“Islam and Friends” Makes Stuff Up

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This 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 dr. James white director of alpha to make a 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 dr.

White call now It's 602 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or toll -free across the

United States. It's 1 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 And now with today's topic here is

James white Hey, good morning. Welcome to the dividing line lots to get to today.

Let's dive right into it Please keep in mind a week from Thursday University of Illinois in the

Champaign -Urbana area Debate with Dan Barker. It does the triune God of the triune

God of Scripture lives very much looking forward to that and getting word of possibility of Multiple other debates with Dan Barker in September.

So we will keep you apprised of that as well I think it's useful to go over these things given how much press

Those who oppose Christian faith get today But before we get back to Dan and to his objections of the

Christian faith and giving a response to them. I Ran across was directed to a audio from Islam and friends now, this is a fellow that I responded to quite some time ago

I didn't go back to look at the video, but That what he was the one who was promoting should barely destroys

Christianity in 55 seconds and we reviewed that and demonstrate that it wasn't anything like that at least he's an interesting study in how

Completely prejudiced someone can be in listening to something and how you can just not even hear what's actually going on Because you're not listening up many times.

I've told people look I know when I go into debate There's certain people on my side They're not gonna hear a word the other side has to say and I'm not condoning that but I recognize it's the case

And there are people on the other side that are not going to hear a word. I have to say it doesn't matter

I could stand on my head and They are not gonna hear a word. I have to say nothing and There's nothing

I can do about that. That's that's that's just the way it is. And So here is someone good example of that.

I don't have them yet I had been promised them two weeks ago the videos of the

London debates, but I Did I not I thought for certain I sent an mp3 of?

At least the Sammy's Autry debate back to you Here in Phoenix, but I'll have to look

I was gonna cue that up. I just didn't get to it. I apologize too many things going on This week, but I was gonna cue it up so we could compare the two and I completely forgot to do it my apologies to you, but I know that at least the closing statements are available on YouTube because I put them

I think the entire things on YouTube from somebody else's one of the audience cams, but not the professional version of it, but I Was directed to this discussion of two things.

First of all a discussion of the brother Imram non debate now what happened was three four or five months ago and Evidently these folks don't realize who's who on our side of the fence, which is understandable

I don't spend my time figuring out who's related to who on the Islamic side I mean, I have some idea of who you know sees

Shabir Ali as a good apologist or suit who sees Osama Abdullah as a

Good apologist or whatever and so they sort of mishmash us all together and so David would becomes me and I become

David would and and That's compliment to me David's David's fine man Nabil Qureshi great brother in the

Lord But they do their thing and I do mine and sometimes we get together and we get to do it together And that's very encouraging to me.

Hopefully it's encouraging to them I think they do a great job, but they're a little bit more focused in the debates that they do

I'm I'm doing a wide variety of things though. I think I think David would probably enjoy the debates.

I'm doing with Dan Barker. In fact, I hope both David and and Nabil Enjoy the debates and I'm doing this next week because we've had some discussions about apologetic methodology and things like that anyway

But they seem to think that Arabic Christian perspective me David we're all just one mishmash of things when in reality were three different ministries that cooperate together, you know

I've been very happy to Do everything I can to be of assistance in those places and they've been assistance to us and we work together in those ways

But we are different ministries and I remember getting an email. I think it came from David Wood.

I didn't go back and look about basically Zakir Naik's apprentice a man by the name of brother

Imran Was gonna come to the United States and would I be willing to debate him?

Well, of course be happy to I'd debate Zakir Naik and any day if he was willing to do so No problem at all

But that was the extent of the conversation we were never contacted by anybody from India or anything like that All I got was an email said hey if this guy came to the

United States Would you be well if you know, would you be willing to debate the guy? Sure So that's the background of this first section

Evidently, they they assume that because we've done major things with someone like a Bart Ehrman We've done major things with Shabir Ali those big conferences where we've got a cruise and a conference and and You know, that's when

Michael Fallon steps in and his expertise makes all those things happen That that's that we've just got money lying around They don't seem to realize the only way we can do things like that is because we've got something like a cruise going on That generates a small amount of money

You know the hotel nights at a place, you know, that's how you make those things work We don't have that kind of money just laying around be flying people around and doing stuff

There's got to be this, you know, it's a huge huge effort That's why we don't do it all that often is because it takes a tremendous amount of work a tremendous amount of money

So it takes a lot of cooperation, etc, etc. So you put all that together. There's the background. Let's let's listen to The fellow from Islam and friends as he comments about this and then we'll transition into his comments on the

Sani Zatari debate I think you'll find this interesting you guys remember, I don't know.

I'm guessing it was like three four months ago we were trying to set up a debate between brother

Imran and James White and Here's the here's the way everything works as far as or worked as far as I understood it

James White in his camp they had a reputation for Hosting events so they would fly people to debates and they would handle all the expenses

So we contacted brother Imran's camp. He's in India and They said he would be willing to come to the debate as long as James White's people, you know took care of everything they

Paid for the flight the hotel saved the works So James White's camp said they're not willing to do that They would

I think they said they would get the venue but Imran's team would have to pay for everything else.

Okay, I just stop right now I have no idea where this guy's coming up with this stuff. No one ever talked to us They may talk to you rich. No, and how many staff members that are off in a bigger ministries?

To that's us. That's right. So if you didn't do it and I didn't do it then nobody from our ministry Okay, no, we this is an interesting

Money guy around here and I'm like lie somebody from India I Might be able to get him to London One way one way, that's right.

And then no place to stay after that. Yeah unwilling goodness gracious. I Don't know where is this guy just comes up with stuff.

I don't know where it comes from. But hey that that's that's what I said and it was kind of odd because number one, like I said, they had the reputation for normally hosting these type of Events why

I the only thing I could figure is We've we've once Flown Shabir to Seattle for the and that was before a cruise at a conference in a cruise

That was that was a flight from where to Seattle. Yeah, Toronto Toronto Toronto's in Seattle not quite

Now I see what he's gonna say here is well James has said he'd be willing to go to India I've said that if soccer

Nike was willing to debate now That was before people told me it was constitutionally illegal for a Christian to do that in India Anyways, which is a little bit different, but my the point that I've always made is

I am more than happy to debate soccer Nike because When I listen to the man's presentations, he doesn't know the biblical languages.

He doesn't know biblical history I do not consider him to be a great challenge against Christianity at all

I know that I know the Muslims do but I'm sorry I'm not impressed simply repeating Ahmed D dots many many many many many simplistic errors is not the same as presenting a meaningful case and So he's gonna take that's it

Well, if you'd be willing to fly to India, then why wouldn't you be able to fly him over here to which I would say

Well, if if something were to work out to where for example soccer Nike would be in London and was willing to debate in London, what would we do?

we'd put out a call to our people and we'd say we want to get to London and We need to raise the funds to do it and that's what we do about it

But again, no one talked to us. This is all just made -up stuff I don't know what in the world this guy is talking about, but he certainly presented as if it was somehow a fact

My camp is made up of two people and the two people who are currently on the microphones right now

And we didn't talk to nobody and nobody talked to us and said would you be willing to fly brother Imran out and blah?

Blah blah blah blah. So, you know, it's it's just make stuff up as you as you fly, but number two They said that they would be willing to fly out to India So I'm like if you're gonna pay the expense to come out there

Why don't you guys just pay the expense to bring him here? But whatever right? So the talks failed at that point and nothing happened and nothing happened indeed now, so why?

Did this not happen? You're ready now Those of you who maybe have gone on YouTube We like I said, we hope to have the professional taping available soon but I debated

Sammy's authority on the deity of Christ at Trinity Road Chapel in London in November and It it was not an enjoyable debate.

I don't enjoy debating Sammy's authority because he's just not an enjoyable person to debate He's he doesn't provide much of a challenge on a scholarly level certainly he doesn't interact what you're saying

He doesn't understand Christianity very well so his arguments are frequently require you to do a lot of basic explanation of things and You know,

I I think it's pretty obvious. I think Sam Shamoon has has posted a review of the debate.

He's listened to it and I don't think that that almost any rational person is going to say that this was some smackdown on that where I was somehow crushed but I don't know.

Listen, listen to what this guy has to say few months after that brother, Sammy's actually

Mind you Sammy's actually is like 22 years old, right? He debates James White and I think this debate took place in the

UK Sammy's actually Annihilates James White.

He he mops the floor with him. Okay Now keep in mind like I said a 22 year old kid going up against a guy with a doctorate a list of credentials a mile long and Some 22 year old kid will not some

I mean Sammy is a talented guy when it comes to debating But still a 22 year old kid comes out of nowhere effortlessly just demolishes you now,

I remember this is the same fellow who you know wears 1950 style leather grease jackets to debates.

Okay, and I really wish I had the Again, I might have it on my on my

Mac. I just didn't get a chance this morning to look for it I had other things going on but especially the cross -examination period where He I kept asking him direct questions.

He wanted to make claims based on the original languages If there was a smackdown it was but it wasn't me that was

I don't think any logical or rational person But again, this is an illustration of the people at a debate or listen to a debate that are never gonna hear a word

I have to say I Don't believe anyone who is in the middle of that spectrum would think that this guy listened the same debate they did that's for certain but it is it is funny to listen to this kind of Reading of what actually took place

So The other day I get an email telling me that James White's team

Apparently, I'm guessing this is either James White's team or David wood or whatever or whatever.

I Just you know, I wish I could keep up with what everyone's doing

I know Sam just had debate recently I'm looking forward to hearing it, but I didn't know it was happening and I know that I just saw on the web that either

Nabil or David. I think was David just had a debate I don't even know who he debated never even They don't contact me and tell me who they're debating or who they're talking to debate or anything like that They may think that's what's going on, but that's not happening.

So again, just making this stuff. Well, whoever it was And then and then on the basis of that You then assert that that other people are hiding or they're in damage control and stuff like this

And he's about to say that well the last debate white did was a Sammy's Autry And so we should just let that stand and he's been old refuted and stuff.

That wasn't the last debate I did I did the debates with Shabir Ali In the

UK after Sammy's Autry and I debated Zulfikar Ali Shah at Duke University After Sammy's Autry this guy doesn't even know that it's amazing

How much time you can get out of pure ignorance without without having any facts at all?

They were willing now to pay and host the debate with brother Imran For him to come out here, and I haven't talked to Imran's camp, but I'm thinking to myself

And this is just my personal speculation that they have to be doing this to try to save face

Because here you have like your big guy Your big Christian guy

James white dr. White blah blah blah blah blah Who gets his rear end handed to him by a 22 year old kid?

Who does it easily? So now I'm thinking okay now, they're they're desperate. They want to save face really badly and Now obviously they're willing to cough up the dough to have

Imran come out there. So I don't know I told The brother that told me about this to talk to Imran's camp and see what happens

But you know, I don't think Imran should go for it I think Sammy's actually did a tremendous amount of damage to James White and They took a big hit from a business point of view

I guess if you can call it a business and their stocks to put this in business Went down tremendously

I think we should just leave it at that like your last debate was you getting annihilated by a 22 year old and that's it we're not helping you out anymore and just leave them with uh

With this reputation that Sammy's actually just demolished him and just leave him stagnant.

That's what I would do Yeah, it's not like I was debating Bart Ehrman or anybody else during that time or or ACS right like that.

No It's a little bit entertaining actually I had some more but that that's enough to give you a good a good taste of some of the

Really weird stuff you encounter on the web just completely disconnected from reality, you know, let's just make it up as we go along It does really really really honestly

Make you wonder just just a little bit. Well, anyways, I do want to get back to the issue

Dan Barker and atheism and so on so forth But before we do that We do have a phone call that I am under orders from a higher authority to take

Right out the beginning because he he outranks me. Let's talk with Rich.

Hi Rich Hey, I was just talking to your entourage before getting on the entourage.

Yeah I think that's better than posse entourage. It sounds more sophisticated Yes. Well, but the problem is entourage in almost every lexical use would be used as a plural there and So unless Rich has developed multiple personality disorder

He's he's the only guy in the entourage. Yeah, I guess that would only work if he's a motorist or something You know,

I wanted to talk to you a little bit about Dan Barker and I don't really want to give you advice But just my own observations after listening to him debate a few times.

Yeah, Paul Minard and I Are friends and I still remember the debate. I think

Paul handled him pretty well In his debate, but I had noticed the first time

I had sort of gotten into precept of Presuppositionalism I had listened to the great debate and then shortly thereafter

There was another debate in which I guess one of the Heirs of Bonson in that area in the

Southern, California area had done a recent debate with Barker. Yes I've heard it was interesting that I Kind of it it what was interesting to me was that Barker?

At the time he never really sort of engaged meaningfully on any intellectual level the way say a

Gordon Stein would and And I think that that that that what his his his

Debating style is more of a popular level kind of doesn't really want to get into any kind of hard intellectual things but likes to take the little easy shots and Kind of get it get in and get out and if it's going to require any kind of meaningful

Intellectual dialogue, then that's not really his thing. In fact, I really don't see why he sought after For debate because he never really offers anything very profound

He just kind of offers snippets and I think he just appeals to sort of the popular I hate

Christianity kind of level in in atheist if if you know what I mean Well, obviously as a as a convert, he's a celebrity along those lines and for some reason people really like these celebrity converts mantra

Sometimes that's a good thing. Sometimes a bad thing now. I I know that his book godless

He does try to get into some of those issues I Noticed that he doesn't generally do that in his debates.

He did try to at least engage somewhat with with with Paul in their debate on the infidel guy radio broadcast or whatever whatever it was

But Generally, he does seem to prefer and I've noted in the arrangements for this debate

He does prefer more of the soundbite type exchange because that obviously favors his side

I had to basically make a defense of even having a 20 -minute opening statement to keep that in the in the debate so I think he does recognize that that is more effective and I think that comes from the fact that he's still a

Fundamentalist evangelical in his thinking even though now he's gonna say that in fact, we kind of joked after the last debate

Where you know, it's sort of this absurd thing where where a few times

He has to admit that we're no more meaningful than broccoli in the in the debate We're cosmic pretty much cosmic broccoli, you know, no no more meaningful than cosmic broccoli but then he ends his whole debate with sort of what

I call sort of an a you know an Altar call and all you need to do is have the the music going where he talks about right now

We have meaning and stuff like that. It's it's sort of like you can picture him just kind of changing

You know, it just got moving from one sort of emotionalistic religion to another

Neither with neither of which were Christianity, but sort of you know, tugged on the heartstrings kind of thing

You're broccoli, but right now you mean more than broccoli, but ultimately you mean nothing than brought nothing more than broccoli

But believe it now because you know, we we assign this to ourselves, you know and so I think that the more you can do to kind of Push him into the realm of absurd.

You're probably going to be you know, which is probably your goal Well, yeah, I mean, I I've got a really good idea where I'm going.

I have listened to all of those debates There may be some debates out there I just haven't found but I've listened to the one with with Paul more than once I've listened to Obviously the

Wilson debate number of times I have those queued up here Actually, there were two Wilson debates and I've got parts of that queued up here.

So I've I've heard him taking on evidentialists I've heard him taking on presuppositionalists You know,

I know exactly where he's going to go as long as he's consistent you know, I've got godless right here next to me and and you know,

I know where he's going and obviously one of the points that I want to make is the the

Fundamental absurdity and emptiness of the worldviews he promotes, right? He's a pure functionalist morality exists only long as long as the the brains cells and his between his ears are functioning evidently

What is true and what is honest and what is just and was lovely stops being those things while he's unconscious

So when he's asleep evidently even the laws of logic are suspended And of course when he dies, they're gonna be suspended forever

And I'm gonna I'm gonna make the point that I'm again, I'm assuming he's listening to these because It strikes me that he does his he does do some homework and he he and I have encountered each other many many years ago so when

I Speak to him. I I want to emphasize the fact that he is extremely inconsistent with his own worldview he still is not only very emotional, but He believes there's such thing as beauty he believes he loves jazz piano and what

I understand he's an extremely talented pianist and I want to make sure that audience understands that the beauty of a

Beethoven piano sonata or the beauty of even Dan Barker's jazz piano

Is beautiful even after he goes to sleep it's going to be beautiful even after he's dead and it's not just a matter of The functionalism of a brain that he he cannot account for why that is true within his own worldview and right and he's not

He isn't does not self -consciously try to avoid Saying things that will contradict his own worldview.

He's he who could I mean, you know, so Yeah, I've got some some pretty good ideas of which directions

I want to go and and you know Obviously, it's never as long as you'd like it to be especially right in a university setting they try to keep him pretty short, but like I said, there's some possibilities of some others in September that have come up and so the one thing is

Yes, there are times when he clearly wants to try to inflame emotion where you know Tells God to go to hell and things like that He tries to get

Christians upset at that point, but he's not like a lot of the atheists out there He can you know engage in a debate without Spitting at you and throwing things across the stage and things like that.

So that that makes it a little bit More profitable than some of the people that you might you might engage or just beyond the level of nasty

Yeah, well, yeah far be it for me to I mean, I'm not trying to I'm sure you're prepared

I just wanted to offer those Observations such as they were and and try and help you out as as any way

I could from a few times I've listened to him in debate. I just he just doesn't come across as a very serious

Philosopher in a lot of cases he I think he's popular because of the way that he interacts with folks

But yeah, I wish you well in that and I hope that I'm looking forward to hearing it afterwards.

Okay? I'm looking forward to The debate myself and hoping that we can get a good taping of it for everybody to listen to you later on.

Okay, great Thanks a lot. All right All right. Let's get back into this.

I had mentioned the last time This email that I had discovered from 1997 were evidently it's a guy named

Ralph had informed Dan Barker about Doug Wilson's being involved in this this jury

Pool in this jury in a capital murder case and I guess it was feral till who afterwards was asking

Where can I get the cassettes this guy named Ralph? That had to provide this information and how Dan had been willing to use that and to make it look like he was asking

Serious questions when it was just he was just guiding him into this trying to make these these accusations against the

Bible and in the process It was funny to me, let me see if I can find

Let me see here. I believe it's right here. I believe let me check this out. I believe the next alleged contradiction in The contradiction list we've been looking at and and Dan makes reference to this list more than once it's in his writings

And he's using it in in his debates as well. I think the next one is The one about murder and kill let's let me just play it here and let's see

Lord So there's one of his favorite accusations along those lines is that the

Bible is contradicting itself at the point of kill or murder now In reading godless,

I ran across the section where he talked about the various debates that he has done and he talks about his encounter with Doug Wilson and like I said last time it is really interesting to listen to his own take about About His encounter with with with Doug Wilson.

I read you some of the email last time Where he said it was, you know a real smackdown.

It went real well, etc, etc I was very prepared I Got Wilson to contradict himself blatantly a number of times.

I was shocked about Wilson's attitude regarding morality, etc, etc Let's listen again to what

I thought was One of the most fascinating exchanges and that was where again

Dan Dan was pushing this idea that the Bible's contradictory on the subject of murder and the subject of killing and this was during the cross -examination period

It would help if I was on the right one, there we go double -click there we go.

Let's try to Versus says thou shalt not kill and another person was reading the

Bible verse where God said take up the sword and slay every man His his neighbor and what if they read two different contradictory

Bible verses that would explain why the humans can't agree Because the Bible is inherently contradictory, right?

He can't answer the question. Can I answer the question? There are two different words in Greek for one is killing and one is murder and in the

Greek translation of the Old Testament The Prohibition in the Ten Commandments is a murder not a killing

Exodus 20 says you shall not commit murder Exodus 21 requires the death penalty if you do commit murder

Now just in passing oof on you size is the Greek translation

And fun you size clearly needs to deprive a person of life by illegal intentional killing to murder to commit murder

I was just reading from the low need a Greek lexicon at that point. That is what the Greek term means

And and notice that Doug was very clear. He was talking about the Septuagint translation. They're the Greek translation of the

Old Testament Because you were a gentleman a scholar

I would be happy to know what question would you like me? The Hebrew word there is rucksack in the

Old Testament, which is not the word for murder It is used all throughout the Old Testament for simple killing for accidental homicide for people accidentally negligence

You are wrong to suggest that the Ten Commandments prohibit murder only Now, let me just stop right there

I don't know how many times I have heard Dan say this now I have heard him specifically say that sock does not mean murder.

That is wrong Wr -o -n -g He cannot read Hebrew. He does not know what he's talking about there are look look at almost any lexical source the halo

H a lot you can look at Brown driver Briggs, you can look at any of them.

They will tell you especially the PL form specifically means murder Now can it mean just simply slaying?

Yes, it has a wider semantic domain But he is denying that part of the semantic domain of Ratzak is to murder and he's wrong.

It's just he doesn't know what he's talking about and This is where I think maybe

I can bring something that a lot of people he's debate in the past can't I can look at him and say you're wrong and here's why and here's the lexical sources, especially when he's debating primarily philosophers, they're not comfortable being quite that bold that's straightforward and Most of them haven't actually taught the biblical languages in the past at some point in their lives

And so they they don't want to make that kind of statement, but I've listened what the man has to has to say

I look at the lexical sources and he's wrong He's he's just simply playing fast and loose the facts and he's not to get away with that In in dealing with the biblical text in in dealing with me.

So if Dan if you're listening, you're wrong But sock can mean murder it does mean murder in numerous places in its usage and in fact the focus if you will look at the the triliteral root is upon specifically murder and only by Extension does it come to have other meanings?

It means manslaughter specifically because it's also used in numbers for the refuge cities for the man who unintentionally takes a human life

But the focus is upon the taking of the human life and in most of those contexts. It's murder and the

Greek translators of the Septuagint understood that and That's why they used oof on use fun you size in the the text in the tank man

So we'll continue with that exchange between Doug Wilson and Dan Barker other things along those lines

Here on the dividing line right after this break Bible works 8 is here full of innovative and essential tools users will have a hundred and ninety plus Bible Translations 35 original language text and morphology databases 29 lexical grammatical references and an abundance of additional resources

Pastors you will appreciate the phrase matching tool which will allow you to find all of the verses containing phrases

Similar to your search verse giving you greater depth and keener insight during sermon preparation Seminary professors and students will be enriched by the way

Bible works 8 shows the most common words in the pericope book or chapter Plus provides a wider range of formatting options and faster access to copying preferences scholars your research just got easier with the army external resources manager a

Handy tool to collect organize and display resource files from your computer as well as the internet. Dr James White says

Bible works is the best Bible software available I have used Bible works software for years and each new release has brought many new and useful tools to the program

This is the program that runs 24 -7 on my office computer And it is the one that's running on my laptop when

I engage in debates It is simply the number one research tool for anyone doing serious exegesis of the text for over 15 years

Bible works has assisted all users in their study of the original languages and That enables you to do one thing focus on the text and that translates to focusing on the truth

Order your copy of Bible works at a omen org and for a limited time You'll receive free shipping and a free mp3 download of the white airmen debate

The history of the Christian Church pivots on the doctrine of justification by faith Once the core of the

Reformation the church today often ignores or misunderstands this foundational doctrine in his book the

God who justifies theologian James White calls believers to a fresh appreciation of Understanding of and dedication to the great doctrine of justification and then provides an exegesis of the key scripture texts on this theme

Justification is the heart of the gospel in today's culture where tolerance is the new absolute

James White proclaims with passion the truth and centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith

Dr. J. Adams says I lost sleep over this book. I simply couldn't put it down James White writes the way an exegetically and theologically oriented pastor appreciates.

This is no book for casual reading There is solid meat throughout an outstanding contribution in every sense of the words

The God who justifies by dr. James White get your copy today at a omen org

Hello everyone, this is Rich Pierce In a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man -centered self -help program

The need for a no -nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater I am convinced that a great many go to church every

Sunday yet. They have never been confronted with their sin Alpha -Omega ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner making no excuses

Man is sinful and God is holy That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior?

We are to come before the Holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well

Support Alpha Omega ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

Thank you And we'll go back to the dividing line let's keep going here real quick I wanted to continue this exchange between Doug Wilson and Dan Barker on murder then we'll take our call

Okay You missed the point that I said I was talking about the Greek New Testament that commandment in exodus 20 is quoted in the

New Testament Greek has a word for murder and a word for killing when the Old Testament is quoted in Greek It has the word for murder out of the

Ten Commandments So the Greek group the Greek translator group because the Hebrew scriptures does not sing murder now see that that's where he's wrong

The Greek translators were right because they know Hebrew and Greek far better than Dan Barker does

Dan Barker's assertion is that a sock Cannot mean murder. He's wrong wr -ong published lexical sources say otherwise

That's what needs to be pointed out But you hear him rather cheekily.

Well the Greek I know more than the the Septuagint translators Look yeah, do look it up look up brown driver and Briggs Look up any of the of the modern lexical sources and you will see that he's

See his whole point is he's trying to create this silly contradiction

God said don't kill and then he told people to kill and it's so simplistic. This is Dan's big part he forces his contradictions are based upon reading the

Bible as a person without any knowledge of language context literature or anything you just have to read it like you are a

First grader and you have no understanding of anything beyond that He will then turn around and criticize

Christians who believe the Bible in that way and read the Bible in that way But that's what he forces you to defend.

He will never allow the scripture He will never ever interpret the scripture with the same level of flexibility or understanding of context that he would demand for his own writings his own writings require that you allow for that kind of reading and and and he doesn't

Say you shall not kill and that's just 21 you part. He requires the death penalty For certain offenses.

It sounds like you're saying the Bible is contradictory Now do you think it's contradictory between Exodus 20 and Exodus 21?

Well, I don't know where my Bible is. Are you seriously maintaining that Moses was a pacifist?

No, Moses was a bloodthirsty leader of a bloodthirsty religion Now when Moses came when

Moses was up on the mountain and he got the Ten Commandments He was looking at the tablets walking down from the mountain Did he stop up short when he got to the commandment not to kill?

Did he say no killing at all? Well, if he understood Hebrew, that's what he should have said

You think he did understand Hebrew Now, I'm sorry, that's a smackdown.

Okay, that that is a oops I should never have gone here and I should never repeat this again, but he has repeated it over and over again in other debates

Which tells you something, you know when when someone has it I Read his review of the debate here in his email it wasn't anything about how that went down nothing about that at all, which is which is interesting, but Anyway, I found that I found that fascinating and and God bless

Doug Wilson that see I would just I I Would just go well, you're wrong because this lexical source says this and this lexical source says that I think

Doug made it much more memorable When you know, he's like so Moe's walking down the mountain with Ten Commandments He's reading along and he gets that one goes.

What do you mean? No killing at all. Wow. How can this be? Well, if he understood

Hebrew, well, do you think he did? The language he's speaking, you know

Perfect I mean I that's that's where I my hats off if I was wearing one

It's a Douglas at that point. All right, let's let's take another call real quick here and get back to this

Let's talk with I'm is this Phillip or Philippe Philippe? Hello, Philippe Hi, dr.

White. Yes, Philippe. How you doing? Pretty good. Thanks. How are you doing doing? All right good Hey, I just want to say first of all, thanks for putting these dividing lines on every week.

Very helpful I actually used to call up when you had recordings on the telephone Oh my goodness ten years ago and I hear art simple or whoever would be exchanging with you

It was a long time a long time benefiter of your work. So I appreciate it. That was a long time ago

But um, I guess I was gonna had a couple things. First of all, you know, dr Dan Barker always makes a count about believing in one less

God Mm -hmm And I think I look at a painting on my wall and I can debate with my wife or my friends who actually painted it

But how absurd it would be to be saying? Well, you guys can debate this all day long a lot of people used to think someone else painted this but I just believe a one -left painter

And if he really believes in that kind of thing what he actually say that he could believe in one less morality than him

Because he's pretty strict about his morality is right Well, he's very strict about it But he he has no basis for saying that he the amazing thing to me is how many times

I've heard Dan Barker say that morality by Definition is and then he gives his extremely simplistic definition about Causing the least harm in life and I and I keep wanting to yell out and once in a while some debater will call him on It who gave you the right to define this?

Where is this definition found? This definition evidently only exists when you're conscious because it's a function of your brain

And so it ceases to exist as soon as you go to sleep or as soon as you die And so what what do you mean by definition, but unfortunately most of the time he gets away with it

He gets away with it. Nobody says who are you to define this in in this way? It's it's amazing and frustrating.

It does make me ride a little faster though, and I'm listening to it. So it's a good Refreshing hearing the debate on it

I'm looking forward to it. I just hope that we Have enough time to really, you know get into it the the debate format that I've proposed is more of an academic debate format

It's similar to the Monson Stein debate format in the sense that You have two parts of the debate.

The first part is longer than the second part And so it's a little bit more of an academic style and the cross -sex periods are fairly short

But they're specifically meant for clarification of points and so it I feel like I've got a fairly the more difficult task because I'm trying to get a 21st century modern post post modernist

American university students to actually think critically about worldview issues. That's a that's a tall task no matter what you're doing

You know, so but we'll you know, leave it up to the Lord Okay, I do another question too.

I had you know, I like Joel McDermott. I've read some of the stuff and Most I agree with most of what he says, but I wasn't quite sure when he disagreed with you on your

Bart Ehrman debate How would he have gone about? Debating Bart Ehrman on this.

I don't know That was why I was so confused and why we invite him on the program and I even after The program is over.

I can't answer that question. You'd have to ask Joel. I I don't know I don't know what the difference would be a lot of people who commented over on the blog

Assumed I was not a presupposition list because I dealt with with evidences You know and stuff like that.

So I don't know I really don't know but I know that one of the things I want to do in the the

Barker debate that is probably gonna cause a few pure presupposition lists to itch a little bit is

I want to demonstrate the presuppositional nature of the debate by Presenting a case from evidence and then demonstrating how

Dan Barker responds to it how I respond to it as an illustration because I just Don't see that most people

You can tell them all you want about the the roles of presuppositions play, but if you don't illustrate it

I don't know what they're gonna get it. So I've got to try to present Something and then say now see

I see this as clear evidence of the existence of God Dan responds to it this way

What does this tell us how does this inform us as to how this debate is to be decided and so Maybe because that particular debate with dr.

Ehrman was so focused upon What should be factual issues shared factual issues regarding the text of the

New Testament that maybe there were some who felt that? I wasn't being presuppositional enough at that point or something like that I don't know, but the problem was

I wasn't debating Bart Ehrman on his on his worldview That would be something to be very interesting to do, but he specifically attempts to avoid that as much as this humanly possible and So, I don't know.

I Really that was a that was a mystery to me at the time that remains a mystery to me today Okay, okay

Thanks a lot god bless bye -bye and don't forget next Thursday to be praying for the debate

I I did manage to Yeah, you know I have to wonder rich if we won't be able to expand a little bit on what we did

During the urban debates. I I've not not mentioned this but during the urban debate once my opening statement was done

I have a modem broadband modem for my my Mac and I went on Skype and I opened it up and called one person

A Figgy in California, and I guess he told all the rest of you that he did that and you all

I don't know how many People we had con eyes. I recall there was maybe nine or ten people I think about nine or ten people that were listening live which would be real interesting to bring

Skype in to hear if we did It today here webcast and webcast it out the problem is

That I have to use my computer for my opening statement, and so I can't be Skyping while I'm doing that That's that's that's asking for you know.

I do know some other people that will be there and who have Skype hmm very interesting

We'll have to think about that. Yes, cuz at least from after the opening statement. I would be able to do it

Yeah, but it has struck me a lot of people have said a number of times Why is it sure be nice to listen live to that yes, and?

It's not impossible to do no not anymore Not you know for a long time it was an issue of Does the place have wireless and blah blah blah?

but with my modem, that's not an issue anymore and so I Could probably get a signal out one way or the other but on the other hand if someone were there that maybe had 3g

Their connection you know one of those little laptop do the keys and they really you know Well all they need to do is get the get the audio here in the studio

And I could handle it from there, and then from there We could put it out over the regular dividing line thing so I think it's something

We probably need to try to look into doing in the future because it you know a lot of folks want to listen to it

Live there's something special about listening to it live, and I think it might help folks pray Indeed hey while you got a bookmark right there

I just want to point out that we have 18 copies of the first edition of the King James only

Controversy left in stock with your signature in it, and I just cut the price in half

Oh, so while they last folks last okay, all right there you go 18 18 copies because I got

I just got my like I said last week I got my copy of the new edition the King James only controversy

I cannot believe that I forgot to blog that but or maybe I did I don't know it's hard to remember anymore

But I know I didn't put the cover up and it's a very nice -looking cover and a little bit more Little a few more pages 32 pages you feel it just like with the

Potter's freedom You can you can tell it's a little bit more a little bit more of a book there, so You might want to get your your copy at a omen org all right anyway, so let's see where were we?

I have all this stuff queued up and Unfortunately yeah, I think I've got just enough time to do it.

Let's let's let's go over here and Is this part one?

I want you to listen to what Dan Barker thinks about John Calvin? Let's listen

Hey, it's 500th anniversary of John Calvin right guns are 1509 July Let's listen to a

Dan Barker thinks about John Calvin I think you could name as many as I can let me give one poignant example, and that's

John Calvin John Calvin very bravely Dissented from the authority of his day the authority of his day was a

Roman Catholic Church He had the intelligence to rise above the authority and think for himself and say wait a minute

He challenged the authority of the church for many reasons and He following Luther's lead broke free and said we are not going to follow.

We are going to dissent We're going to protest and they they reformed that they were reformers. They were

Protestants He wrote his institutes of the Christian religion, and then what did he do he turned right around it became?

Just as much a bully as the Roman Catholic Church was what did John Calvin do he set up a little mini theocracy of his?

Own now that he had written his institutes Now there was no more room for dissent now

He was able to dissent, but no one else could no one could disagree with him He executed people for the crime of simply dissenting from his opinions

He banished people from Geneva from this theocracy he instituted complete thought control

No theater there was there was these thought police in that city religion and government were united under Calvin, and it was a horrible

Disaster to human freedom and to truth one example is Michael Cervantes Michael Cervantes many of you know like John Calvin was also a dissenter from the

Roman Catholic Church Cervantes deeply believed in God he read the Bible and yet he came to a slightly different conclusion than John Calvin and Cervantes was enjoying his newfound freedom to read the

Bible for himself But he was convinced with careful rational thought that the doctrine of the

Trinity was wrong He like Isaac Newton another believer and many others were convinced that through careful honest open study of the scripture with an open heart the doctrine of the

Trinity could Not be substantiated. He was arrested and put in an in jail by the Roman Catholic Church, but he escaped and what did he do?

He thought he could go up to John Calvin and reason with him. He thought since we are dissenters Let's talk this out and in Cervantes was convinced

He was a brilliant doctor by the way Cervantes was the first guy to Explain the circulation of the blood through the human body

He thought well Calvin's a bright guy. Let's talk this out and I can explain to him. What's wrong with Calvin's theology

What did Calvin do? Calvin had Michael Cervantes burned at the stake

He had committed no crime in Geneva. He had broken no law in that city. He had broken no biblical law

His only crime was that he had the audacity to challenge the authority of the theocrat of the

John Calvin himself Calvin did not separate religion and government.

He united them in that Union was deadly Not only did he have him burn at the stake He tied

Cervantes his book to his body and he ordered that all of Cervantes his books should be destroyed and when

Cervantes was being burned at the stake for his heresy for his audacity to dare to challenge the

Inerrant word of Calvin. He was burned with his book on his side John Calvin was a monster

And when monsters gain political and governmental authority the people suffer Government becomes a joke.

No, it's worse than that government becomes the enemy of the people the New Testament Later on he's basically going to say that anyone who admires

John Calvin is morally reprobate That's that's where he goes and you know, the sad thing is since people, you know, the last time

I heard someone give as Tortured imbalanced and faults of view of the survey this affair is that one was

Jimmy Swaggart Jimmy Swaggart now you can you can understand why Jimmy Swaggart? I don't think that Dan wants to be in Jimmy Swaggart's camp

And I don't have time in only four minutes to go through everything But let me just point out a couple things there.

He said that that surveyed us broke. No laws in Geneva That is a joke. Of course. It's a joke

The crime in fact was heresy And that was against the law

He had just accused Calvin of all the thought police and everybody else and then he turns around says that survey

This didn't break any laws. It's baloney What he you know that the problem here is is and this is one of the questions.

I may ask Dan And we'll have more some more time Lord willing next time to expand on this But given his own definition of morality, we all could immediately jump to why do you judge

Calvin given? You can't give a justification morality, but even given his definition morality.

How does this apply to the gross? Imbalance of the presentation that was just made by Dan Barker about about John Calvin.

Where does his morality fit in there? why doesn't he mention that Calvin risked his life to try to meet with surveyed us many years earlier in Paris and Surveyed us stood him up.

Why doesn't he mention that Calvin knew surveyed us his identity when he was

Michael Villanueva? he had an assumed name and he had and Calvin had to be coerced

Because of a legal proceeding to even identify surveyed us so that he was arrested by the

Inquisition and Escaped before he was to be burned with all of his works Why doesn't he mention that surveyed us made a beeline for Geneva knowing that he would be arrested in Geneva Why doesn't he mention that surveyed us tried to have

Calvin imprisoned while he was in Geneva? Why doesn't he mention that Calvin was not a citizen of Geneva in 1553?

He did not become a citizen until 1559 Why doesn't he mention that there were many people in Geneva who sided with surveyed us against Calvin because they were his

Political enemies at the time and that for a period of time it was uncertain what was going to happen in that situation

Why doesn't he mention? that Geneva sent letters to all the other

Swiss canton's asking their advice as to what to do about surveyed us and that Every one of the Swiss canton's without exception said surveyed us had to be burned

Why doesn't he mention that they wrote to Philip Melanchthon? Luther's successor.

Yes the retiring the the rather squishy Melanchthon and what was Melanchthon's response?

Surveyed us must die by burning. Why doesn't he mention that everyone in that day?

including Miguel surveyed us Believed that it was the state's duty

To do what it did. Why doesn't he mention those things which give so such tremendous context

Why doesn't he mention that it wasn't Calvin that had him burned? Why doesn't he mention that the ministers led by Calvin asked for a more humane?

Method of execution and were turned down by the secular government that did the burning which was called the little council

Why doesn't he mention those things? To not mention the historical things to not mention all those

Contexts that I just mentioned briefly is to lie about history How does Dan Barker's morality fit into this because if morality is just not harming others then you can do anything you want with history because history's past doesn't exist anymore, right you can't harm it and so how does

Dan Barker for example, look at a the story of like 1984 and Say there was something wrong with what the government did in constantly changing history

What's wrong with that? History doesn't exist. You're not harming anything and See, I could very easily

Tell Dan Barker's story from his his conversion story and I could leave out all sorts of the context

I could talk about how Dan Barker preached for money even when he didn't believe it anymore and I could paint

Dan Barker is a Horrible person as long as I could be selective with my historical facts and that's what

Dan Barker did to John Calvin right there Why is it immoral for me to do that, but Dan Barker gets away with it

Interesting question to ask maybe I'll get to ask Dan quit that question myself We'll continue with this on the dividing line

Thursday Lord willing. See you then. God bless The dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega ministries

If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -4602 or write us at p .o

Box three seven one zero six, Phoenix, Arizona eight five zero six nine. You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org, that's a o m i n dot o

RG where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks Join us again this