I got pushed into the destruction and in 2013 I started a ministry called answers for hope and actually the website answer hope org.
- 07:20
- It is still there It is a website at first. I know the website right is posted. It was like a blog I posted something and I actually
- 07:25
- I posted frequently I posted every day But later on I started another website, which is the rabbit
- 07:31
- Clarkian blog and Recently, I redid answers for hope org and I made it to where it's a question and answer site only
- 07:37
- That means that right now all I do is respond to questions that are sent to me via email and I post it on there
- 07:42
- I try and post once a week, but I don't always get to do so due to time constraints The rabbit Clarkian blog is more for me interacting with other people
- 07:50
- Also, it's for me ranting and sometimes my sarcasm comes out in some of those articles whenever I'm talking about things like Gender identity and and what have you in politics?
- 08:00
- and so that one's more of an informal website where I just kind of say what's on my mind and I have a third website called
- 08:07
- Uh, the Christians investors club and the website is Christian investor club org I do post less frequently on that because it's not really a primary ministry.
- 08:13
- It's more of a secondary thing and there I teach Christians how to invest in cash flow in Investments that produce cash flow and how to handle their finances better.
- 08:23
- So those are right now I have three ministries and that is that is all three That's awesome.
- 08:29
- I actually didn't know that you had the third ministry and I wasn't sure if answers for hope was still active
- 08:36
- So answers for hope is the one where you you tackle questions that people send you
- 08:42
- Yes, and actually I have an interesting I have some interesting questions coming up answering such as how it's possible for Jesus to be both
- 08:50
- God and man You know, so like question about the hypocite Union and that's been a big problem for the church and Gordon Clark tried to address it
- 08:56
- But unfortunately, he didn't he didn't get to finish it before he passed away So I still think that the question that there's still there's still an issue with that that I plan to Address in my dissertation whenever I whenever I finished my
- 09:11
- PhD at Whitfield. I'm definitely looking forward to that I know Carlos Montijo is actually also working through that and it is a very complicated issue
- 09:20
- But let me let me go ahead and do this. Let me draw some attention to that so if if our listeners want to Send you a question
- 09:29
- Where do they send it? On answer .org. I have a full contact form
- 09:35
- You'll see where it says ask a question. You can click on that There's a form that you can fill out that will send an email directly to My to the ministry email address, which is answerhope at gmail .com
- 09:44
- You can also email directly at answerhope at gmail .com I do occasionally get scoffers that try and email me and then
- 09:51
- I'll decide whether I want to respond to it publicly privately or if I want to even respond at all But I do also get a lot of questions from Christians and there's a variety issues that come up and there's sometimes
- 10:00
- You know a question comes up and I go. Well, I haven't really thought of it I recently had a question about whether there was a distinction between adultery and fornication
- 10:09
- I never really thought about it before so I had to go and do it I went I took about a month to study it before I answered the question
- 10:15
- So sometimes I don't know the answer and I go and I try and find out if I don't feel I can answer it After I do my research,
- 10:21
- I just tell them that I'm I probably wouldn't be of much benefit if I did answer it And maybe refer them to someone who's more of an expert on it.
- 10:29
- If I am able to answer it then I'll go ahead and Post it on the website. I typically only post the first name of the person
- 10:36
- I don't post their last name because I don't know if they really want everybody know exactly who it is. That's asking the question So as a result, sometimes
- 10:42
- I'll have like a bunch of questions Like for instance, I had the question I had about adultery was from from a guy named
- 10:48
- David And I have another guy named David who's asked me different questions And some people may be led to believe that a lot of these people are the same, but they're usually not
- 10:55
- Well, I really appreciate the spirit in which you're wanting to address these issues because I think that a lot of times when we
- 11:04
- Put ourselves out there. We're doing podcast. There can be a temptation to Want to be an expert in every area and I think that We are supposed to be a part of a body of Christ We're supposed to be well, we are a part of the body of Christ, which is the church
- 11:20
- But we're supposed to interact in that way and so there's a lot of areas that I'm not an expert in and so I have to defer to Somebody else who might be an expert in that area
- 11:31
- So I definitely appreciate the attitude with which you're you're operating yourself in Okay, I gotta ask you this the rabid
- 11:40
- Clarkian. How did you come up with that name for your your blog rabid
- 11:45
- Clarkian? Science jokingly called me a rabid Clarkian repeatedly and I sort of just adopted it. It's kind of funny
- 11:51
- Some people I see what's the what do you mean by rabbit? I go. Well, I guess I'm sarcastic. I'm very opinionated
- 11:57
- You know, so that's kind of so I thought that's that that's what it means to be rabid in that in that website
- 12:02
- As I'm just opinionated and I'm sarcastic Okay, so we've we've got to talk about something and let's just get it out of the way we've had we've had a long history in the ether of Facebook and the intranet and I would like to Just throw this out there is that we've had our disagreements in the past and We've been able to reconcile obviously by the grace of God We're friends.
- 12:35
- I would actually count you among friends But let's just go ahead and bury the hatchet with regards to the conflict that we had
- 12:44
- I'll give you an opportunity to give a little bit of a backstory I believe it was about a year and a half ago
- 12:51
- The reason that we need to bring this up is because we actually have written an article that had your name in it and we
- 12:59
- Referenced a disagreement that we had. So let me give you an opportunity to give some of the backstory and I'll just I'll let you
- 13:06
- Take it Sure. Um, I'm a student of dr. Talbot and he's a formist he was a student of Gordon Clark and I Also, and you know quite a few of dr.
- 13:17
- Clark's former students dr. Kaiser for Kaiser for instance and dr.
- 13:23
- Bill Higgins So I do know I do know a few of those students. I have been in correspondence with Gary Crampton Recently about an academic paper that I wrote we've been going back and forth because we had some we had some agreements disagreements and some
- 13:36
- Things that he thought should be clarified So I have had correspondence with numerous people now the way this started and I'll be completely transparent here the good and the bad and everything
- 13:47
- I was a part of a group called the Gordon H Clark discussion group on Facebook Anyone who isn't a part of the group that's interested in Clark.
- 13:54
- I highly recommend you join it There are a lot of really knowledgeable people there. I don't agree with anyone there I don't agree with everybody's interpretation of Clark there
- 14:01
- But if you want exposure to a lot of people who who are interested in Gordon Clark That is the best place on Facebook to go to there is another group to you
- 14:09
- I'm called the Gordon Clark discussion group that was not quite as busy But there are knowledgeable people there as well That are not a part of the
- 14:14
- Gordon H Clark discussion groups for for you know various reasons We all have our preferences about how groups should be ran and everything
- 14:21
- This all started Whenever I had blocked someone because they really got on my nerves I just felt like they were wasting my time and I felt like they were a nuisance.
- 14:29
- I blocked them now This was apparently against the rules of the group And I refused to block them and I actually
- 14:37
- I threatened to leave multiple times and I'm not saying I Shouldn't have threatened. I should just left. I shouldn't just made it
- 14:42
- I shouldn't made a big scene about but that's what I did I made a big scene about it and I made a final post saying that I'm leaving because I don't agree with this rule out
- 14:49
- There everyone voted on it and kind of decided to keep it. So I left the group I thought it was the best thing to do I don't want to stay there and keep arguing with people about how the rules should be especially when it's not my group in the first place
- 14:59
- I went and I started a group with Dr. Talbot and some other students of Gordon Clark called Clarkian apologetics group
- 15:05
- And I and I used the term Clarkian apologetics for the group because there wasn't really a group that really had that title So I thought it'd be really easy for people to find
- 15:11
- I would imagine that anyone who tried to search for Clarkian apologetics would use This term use Clarkian apologetics as a term that they look for.
- 15:18
- So that's why I named the group that Dr. Talbot was an I'm in and I had some other students In there,
- 15:24
- I think Kenna Gentry was in the group too, although he's not Clarkian. I think he was a part of the group though The purpose of that group as Dr.
- 15:31
- Talbot and I agreed on was just to educate people on Gordon Clark The problem was was that we kind of wanted it to be a place where we where people can come and ask questions
- 15:41
- We didn't really want people going with us back and forth because we just really we didn't we didn't really want to spend a lot of time arguing on social media
- 15:49
- I Don't know how dr. Talbot feels about this, but I don't think we handled it very well
- 15:55
- We had you know people like town came on and had some disagreements Luke Minor has some disagreements So we just and we responded by eventually banning them all.
- 16:02
- I mean any dissenter basically we we kicked out the group You know and because we just thought you know It was rude for like if you're teaching a classroom for like somebody to come in and just start trying to take over the class
- 16:12
- That's how we felt about at the time I I told Luke Minor that he was not a Clarkian I shouldn't have said that because you know of his definition of knowledge.
- 16:21
- I didn't agree with it and some other things So it was a really it was a really nasty situation, and it really it was it was stressful because I had so many people you know
- 16:30
- Going at me, so I got really defensive, and I would you know and I talked back I said some things I shouldn't have I think I think the others on the other side
- 16:36
- I'm not going to specific so I don't want to start anything But I think some other people that respond to me didn't say something they shouldn't have so it was really just it was just a very terrible thing that happened so You know and I regret it
- 16:48
- I you know I hate that I said those things I you know I hate that I keep them off the page what we should have Done was just let people give their opinion and just not respond to it and just let it stand
- 16:55
- That's what we should have done in my opinion So there was a lot of there was a lot of I think
- 17:01
- People that were mad at the Gordon Clark group that we're talking about our group You know maybe maybe to them it looked almost like a cult because we were kicking people out disagree with us
- 17:09
- You know but it is our group we have a right to do that But I just don't you know looking back. You know they say hindsight is 20 -20
- 17:14
- I don't agree at all with you know with what the how I handled it before and I'm very regretful of that I also brought up an issue in the group about Gordon Clark's definition of saving faith and This caused some disagreement, and I also mentioned in the group that dr.
- 17:30
- Robbins had had edited dr. Clark's book so that's doctor said the books that you get from the
- 17:35
- Trinity Foundation may not necessarily reflect What what the what Gordon Clark actually wrote now?
- 17:41
- I will say this from what I understand for dr. Talbot Gordon Clark when he wrote he was he was very technical in his in his writings
- 17:53
- So and dr. Robbins helped Helped him you know I'm not saying dr. Robbins can't be completely changed, but he did help edit
- 17:59
- Clark's works You know a Clark trusted him and dr. Robbins did edits you know Clark's works You know having footnotes in and everything to clarify some things he said and things like that But I but the way
- 18:09
- I said it and what I understand for dr. Talbot time was that dr. Robbins had actually taken
- 18:14
- Clark's book on saving faith and rewrote it to where it agrees with them With dr. Robbins view because he had a little bit of a different view of justification than Clark did
- 18:23
- You know and I said that and it turns out what I said was not really accurate. I misunderstood what dr. Talbot said Dr.
- 18:29
- Robbins didn't have a disagreement with Clark on saving faith, but he did not actually change what dr. Clark said in the book to reflect his own position
- 18:36
- That was false And I've taken responsibility for that for being careless and not really asking enough questions before going to bring a bombshell like that out there
- 18:46
- That was one of the big disagreements I think that was one of the most contentious disagreements that that we all had was was the issue of dr.
- 18:52
- Robbins and the Trinity Foundation, and I've expressed I've expressed regret over that You know and I think we all have some regret about at least how the situation was handled
- 19:01
- But that but there were some articles back and forth there was a lengthy There was a fairly lengthy article that Luke Miner and CJ wrote
- 19:09
- Towards me Tim and Carlos had written something towards me Sean Geraghty made some comments and I looked at it, and I was going to write a response to everything
- 19:19
- But then I just finally said I'm just going to I'm just going to let it go because I just didn't feel like going You know back and forth with everybody
- 19:26
- But later on you know as you know people cool off as time passes and and Really, um you know there was a time
- 19:35
- Tim I think it was you and Carlos writers hung up on y 'all during a conversation I just hung up didn't tell you guys that I hung up.
- 19:41
- You know Yeah, you hung up on me Yeah, so it was a very tense.
- 19:47
- You know it was a very tense thing I know it was it was over the it was over the the comments with regards to To John Robbins, and I do remember as a matter of fact the reason that we we stepped in was because you had said that Luke Miner wasn't a
- 20:02
- Clarkian and then that's when we stepped in and then with with respect to the issues about the editing that John Robbins did and the
- 20:11
- Trinity Foundation and You know I haven't talked to dr. Talbot in years.
- 20:16
- I do remember that when I did speak to dr. Talbot he had told me that there's there's
- 20:22
- Clark, and then there's Robbins's version of Clark and that I needed to be careful with the
- 20:28
- Trinity Foundation and I found that to be a little bit discouraging. You know
- 20:33
- I don't know where he's at with that I can't represent his views now or currently you know and my hope is that Because he's he has said some some disparaging things on Facebook with regards to dr.
- 20:48
- Robbins, I don't know why there would be You know I I think that he probably didn't appreciate
- 20:56
- Robbins's Polemics because Robbins was very polemical, but you know I hope that Whatever grievances he might have had with Robbins I hope that that he's been able to resolve that You know
- 21:12
- The the main thing that that I want to to get at here Is that I think that we've been able to reconcile because like you said enough time had passed
- 21:22
- You know that they say cooler heads prevail And I think that you know whenever we go to Clark if we if we disagree about something that Clark had said we
- 21:34
- Think that you know Clark meant this when another person thinks that we meant that I think that we can
- 21:41
- Just come to the table as brothers and say you know this is what I see and you know
- 21:47
- This isn't something that we should divide over and I think that that's probably where you're at as well right now
- 21:54
- Am I correct in saying that? Yes, even if we may have disagreements I think that we all do enough good to where we should just focus on working together instead of trying to argue and just maybe
- 22:03
- State our conditions and let other people figure out which one they want to take Yeah, I definitely agree and so just for clarity sake you no longer believe that Robbins edited
- 22:15
- Clark's work in a way that would misrepresent Clark or in a way that would change what Clark had initially
- 22:22
- Written am I correct? Yes, you're correct on that. Like I said, I had misunderstood what dr Talbot said and That's why
- 22:29
- I had said what I said and it really I really stepped in it whenever I had said that so I spoke too Question so that's how that got started yeah, and that's actually the point when when
- 22:40
- I got kicked out of out of the Clarkian group because I had actually Challenged that and then you know
- 22:48
- I don't remember if it was you that reached out to me or if it was me that reached out to you But all
- 22:53
- I can say is I'm grateful that we're now talking things are good And so for the remainder of this podcast what
- 23:00
- I want to do is I want to promote Your book and say congratulations on Actually publishing a book because I haven't done that.
- 23:11
- I'm hoping to in the future I hope that if I do in the future that people will read it and buy it but um you you recently published a book and it is geared towards Clarkian apologetics and It's a apologetics made simple five keys to an unstoppable
- 23:29
- Apologetic so what inspired you to write this book and what is the main thrust of the book?
- 23:36
- Well, God has blessed the church with a long line of gifted theologians and philosophers throughout the history of Christianity I really believe that a lot that most of the objections to Christianity have been sufficiently
- 23:52
- Answered I think the only one that there could be any argument about is that maybe the church is not still quite as a whole
- 23:57
- So does not quite understand the hypostatic Union I Believe that it's resolvable.
- 24:03
- I actually do have a solution of mine I'm not going to share it right now because it's in its infancy But it may be you know, if Carla speaks me to it
- 24:09
- That'd be great because it'd be a lot less work for me. That is a tough issue to tackle There's a lot of terms that need to be defined and I think that's where the problem goes with the hypostatic
- 24:19
- Union just the terms that the church is used throughout its history and But You know, so I really
- 24:26
- I felt that I don't you know, I haven't been in very good health over the past couple years
- 24:34
- I really you know, I really thought you know, I don't really know how long I'm going to be here So if I'm going to publish something
- 24:40
- I want to be the most I think most beneficial book that I can publish now
- 24:45
- This is my first book. So I made it short because I really wasn't sure I you know The editing and in the formatting
- 24:51
- I didn't want to deal with a 300 page book For the first time trying to get all that stuff done Fortunately for me when
- 24:58
- I when I was working on the cover Fred Beal had saw what I was doing and Fred Beal is a is a
- 25:03
- Vantillian Very good guy. We're very good friends. He actually helped design the cover of this book for me, even though I'm Clarkian He's a and he's a
- 25:11
- Vantillian. He actually helped me with with this book. He helped format the book for me He just really made the process easier for me and I definitely appreciate him for that He's actually working on his own book on the
- 25:21
- Trinity and I'm really looking forward to reading that because I think he's really I Think Vantill had some some good ideas and I am confident
- 25:30
- That Fred Beal will will continue that will build on the good things that Vantill has said You know while you know, maybe filtering out some of the things that weren't so good
- 25:41
- So but that aside what led me to write this book? There was a couple of things I took into consideration
- 25:47
- The first one was how much of a benefit it would be if I were if I were to not make it to next year or something what
- 25:53
- I had would I be leaving something behind that that that someone could use and One of the things I see whenever I watch debates between atheists and Christians and the average
- 26:03
- Christian There are a lot of things at play in the discussion that goes unnoticed by both sides such as definitions of terms
- 26:11
- And for the Christian, you know when to walk away from a discussion instead of wasting your time beating your head against a brick wall systemizing the apologetic and the worldview that the
- 26:21
- Christian is constructing The philosophy of language is a big issue that I think a lot of people don't understand
- 26:27
- I have found that a lot of people tend to take very uncharitable representations of the other position or to make theirs look better I mean you see this more on the atheist side than the
- 26:36
- Christian side in my opinion I see a lot more coming from them and then also You know being able to do apologetic in a way that is that is consistent with how
- 26:44
- Jesus Christ would have done it So, you know So that this is what I had written about and I give
- 26:49
- I give five keys To on how to engage in discussion now, this book isn't really about responding to any particular argument
- 26:55
- I think Christians have done a great job of addressing a lot of the arguments already I didn't you know, so I'll wait and do my own version of those kind of books later after I you know
- 27:04
- But what I really want to get out there is I want to teach the person how the you know These these five things that will really make defending the faith easier for them
- 27:13
- If you follow these things and if you really pay attention to them you will find that it's that atheists will have a a
- 27:20
- Significantly harder time dealing with you people can listen to some of my more recent debates after I had become more seasoned and more
- 27:27
- In line with you know with Clark's philosophy. They can look at my writings You know, I utilize all these principles of my apologetic and I am convinced that anyone who follows these principles regardless of their apologetic methodology
- 27:40
- Will have an apologetic that is impossible to counter So some of the things I emphasize is first is dogmatism
- 27:46
- Which base which is basically what I cover is that there's no such thing as neutrality. You've heard. You've heard.
- 27:51
- Dr. Bonson, I think it's a great a great quote. There's two things you need to know about neutrality first They aren't and you shouldn't be that's a great quote from And And I actually like that you did that I like that that you quoted
- 28:05
- Bonson favorably in one of my recent articles on the Scriptural is ad hominem reply
- 28:11
- I quote Bonson favorably as well because while as a Clarkian I do have disagreements with Bonson and I know that Bonson wrote against Clark and had some disagreements with Clark we would
- 28:24
- Certainly want to You know where these guys said something good. Let's let's acknowledge it
- 28:30
- So, I mean, I appreciate that, you know That was a really good point that Bonson made about neutrality
- 28:36
- And as a matter of fact, I don't want to give away the whole book, but you know, I wanted to just for illustration
- 28:42
- I wanted to ask you about dogmatism because I see what you're doing you're giving people a
- 28:50
- Foundation for how they should approach The debate rather than just giving them, you know, here's an argument.
- 28:58
- Here's you know, here's a response You're giving them the mindset That they should have with how to approach the debate and I thought that this was really important I thought the the chapter on dogmatism was actually very
- 29:12
- Insightful and let me say the book is small But I thought it was very well written and I thought it had some really good information so if you if you have an opportunity,
- 29:23
- I definitely would recommend our listeners to check it out because Dogmatism let's dive into that a little bit because I think that a lot of people out there have the view of Christians as your dogmatist
- 29:35
- But we're not we come to the table like you said neutral following the evidence wherever it leads and One of the things that you have in here is everyone is a dogmatist
- 29:47
- So I want to give you an opportunity to explain to our listeners what that means
- 29:53
- What do you mean by everybody's a dogmatist? Like how can a scientist who is coming to the table?
- 29:59
- Neutral he's allowing the evidence to speak for itself. He's allowing the evidence to to guide him and direct him
- 30:06
- He's not a dogmatist. The Christian is the dogmatist and they're stuck in their ways You make the point that even he is a dogmatist
- 30:15
- So I want to give you an opportunity to explain to our listeners what you mean And then that way it'll give them a little bit of insight into what the book contains
- 30:25
- Sure. So when you look at the history of philosophy You will find that there are philosophers that come in and they and it's very clear that they have specific goals
- 30:33
- And this is true for Christians and non -christians For instance Immanuel Kant wanted to save empiricism from the devastating critiques of David Hume So anytime someone enters a discussion it is impossible to enter a discussion unless you want to accomplish something
- 30:50
- Everybody has their goals that they want to accomplish and they will try in In philosophy and they'll and they'll try and raise whatever arguments they can to reach to reach that conclusion
- 30:59
- No atheist goes into a debate with a Christian, you know to actually challenge their beliefs without The intention of trying to show that they are correct
- 31:08
- So the atheist goes and he already believes he's correct. The Christian goes in here already believes he already believes that he's correct as people that are not omniscient the view that we have of the world around us is affected by our assumptions and Everybody if you make any argument it is absolutely necessary That you have to start with something as dr.
- 31:30
- Clark has said if you haven't if you haven't started you haven't begun And to give a give an analogy
- 31:37
- In NASCAR race, you can't finish a race unless you start it first Right Clark Clark makes the point that every every philosophy must have a first principle laid down dogmatically which cannot be proven but must first be assumed every worldview must have its first principle or axiomatic starting point and when when we say that Every principle must be laid down Dogmatically, is that what you mean by everybody at that point becomes a dogmatist?
- 32:06
- Yes, that is what I mean Everybody has to start with an assumption is impossible to argue without starting with one
- 32:11
- If you're not omniscient you have to you have to start somewhere and assume it and then if you think that you can prove your
- 32:16
- Assumption that means it's not an assumption. There's some that no assumption that you're making in order to try and prove it It is impossible to try and build a system of philosophy without Starting with an axiom now there is one thing that I want to cover to you about that the most common ejection from atheists to Clarkian apologists is that an
- 32:35
- Axiom is self -evidently true and because a Bible is not self -evidently true It cannot be an axiom this goes into another part of my book which
- 32:43
- I talked about the late the philosophy of language and the fact and really The truth is is that a definition?
- 32:49
- It's just a description of Of a of a term it just it's basically language conveys propositional meaning
- 32:56
- We can define terms any way we want to and to say that we cannot define an axiom a certain way because there's a different Definition.
- 33:02
- Well, it makes the whole English language fall apart because it's not uncommon for an English word to have four or five different definitions
- 33:09
- The idea that we have to use only one definition of axiom Whenever we articulate our philosophy is completely it's nothing more than special pleading because there's no reason to To say that we have to define an axiom a certain way as opposed to defining a tree a certain way
- 33:29
- There's multiple definitions of trees. We see them every day in there and people use the term tree in different ways So the most common objection to laying out a case for dominant is when we talk about an axiom a first principle
- 33:39
- We must start with that's the most common objection and that's how to respond to it It just doesn't it just doesn't jive with the way the
- 33:45
- English language works Now I will say this if someone says that they do not start somewhere if you keep you know
- 33:52
- What happens is if there's nowhere to start that you're starting with assuming that it's true without being able to prove it There you have to keep you have to keep arguing for a proposition of the proposition as it gets walked back and you end up with an infinite regress of Propositions that the person has to argue for so basically they can't argue for them all
- 34:08
- So their their epistemology will collapse into skepticism. The problem is
- 34:14
- We recognize that we are dogmatists. We as Clarkians, but other people don't recognize they're dogmatists
- 34:19
- You have to be able to show them that they're making assumptions They cannot prove and that's something that I cover in chapter one of of the book is is that why everyone's a dogmatist and I even give
- 34:30
- I believe I give an example of a Conversation between an atheist and a Christian that highlights that the atheists although they're making very grandiose claims
- 34:37
- They're making assumptions. They cannot possibly prove and because they're making those assumptions. They can't prove they are dogmatist
- 34:43
- Yeah, you're bringing up some really good stuff. So the reason that Everybody is required to have a first principle is because if you don't then you'll fall into an infinite regress and and it's how do
- 34:56
- You know that a is true. Well because of B. Well, how do you know that B is true? Well because of C and obviously we could go on Forever past, you know the the alphabet we could just go on forever
- 35:07
- And so that that brings up another point is what about? Proof, do you hold to the view that you can prove your first principle?
- 35:17
- Because I know that we're talking about apologetic methods here the way that I See it and you can tell me what you think
- 35:24
- But the way that I see it is that if you're trying to prove your first principle well, if everything has to be demonstrated if everything requires a demonstration you either fall into an infinite regress is what you
- 35:37
- Mentioned or you fall into circular reasoning and you're trying to prove the very thing that you have to assume.
- 35:42
- So When you point out that everybody's a dogmatist does that mean that you cannot prove the thing that you are trying to assume
- 35:52
- Sorry for your some snorting like it's not a demon or anything. It's just my friend So as far as as far as that goes, you know as a dogmatist
- 36:01
- I Define dogmatism basically as as just a philosophical system that's predicated upon an assumption that cannot be demonstrated
- 36:10
- When you talk about proof whether or not you can prove your axiom it depends on what you mean by proof by proof in a in a context of a
- 36:19
- Assumption about you know a discussion about philosophical systems. I would define proof as Something that is deduced by necessary consequence from an axiom or a theorem that's already deduced from the axiom
- 36:30
- So I look at proof as a deduction that shows if one proposition is the case the latter proposition must be true To me that that is how
- 36:36
- I would that is how I would present a proof now The whole thing is to with with respect to the
- 36:45
- Axiom in question the Bible alone is the Word of God that that's the Clarkian axiom We cannot demonstrate that it's true in the re and it's not because God has not revealed himself sufficiently
- 36:55
- The problem is is that if we try and use other methods that that disregard the axiom in question
- 37:00
- You started if you started another place like let's say you try and approach it empirically or rationalistically
- 37:06
- There are certain problems with those epistemologies and it's not just in trying to prove the existence of God It's in any claim that you try and prove with those methods whatsoever
- 37:14
- You will fail though you with those with those epistemologies because of their inherent flaws your arguments will have holes in them that your opponent
- 37:21
- Can tear apart So can we prove our axiom? No now Can Christians know that the
- 37:27
- Bible is the Word of God? I say yes, because it's true and knowledge is a possession of the truth So I I say that yes, we can know it's true
- 37:34
- And the reason why we know it's true is not only because God revealed this word But there's a supernatural thing that happens whenever you are when you come to face in Christ It's a the witness of the
- 37:44
- Holy Spirit. We have all these things that you know, we have Holy Spirit within us You know that testify to us the truth of the
- 37:51
- Scriptures so our belief in the Bible actually is something that you could say is is a Supernatural there's an element to it to where it's not just us.
- 37:59
- We didn't just come in and By our own volition come to believe that the Bible is true. This is the truth that was given to us by God Almighty himself
- 38:06
- So can we know it's true? Yes, because God has told us so now can we go and take the proposition and demonstrate it to another person?
- 38:13
- That's true. No, we can't because we're starting with it We can't argue in a circle and try and prove it that's begging the question and really whenever you look at it
- 38:21
- You know, you look at what Van Til said about virtuously and viciously circular arguments now, I emphatically reject that distinction
- 38:27
- I do too. And the reason why is because even if you
- 38:32
- Well, this this is the issue that I have with it and you can tell me what you think But when you say viciously circular you're saying that there's a self contradictory
- 38:41
- So like empiricism is viciously circular because they're starting with a non -empirical knowledge claim of Empiricism, but when you say that you can prove yours because it's not viciously circular
- 38:53
- Well, it's still fallaciously circular if you're trying to prove it and that's the issue that I have with it
- 39:00
- What are your thoughts on that? Whenever you look at the distinction between viciously circular circularity and virtuous circularity
- 39:08
- The problem that you get is whenever you say that someone begs the question There is a there is a definition for begging the question and I guess someone can redefine it if they want to but typically they're
- 39:18
- Not redefining it. They're using the state that straight plot definition that logicians usually logisticians usually usually use
- 39:26
- But whenever you talk about putting you're putting an adjective Vicious or virtuous in front of the begging the question.
- 39:35
- The problem is is that fallacies are determined by two things number one their form and number two whether or not the premise in question actually necessarily leads to Another proposition in a deductive argument
- 39:51
- The problem we have here with this distinction is that the form of the argument is still the same in logic
- 39:57
- Begging the question is considered in a valid form if A, A. If B, B, you know
- 40:04
- A is true Therefore A is true That is that is circular the form even whenever you take what
- 40:12
- Vantillian say makes The argument virtuously circular as opposed to viciously circular
- 40:18
- You are in fact, you're still using the same form or argument because it's the same form
- 40:24
- It is still in an invalid argument in logic and it is a fallacy Just putting an adjective in front of it and trying to make some qualifications does not solve the problem in fact, it may very well induce other fallacies into into the discussion such as Such as special pleading which is an informal fallacy.
- 40:41
- You're asking for special circumstances Well, let me let me ask you. Let me ask you then. So where does that put you with respect to the
- 40:50
- Transcendental arguments of the tag that then that we see our Vantillian brothers use and they say that they can prove well what they often classify as an axiom they
- 41:01
- Let me let me see if I can say this differently what they often say is an ultimate standard is what we would say is their first principle and they just Some of the
- 41:13
- Terminology that they use I think is a little bit different, but they they say ultimate standard and we say first principle or axiom
- 41:22
- But it's really the same thing. Where does that put you with respect to the transcendental argument?
- 41:29
- How would you use it? Do you think that the that the argument can be used to prove the
- 41:34
- Bible is true or to prove that God exists? Like like our brothers would say
- 41:40
- I Would like to say that and I don't cover this in my book because my book is solely about apologetic methodology
- 41:46
- That's why it's so short No reason why I made it short was because a lot of people don't read the first chapter books
- 41:51
- Anyway, so I want to make it short enough to where people would be able to read it without thinking They're spending too much time on it But that aside as far as the transcendental argument goes
- 42:00
- I'd like to say first overall and I know some Clarkians don't agree with me on this I Have an overall very positive view of Vantill although I have disagreements
- 42:10
- Vantill did say a lot of really good things Clark even described Vantill as mostly orthodox after the after they had reconciled after the
- 42:18
- Gordon Clark Vantill Controversy, I really think and it's my belief that it is time for Clarkians and Vantillians even if we have our disagreements to work together
- 42:28
- Reunite in the truth of Scripture and the truth in Christ and just put that that ugly confrontation aside it's over now both men have gone the glory and We really you know when we're when we're barricading with each other all the time
- 42:43
- It just really distracts from the sharing of the gospel that we should be doing Although we do have some disagreements of some significant
- 42:48
- You know we are still brothers in Christ and we ought to We ought to take both Clark and Vantill for the good things they said and you know
- 42:55
- If we have disagreements that's going to happen. There's always there's always gonna be disagreements in the churches You know even Paul talks about not getting involved in Petty issues of disagreement
- 43:06
- So look, but you know, the whole thing is, you know, and I've been in court I have been in correspondence some not extensive correspondence mind you but I have been in correspondence with dr.
- 43:15
- Frame some too and he agrees to you know, one of dr. Frame's Goals was to try and and help ease this rift a bit.
- 43:22
- He feels very strongly about it. I do too I hope that the younger generation that's coming in will be able to help men those issues further
- 43:30
- I think that the Gordon Clark Vantill controversy is one of the worst things that happened in recent church history I think it was a terrible thing.
- 43:37
- I think there were things that were said on both sides that that are regrettable But nevertheless regarding tag
- 43:43
- It depends on what you mean by tag because if you look at the blogs Especially in one issue is is that a lot of people who are
- 43:49
- Vantillians don't really understand Vantill They think they're Vantillians, but they actually have some disagreements if you look at some blogs about tag, you'll actually see people lay out a syllogism for it.
- 44:01
- Uphaman syllogism would be Something along the line as without God, there's no intelligible experience
- 44:07
- There is intelligible experience Therefore God exists. You'll see you'll see syllogism like that.
- 44:15
- I've seen some constructed in a valid format I've seen some constructed in an invalid format But the point is some people have actually tried to to make the tag argument to syllogism
- 44:23
- The problem with that is it misses the point of what Vantill was trying to say What Vantill was trying to say was in order to even argue
- 44:31
- Against Christianity you have to presuppose the implications of Christianity. God according to Vantill is the
- 44:40
- God's existence is the necessary precondition for intelligibility. Now, I don't like those terms
- 44:48
- It's pre -existing. I'm not entirely it just just seems like an awkward turn to me
- 44:53
- I don't even like the word exists because it's a predicate that can follow any subject You just really to say something that does that that we think it just doesn't exist
- 45:02
- It just doesn't really does it's kind of topological in my opinion intelligibility as far as that goes
- 45:09
- I don't like that term either because it's really ambiguous a lot of times people are talking about being able to observe things and make
- 45:15
- Conclusions, but as we know that those of us who have read Clark and degree know you cannot, you know
- 45:21
- Logically derive a propositional truth from a non proposition There's no there is no inference in logic that allows for that kind of thinking
- 45:29
- So as far as tag goes, I agree and Clark does not for the record but I agree that That tag can be used in a negative sense
- 45:41
- To show you know as a polemic to show that that really in order for the atheist to argue
- 45:47
- He is assuming some things that are that are that are true if the Bible is true I think there's nothing wrong with showing that and the whole thing is to you know, that you know people who make syllogisms
- 45:57
- Vant Hill understood that that in order to make a syllogism There has to be some sort of foundation for logic
- 46:06
- And he understood that so he would even say in order to make a syllogism you have to presuppose Christianity So really, you know when you try and make tagging to syllogism, you're kind of you're kind of not adding to the discussion
- 46:15
- In fact, you may be detracting from it because you get distracted by other issues But yeah, I agree, you know a tag can be used now think tag proves that God exists
- 46:22
- I would not and I don't think the tag proves that the Bible is true But I think it's a good way to show people if you approach it the right way
- 46:30
- That they are there are some assumptions They have to adopt some of our beliefs that are that are actually contradictory to the implication of their own beliefs
- 46:37
- In order to even argue against Christianity and using it in that way. I think it's I think it's fine to use it
- 46:43
- So, let me go back I may have misunderstood you said Clark would not agree with what you just said or he
- 46:50
- It sounded like you said Clark would not agree with that. Yes, I did I did preface that but what he would not agree with this
- 46:57
- Clark did not believe that it was possible to show that all non -christian worldviews would lead to skepticism
- 47:02
- He did think that there could be a problem with you know, there would be allegedly a problem with a worldview that starts with a
- 47:11
- A You know non -christian axiom the problem, you know, he thought maybe it would be possible to construct such a worldview
- 47:20
- That would be logically consistent, but he he's you know But he just didn't feel that he could prove that any worldview that is not
- 47:26
- Christian would necessarily lead to contradiction He never believed that but I think you know When you look at the Bible and you see what it says about knowledge of where it comes from you know,
- 47:33
- I think it's very easy to conclude that that Knowledge does come from God and that if you forsake God you're forsaking knowledge and and if you forsake knowledge
- 47:41
- You're gonna run to a problem in your worldview at some point. I think the Bible makes that very clear given what it said But Clark, but I don't think
- 47:47
- Clark would agree with that I may I may have a different understanding because I thought that Clark did believe that all of the worldviews would lead to skepticism and therefore the the unbeliever should consider
- 48:02
- Christianity and I as a matter of fact, I thought he even wrote something to that effect either in God's hammer or in What would be volume four of the signature series?
- 48:15
- Because I have read it somewhere I can't remember where it was It's quite a while back the way I look at it is, you know, and and I'm fallible
- 48:22
- I could be mistaken Maybe I'm maybe I dreamed it or something, you know Yeah, I could too
- 48:28
- I I don't have the reference on hand and You know, it's it's really interesting because Clark wrote so much that I've read some of his stuff
- 48:42
- I want to say like more than five times some of his stuff I haven't even gotten to yet, but he's written so much that you hear something and it's like, you know what?
- 48:52
- I don't know. Let me go back and and I'm gonna have to go to this book and look at my notes and see if that's what he said, but um, but I think we're probably just gonna have to Come come back to the table a little later point and figure out if Clark really if you believe that or not
- 49:13
- Unless what's up? Right, right,
- 49:18
- I can't prove it but um, let's get back to the tag because you were saying that it can be used as a negative test and I think that I Think that I agree with that.
- 49:28
- I'm trying to figure out if we're saying the same thing. The tag can be used as a Reductio ad absurdum
- 49:36
- To lead the other person's worldview to absurdity, right? how
- 49:42
- I would approach it is if I use tag and I have used it and I have I have used recently but The way
- 49:47
- I approach it is I show that unbeliever said look and it's almost and it's similar to what Clark does But it's just it has a little bit is a little bit more to it because I'm trying to show them say hey look
- 49:56
- What the things you're arguing you have to assume parts of my worldview that actually contradict what you're trying to what you're trying to argue for For instance, it's not possible
- 50:04
- Given a naturalistic worldview to say that there are any there's really any prescription to thinking logically There's really no such thing as necessary inference.
- 50:11
- It's just a part of our imagination They're assuming that there is necessary inference, but that's not something that really is possible
- 50:18
- Unless you have unless you have someone who is a I guess you would say that has the authority to do to To declare those kind of things are prescriptive
- 50:29
- So, you know you don't have you know, and that's really what it amounts to, you know You know it comes to ethics in the Bible and Logic is the way it is because it's a structure of how
- 50:37
- God thinks and and of course God's creation is going to reflect how God So really, you know unless they can demonstrate that the laws of logic are prescriptive given a naturalistic worldview
- 50:48
- Which I've never seen anyone do Then they're really there You know We can demonstrate from the
- 50:53
- Bible because we start with an action the Bible and it's a word of God regardless of whether you believe it or not We can deduce from from what it said in the
- 51:01
- Bible all the syllogisms that's used The fact that there is there are valid arguments and invalid arguments the
- 51:06
- Bible talks about both You know whenever they're dealing with arguments used by individual people They you know, there are there are certain inferences that are that are necessary and you can deduce that from Scripture But you can't deduce that from a naturalistic worldview
- 51:20
- So so basically because you cannot deduce that from a naturalistic worldview whenever you're trying to argue as if there are prescriptive laws and rules concerning inferences you're assuming a
- 51:31
- Proposition that you just can't get from atheism, but you can get it from Christianity That is an excellent point because they're not they're not prescriptive.
- 51:39
- They're descriptive, right? So because of that they're having to take on they're having to borrow from our worldview As Cy would say and as Bonson was saying as Vanto would say in order to argue against it now
- 51:50
- I think that's a powerful. I mean when it comes to because they're not just you know, you can be logically rigorous But there are certain arguments.
- 51:55
- I think that get people think And I don't think it's wrong to use tag You know because the tag could actually it could actually get those wheels going it could think you know what he may have a point
- 52:05
- I have to assume things that he believes that I don't is that I really don't is that your dog in the background?
- 52:12
- Yes, that is a he has he had heartworms when I whenever he wandered in my yard But the coughing and stuff is still it's still there
- 52:21
- Just just just so we know that that you don't have a relative who's choking in the background that you're ignoring
- 52:27
- Well There better not be well, let me okay, so you're saying some really good stuff
- 52:36
- Let me go and let our listeners know that Joe Lonza has now joined the group and I have to take responsibility.
- 52:44
- I Totally biffed it on telling Joe the appropriate time So that's my bad
- 52:50
- Joe. I apologize Glad to have you here Yeah, it's not a big deal.
- 52:55
- I Think time zone thing is a little confusing for the most part where I'm in Ohio What do you guys are in Texas?
- 53:03
- I think is that right? Well, I'm in Texas I don't know where actually I don't know where Jason is. Jason is oh,
- 53:10
- I don't really know for sure, but I think I'm in Pensacola, Florida Yeah So Joe, we're just talking about tag right now
- 53:22
- We we talked a little bit about Jason's book probably want to get back to that in a little bit and then
- 53:28
- If there's time, I don't want to go over an hour and 30 minutes But if there's time I'd like to ask
- 53:34
- Jason about the article that he recently wrote in response to dr Malpaz who wrote an article against me so that that should be fun
- 53:43
- So Jason separate segment if we don't get to I'll be happy to talk about it Although I didn't enjoy writing at all. It's very tedious and a pain in the butt because it makes so many mistakes
- 53:52
- Yeah, I Never responded just because it would have been basically what you just described but you you you jumped on that grenade, so Let's uh, so let me give you an opportunity to just finish what you were saying if you remember or we can just move on I was just reiterating now to trade one more time
- 54:12
- Tack can be used even by Clark Ian's and I don't you know and I really don't think any argument for shanties off the table as long as we have
- 54:19
- Authority of Scripture in mind and that we're not trying to use it as something apart from Scripture to prove Scripture But you know
- 54:25
- But there are some arguments that are that are I think more persuasive to people than others I have found that there are some arguments
- 54:31
- I have actually I have actually even I've been known to use a variation of the cosmological arguments
- 54:37
- Whenever in this questions with people that seem receptive to what I am saying So you have to use some discretion about which argument may be the best fit for the situation, you know
- 54:46
- And of course, I'm not an empiricist, but I do know that the Bible says that the universe had a beginning I do know that the
- 54:51
- Bible says that God created the universe, you know those kind of properties propositions are can are there are some some things that have been to conclude and Empirical say they're consistent with that and I can
- 55:01
- I can hope you know And I can I can appeal to those to try and say hey look, you know It's like I'll call it in an act 17. Look, you know looking at telling them about the world that that God had created
- 55:10
- But I would never use your argument to try and prove Scripture is true. That's my first principle I would just say hey look this also, you know, if you look at this this element
- 55:18
- I mean these these things that we have included through empirical studies are consistent with what the Bible already teaches
- 55:23
- And I think that's something that some people do react to Better than trying to you know, it's not everybody's a analytic philosopher
- 55:30
- Not everybody's going to understand where we're coming from unless we sit down there and just explain the whole thing You know the parks philosophy, which
- 55:36
- I think would take quite a long time But yes, I agree. We can use tag We can use it as a negative argument to show that the ages is having to assume things that they cannot deduce from their axiom
- 55:47
- And that can be deduced from Christianity's axiom that's That and show them that they you know
- 55:54
- They're not being consistent with themselves and they're making their arguments and try and then point to the Christianity Hey look this kind of these things you're arguing for are consistent with what the
- 56:02
- Bible already teaches And you know, you should you should consider Christianity, you know, so that you can you can get out of this logical conundrum that you're in Okay, so all right for our listeners
- 56:11
- I I do have to apologize That Joe Lonzo was so late
- 56:17
- So we are going I'm looking at the time now and I'm realizing that I'm I'm not going to have enough time to get into the
- 56:26
- The discussion on dr. Malpass right now but I'd love to have
- 56:32
- Jason Peterson back and hopefully next time I can give Joe the
- 56:38
- Appropriate time Joe is In a different time zone. Initially. I said I set this up at 9 9 15 and which is 1115 for Joe and then
- 56:49
- I moved it to 815 and I forgot to tell Joe so Joe I apologize about that but um
- 56:56
- Jason We're gonna have to end it here. I'm looking at the time.
- 57:02
- I'm realizing that I've got to get going So would you be willing to come back at a later time and maybe talk about the the article that you wrote with With regards to a response to dr.
- 57:16
- Malpass Sure, and I'll probably take an entire episode. Anyway, yeah yeah, it probably would and so So Jason's book is apologetics made simple five keys to an unstoppable an unstoppable
- 57:32
- Apologetic and I think it's it's uh, it's got some great stuff. It's very well written.
- 57:38
- I enjoyed reading it So check it out. Be sure to check out the stuff that Jason Peterson has got going on I think he's a solid brother in the
- 57:46
- Lord I'm lamenting over the fact that he changed he went from being a reformed Baptist to being a
- 57:53
- Presbyterian I think that was a huge mistake and we're gonna have to we're gonna have to fix that the next episode.
- 57:58
- No, I'm just Kidding. I'm just kidding. I actually Man, I can't even speak to that because I recently became a reformed
- 58:07
- Baptist. So who knows who knows where God is gonna lead me You know, it's funny because Tim Kaufman's a
- 58:17
- Presbyterian And I'm a reformed Baptist and I just don't know enough to even have that conversation right now
- 58:24
- But I'm just I'm just teasing with you, but I know he Jason's a he's a solid brother in the
- 58:30
- Lord He loves the Lord and you know our goal at Semper Reformanda radio is to just to highlight other ministries where we think that they're doing well and And I think that Jason is he's an excellent apologist.
- 58:45
- He's a smart guy from what you can From what you just heard. He's a smart guy.
- 58:51
- He's he knows his stuff. He studies He studies to show himself approved.
- 58:57
- So Jason, I want to commend you for that I want to say thank you for coming on to our show
- 59:02
- Thank you for taking the time out of your Saturday Saturday to be with us and Joe.
- 59:07
- I have to apologize to you I totally biffed it. So please forgive me Thanks guys.
- 59:13
- It's been an honor pleasure and and Joe has not said a single thing It's probably mad at me
- 59:21
- He got something and he can be satisfied Yeah all right, then we will check you guys next time and be on the lookout for another episode with Jason and Hopefully we can go over the article pertaining to dr.