Pro-life Evangelicals for Biden? The Real Issue with TR Onlyism

Greetings and welcome to the dividing line. It is a Monday. We're doing programs on Monday and Tuesday of this week.

I have a leadership thing in the Bobby you wobber thing That's a very technical description of a leadership retreat this week

So we will be doing Monday and Tuesday as announced at the top of the hour

I have some questions for For Pro -life

Evangelicals for Biden I Have some I have some questions for you a statement came out today

And I noticed that it's been signed by a number of people that automatically You know sort of caught my name or my attention

When it was when it was first posted of course Richard Mao immediately tells me this is way off on the left side on the left wing of the left wing

So that didn't really surprise me a whole lot Richard Foster, okay. Yeah, all right

David black All right, but Samuel T. Logan president emeritus

Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia now I've been told that he was dismissed for having a leftward leaning even in 2005 but still it gives you a some some idea

Bryant Myers also from Fowler Seminary Dennis Hollinger president emeritus

Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary So here's some of the people and these are as pro -life evangelicals pro -life evangelicals for Biden calm and I'm seeing this type of a statement more and more and I think we need to examine it

Logically and be prepared to challenge it as pro -life evangelicals We disagree with Vice President Biden and the

Democratic platform on the issue of abortion Let me just stop immediately Abortion is not just an issue.

It is a foundational worldview conclusion and It is not see

Because people are not taught to think holistically and this is gonna come up in my debate review later on People today do not see how what they say in one area is

Actually based upon conclusions they've come to in another area and So they they allow distinctions to stand that are actually not there and they don't practice proper recognition of categories

Abortion is not just an issue over here. We can't take

The worldview situation we face today and do the the chicken coop type thing

Or the atmosphere to man it's getting tough to come up with illustrations that span the age range of Because things have changed so much but back when

I was young when you got a job someplace normally you would come in and there would be a

Male but you'd have a male slot and Sometimes it was just a wooden rack with little squares in it and You'd you'd put stuff in there.

It could be your paycheck. It could be notifications vacation stuff

Your pink slip. Yeah, whatever that's ignore the man behind the behind the glasses just you know and so a

Lot of people treat Theology that way that's that's the normal context which I've addressed this

Where you have your doctrine of God your doctrine of the Bible your doctrine of the church your doctrine of end times and they're all just Separated from one another and you're never supposed to touch the stuff in anybody else's box and so these doctrines actually never touch each other either and That's not good for Christians what you believe about God should be absolutely foundational what you believe about everything else and There should be connections between them, but not connections to where they all become the same thing

That's that's the other extreme So on the one side that people would just have a totally fractured theology They on the other side you get sort of a fundamentalist mindset where every single doctrine is equally important So your doctrine of God for many fundamentalists, let's be honest

Your doctrine of end times things is more important for many fundamentalists than your doctrine of God I know many a fundamentalist that could not define the doctrines of Trinity if you put a gun to their head

But they can run you through 12 different verses on a pre -tribulation rapture, right?

Hopefully we all see that's not good that that's not having the foundations strong and then building on that foundation and Recognizing there are some things that absolutely define the faith and there are other things that do not absolutely define the faith

That there have been disagreements on for a very very long time Well in a worldview situation you're looking at the same thing and when it comes to abortion in The situation that we look at in Western culture today very plainly

It is the result of a worldview regarding the nature of man.

That is fundamentally anti -christian fundamentally anti -christian It denies that the

God is the creator it denies The God has created man in him in his image and has revealed with clarity

Not just the issue of the humanity of the pre -born child, but sexual morality

Itself that brings about the creation of human life so that the entire sexual revolution in in its entirety and that that means the questioning of gender sexuality marriage

Everything that is associated with it is Rebellion against God and Any pro quote -unquote pro -life evangelical

If that word evangelical can have any meaning whatsoever at all any longer and given many of the people who sign this it doesn't

Because many of these people do not believe that the Bible is a clear

Consistent revelation from God the vast majority of these people do not believe that God has spoken with clarity They do not believe that God has spoken with clarity

So this is meant to confuse but the point is that When you talk about the issue of abortion

You are buying into a narrative that is a fundamental lie and must be challenged from the start

It is not simply an issue it is the result of an entire worldview conversation all right, so So it's real easy to go.

We disagree with Vice President Biden and the Democratic platform on the issue of abortion No, you disagree with the

Democratic platform on its entire worldview commitment and if you are not bright enough or Honest enough to see that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry owns the

Democratic Party in Toto Then you're just simply not honest with the reality around you.

That's just all there is to it This isn't this isn't well, we can have a discussion about it. No, that's just the way that it is You cannot be a pro -life

Democrat anymore. Have you not noticed that? It's become very plain Continues but we believe a biblically shaped commitment to the sanctity of human life

Compels us to a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of human life from beginning to end

Now here is where The Marxist leftists and you just let's just be honest where this is coming from Because this is gonna come out and what in the next paragraphs

Once you see someone Using the terms equality and Turning it into a synonym for equity

You're dealing with Marxism. They can jump up and down say no. No, no, no. No, no, you're just being you're just being good. No once you will not make the world view decision that Recognizes that while all men are created equal before God not all men are created equal in the sense of Possessing the same gifts from their

Creator Everybody knows this is true. It is obvious people just don't want to discuss it so We've used sports illustrations in the past, but I'm not watching sports anymore

But there are certain sports that obviously I could never play. I Was not given the gifts of God to be able to do those things to be able to perform on that level

I am NOT tall enough or fast enough or strong enough or whatever else it might be and in the

Christian world view My genetic makeup comes from the hand of God. He has a purpose in that I can actually look at that and go.

Hey here's where I can find out what I'm supposed to do in the sight of God and I don't even have to worry about things like playing basketball

I've played basketball It's fun, you know at the local local court years ago when

You could still you know, turn on a dime and stuff like that without Stringing everything in your your hips at your knees and and all the rest that kind of stuff.

Yeah, that was that was fun Oh, it is already turned down good. All right I was just looking at the thermostat to make sure it's cool enough to keep me from frying in here

We get up we get all that but the reality is there are people that have gifts to be able to Do scientific inquiry medical inquiry there are gifted engineers to be able to solve complicated

Problems sends spaceships to Mars and you know, we've got a we've got a rover heading for Mars right now

I think that's really exciting. I just love that kind of stuff You can go online and actually follow it and watch it where it is and all sorts of neat stuff like that I don't have that capacity and Equity is saying we should all have the same but I think someone who has the capacity to do those things should be rewarded for having that kind of capacity and we obviously not have any problem with people who have

You know I think it I think it is upside down that that we only give a certain amount of reward to people who can land a spaceship on Mars safely

But someone who can throw a round inflated ball 23 feet into a hoop consistently gets 500 times 5 ,000 times what the guy that can land the spaceship on Mars gets

Says a little something about our society, but that's where we are. The point is equality and equity are not the same thing and To demand equity is to say

God needs to make us all the same and he doesn't same thing with nations

Yeah hate to tell you this but the Bible teaches that God blesses some nations and other nations he doesn't and History proves that that is true.

Oh, but that can be abused anything can be abused All truth can be abused two plus two can be abused

You don't you don't and it is being abused. You don't you don't get rid of Truths just because they can be abused every biblical truth has been abused at some point in the past too

So don't even go there so What you're hearing here is a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of human life from beginning to end and so This here's the category error.

They will equate not suctioning a baby into pieces in the womb

With providing welfare that's which for example has destroyed the black family since 1965.

Those are the same things now those are the same things now, so Now being pro -life and Affirming the value of the child in the womb

Means that you must be for big government bailouts debts and socialism

They're not the same thing. They are not logically the same thing by any stretch the imagination But we live in a day where what's logical doesn't really matter to a lot of folks.

So the next line next section And check this out many things that good political decisions could change destroy persons created in the image of God and Violate the sanctity of human life.

Now, please notice the elevation of political decisions. These are big Government socialists that are speaking here and and religious people can be big government socialists whether that's consistent with biblical revelations different issue

Poverty kills millions every year. Well poverty has existed Amongst mankind from the beginning and it was a far greater killer of the past.

And in fact, it is capitalism that has fundamentally Diminished the role of poverty around the world.

Just just look back over the past 500 years Any meaningful study of the role of poverty

With human mortality will demonstrate That it is capitalism that has raised the living standard of the world far more than anything else

But this is fundamentally opposed to that just so, you know poverty kills millions every year so does lack of health care and Smoking Okay, I detest smoking.

I always have I've always felt that it just stinks to high heaven

But I Can put that in the proper category as well? I mean,

I'm old enough that when I first flew on a jet there was a smoking section and non -smoking section.

I Flew before the ban on smoking on and it didn't matter where you were in the plane

As long as one person lit up everybody got off the plane smelling like that person's cigarette and I I didn't like that But I can recognize where that is and in the priority list with abortion not even close

And then of course so does lack of health care health care has now become the Right that everyone's supposed to have because wow, we just we can do things now

We can never ever ever ever ever do before but again This is only the second or third generation that could have even begun to think about this

So much has things have things changed just in the past short period of time When when

I was younger you recognized that There were certain kinds of treatments that well, that would be great.

But you know, that's just that's ridiculously expensive and No one at the time had yet come up with the idea well and we should force everybody to pay for my medical treatment

That's now a universal given now a universal given and now it's and then now the next comes then everybody needs to pay for my sex change operation and and my abortions and my education and my housing and everything else that's

That's how governmental thievery is established Racism kills

Well, I have a feeling I know what this is being is the context it was being used in and it's of course a lie

It's a false narrative in the United States. Oh racism does kill but it's primarily black -on -black racism in Chicago I didn't see the numbers for this weekend

At least last week or the weekend before it was 80 shot 5 killed That was actually an improvement because we've had as many as like 20

I think and dead in in one weekend over the over the course of the summer It's a war zone that racism kills because that's that's real racism, but it's black -on -black

And of course, that's not actually racism anymore because it's been redefined But the idea is that white cops are hunting black men down in the streets every single night and The facts say that's a lie.

It just isn't true and everybody knows it isn't true but it's politically expedient to use it right now to to disrupt and destroy the

Constitution United States racism kills it does in Africa It does big time in Africa and it does in many other nations like in in Asia Where there is racism between various tribes and things like that Yes racism does kill in those contexts

But that's not the context in which this is being used because now those people are voting for Joe Biden Well, they might be

I'll take that back. I Personally believe that that that the election in November of this year, which we won't know about until December of this year

Will be the most corrupt in American history. I do believe that I Honestly have accepted that that narrative.

I think there's strong evidence for it So but they're not they're not in they're not a part of the audience

For this statement unless we click quickly make major major changes Devastating climate change will kill tens of millions.

That is another fraud But hey, it sells and it has been repeated so many times that especially young people just accept it as as the as the assured results of science when it is not by any stretch of the imagination any

Stretch of the imagination, but it's the narrative in media. And so you just believe it So now you're getting an idea where these quote -unquote quote -unquote pro -life evangelicals are coming from Poverty lack of accessible health care services smoking racism and climate change are all pro -life issues

There's where these people are really going This is a dilution of the very strong movement that has been growing for a long time for the abolition of abortion

This is how you dilute it By trying to channel that energy

Which is really come about by our increasing knowledge of the humanity of the pre -born and by the sonogram the the the

Ability now almost everybody now gets to have a 3d full -color

Picture of the child in the womb before they're born. I think that's awesome. It's wonderful but the fact is if you can look at a 3d picture of the baby's face in the womb and then the baby's face two days after being born and it's the same face the continuity of human life is thereby established and That has changed everything as long as the womb was a dark mysterious unknown place then you could hide these realities you can't do it anymore and And so now they're trying to channel that power

Into their Marxist socialism to try to change how society functions None of this, of course is based upon the scriptural categories

Though I am well aware of the fact that all these people will abuse the scriptures to try to create connections

We have been seeing that for Years now, especially since 2018

Where the the the switch was flipped and it's full speed ahead and so we're getting it from TGC and ERL C We get all the really really really bad

Tangential Horrible Isagetical argumentations from leading names and people to try to connect these things together

But the idea is is to divert The power of the pro -life movement from the central sacrament of the

Democratic Party, which is abortion into promoting the idea of Marxism socialism and the utopian socialist state, which is also known as communism

So there you go as the National Association of Evangelicals official public policy document for the health of nation insists quote

Faithful evangelical civic engagement witness must champion a biblically balanced agenda end quote

Therefore we oppose quote one issue and quote political thinking because it lacks biblical balance.

Well this politically motivated Deceptive evil statement and I hope you've got my idea as to exactly where I come down this

We need to be able to see through this This is this takes the same type of level of discernment that it takes to see through when

Ecumenical statements are made that attempt to deceive people as to the religious beliefs of various groups this is what this is how you can recognize when

Mormonism is is Trying to enslave you about while claiming to be the the the one true church and and all the rest this type of stuff

Therefore we oppose one issue political thinking even though they're the ones that made the mistake of calling abortion the one issue

It is they who are not seeing the connections it is they who are bringing in the

Antibiblical anti -christian presuppositions and saying it's fine for you to go ahead and go this way.

There is a full court press right now on The part of people who used to be regular stalwarts at reformed biblical preaching conferences to convince you that you can go ahead and bury that voice in your conscience that's saying but These are the people that are putting puberty blocking hormones in eight -year -olds these are the these are the people that are that their worldview promotes polyamory and and bisexualism and homosexuality and and and the profaning of marriage and and The the murder of unborn children, but because they want to Balloon the national debt even farther into the stratosphere in the name of equity to give people money

I can go ahead and vote for them and feel like I'm doing what Jesus would have done. That is a full -court press from people that Ten years ago.

I would have said no No, they would never do that. Oh, but they are But they are and It's being highly effective.

Let's just be honest being highly effective. I am seeing Christians in my feeds

That are actually going well, you know, what really is wrong with socialism? I mean, you know didn't

Jesus say some like socialist things and you're just like I mean, it really makes me go.

This is This is a deception that can only be explained by judgment on a nation

Especially when you have Christians falling for it going Okay So Just the next next paragraph real quick knowing that the most common reason women give for abortion is the financial difficulty of another child

How about adultery? How about fornication? How about unfettered sexual license?

How about that? It seems like these folks have the idea that well, that's just gonna happen.

There's that Just the way it is nothing you can do about it. And so we've just got to do the best we can in light of What's actually gonna happen

We appreciate a number of Democratic proposals that would significantly alleviate the financial burden in other words steal from you

Your children and your grandchildren and give it to people who engage in illicit sexual behavior

That's what these evangelicals are saying accessible health services for all citizens

Abortion affordable child care and a minimum wage that lifts workers out of poverty as if That can never work all of history shows.

They always run out of money. I Everyone who signs this statement if they're gonna be consistent

Then sell your property and move to Venezuela where this is already being done Move to a place.

It's consistent. See how it's working See how it's working That that's the way to do it, right?

They won't do it. They won't do it Just it is it is an astonishing day.

It is an astonishing day that we live in there is There is absolutely no

Wow anyway Few questions for the alleged pro -life evangelicals shift gears completely here

I hope some of you had the opportunity if you haven't yet. I Hope you will take the time.

We haven't linked to them yet Have we we need to get need to get the debates into our YouTube page? you can we've got full permission to do with them as we wish so you can either just link over to theirs or Grab them and upload them or whatever you want to do.

Well, make sure to grab a copy though Make sure make sure we got an archive copy in something that we hide in a

EMP proof box Really really hate to lose all that stuff.

Oh, but I do I've got my backups inside those I'll get I'll give you some I'll give you some of those

Bags put in a lead line box. And yeah, well, we're We may not have a computer to restore it on but we'll have the data someplace anyway

Right next to your tinfoil hat that's that's perfectly fine Over the weekend

Friday night Saturday morning we did Technically two debates. I'm gonna call it one debate

Because it was one debate. I mean it was even advertised as part one part two of a critical text versus TR only position

But we did two debates they lasted right at around two hours,

I think maybe a little less than two hours each Between myself and dr.

Jeffrey riddle and He had insisted that The longer ending of mark be included.

I had disputed that for a simple reason. It's not a tear only passage If we're going to debate be debating the unique Claims of the

Texas receptus only position and remember these folks have said that I am

NOT confessional Because if you use anything other than the TR then you can't really be a reformed

Baptist I'd like to point out that the vast majority of reform Baptist don't believe that but that's their position and So from my perspective

If you're going to have a debate and I've explained this before but it really seems to me

I listened Dr. Stephen Boyce did a thing with Jonathan Sheffield on The same

YouTube channel Reviewing the debates on Saturday evening, and I appreciate I'm gonna have

Stephen on with me He and I did a couple hours on the errors in the

TR Of I don't know a month or so ago or something like that he's younger than my youngest child and so the next generation that's going to be fighting this battle long after us old folks have already moved on to Eternity itself, but He was on and and I could simply tell by some of the comments that Sam made

The host and certainly I'm sorry, but Jonathan has never ever

Accurately represented me not once not that I know of and I think it's I just don't think he's capable of doing it

And that what's fascinating is he's gonna be debating Bart Ehrman On the same

YouTube channel That's what I I'm looking forward to listening to because I know what's gonna happen

Um Just as I am constantly misrepresented. So will Ehrman and and Ehrman will not put up with it now

He'll stay there because he's getting paid to do it but It's it's gonna be

There you're just gonna be able to hear in Ehrman's voice this but that's not how you do it because his perspective is this

Anglican Apostolic Church thing remember he's the guy that does all the the the comic videos You know with me and Dan Wallace and Bart Ehrman as if we believe the same thing because he

I think he thinks we do And he was misrepresenting me and saying I just get rid of all the

Byzantine manuscripts. I just It was very very clear from what he said and some of the things that Sam said

That my whole intention and my whole purpose in doing these debates didn't seem to be clearly communicated and I don't know if it's just I'm just a horrible communicator or Just or if this whole field is just so unusual to people that they struggle with it

By the way before I continue the review, I have invited Nathan Beattie Nathan B -E -A -T -T -Y

Nathan is a Christian a Reformed Christian on Facebook. I have invited Nathan Beattie To join me on the program today

Open invitation only to him. Nobody else. Don't bother calling today. We're not taking other calls The number is eight seven seven seven five three three three four one for Nathan Beattie Why because he posted on Facebook James White argues like an atheist and This is in reference

To the debates that were done this weekend So I would like to invite him to explain to my audience how those debates

Means that I'm arguing like an atheist Since 99 and a half percent of Reformed scholars argue as I do then evidently nine nine and a half percent of Reformed scholarship is arguing like atheists as well and Certainly the things that I have seen and I haven't even

I mean if I had wanted to immerse myself in Vitriolic hatred I could have done so over the past 24 or 36 hours

Because the types of comments that were coming From TR only type folks just absolutely amazing

For example when I posted my invitation to Nathan Beattie now remember Nate. I didn't I don't know who

Nathan Beattie is Okay, I'm not to my knowledge. I've never met him apple cider vinegar again

That'll clear your sinuses what Nope.

Nope. Well, there's uh, there's club soda and stir stevia flavored

Stuff and ice. That's it. That's that's that's all there is to it. Anyway, it wakes you up in the morning.

Um, I Invited Nathan Beattie who I do not know Onto my own program to my own audience to explain why he thinks

I argue like an atheist now I can tell you if he doesn't call I'll tell you exactly what he would have said. I know

I Listen to the other side The other side doesn't listen to me, but I listen to the other side

Oh, I oh they'll tune in but they won't do so with a desire to understand

And I've been dealing with people who are willing to trade truth for certainty

Since the 1980s on this subject since the 1980s I started studying

King James only ism about 1984 So I'm coming up on 40 years of this now.

Okay, so I get it I I do understand it and I can I can distinguish between the different groups and different flavors

But I see what is common what's commonly driving? this kind of thing and so I can tell you what he's gonna say, but I Give him the opportunity to express it himself.

Okay, so I post that and Right afterwards a guy named

George Lacey Responds and says what a sad man

To have to stir up controversy to make a living At this point.

I'm not only embarrassed for him, but also for his sycophants this is this is the

This is the TR only mindset and it seems to be Pretty nigh unto universal

It just seems to create this kind of attitude So you've got a guy who makes an accusation?

Against a minister of the gospel who has defended the the faith against atheists multiple times in public settings and He says

I argue like an atheist That's not divisive Because that's in the service of TR onlyism, but if I dare say would you like to call in and explain that you sad little man

Making a living after staff of stirring up controversy Hypocrisy is astonishing.

It's just it's like wow. Does that not make you like wobble when you walk? It's just so bad

Anyway and then Shane Dodson and I know I know that I've had conversations with Shane Dodson in the past but but he posts a

Meme that says that's bait So I'm not sure if Shane's into the TR only stuff or not

Right, yeah, don't take debate don't take debate. Yeah. Yeah but And and they're all they're all wondering how

I know about this because this is in a Facebook group that I'm not a part of And I was he must have an alias.

No, I do not have time for that. Sorry But yeah, I do have friends in there and when I see people behaving like children

They let me know that people are behaving like children. So anyways, Nathan eight seven seven seven five three three three four one and Hopefully, I'll remember before we wrap up that if you don't call

I'll go ahead and explain to people what you would have said if you had called Because I know what you would say if you're gonna call

And we'll respond to it so respond to it them As I was saying, it just seems that my intentions were not clearly expressed though.

I thought I had clearly expressed them as I said

Dr. Riddle insisted on dealing with a

On dealing with a text that is not a TR only text So there are many different kinds of people

Who could have many different kinds of textual critical theories Who would defend the long reigning of Mark the long reigning of Mark is quite defensible.

It's ancient of all of the major variants in the

New Testament, it's the most defensible and so I said well why why deal with something like that when that doesn't mark

TR only as a moth because There are other perspectives that do not have the unique theological claims of the

TR only movement that likewise defend the long reigning of Mark So let's let's deal with things that would actually define a position.

Well, he wouldn't do it. So I'm like, okay fine. I Can talk about what the issues are we can present the case?

You know, I I mentioned the perspectives on the endings of Mark book that Came out a number of years ago would give you a good idea of you know

Two different sides but even different emphases within those sides and things like that James Snapp has a book on the subject

You can you can look at all that stuff and as Erasmus said over and over again make up your own mind

But it would allow me to say I want to know what the Apostles wrote And to point out as I did that the fundamental reason and I quoted dr.

Riddle dr. Riddle Specifically stated that mark 16 9 through 20 is out of pistachios.

It is self -authenticating as a pericope as a 12 verse block of texts it is as self -authenticating as the 8th chapter of Romans is

Think about that think about that because This is where dr.

Riddle starts This is the Texas Receptus. This is Scrivener's edition This is a

Greek text based upon the choices of an English translation the King James Version of the Bible Which was based upon a number of printed texts primarily obviously from Erasmus Stephanus and Beza Which were based upon a very small number of manuscripts in comparison to the manuscripts that we have today

Representing only a certain portion of even the Byzantine manuscript tradition But this is the autographs this is what the

Apostles wrote Been kept here in every age doesn't mean it can be found in every age from their perspective but they believe it's been kept here in every age and this is what the

Apostles wrote and by Asking dr.

Riddle to defend Ephesians 3 9 where this stands alone

It stands alone in fact let me they frequently want to Make reference to this

But let me let me show you something here. Do you do you have this?

Oops great Well when I went full screen, sorry, hold on a second when I went full screen

Everything went bye -bye. There it is. That's the best I'm gonna be able to do It's like full screen it it messes everything else up and I don't have anything up here to see if you've got it.

Anyways, so You'll have to let me know once you've got it Okay, there's the small version of it and there you go and right here is

Chi Fotis I to bring to light All Pontos believe it or not.

That's Pontos very different kind of fond of where you sue tis. Hey Oikana mea to muster you

To bring to light all that of what is the Oikana mea the

Dispensation the plan of the mystery Okay, what is this? This is the completion polyglot

Now the competition polyglot was actually printed before Erasmus's first edition

But it didn't come out until afterwards because as we all know Back then you had to get papal approval for everything.

So I was sitting in boxes in crates in a storage house Wonderfully beautiful volumes

You know a real magnificent amount of work But what does it say the Oikana mea why because that's what

Ninety nine point nine nine eight percent of all manuscripts of Ephesians 3 9 have always said have always said and so this text allows us to focus in on an error in the

TR and See if people will be willing to recognize that this isn't the autograph this is the result of Erasmus analyzing a small number of manuscripts of Stephanos adding a few more in of Beza adding a few more in and he actually thinking that one that he added in He didn't realize

Stephanos had it and so that Was was an error, but this is the result of a human process not for TR only us

Because this is the result of a human process This is the Tyndale House Greek New Testament.

This is my this is the first Greek New Testament ever had leather bound I Went into hawk for this.

I couldn't I was making so little when this was made this You know how old this is rich.

Not only does it have those those my foil thingies in it that I that I used in High school.

Okay, but this is so old That the phone number in the front has no area code on it

Because all of Arizona had one area code so you didn't need it Yeah, there was a day folks and phone numbers were only seven digits long

That's how old this thing is UBS 3rd edition non corrected it hadn't even come out the corrected edition

Whether you have the Nessie Island down there, whatever Whatever it is. They are human derived texts and that's all we have and That's where the issue is they want to say nope.

Nope. Nope. Nope that makes you an atheist. No, that makes me a Christian because every generation of Christians from the start

Has had to deal with the issue of the fact that God's Word has been transmitted to us in a particular fashion

And did you notice if you listen to the debate? Dr. Riddle never touched something I brought up in both parts of the debate and That is the

New Testament Authors quote textual variants from the Greek Septuagint that vary from the

Hebrew Masoretic text in their writings deal with it

They can't They can't Because theirs is an anachronistic.

It's backwards It's it's taking this and looking through it back into history

And so when you look through this you have a certain set of arguments for the long grinding of Mark Because it's in here

So you have to have arguments and then you look you turn it over to the comma You honey, um and first John 5 7 different set of arguments.

You'll still use them. You turn it over to the percocet adultery It's in here different set of arguments.

Why because the evidence is different for each one and Ephesians 3 9 completely different set of evidence then you have

For any of the others and so once this becomes the lens through which you're looking

There is no way to question this There is no way then to defend this because it is your beginning presupposition and the scary thing was dr

Riddle actually went so far as to identify that presupposition of this as the autograph with the

Presuppositional nature of the existence of the triune God is the foundation of all human knowledge and that is a category error

That's fatal to all of apologetics Fatal from a presuppositional perspective if you can't tell a difference between the foundational necessity of the triune

God to make all facts facts and understandable and the specific printed edition of the

Greek New Testament Then you're not a presuppositionalist and you don't understand presuppositionalism at all at all that was what was add

I Immediately thankfully and often in debates you don't get get to do this

Sometimes if the person makes a statement and you don't have an opportunity to respond later on it just it just hangs there

But in this office this instance, I had the opportunity to go. Whoa. Hey, wait a minute

We just heard dr. Riddle equivocate Between this assertion and the very centrality of the triune

God is the foundation of all human knowledge Wow That's amazing so the whole point is in the first half of the debate

I Was more than content to say hey, this is a very ancient reading

Has really good Foundational evidence to it and it's found in some of the earlier Translations and it's found in early patristic sources and that's that's that's exactly right

I still reject it and here's why and I never got almost any kind of meaningful response

Other than well those other endings exist because the original fell off the last the lot that 9 through 20 fell off of some

Early manuscript that then got copied and it became popular. I guess None of this could be documented.

It's all hypothetical and then the other endings came about Because that became so popular which goes against the whole apostolic church thing, but that's a whole other argument

But you you it's pure speculation and I'm just simply going okay The two earliest manuscripts that we have of mark do not possess it

It's not in a number of the manuscripts of translations under the languages and you have all these other multiple endings

So why and people saying no, there's only a couple There are only a couple but sometimes they're put together

The Freer Logion stuck in the middle of the the longer ending of mark in Washingtonianus So there are different forms of the ending of mark

Why why would that be if this and why didn't happen anyplace else why didn't it happen to To one of the epistles or why did it happen to Luke or why didn't happen to Matthew or John?

I mean John 21. I mean, you know, what if you know it only happens to mark But I'm fine to go and you know what?

if your methodology emphasizes these types of things as as being more important than the antiquity of the sources and the relationship of sources one to another then you're gonna come to a different conclusion and I'm not going to You know have a cow about that I'm gonna disagree with you we can we can debate it but fine

Okay Then the second day rolled around and I told a few people Today is gonna be a lot different than last night

Why? because the roles are gonna be reversed and I'm gonna be able to demonstrate and it was funny

Some people said well, you're being inconsistent because you argued one way yesterday. No, I argued the exact same way both days We both tried to make that argument.

Dr. Riddle failed People actually tried to equivocate a Couple of at most a couple of Barely known minuscule manuscripts from the second millennium

With the two earliest Unsealed manuscripts of the of mark the two earliest witnesses we have

Together with versional witnesses no textual scholar would ever make that error It is an error to equivocate those two sources no, no one who works in the field would ever make that error, but a lot of people were making that error and Saying you're being inconsistent.

No textual scholar would ever say that you're not being inconsistent at all But the point was in this situation you could now see

That when you boil it all down when you get rid of all the excess verbiage what

Jeffrey Riddle is saying is This is it It's not questionable.

The manuscripts do not matter Patristics do not matter early versions do not matter if it's here

It's the autograph and it's the autograph because something special happened at the

Reformation Something special happened at the

Reformation and so the text of the Reformation now, is this the text of Reformation? No, it's not

How can you say that? It's simple Any meaningful historian would have to recognize this

For something to be the text of the right What was if this was the text of Reformation the only meaningful way of saying that is this

Oh Oh Diddy diddy diddy diddy

I should have that in here. I Have it down there. No, that's Greek Septuagint.

That's not it. Huh? Well, I'm gonna have to grab one and and pull it in here So that I will have this the next time

I swing around and try to grab something but I don't have it back here, but um Let's pretend for a second

That this is Latin Vulgate. All right In this sense Latin Vulgate Versus the

Greek. Yes, you could say that but that's only in the sense not of the specific readings of this over over against something like this but Greek as in That which gave rise to the

Vulgate that would be a meaningful assertion that this is the

Reformation text, but they didn't have this So they were not saying this is superior to this because they didn't have this and could not have this the reason to our only ism can exist is because the vast majority of people are absolutely ignorant of the status of textual studies in the past they don't realize the centrality of The rise of the printing press they don't understand how vitally important it is

That we now have catalogs of manuscripts. They did not have that You cannot do meaningful textual critical study of manuscript relationships if you don't have access to them and Until there is a catalog that can that can assign a consistent designation and then provide the contents transcriptions of the manuscripts eventually last century

Microfilm which was really bad if you ever had to use it. It's just like but now that's what this is why

CSNTM is so important and The digitizing is manuscripts and and why you can now go online and check these manuscripts out

You can blow them up and you've got these super high -res photographs. You need to realize This is all brand new

This is all in the past decade Especially the computer part of it in the past decade.

I mean, I remember 14 years ago going to London and trying to find a way

To put more of the textual data stuff onto my phone or onto a small iPad

Well, not iPad, but something you can carry Because we were going out to talk to Muslims on the streets in London I didn't

I didn't have it in this yet that this was only 14 years ago Now it's all here

That's brand new So Once you realize that Then you realize this whole idea

That this is that's why I will never call it the confessional text position because that is an anachronistic historical monstrosity

It's an anachronistic historical monstrosity They did not have these they did not make a decision of one over the other.

They did not have the data They did not have the catalogs Don't force them to take positions on the basis of Anachronistically forcing them into those contexts that they never experienced that is unfair

And it's abusive history, it's an abusive history So in the second part of the debate what you were able to see

Was the tight circularity so much so that I brought up the the phrase that he used providential eclecticism

Providential eclecticism now He may be the only person who's ever come up with that I've never heard anyplace else, but think about what that means eclecticism is

Reasoning through each of the texts based upon internal and external evidence and weighing those things and if you've got reason to collecticism and you've got people who emphasize the external over the internal and some internal over the external and and Some people go back and forth but providential eclecticism.

How is that anything less than inspiration? How is anything less than inspiration?

because if since you since you'll go against The manifold testimony of the entire historical church and manuscript tradition to maintain

Ephesians 3 9 1st John 5 7 Revelation 16 5 Since you will throw out the entire manuscript tradition at that point and say it's got to be this

Then the providence that produced this Must how do you even call that eclecticism unless it's actually

God guided Erasmus to manuscript 2817 if that's what he used and Then remember what what what dr.

Earl said? Well, yeah God did it and I said because I'm a Christian so here you have the situation where We're both reformed.

And so I believe in the absolute providence of God and that means it was a part of God's decree

That history unfolded the way that history unfolded that's absolutely true But that is not an argument from my understanding or his understanding of the methodology.

We should use going forward from here God did it So as I point out, well, that's what

Gail Ripplinger said to you know an acrostic algebra She had to use NESV instead of NESB.

She was NESB throughout her book Well, I use NESV and when I asked her that she said that's what God calls it.

You can't argue with that You can't argue with that so if Erasmus came up with a reading

God did it and It must be infallible It's all there is to it.

End of that discussion. That's easy, isn't it? It's also indefensible Why did

Joseph Smith render the Book of Mormon? Why did Joseph Smith render the Book of Mormon? God did it Why is the

Quran there? God did it. We're done Let's let's all go have a coffee together because we don't really have anything else to say because we have now

Completely removed our text from history and you see the problem is that's not reformed

That's not how we do anything else We recognize God's redemptive work in history. We recognize that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate not somebody else that he was crucified in Jerusalem not someplace else and So we don't answer challenges by saying

God did it God did it And that's probably what's behind Nathan Beatty's statement.

Oh, he's arguing like an atheist Because I am saying that scripture came to us in history that God used the distribution of manuscripts

Persecution of the church even the Roman Empire itself To give us the New Testament in a way that is superior to because it's a free transmission

It's superior to a controlled transmission as you have in the Quran now, unlike dr

Riddle who has never taken any of this Into the debate realm with Islam or with atheists.

I have For hours on end in front of university audiences with Yusuf Ismail at Northwest University in Patras Um, South Africa in a church in London with Adnan Rashid.

I have taken this into those places I've gone into the Gray Street Mosque in Durban, South Africa with the

Muslims sitting right in front of me And I've defended these things and dr Riddle has not and he can't and it's not because the man is not capable

It's because the position is in coherent incoherent

That's why Sam said well, you know, dr

White seemed to be quite passionate in the second part of the debate had to be because now the realities were coming forth

That this is a circular system. It's a historical and It cannot allow for criticism

Therefore it's indefensible and cannot provide a ground for the criticism of any other religious faith. There you go

That's what it's about That's what it's about and look dr.

Riddle brought that up in his opening statement on the first night. I Did not

I Actually, I was really tempted to I did not have

I had a I had a few notes for the first night I did not for the second night second second morning

But I was highly tempted to just go directly to what the real issue is once I got in the rebuttal since he had raised his definition of providential preservation and The Texas Receptus then

I felt free to respond to it and point out. Hey, he has made the statement

Mark, 69 through 20 is out of pistachios He attributes to a textual variant the character of Self -authentication that all reformed people attribute to all of Scripture and not only the long writing of Mark He'd have to do the exact same thing with Ephesians 3 9 so a reading that he has no evidence that any

Christian in all of history in the first thousand years of church history ever saw is the

Out of pistachios. It is the Self -authenticating Revelation of God so much for the early church so much for the building of that church over those that thousand years and So it just really seems like You know, maybe

I've just failed to make it very very clear. Why am I doing it's not because I want controversy. I Don't like having reformed people

Accused me of arguing like an atheist or making money off of controversy and all the rest this absurdity.

I Would rather avoid all of that and most people do but I have a problem.

I actually take this message out into the world. I Actually take it into the very places that it's going to be denied with the greatest strength and greatest argumentation

So I have to be consistent and so it's one thing for you guys to sit in your private

Facebook groups and Throw out your slander and your jokes and pat yourselves on your back on each other's back

How many of you are out there doing anything? Just ask yourself a question.

Just sit back. Just push your chair back and go Yeah, how many of us are?

How many of us are taking this? Out there against the people who are denying the faith and and denying the

Transmission of the text of Scripture and take the God did it defense and see how that works

Have you never sat down with a

Mormon missionary? Have you never dealt with their saying when you point out?

the problems in the text of the Book of Mormon Either the changes or the fact that it's a historical or its contradictions with the

Bible have they not looked at you and said God did it and Then gave you a warm testimony that the

Holy Spirit has confirmed that in their heart How many of you have ever sat down the more a missionary for more than an hour?

I've witnessed over 5 ,000 LDS Missionaries, that doesn't make me right.

But what it does mean is I know what it takes to be consistent

And I don't have to hide in a private Facebook group and for some reason

Nathan Beatty didn't call today But I just told you what he would have said you say that I'm arguing like an atheist

You are actually making the mistake of thinking that Placing the transmission of the text of the

New Testament in history, which is what all the early churches did All the early church fathers did that's what

Eusebius was talking about. That's what Jerome was talking about. This was origin was talking about standing in their line

Arguing like they argued like Erasmus argued like Beza argued makes you an atheist

No, Nathan, you've been deceived by a really really bad circular argument that feeds into your desire to have absolute certainty absolute certainty by confusing categories

You can have absolute certainty about the resurrection of Jesus Christ That doesn't make you an expert in every textual variance in the transmission of the text of New Testament Textual variation is an artifact of the methodology that God used to preserve his word you don't like that and So you dare accuse those who have done so much more work in this area than you have

Who have taken this out against unbelievers of being of acting and thinking like atheists?

Brother I hope you'll think through what you said. I hope you'll think through what you said. May I repeat what

I said during the debate? Because this and you have to you have to say

I've said it over and Over and over again if you consistently apply

Meaningful sound rules of hermeneutics to the Tyndale Greek New Testament into the

Texas Receptives Will there be any difference in the outcome in the message of the gospel you preach none n o n e none

Does that make this hold of conversation irrelevant? No, it doesn't but what it does mean

Is it those people who say well you hate the Word of God you're destroying the Word of God. It's ridiculous utterly ridiculous

Even the King James translator said the meanest translation of the scriptures That seeks to be consistent and faithful is worthy of being called the

Word of God now a lot of modern people don't like that because they want a

Level of specificity that no one in the in the in church history could have ever understood and Those are the people that when you show them

That the Apostles quoted textual variants in the Greek Septuagint in support of their argument

They end up leaving faith I've seen it happen. I had a conversation with the guy once and that's what had absolutely rocked his world and It likewise rocked him that there were people that already knew about it

And that it didn't rock their world so I Am very thankful that the debates took place.

I thought I Did everything I could? to to bring this out and make it clear and understandable and Hopefully this will help to explicate further my concern

Truly is the long -term benefit of the church And I believe that the embracing of this kind of Incoherent circularity

Fundamentally damages the defense of the text of Scripture So that's why we did it and I think they were quite clear.

I think they were quite clear All right. There you go. Um, so you did check the phone lines.

They were they're all working and stuff like that All right.

Just want them Just want to make sure because We gave we gave that we gave the opportunity gave the opportunity laid it out there

There you go. All right. Well, we'll be back tomorrow Because that's gonna be it for the week.

Like I said have a leadership retreat to go to this week and Then I really don't

I honestly don't see anything Until we go back to st. Charles At the beginning of December and then from st.

Charles drive To we're gonna we're gonna need to rent a car for the first time up there in st

Charles and then drive down to prior see Derek Melton and the Saints down there in in prior and Derek's gonna

Take me out and torture a rabbit That sounds like some kind of weird

Ceremony but actually we're gonna go coyote hunting and so you you use that have you ever heard one of those those coyote lures?

Oh my gosh, oh Yeah, but but the but the sound of the dying rabbit thing, oh man, that's enough to give you nightmares

I've I have just recently gotten over the nightmares that I got from that the last time I was there and So what?

Oh, it is. It's just oh, it's just oh Man and all those all the coyotes were probably just sitting right behind us going.

Do you think we're going out there? So anyways, I don't think I have anything until that trip to st.

Charles and to Prior so that'll be the first full weekend and then the next week in in prior in December So looks like the rest of October and November should be fairly

Man I'm telling you Well, yeah, yeah, we might be able to do something I mean,

I might be able to find a friend that would be willing to do a well I'd be a great place for future sweater vest dialogues, too

So that'll be that'll be fun. So we'll we'll do something No one can touch Doug Wilson during November because that's that's that's when he burns sofas and does weird stuff like that The problem the thing that scares me

We are not burning sofas. No, no, no, no, no not in the desert. We could burn all of Phoenix down but The thing that scares me is have you noticed each each year

Doug has escalated the pyrotechnics. So eventually Something something's gonna go badly wrong

I hope not but Something's gonna go badly wrong when you keep trying to get bigger and bigger every year.