Pale Blue Dots, Philosophy, Feser, and Mt. Carmel

And greetings welcome to divine line we are back here in Phoenix, Arizona for a while anyway not on the road and That seems strange by the way,

I just want everyone to understand we should have announced this many many years ago But I I do not get to say anything except what rich Pierce tells me to say so So any complaints that you've ever had

Any complaints you have about what I say today? you know who to call the numbers out there and In fact, you don't you don't have to be doing the

I need to talk to James thing anymore because now you understand You know what's really going on? I'm just the figurehead and just wanted you all

Want you all to know that and so that you'd be ready to ready to go anyway so much going on the world

Maybe you can spend some time with us and take a break from it all probably not too much is gonna happen Over the next 90 minutes or however long we get to we get to do this

But yeah, lots lots going on a Lot a lot of believers saying man.

I just don't I don't even know what to focus on. It's really hard to Maintain focus and things like that.

It's true Let me just mention Over the past couple of over the past week or about 10 days or so I've been getting an unusual number of text messages from my good friend

John Cooper who has started his own war online and that's actually good language to use because that's he said

I'm he's declaring war on deconstruction and you may recall that I What got me and John together initially was?

His interview on CBN about a Christian artist that deconstructed a deconstruction is a modern

Critical theory term. I think it was it was a Derrida that came up with that one somebody and it's in the vast majority of its usages and in the ones that Everyone can see online people who announce these things

The biblical term for this is called apostasy so Derek Webb the rapper recently all sorts of these people who decide to deconstruct what they're doing is

I once said I believe this and Now I have rejected the fundamental foundational elements of The Christian faith and I now believe

Well, maybe I don't believe anything anymore, I don't know what I believe but I've deconstructed that is

I have walked away from the faith Once he talked about and of course

After that first interview lots of people started contacting him and asking him about you know, every time somebody would apostatize

It's like John's getting phone calls. Would you like to comment on? such and so and So As soon as he does this all of a sudden you've got

TGC articles and and Articles for desiring

God Where now there's a new kind of deconstruction. There's there's that kind of deconstruction and then there's the deconstruction that would basically be in old -language

Sanctification Where people are literally saying well, but some people deconstruct in that, you know

They they start questioning the things they were taught when they were younger and they come to a deeper appreciation

That's supposed to happen. That's called growing up That's not deconstruction Anyway so You know being in that field in the music industry and taking a stand on God's law and the

Lordship of Christ is like that pray for pray for brother John. He's he's got incoming every single day and And Thankfully, you know

John I'll say some sometimes it's I'm just I'm just really really Shocked that someone would say stuff like this.

I'm like, oh you dear man you've You've been in the music.

You've been you've been singing and and playing your bass for a long time

And the rest of us no. Oh, no. No, we you know, we fully expect that to happen because that's

That's what goes on out there. Anyway, so pray for John. He's he's a he's a good man.

Um, I Saw this video. I had to share it with you Just had to share it with you.

I hope we don't get dinged for this because YouTube I'm going

I'm using this In fair use I'm going to comment on what's said.

It's less. It's all it's less than two minutes long So I have to play all of it to have enough of it to comment on so, please stop

Hey But Let's just let's just watch this because I think it it really

Gives you a sense of the religious nature of scientism in our day but what's useful about this one is

Hopefully you can fully understand what the connection to truth is and That's where it's important.

So listen in this was the pale blue dot this was

Our willingness to see the earth as a one pixel object in a far greater cosmos

It's that humility That science gives us That weans us from our childhood need to be the center of things

And Voyager gave us that image of the earth

That is so heart -tugging Because it's you can't look at that image and not think of how fragile

How fragile our world is how much we have in common with everyone with whom we share it

Our relationship our relatedness to everyone on this tiny pixel

Okay, so some of you may remember Grey level the

Canadian progressive rock band Has a song pale blue dot and that's what that's what it was about Was this this image that Voyager takes as it's heading out of our

Solar system and is out of our solar system now. It's in interstellar space. You can follow

Voyager by the way on Twitter Think about that when Voyager was launched

No one had ever dreamed of Twitter, but you can now follow Voyager on Twitter to find out how many light

Minutes it is away from Earth and all sorts of fun stuff like that, but it is an absolutely fascinating image and So let's start with the true things

Things like that give us Incredible perspective. There's no there's no two ways about it.

I We had a little get -together for a birthday luau for someone in our church on Saturday night,

I think it was and So we're sitting outside and I happened to notice that Orion was right over our heads and so I I'm the guy that talks about the stars when you're out there in the dark and I was there's

Beetlejuice and this is a big Beetlejuice is and and Then if your eyes are really sharp, you can actually see the region where the

Orion Nebula is and the Orion Nebula is just awesome It's fantastic So I'm talking about stuff like that and I started talking about how big

How massive the universe is hundreds of billions of galaxies? Not just hundreds of billions of stars.

That's just in our one galaxy, but hundreds of billions of galaxies It's just massive so far beyond anything that we could think of we think of the

Andromeda galaxy our nearest Galactic neighbor coming at us at a million miles per hour on a direct collision course and It gives you perspective and there is something true in Recognizing that None of us are the center of all things

But at the same time if you were listening to what the woman said she's a science writer, okay

There's no recognition of a creator of a purpose, you know,

I I have a picture at home. I Had it printed and I want those real neat things you can hang on the wall and it's the

It's the pictures from the descent of our probe in onto Titan one of the moons of Jupiter, which

What what's what blows me away about it is? From Earth with our best telescopes even with Hubble or eventually soon with the

James Webb scope You you can't see Anything on Titan because it is completely encased in a gaseous

Cloud that reflects all sorts of light. We had done some I think we had tried to do some some kind of imaging through the clouds and stuff like that, but you just can't see anything and So in this series of pictures taken as the probe descended through the atmosphere all of a sudden here comes the surface of Titan it's never been seen by humans before and It gives you just a little glimpse of What may well be waiting for us if there are if there are 200 billion galaxies?

You think there might be some connection to the scriptural Mind has not

Conceived we haven't even thought of the things that will be revealed to us

Maybe I don't know But I I know that You are given a tremendous perspective

But how you're gonna understand that it's completely depend upon what your your beginning presuppositions are and one of my concerns is a lot of Christians we try to have a

Christian worldview over here but we've accepted the starting presuppositions of a

Non -christian worldview over here and when the two get together

You have to put one over the other. You can't that you can't have two ultimate authorities and My concern is a lot of Christians just don't think through these things and so you see something like this and You see the truth in it

Yeah, there's a perspective that that that perspective helps us to see how big the universe is and everything else, but if you join that with a naturalistic worldview it reduces

Human life to a meaningless nothing. It's I mean

Nietzsche would love it Nietzsche would it's nihilism emptiness. No meaning at all and As believers we have to think through How we put all this together because our

God created all of that Therefore there's a purpose for it. So it's in that context then

That some of you saw I think this morning a Video From the 2018

World Economic Forum That is

Frightening But it gives you the essence of the global elites perspective and we as Christians Again we we find ourselves behind the curve trying to catch up But this situation where they're telling us what they want to do.

They want to hack the human being they want to They they fully accept that mankind has gotten to the point he's gotten to via natural selection and By the way, that's what that's what allows

This kind of evil and it is evil to express itself is

That it's only evil if we have been created with a purpose if we are purposeless Biological machines you can do do what it was want.

There's death doesn't really mean anything because life doesn't mean anything Why bother? Why worry about it?

and so these global elites who are Functioning fully on an anti -christian worldview

Hey fill your bodies with experimental drugs We'll do whatever we want whatever whatever promotes our

Purposes that's how they think that's they believe they are that much better than all the rest of us and that comes through and how they speak how they act and Of course what they're planning

So listen to this This presentation and compare it with that scientism idea that we just heard

That has elements of truth to it. But now we're talking about man. What what happens when you take that?

Nietzscheistic nihilistic there's no ultimate purpose and Bring it down here onto the pale blue dot

And you give people political and military power and Now they're gonna live it out

What happens? We are probably one of the last generations of homo sapiens

Because in the coming generations, we will learn how to engineer Bodies and brains and minds now how exactly will the future?

masters of the planet look like this will be decided by The people who own the data now, why is data so important?

It's important because we've reached the point When we can hack not just computers we can hack human beings and other organisms

Now, what do you need in order to hack a human being? You need two things

You need a lot of computing power and you need a lot of data especially biometric data but control of data

Might enable human elites to do something even more radical than just build digital dictatorships by hacking organisms

Elites may gain the power to re -engineer the future of life itself

Because once you can hack something you can usually also engineer it all of life for four billion years dinosaurs amoebas

Tomatoes humans all of life was subject to the laws of natural selections and to the laws of organic biochemistry

But this is now about to change Science is replacing Evolution by natural selection with evolution by intelligent design

Not the intelligent design of some God above the clouds but our

Intelligent design and the intelligent design of our clouds the

IBM cloud the Microsoft cloud These are the new driving forces of evolution and at the same time

Science may enable life After being confined for four billion years to the limited realm of organic compounds

Science may enable life to break out into the inorganic real

And think about that. There's so much there. I almost stopped it a few times. I want you to hear the hear the whole thing Aside from the obvious it's like Oh Intelligent design not of a

God above the clouds but of us The global elites

So if we if it takes all that computing power and all that data to do it now

Didn't it require something like that in the past? It's just so obvious, you know to most of us.

We're like going you do realize what you're saying But once you realize what you're saying

Then don't you recognize the immediate question? How do we have the right to take what has been designed and to redesign it?

And this is this is the issue That not just Christian ethicists or Christian moralists must address but every

Christian living in our time In our day must address

And that is what is the dividing line? Between learning about God's creation

And Improving life on the basis of our knowledge Of how

God has created us. So we now know that back in the 1950s When all the doctors on TV were smoking like a chimney that wasn't really a good thing

Okay, we figured that out. We now understand what lung cancer is and stuffing radioactive stuff in your lungs is

Sort of a bad idea Okay We we figured that part out

But what is the what is the the line then? Between that and Neural implants

Neural interfaces to the internet Things that improve

Human performance the bionic man concept Drugs that that alter the mind

I mean look Science fiction has been talking about this for a long long time There are there are there's television series that had an episode that that dealt with this implantation of I mean really the

Elon Musk type stuff in military applications So that you could have soldiers who could

See what a drone sees Yeah, that makes for a pretty Effective soldier doesn't it?

if you've got drones over the battlefield and You can see where your enemy is from a place of safety

You're gonna win that battle and you know, the Chinese are doing it

You know, the Russians are doing it and so the pressures on everybody to do it because there you go see and in this particular instance

Then you could also Cause the soldier to see who you wanted them to kill as if they were animals rather than human beings

That was the scary part That was the really scary part So It's a worldview issue

You know, I've noticed people recently that well, you know worldview that comes from that comes from Kantian thinking and you know so therefore you shouldn't

Allow a use that kind of terminology if you're not going to use Thomas's stuff over here or whatever We are living in an absolutely unique time

Mankind has never faced what we're facing right now There has never been a thoroughly secular worldview

With power to enforce itself upon the minds of all of humanity

Almost instantly and so we are facing unique times and Christians Should be the first ones to be proclaiming loudly the designed nature of man,

I'm afraid Most of our theistic evolutionary friends our bio logos guys

Aren't gonna be with us. They're gonna be against us. They're gonna be they're gonna be they're gonna function the way

That leftist quote -unquote Christians function today when it comes the issue of does the

Bible actually speak to? sexual morality homosexuality Transgenderism stuff like that the the media can find 47 different Beta males in stole and rainbow -colored stoles to stand there and Say that the

Bible does not say what it says And in the same way, it's gonna be the bio logos folks

Who are gonna be on the other side of this issue when we say no

God intelligently designed and Has a purpose in how human beings live and For how long they live and when you think about it the drive to live forever

Think about what that if there is a day of judgment. What does that mean? What does that mean to a person who dies?

outside of Christ the judgment That will be theirs the increase in the wrath of God people don't think about stuff like that We need to be people who are promoting humankind made in the image of God as God Intended him to be made and that it is good and it is natural and it is right

And then in fact, it is evil and perverse to seek to change what God has made.

I'm not saying Don't learn everything we can about the body. That's wonderful. That's fine.

I am thankful that I have benefited from From knowing all sorts of things about nutrition and supplementation and and you know balance and things like that in Riding a hundred and fifty thousand miles on my bike

I did just pass hundred thousand miles of a bike you gotta You gotta take care of your body to be able to push it that far for that long stuff wears out, you know knees hmm

It's good to to know those things that's one thing because we're looking at what has been designed it's changing that design altering that design using genetic manipulation and engineering

That is where the controversy lies and The reality is that in China Russia places like that these these folks are approaching these topics from a completely

Worldly perspective and that's why I keep saying Secularism is the greatest greatest challenge to the claims of Christ that has ever arisen and Christ must reign until all his enemies have been put put on his feet

It's gonna be a big battle. It's gonna be a big battle could take quite some time could take quite some time

All right. Well, there's There I hope is a subject that Homeschool families can talk about and think about because especially our kids are going to be our grandkids for me

They are gonna be facing This world and That's gonna be a central issue

They don't don't let them become adults without having really worked through The goodness of God's creation and The reason why we should not see it altered and changed in unnatural fashions

All right. Let's uh, let's change our directions here looking moving windows all over the place here

I Have decided that in responding to The redoubtable

Mr. Paulman and Will Hess that now while I was traveling home

I Wrote an article where I documented just the

Utter unwillingness of Will Hess to stand corrected. I wrote a 155 word

Three tweet thread that was made up of two sentences

And I had a friend in Russia So English is not its original language he said

I Read it and it was perfectly plain to me and it's perfectly plain to anyone anyone with a semi unbiased mind knew exactly what

I said If you diagram the sentence, it would be a complex diagram, but it would be a grammatically correct diagram

But I I made the argument that the

Molinist Simply does not believe that God could create a world in which you have moral agents that are culpable for what they do and yet everything is

Fulfilling his purpose his decree his intention That's the

I mean, that's that's what Tim Stratton says to God cannot Logically cause a

Determinately cause a free choice of a free creature. That's that's that's not possible to do. That's the whole point and That's what middle knowledge is about.

That's what they won't defend by the way tonight. I will be on with Eli Ayala To talk about the debate only reason

I'm doing that is because It's Eli's fault that I'm involved in any of this anyways

No, honestly What was it 18 months ago or so? He contacted me during lockdown stuff and he said hey, would you come on my program and talk about Molinism?

I hadn't said anything about Molinism for years it had been a long time since I'd done a program of Molinism and I mean sometimes

I think sometimes entire years would go by where I would not mention Molinism and And That program was what eventually led to everything that Led to the

William Lane Craig thing. And so it's all it's all his fault. It's all his fault. So so That's the only reason you know, he wanted to do a review of it and it's like well, okay all your fault

Anyways, so I will get to call on your program and say it's all your fault. So that's that's fun But that'll be tonight live on YouTube somewhere

So that that issue I Had made that statement and and Will Hess just he just flat -out

Said you you're saying that that Molinists deny the triune God. I mean It was just I Wasn't gonna get into this but again,

I wrote the article. It's fully documented there There is absolutely no argumentation about this at all. It's it's indefensible

Will Hess will not be corrected and he just keeps repeating the same errors over and over again in spite of the direct evidence right in front of his face.

I mean you just and So you can you can sort of figure out what kind of review of I'm not sure why they're doing because when they held us up they held up the original edition not the updated edition of the

Potter's Freedom but What what are you gonna get? Well, you're not gonna get anything meaningful.

That's for sure. Not when you've got someone who can Be corrected Clearly, it's 100 %

Factuality, there's no argumentation here. It's indefensible and I'm just not gonna

I'm just not gonna be corrected. I'm just gonna keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again Go read it.

It's on the actually so I put that on the main blog because it was too long to put on the Theology Matters blog, but it's it's at AOMin .org

look it up and you can look at so all of that to say what I've decided to do is

As I listen to this alleged review What I'm really focused at what

I really want to focus on is any exegetical commentary Look at the text that's that's the only way to make it usable the rest of it's just bluster

But we did have this and I had already written it down I said, you know, this is this is worth addressing

This is relevant to the next topic we'll be looking at so it actually creates a nice transition

It's about philosophy. It's about philosophy. So let's Let's listen in to It's what we got here.

So then this next category is fun This one actually almost had me like,

I don't know flipping tables. I was incredibly annoyed. You're a philosophy geek

I'm a philosophy geek, but you're more so than I am So this part is bad on page 38.

He begins to reject the Philosophy go ahead. Take it away. All right. Yep Quote it is not philosophy that leads the reformed believer to his or her conclusions

It is biblical exegesis that does so end quote So this is ironic.

We're really gonna see how okay How about for those that are interested the few that are interested

This is chapter 1 Subtitle the thrust of this work

This is after a lengthy Citation from Spurgeon on the sovereignty of God The centrality of Christian revelation

This is a single issue that separates supernatural religion of Christianity from the man -centered religions that surround us Well, the work of salvation is perfectly accomplished by God for his own glory or is dependent upon men's cooperation assistance

Is the watershed issue that separates biblical Christianity from everything else? They already objected that the specifics of the debate revolve around what it means to confess that salvation is of the

Lord What does this necessarily mean with reference to man's abilities or inabilities? What does this tell us about the atoning work of Christ or the perfection of Christ's work of salvation?

These are the issues of the debate subtitle the thrust of this work. This is on page 38 original edition the writer of this work has absolute confidence that the reformed proclamation of the gospel will never pass from this world and That the work of Christ's kingdom represented by that proclamation will continue until he rules and reigns when

I was reading this I stopped And went hey Hey, wait a minute. That's That's what a post -millennialist says

And I wrote this I wrote this 22 years ago. How'd that happen? I just chuckled.

Uh Anyway, why because God's Word will never fall as long as the

Holy Scriptures exist And the Holy Spirit brings regeneration the hearts of men the message of God's free and glorious grace will continue

The message of the gospel of grace is first and foremost a biblical Message it is not philosophy that leads the

Roman the reformed believer to his or her conclusions. It is biblical exegesis that does so and for this reason the firm ground upon which the true

Calvinist stands in defense of his belief in the absolute Freedom of God is the text of Holy Writ Because of this conviction this work will focus primarily upon biblical issues the argumentation provided by dr

Geisler and other proponents of a non -reformed position fails upon exegetical examination

So what's my point? the point is that This book is not going to be focused upon Philosophical arguments one way or the other it's going to be focused upon what scripture teaches

Regarding the freedom of God the fallenness of man the perfection of the work of Christ and the reason is that this is the foundation of What it is we're saying we're not saying well we've come to these philosophical conclusions.

That was my point That's the essence of it So with that having been said now, let's listen to this

Insightful and brilliant response important the role of philosophy is for White's conclusions in chapter 2

But for the record, I don't think it's a bad thing to allow philosophy to guide our conclusions

I think we should and I think it's unavoidable It's just it's actually it's just not possible

Not to do that because whatever conclusion you reach regarding the role that philosophy should be playing

Those conclusions will themselves be philosophical Now I'm only pointing this out because it shows how blind

White is to his own presuppositions and how simplistic his outlook is Notice how throughout this entire book up to this point.

There hasn't been meaningful exegesis either Now I just want to stop right there for a moment Because this does fit very well with what we saw over the past weekend

Where mr. Hess refused to be corrected on what was right in front of his face We're in chapter 1 okay, and We haven't gotten to any of the biblical issues yet So if you're giving background information, why would you do exegesis again?

That's not it's not even a meaningful statement I Mean in a high school

English class Freshman high school English class the the teacher would have to mark this and go

That's a bad observation because that's not what was going on in the book at this point That's not that's not a meaningful criticism.

Why did you say this? Um No, we've only been historical and philosophical argumentation

We could also talk about what does white mean by meaningful because he just seems to He seems to mean by that that anything

I don't like But yeah, white just doesn't know what he does it now And it's really worth pointing out that exegesis itself is predicated upon certain philosophical commitments

Bingo a few of those include that there is a physical world That belief or the belief that meaning is something that's real right the belief that communication is possible

The belief that communication is possible over time the belief that we should seek the author's original intention

The belief that context is a reliable guide to ascertaining meaning. There's just no way to do exegesis without philosophy

And again, it's not a bad thing, but white is oblivious to that fact He really thinks it's as simple as the

Bible told me so, you know, right? Yeah, okay It's just as simple as the

Bible told me so I'm oblivious. Don't know what I'm talking about.

Of course. I was lecturing on stuff like this for this kid was born, but hey This man is the repository of all wisdom.

So we got to go with whatever he says. All right, there is an important element here

If you could take that down there is an important element here and That important element is to be pointed out with some words of Scripture Specifically We need to recognize that for example in first Corinthians 120, where is the wise man?

Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know

God God was well pleased the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe now so you have an assertion

That there is a wisdom of the world and there is a wisdom of God and they are not the same thing

They have to be distinguished from one another, right? Okay, keep that in mind and Then let's think about what the

Apostle Paul warned us about in Colossians 2 8 Colossians 2 8

Which says to us see to it that no one takes you captive Deates philosophias

Through philosophy and Empty deception according to the tradition of men according to the elementary principles world ooh kata

Christ on Now this is the term Philosophy it is the

Origin of our utilization of this term So How can you identify what philosophy is?

That you are to not be taken captive by it You see this is a a very shallow very simplistic

Argument that we hear all the time have dealt with Every day every generation has to deal with it, but I've been dealing with this again longer than probably either one of these men have been alive you can reduce any assertion

To a philosophical topic or concern So as long as you use if you if you start to say well, let's let's think about Adam in the garden

Okay, you can say well, wait a minute How do we know what Adam means? How do we know what in means?

How do we know what the garden was? These are all issues of Epistemology and so you see epistemology comes before exegesis

Linguistic philosophy comes before Exegesis the Word of God cannot be prior to philosophy

Now I hope as you're listening that you're going well, wait a minute if that's true then there's no way to understand what

Paul says in Colossians chapter 2 and this is what

Philosophy geeks as they describe themselves as this is what they do and they don't realize it's a child's game

It's a child's game The issue is not can you ask epistemological questions about anything?

About any written communication any oral communication any any conceptual discussion you can raise all sorts of issues and start arguing between nominalism and and realism and you can start doing everything and That's what they like to do

That's they seemingly think that that's great The problem is we're supposed to be

Christians and There was no

Aristotle or Plato or Anybody else in the garden and yet God made man responsible

For the revelation that was given to man Without all the epistemological categories

Without any knowledge of The laws of logic

Adam's mind we would assume functions perfectly it's not fallen And I would agree that laws of logic

They reflect God's thought as a Christian when you ask what's the origin of these things?

well, God created all things and Therefore since he has created all things with a purpose and intention

Then it's gonna be orderly. We are thinking God's thoughts after him when we when we do these things. That's that's a beautiful It's wonderful.

I I I think I have I don't know how many times I have on this program Suggested to people the study of logic

I have an entire set of books down here that I've gone through with folks before on Recognizing logical fallacies and all these things all wonderful very important and all secondary to God's revelation

God's revelation came before all of them. God spoke to Adam and Eve they had divine revelation from God before they had philosophy before they had anything else and So simply being able to turn any human communication

Or any thought in saying well that has philosophical meaning to it.

Yeah, it does that doesn't Have anything to do with what

I said in my book and again if these men could have had the reading comprehension of high schoolers

They would recognize this But they they don't because of their bias that's what's so educational here

It's not that they if they're reading a car manual they'd get it

But it's a book on Calvinism. They don't get it. Hmm wonder if there's a reason for this there is there is it's the bias and So what

I'm saying is and this could be understood by anyone There are people

Who when you press them? When you press certain philosophers especially atheistic philosophers

For why they believe certain things about the world they will give you a rather complex

Philosophical argument given this given these

Assertions here. I believe that they consistently to this conclusion and you know

This is based upon this perspective view of the world and this here and and I think this is the better way of understanding

The epistemological claims I'm making here and and so on and so forth. I come to this conclusion

That's not where reformed theology comes from and to sit back and say yeah but Reformed theology, you know, you can look at it philosophically and it's and it has implications for last week.

Duh Absolute duh That's not what I was talking about Yeah, Rich said and they know it well

I don't know they know that the level of bias on these guys is off the charts. It's it breaks the needle

That's not what I was talking about That's why I read it the reason

That I have confidence That people will be preaching the reformed gospel after I'm dead is because the

Word of God is The foundation of it it is There is only one clear consistent meaning to John chapter 6 and Every time people try to get around it

They only prove the point more clearly and more obviously must be very frustrating must be very very frustrating

The foundation is exegetical It's not the atheist philosopher

Going well if you accept this premise and this premise and this premise therefore by modus ponens this no

That's not Where it comes from? That was the point that they missed completely

That they were oblivious of It wasn't I this oblivious of anything.

It's these guys and their bias That just simply can't even

Can't even deal honestly with a single sentence of a book That's what is truly amazing.

It really really is truly amazing Was there something else in that?

Nah, I think that was that was about it So, yeah, there you go absolutely amazing, all right, so Did it eat a day -to -day, all right get into the stuff that's gonna make me just so massively wonderfully

Popular I'm sorry And rich rich is

I'm glad rich has understood that everything from now on will be his fault and that he will be

Taking responsibility for all this though. Remind me we've still got Eric to deal with at the end in case

I get lost There's something fun at the end folks. There's something there's a

Yeah, I Don't even know we're gonna go from from the divine to the really odd before we get done here okay,

I Was given a gift on my way home It's 1 ,100 pages long

In one volume Thomas Aquinas is summa theologica Check out that the font on that I can read it with reading glasses

Triple column 1 ,100 pages long. I think a lot of people just look at that and go well man

The guy's got to be right if he can write that much This seems to I mean, he's just so brilliant and And he was

No question about it, but you see I've seen entire works like this

I Hadn't noticed there's a note Well, it's not a note to me

But I now Okay, this is what live live live webcasting is all about Okay, so My brother up there in over there in Texas must have this is a question 11 was page 546

I answer that with regard to heretics two points must be observed One on their side the other on the side of the church on their side

There is the sin whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the church by excommunication But also to be severed from the world by death

For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul than to forge money which supports temporal life

Wherefore if forgers of money and other evildoers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority

Much more reason is there for heretics as soon as they are convicted of heresy to be not only excommunicated

But even put to death on the part of the church However, there is mercy which looks on the conversion of the wanderer wherefore she condemns not at once But after the first and second admonition as the

Apostle directs after that if he is yet stubborn the church no longer hoping for his Conversion looks the salvation of others by excommunicating him and separating from the church and furthermore

Delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death

Interesting it was just the note was written in the front. I hadn't seen it till just then I only mentioned it in that Thomas's work was fundamentally

Canonized in the sense of acceptance not scripture, obviously At the

Council of Trent and I do I need to remind everyone. I guess I do. I guess

I do need to remind everyone that Geneva This is not known by many people

Has nothing to do with what I was gonna be saying, but saw the note Providence Geneva was a missionary production center and The one time

I got to visit Italy One of the things I did enjoy I got to talk with one of the brothers who had written a book about many of the martyrs from Geneva Geneva's pretty much just straight north of Italy and The preaching of John Calvin produced missionaries

A stream a steady stream of missionaries that went into Italy and died

Horrible deaths by burning with Thomas's approval.

Don't happen. That's that's that's history and Do I think it is relevant that Every time

I'm looking at Issues where the faith interacts pastorally with life in Thomas The issue of the keys and magisterium the church comes up.

Yeah, I do Yeah, that's that's sort of important That has historical significance to it.

That does not account for that does not create an argument Against Aquinas's Assertions regarding the doctrine of simplicity

It does place him in the context of demonstrating that the text of Scripture was not nearly as central or understood by him as You would want it to be for a person making conclusions on any doctrinal matter and And the difference between an

Aquinas and an Irenaeus Aside from a

Thousand years is a completed Canon and a thousand years of church history to demonstrate what can happen so again, that wasn't

Like I said, I just looked over hey, what's this there's a note and then looked it up and Voila while I was gone

Some somewhere during that time period and I'm discovering that I sort of try to keep track of time

By what RV park I was in try to remember. Okay when I was reading this

I look outside which one was that again type of a situation a Article came out in first things

Called doubting Thomas By Edward Fazer who everyone acknowledges is a well -known and great

Thomas Aquinas scholar okay, I would find that to be a less than enjoyable life personally, but To each his own

I know scholars of Ignatius of Antioch, and I know scholars of Irenaeus and there are people that focus upon Certain things.

Yay. I I would actually ask God why he hated me so much if that's what if that's what

I ended up doing, but hey, I I Love ancient manuscripts. So some people think that that makes me weird.

Okay, but whatever What happened was Fazer wrote a review of Jeffrey Johnson's book on Thomas Aquinas and natural theology

Now if you've been on a under a rock someplace Something has happened over the past Few years and Here are two

Answers as to what that is I had asked the question

I had posted. Let me wind back here. I Took just a basic paragraph from Aquinas because I have the

Summa in Lagos and so I had grabbed a section that speaks of penance it speaks of Soteriology salvation

In a very Roman Catholic sense, I mean Aquinas really defined The Roman Catholic position for the

Council of Trent which was the counter -reformation Council and So it's talking about infusion of righteousness not the imputation of righteousness actually the infusion of grace, sorry and the power of the keys the church and The free will of man everything

That was At stake in the

Reformation in the material principle justification by faith And it also therefore has a direct connection to solo scriptura as well and I posted it without comment

Now this was completely purposeful on my point because what I fully expected to happen is exactly what did happen and that is instead of now if I had posted this in the year 2010 the responses from my peers from my group

And I don't know what they want me in their group anymore, but what was my group back then Would have focused upon the

Reformation so they would have been focused upon infusion of grace rather than imputation of righteousness

Centrality of the free will in the sacramental system of Rome power of the keys papacy

Penance the whole sacramental system That would have been

The only meaningful response we all would have been on the same page. We all would have been thinking about and Of course and and people thinking of me there.

There is no person Identified with the Reformed Baptist movement that has debated more

Roman Catholics than I have none Not living. Anyways, I don't know of any in the past That's that's just a fact so what would have been the obvious Interpretation of my even posting those words all the context that Reformed Baptists have in seeking to evangelize

Roman Catholics and all the rest I Knew that was not even gonna come up Instead the assumption that was made

Was well, you can't disprove Thomas's natural theology and his his his assertions about simplicity

Because of what he says about stereology. I'm just surprised at you That's why

I posted it To demonstrate that something has changed and it wasn't me it wasn't me

I'm still saying the same things. I was saying back then it wasn't me. And so I asked the question.

Why is it? What's the change? Well Jacob Aitken at Rogue Tory Responded with this.

Why do we respond differently simple in the wake of Richard Muller?

More historic reformed sources are available These sources were critically appreciative of Aquinas on some points

Richard Muller taught us how to do historical theology You do realize what that means that up until this point of time.

Nobody was doing historical theology. Nobody nobody who Give you an example

Of 19 97 ish

There is a real long exchange that myself and others had

I was sort involved the beginning it continued for quite some time afterwards on the issue of the monarchical episcopate in Rome Now, what's the monarchical episcopate in Rome?

When did Rome the when did the ecclesiology of the church at Rome? Developed the idea that they only had one bishop who was the successor of Peter Because that's central to the claims of papacy the earliest evidence very plainly is

That Rome had a plurality of elders the Epistle Clement to the

Church of Corinth Um The the fact that when

Ignatius writes the church at Rome on his way to Rome he does not greet a bishop He greeted other bishops by name there is clear obvious evidence of a development of a theology the the

East has the monarchical episcopate the West is developing it slowly probably around 140 -145 is when it finally establishes itself.

So evidently looking at sources seeing their impact upon the development of theology and The application of New Testament theology did not exist until Richard Muller.

That's absurd people Wake up now there were clearly plainly

Sources that had not been published or You know, it's and again, it's like oh we found writings from some of the people that were involved in in In the writing in London Baptist Confession of Faith.

Yay. That's great. That's wonderful Do you know only about a third of origins been translated so far

I'm not really sure that we need the rest of it to be honest with you, but You are aware of that, right?

There's In almost every century of church history. We have a small portion.

It gets better the closer you get obviously But there's all sorts of stuff the idea that well, um

Richard Muller taught us how to do historical theology. And so that's why now We're responding the way we're responding.

Well, that was insightful. I think it's it's Showing that people don't know what was going on 20 years ago, but it's insightful and then

Nathan white down in Georgia Posted this today this morning and this is an attitude

I'm seeing Again with my own is it former tribe?

I don't know who determines membership here Some of you have never read

Muller's post -reformation reform dogmatics And it shows this should be required reading before anyone claims the title of reformed or Makes assertions regarding what is or is not reformed

Wow so Rich did I but I have you guys read that back and well actually hadn't written it was didn't exist back then

So I guess we couldn't have been reformed Wonder what

Calvin would think of this, um Look there is every reason to Read widely and the funny thing is years ago when our

Scott Clark Was banging the drum about how you

Nathan are not reformed. I said at the time The best

I think the only meaningful lasting definition of Reformed has to be focused upon The complete

Submission to the utter freedom of God in His sovereignty over mankind and his affairs

That's what defines it. That's that's the heart of it. That's where that's run conditional election is

That's where particular redemption is that's it's all to the glory of God that that's that's what it means to be reformed and So this definition does now say well, you know what now

Richard Muller defines it Hmm, okay So are we going to add?

Muller's work as an appendix to the London that's confession of faith seems that we need to if You really want to be in the club that sort of misses the point of confessions of faith really does

And it leads to the discussion of What it means to subscribe to a confession of faith and now

That it means that you you need to access all possible data Concerning the personal beliefs of Everybody that was there in the construction of the wording

You realize you can't do that in the ancient world And if when you do it would create havoc

Especially for Protestants If you're one of those prizes goes I accept all the seven ecumenical councils.

Really have you read all their canons and decrees? Have you read their history? You know how many fights there were between monks that that actually ended up impacting the outcome of those things

Yeah, most people don't know and we've got no way of knowing What the people who wrote up the documents

What they actually believe oh, I suppose you know if Athanasius was involved. You can look at that.

You can look at Hillary Yeah You can do stuff like that But this is now the standard this is now what you have to do so back to the phaser thing, sorry long long

Discussion there I Was I'll be perfectly honest.

We had discussed it with a bunch of people on Twitter. I don't recall having said anything.

I had other things going on and I I think I managed to Anyway keep my mouth shut

But the number of ostensibly reformed folks That were just oh

You've got to read this phaser. Oh, this is just go. This is just awesome

Back in the days when adults were still in charge There would have been more than significant time allowed for a meaningful response

Before there would have been this triumphalistic childishness that I saw on social media and Dr.

Johnson did write his response fairly quickly Shouldn't have to be done that quickly, but he did

I didn't see nearly the promotion of the response that I saw of the article

From phaser who by the way is not reformed. He is a Roman Catholic But what

I didn't see now, I did not have the time or the interest or desire to go running through Every linked blog article or anything else to see if anyone did this, but I did not see anyone

Pick up on what I picked up on when I read phaser's article. Let me let me read something to you

It's not a long article It is dripping with sarcasm it is it is the quintessential.

I am the expert in this field. Do not question me Attitude you get that one real strong Here's what it says second the claim that all human beings know non -inferentially and With certainty that there is a single omnipotent omniscient and perfectly good creator the universe is manifestly false

There are after all atheists and Also people who believe in God but have various mistaken beliefs about him that he is identical with the world that he is not all -powerful

And so on Johnson would insist that such people don't really lack knowledge of God and his nature

But are merely trying to repress what is obvious to them Needless to say this foot -stomping

Simply begs the question and does nothing to answer the evidence against Johnson's thesis Johnson would retort

That the Bible itself teaches natural revelation in his sense rather than natural theology ready for this says who?

Aquinas and other classical theists hold that what biblical writers like Paul had in mind was in fact natural theology

And that is precisely through the possibility of philosophical arguments that God's existence in nature can be known from the natural world

Johnson claims this is a misunderstanding the relevant scriptural passages, but he merely asserts this he gives no non question -begging arguments for this interpretation

To demonstrate something from the Bible you need do more than thump it Okay, can

I be honest with you? I have no respect for this man in his form of writing. All right I'm sorry, but every one of you reformed people that read this

If you didn't stop right here and go phaser doesn't know his Bible very well

Shame on you, and why didn't you speak up? That's what

I want to know. Why didn't you speak up? You know what Romans 1 says

You know where he's coming from There's Roman Catholic anthropology oozing out of this and You're the same people going well, we can't worry about what

Aquinas said about anthropology because what he said about simplicity is so cool and good What is going on people?

now I'd like to know if anybody knows and Don't post data to try to fool me if anybody knows where someone did say now

By the way, we to be fair should point out That this is not foot -stomping

Bible thumping that this is disrespectful language. This is inappropriate and That the

Bible plainly does say that God's Revelation does get through and that man therefore is on a polygate ooze not because of philosophical arguments from natural theology but because the clarity of the creation itself

Didn't we all agree on this just a while ago What happened? What was it when

I was doing all the Muslim stuff this all happened. I just missed it. I don't know I Don't get it.

This should be enough for anybody to go. Whoa. Hey, yo It is intriguing that the very next paragraph which is the last paragraph of the article

After saying you need to do more than thump it Says but it is only fair to note that Johnson's views are by no means universally shared by Protestants So who's gonna get the stamp of approval?

From the Roman Catholic expert on Thomas Aquinas theologians like James Dolezal and institutions like Southern Evangelical Seminary are

Contributing to a revival within Protestantism of the view that Aquinas's philosophical theology is the ally not the enemy of the biblical conception of God SES and James Dolezal, I'm not gonna comment what

I'm commenting on is if you skipped over phasers utter denial of biblical

Anthropology that was key to the Reformation and cheered him on Because of his defense of Aquinas on some obscure point or another shame on You shame on you

Why? Where is this gonna lead? Where is this going? Guys, let me tell you something

You're walking down a dead -end road You can only preach on Simplicity so many times and you can only divide and Get rid of people because they won't accept that extended

Thomistic speculation They'll affirm simplicity But they're not gonna go to the ad interest of if you want to divide over that stuff.

The road you're going on is a dead -end Road, I'm telling you right now

There are not enough people that would care there is not a single meaningful

Pastoral application of that extended application that anyone's gonna care about ten years from now

So, where are you going? I'm trying to tell folks you've lost your balance

You've lost your balance What's going on? Why aren't we we were once man you could walk into any

Reformed Baptist Church and You knew what you were gonna hear, you know what it was going to be based on you knew that there was going to be clarity on the key issues of justification and the authority of Scripture and the freedom of God and Now all of a sudden we're selling this in the back

What? There's no clarity on those things in here I Okay deep breath let's do something fun to finish up with shall we

If I can find this thing, where'd I where'd I put it? I don't know. Uh, I don't think

I downloaded that All right, maybe

I've got more than one no, it's not there.

Oh there nope, that's not it Uh Maybe okay.

Wait a minute. Where's where's the movie stuff? There it is. I found him too many windows too many windows too many screens

You know, I y 'all know that I actually ran

Windows 1 .0 Remember that and I remember

Wondering why? Because because you really couldn't multitask at that point

That's pretty much all there was in it. It was yeah Didn't know what was coming. Okay so I Shouldn't do this.

I will I will I Shouldn't do this, but I'm going to anyways in 1998 or 99 a friend of ministry contacted us and Asked if I would come to Idaho To do a debate on Calvinism With a guy named

Eric Lounsbery. It didn't work out. I asked

What the guy was about? Had he written anything? I don't know 17 -18 years later

The guy shows up at Apology of Church He now claims he was yelled at and violently removed which all the witnesses

And everybody that I know and trust says is fantasy Says didn't have him and That was when

Mike Lycona. Yes, dr. Mike Lycona On Facebook said that I had declined to debate his friend

Eric Lounsbery on Calvinism which he says is a doctrine of demons and And at the time

I commented on this you can go back the Dividing line is still there.

I Was I just obviously gotten back from I think Ireland because I was wearing a

Ireland rugby shirt That I had been given by some of the guys there I think in Belfast not

Belfast Dublin area I think maybe no anyway It was in Ireland somewhere

Great fish and chips. It was wonderful Anyhow, um, and I talked a little bit about You know,

I point out Lycona. You do you know what this guy's coming from? So so Mike you you think that Calvinism is a doctrine of demons.

Why don't you and I debate that? I don't know who this guy is But at least you and I be a fair fight we can deal with the original languages and stuff like that.

He of course Refused to respond to any of that. So I'm traveling somewhere on this last trip and Luke the bear sends a

YouTube link to this video to the Apology of Leadership group and So I'm listening to this thing.

I can't watch it and driving like listen to it. And so I'm listening to it and I'm I'm texting rich going

Who is this guy? We've been contacted recently by someone who what what what is this all about what and and finally was it you?

I forget who it was. It came up with the name. It may have been Zach. I forget who it was Yeah says oh this is

Eric Lounsbury Lounsbury, it's L -O -U -N it should be pronounced

Loon He says I was mocking his name because I call Lounsbury Sorry That's not the normal pronunciation

Lounsbury anyway And I'm like, oh wait and so stuff starts

Going and I and rich got me the the URL to the dividing line thing and So I can click on that and it's like oh, yeah

Okay, I'll cover it and that was more than five now almost six years ago that that happened and Even longer back to this stuff

With Idaho and all the rest of stuff So I'm listening to this thing and here's a guy who claims he talks to God and God gives him special revelation

And you know, I sort of learned a long time ago with Gail Ripplinger That there's there's really no debating people

Whose final answer to any challenge will be will God told me so Gail why did

Why did you call it the NASV all the way through your book? Because that's how that's what God refers to it.

Well, okay How do you argue that you know, that's pretty much end of that one

And so I'm listening this and I get toward the end.

I'm actually good play for you. I don't know how many views it has probably a couple hundred I'm gonna give him more

Advertisement than ever but there's only one reason I did this Justin Peters contacted me

I think Sunday night or Saturday night one of the two and he says who's

Eric's lounge bear and like oh no So he's going around contacting everybody with this challenge, which

I guess is supposed to be up in like six days okay, and I'm gonna play it for you.

But let me just serve Give it to you in a nutshell here in a nutshell

Evidently God has told this fellow Why he did not clearly reveal the doctrine of the

Trinity in the Old Testament and In fact if I recall oh,

I don't have it right here Oh Drat, um, and I don't think I got it off of this one.

Let me look real quick. No, I didn't bummer The title of the video had something to do with throwing

James White off Mount Carmel He you look at his at his videos and I live rent -free in his head there ain't no question about that Which is sad because between 2016 and two weeks ago

Not didn't think of him once it Careless anyway

So the challenge is that we're supposed to Explain Why God did not reveal the doctrine of the

Trinity clearly in the Old Testament and if and but but he gets to decide

What the correct answer is because God told him So we've got a guess what

God told him And if we get it, right, then he will confess that he's

That Calvinism is true or something and he's a false teacher or something And I'm not sure what happens to us if we don't do it

I'm not sure if we get if fire comes down and torches us or just what I don't know but um

But that just just thinking about what the actual challenge is just makes you go, huh?

Because we've discussed any quotes from BB Warfield now in Many ways.

I'm a Warfield Ian not so much on Classical apologetics, but especially on Trinitarian doctrine and the biblical revelation of Trinitarian doctrine and So I've given

Warfield's understanding of this all along and It is an important question and anyone who's heard me lecture on the doctrine

Trinity knows the revelation

Now there are some people that disagree with me on this I realized there's some reform brethren that I'm like, yeah,

I Couldn't defend that one in a debate They take another perspective but What I've said all along and I believe is fully defensible what

I've done In Many instances is

I've Like if I'm walking around talking While I'm doing the lecture,

I'll grab someone's Bible. I say can I borrow your Bible? Yeah, sure. Okay, and I'll I'll open it up so they can see it and I'll go so you see here.

I'm I'm right here between Malachi And Matthew, so there's there's

Matthew. There's Malachi Okay, so everybody knows I'm right between the Testaments here, right? Yeah, okay

So if you want to see where the doctor the revelation of the Doctrine of the Trinity is It's right there.

See that see the gutter that's where it is and Normally gets really quiet and I go now think about for a moment

What is the fundamental evidence of? the Doctrine the Trinity It's the incarnation life death and resurrection of the

Sun and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit It took place in history It took place in time

It took place in geography There's a hill outside of Jerusalem where the

Sun died. There's a city called Bethlehem where he was born There's a lake that I've been on called

Galilee that he walked on Took place in history during the reigns of certain

Caesars It took place in geography certain part of the world And It took place in time, which means it was 400 years after Malachi and it was before Matthew It was before any of the

New Testament. The New Testament is a Trinitarian book Everyone who wrote the

New Testament documents was a Trinitarian They lived in light of the revelation that had taken place in the birth ministry death barrel resurrection of Christ the outpouring of the

Holy Spirit And so that's where it takes place and so it is a doctrine that describes

What God did in history? It doesn't come from Nicaea.

Nicaea is important Nicaea is vital the arguments before Nicaea are in vital are vital that arguments after Nicaea are vital, but they don't define

The foundation and this is sort of important on other issues aside from the craziness of Eric Lounsbury I am biblical

Trinitarian. I've said that my book says that That's the reason

I'm a Trinitarian. I'm not a Trinitarian because of post Nicene Philosophical developments and I believe post

Nicene philosophical developments must be examined by this

And I think this is actually up to doing that a lot of people don't

A lot of people don't that's scary But it's true.

So why isn't the doctrine? Revealed with clarity in Old Testament because it was revealed in history

Between the Old and New Testaments so that the New Testament is now written by Trinitarians You notice there is no chapter on the

Trinity introducing the Trinity in the New Testament. Why? Why is it that the that the writers the

New Testament can just so simply associate the Father and the Son and the Spirit and the Spirit of God the Spirit of the

Son just and The the grace of Lord Jesus Christ the love of God and the fellowship the

Holy Spirit be with you all How do you say stuff like that? It's because you already possess the revelation

It happened in history. It's a Trinitarian volume That's why that's the biblical answer

And if this guy comes up with something else the contradicts the biblical answer. Well that tells you what spirits been talking to him

That's how you test these things. That's how you test these things so I Don't know what he's gonna come up with six days from now, and I'll be honest with you.

I don't care because it's not gonna change the reality of any of this because God's not talking this guy and Telling him that Calvinism is the doctrine of demons or any of the rest of stuff and Nobody's could prove anything by trying to fulfill some wacky idea that he has.

Oh, I haven't even played it All right What? Yeah, yeah, yeah

All right, so here here we go here's here's However, let me say in advance

You will not find it My point here is simple you say, you know God if so go to him and get the answer

After all James chapter 1 says that if any man lack wisdom let him ask of God and he'll give it to him

Jeremiah 33 3 says call unto me and I will answer you and show you great and mighty things that you do not know

So as long as you come up with the answer and your answer Originally came from a

Calvinist if you present it to me, I will publicly apologize to you

Here is my declaration. However, I am going to go on the record and say that not one of you will come back with the answer

Not one of you not. Dr. James White not. Dr. John MacArthur not.

Dr. Steve Lawson Not dr. Michael Horton Not dr. Al Mohler Not dr.

John Piper Not dr. Robert Moray Could I just can

I just point something out here for a second? Bob more he's dead

Okay, he died a little while ago So I don't think he got your email.

I don't think he's watching YouTube And if you get an answer from Bob That's called necromancy

Does He just not know what but don't you think that God might have pointed this out to him that was my thought

That was my thought evidently the list of people. He's supposed to be challenging It wasn't given to him by God because God knows that Bob more.

He's dead okay, so I Not dr.

Wayne Grudem Not Paul Washer not Doug Wilson None of you will answer the question

That is the point You would have to know God to get the answer after all if over 2 ,000 years have passed and the greatest

Bible scholars of all time have not been able to provide the answer Clearly it could only be given to you by God and since I claim to know him and I also claim that neither dr

White the Goliath of defending Calvinism nor any of the others I just mentioned to know him that it is only right to give the opportunity to you and every other

Calvinist on the planet earth to prove me wrong But this challenge is not just for the

Calvinist that I just mentioned. It is for every teaching Calvinist on the planet

I will give you all at least two weeks This will give you time to fast and pray to the God that you say, you know, of course

Most of you will simply mock the challenge knowing that you have no hope to answer it Then sometime after the two weeks,

I will give you the answer I may give you more time, but I will make the answer public by the last day of February at the very latest

I will post it in detail here on YouTube in the meantime I will be like Elijah as he waited for the prophets of Baal to go get their answer from God Confident the outcome will be the same for you as it was for them.

No answer will come However, if you happen to come to the conclusion that you have an answer if your answer is not widely accepted by the

Trinitarian Christians Across the board then we will not accept it as the correct answer however, the same standard that applies to you applies to me and just to let you know in advance my

Answer will not be challenged it will be apparent to every single person who accepts the

Trinity that the answer that I provide will be correct and that includes every Calvinist and that is because the answer was given to me by God in Fulfillment of a promise that he had given to me on December 1st of last year and you will see that proof soon enough

Now here is your question Why did God not clearly reveal the

Trinity in the Old Testament? Yes Illusions were given to multiple divine persons as all

Trinitarian scholars know and agree But why did he not reveal the personhood of the

Holy Spirit and the personhood of Jesus in the Old Testament lest any of you disagree with the foundation of this challenge regarding the question and the fact of the hiddenness of the

Trinity in the Old Testament Let me quote one of the most recognized and highly esteemed

Calvinist of all time Namely the famous 19th and 20th century

Calvinist theologian from Princeton University B .B. Warfield who also agreed with a hiddenness of the doctrine in the

Old Testament Listen to Warfield's clear declaration of this fact. He says

Certainly, we cannot speak broadly of the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity in the

Old Testament It is a plain matter of fact that none who have depended upon the revelation

Embodied in the Old Testament alone have ever attained to the doctrine of the

Trinity So again the question Why did God not clearly reveal the

Trinity in the Old Testament? Yes Illusions were given to multiple divine persons as all

Trinitarian scholars know and agree But why did he not reveal the personhood of the

Holy Spirit and Jesus in the Old Testament? I Am NOT looking for answers that are guesses if your answer is not clear and certain to you

It won't be clear and certain to others Those of you who have an answer simply email a copy to me at run to the fight at gmail .com

I will make all the answers available publicly afterwards But if I get any answers that are correct

I will make them public immediately by posting them here on my youtube channel with a minimum of A public apology from myself and a promise that I will leave that video up at least until the end of this year

If any of you happen to have a YouTube program and you want to give your answer publicly, that would be great

Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc YouTube is a really really really interesting place.

That's that's just that's just all I can say Yes, not gonna do it well everything

I said you you approved Wouldn't be it wouldn't be prudent was that when that a bush thing.

Yeah Wouldn't be prudent. That's a good word prudent. I should learn it.

I guess anyway Wow, I just got a mention. I Shouldn't I should not look at stuff

But you saw the the picture Here, I'll move it over here so you can see it.

No, don't put this up, but You saw the Faculty picture

Tony Arsenal Oh Goodness this is great.

I needed a laugh and Someone said what's funny says it's grown men trying to establish themselves as serious academics

By playing dress -up and idolizing men who wouldn't have ordained them Yeah, nice man, isn't he?

No, not really It's been sad to see his Off into that same stuff too, but Tony I'm not gonna return it to you man.

I mean only only you can answer for the attitudes of your heart only you can

Anyways, all right. Well, we've covered the waterfront today and So Lord willing on Thursday, we'll be back again with you the

Creek don't rise My mom at the way we say it when I was kid Creek don't rise and Russians don't drop the bomb

Well, we're back to the same thing again after all these years the Creek don't rise and the