Roman Meme Theology, Data Mining the Bible and Qur’an, Wael Ibrahim, and Live Viewing of Kent Hovind

Well greetings welcome to the dividing line If I look like I'm heading to the beach or something like that. I might as well be

Did you see the predicted highest for Friday Saturday 88 I? Mean it's 14 15 degrees that that would be that'd be 18 degrees above normal for this time of year a big old high -pressure system has

Plopped itself down on top of us, and it's not going. It's just ain't going anyplace, and it is like Ridiculous So I'm I'm breaking out the summer clothes, and you know getting the the nice cool stuff on because I imagine

I get in the car. You know this afternoon. It's good. It's gonna be well Oh, it'll be it'll be triple digits in there.

I imagine so I Came back from lunch and cracked my window, so there's yeah I know

I know it's it's it's amazing and that regular reformed guys, dude. Did you see the tweet?

He just tweeted Hey, dr. Oakley 69 this guy wants on the DL and I told him you get me that coogee you can be on the deal cuz that is

A glorious no no no that is just gorgeous That is gorgeous look at that turquoise in that that is just beautiful.

I'm really trying not to that is just wow I'm not even gonna describe what

I'm thinking right now. That's wow that's just heavenly it really is I think that's kind of kind of clothing.

We're gonna wear in heaven Anyway Anyway let's

Let's go ahead and start. I was gonna start with something else, but let's go ahead and start with the with our meme theology for the day

This one was sent last evening to me via Facebook and Yeah there we go

Heresy that special moment when you have greater spiritual insight than the Apostles Disciples Apostolic Fathers the church and the

Magisterium because you have a Bible that they wrote compiled and gave to you now as with most

Falsehoods There is truth and error intermixed and It does seem that there's a major problem in our world today

Especially with young folks as long as there's a small amount of truth, then you have to respect

The rest it's this false idea that all ideas are worthy of respect

No, all ideas are not worthy of respect That may have been drummed into you by Caesars school room but That is a falsehood

There are stupid ideas in the world and it is stupid to honor stupid ideas, how's that?

Honoring foolishness Is not how you prove that you're a nice person

It proves how you're a gullible person who does not actually respect the truth and hence really doesn't have a lot of love and respect for other people because if you love and respect of the people you'll want people to actually be operating on the basis of a

True worldview rather than a false worldview. So anyway with that said

The truths here are Are found in the fact that if you do think that You alone have come up with an insight that no one else has ever thought of That generation after generation after generation of Readers of the

Bible and and the church As the whole the the body of Christ the faithful body of Christ.

I'm not talking about Christendom I'm not talking about big buildings and marble slabs and Gold encrusted furniture and stuff like that.

That's not the church. It's never defined as the church But there is such thing as church and there is such thing as a recognition that God has been building his church through every generation and so there is a balanced recognition that God has been active in his church and That therefore the idea that there are brand new things that have never been heard been thought of before but is

It is it is arrogance and that of course is why at the time of the

Reformation If you've ever actually done any meaningful reading in the writings of the time of the

Reformation You know that nobody was saying. Hey, you know, we've just it's been wrong all along All of the

Reformers Said we are going back to the earliest days and they made their arguments

You may disagree with their arguments, but they did not say we're just throwing it all out They said actually the early church believe this early church believe that and you've you've heard one of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite theologians

Of the last couple hundred years and that is Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield BB Warfield in describing the

Reformation said the Reformation inwardly considered is nothing more than the victory of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the church

And if you listen carefully that what you realize is, huh? Augustine was self -contradictory in his theology and he was and that's why both sides in the

Reformation could quote from Augustine without too much difficulty because the

Reformers were quoting him on the gospel and their own Catholics were quoting him on church structure and sacramentalism and that of course went back to the fact that he had those two great controversies in his life in ministry and How he solved those

Was not overly consistent. Of course, there were decades between them. So Give the give the guy a break.

But anyway The reality is that the balanced view recognizes

Christ has been building his church and Hence when someone comes along and does that I've discovered something notice that is

That special moment heresy no question about it The imbalanced view is on the one side

You've got the vast majority of non Roman Catholics today and let's be honest the vast rate of Catholics too who are just nominal

I mean, they're just They're there they go to a Catholic Church, but they don't have a clue and could care less one way or the other

The number of actually believing Roman Catholics is a small number Who actually know the teachings of the church and believe the teachings of the church.

That's a small number I think a lot of them would actually are sitting there going. Yeah, unfortunately, he's right

Well that could care less absolutely positively care less

About church history the generations before us our debt to them

How are our what we believe has been honed and Examined and and Placed in such a way that we are the recipients of a tremendous amount of work and thought and reflection and battle

From the generations before us it could care less care less. Hey, I mean it takes it to completely non reflective person

And when I say non reflective, I'm not talking about the light off of my head. Okay, I'm always concerned that people think

Oh, he thinks he's really reflective because he glows No non reflective as in Reflecting upon one's worldview reflecting upon how one's worldview interacts with other people's worldview and what the different worldviews and what the

Differences and foundations are and so when I say someone is non reflective That may be an observation.

It may be an insult. It may be both. It may be only one of the two But what

I'm saying is they're not a deep thinker. They're not someone who Is is really

They may be talking a lot but it doesn't necessarily mean much thought is behind what's being said, even if it sounds like there is and so there are a lot of Non -reflective non

Catholics who just take in what they believe and think that they just came up with it all in their own

Maybe they think they've just you know, well, it's right there in the Bible So I just believe it and and they don't realize all that has come before.

All right on the other side You have the

Roman Catholics who exalt the tradition That has been defined for them by Rome It's not the tradition of the early church very few of them have actually spent much time reading early church fathers or if they do they read things like the

Jurgens three -volume set of specially selected quotes and and stuff like that that really doesn't give you a meaningful sense of What we have in the writings of of the early church fathers, but they exalt the early writers to the point where that becomes the matrix through which the

Bible itself is interpreted and that over -exaltation is

Never really an exaltation to those individuals. It's an exaltation of the system

That has developed and that Tells them what it is.

They're supposed to believe this thing's driving me absolutely crazy today Take it off and try a different Different direction or something.

I'll just wait until them. I've got a video going and then I'll worry about them anyway

So there's there's the there's the imbalance we need to be balanced in the middle and I Know being balanced is not how you sell books.

It's not how you Do anything Today balances is you know, you get shot at if you if you do the balancing so Going back to the graphic them

Heresy a special moment when you have greater spiritual insight than the Apostles Disciples stop there

Because if we think about what's actually being said And we're talking about the

Bible then we're talking about that which is given by God not by men and When you go

Apostles disciples you stop there because that's the end of Revelation That's the end of that which is the anus toss, which is

God breathed apostolic fathers I can point you to Numerous errors in the statements of apostolic fathers

I can point you to numerous errors from the Roman Catholic perspective in the apostolic fathers

But not in the Apostles and disciples So there is a notice they just cram it all together which destroys the unique significance and Authority of that which is the anus toss and subsumes that as is the

Roman Catholic way Under the broader authority of the Magisterium because what have we said before sola

Ecclesia the modern Roman system the Roman Magisterium determines what scripture is and what it says what tradition is and what it says and so that capital

T tradition scripture just becomes a subset of that and that of course functionally destroys the

Ultimate authority of and the unique significance of that which is the anus toss by Paralleling it with that which is not the anus toss that which is not

God breathed. So apostolic fathers the church How do you define that? I don't care

What you say what I saw inside the Vatican is not the Christian Church.

That's not the religion of the man from Galilee these pretentious

Pontiffs who lived a life of luxury engaged in utter sexual debauchery

I Don't care what you say Your biblical arguments are a sham.

They are ridiculous That's not Christianity It never will be never was

Never never not even a possibility The church and the Magisterium because you have a

Bible that they wrote compiled and gave you they wrote They wrote that the church the

Magisterium wrote the church the Bible. No, it didn't Here's sola

Ecclesia Well, we did because we just stick it all together and fail to make the proper distinctions between things they didn't write it

Ultimately the Holy Spirit did by inspiration but the Apostles and disciples were the men who spoke from God as they were carried along by the

Holy Spirit and compiled and gave to you God's the one that compiled it and God's the one that preserved it and he did use his church, but it wasn't the

Roman Church Because as anybody knows the only significant cannot canonical difference that exists between non

Roman Catholics serious historical non Roman Catholics and Roman Catholicism in regards to the canon of Scripture the do canonicals and it is painfully obvious just go

Listen to the debates we've done in the subject the Apocrypha Read William Webster's work on material read the

Old Testament canon New Testament Church by Beckwith Look at the materials for yourself and you will discover very very quickly the fact that you can make a very very strong argument against Deuterocanonicals and That there was a long and deep tradition within the tradition of the church

All the way up to the modern period all the way up to the time of Luther That rejected the

Deuterocanonicals as having a canonical status and it really was the fact that Luther rejected them that ended up leading to the canonization of those texts by the

Council of Trent and so There it is. It's it's pretty straightforward

So this idea they wrote compiled and gave to you is just it's a farce. I mean, it's it's really hard to take seriously

The person who can make this kind of argument but you got to feel sorry for him I mean, it's got to be tough to be a believing

Roman Catholic apologist these days. I mean every morning you got to get up and You got a fear turn your computer on because what has

Francis said now and what am I gonna have to go into full spin mode to try to Turn into an

Orthodox statement on Francis's part now and you've got to know deep down in your heart

That your church is being led by an allegedly infallible guy

That you know in your heart, you know in your heart. He does not believe

What the previous Pope believed let alone Pope's 150 years ago, you know that but you just you just keep pushing that voice down and You know, you just keep

Trying to say no, no, no, no So, there you go, so there's our meme theology for today what

I was gonna say well I looked at that this morning for the first time. Yeah, it struck me I read it like this heresy that special moment when you have greater spiritual insight than the

Apostles despite Disciples and apostolic fathers stop right there which group thinks like that.

They have greater insight than all those the Roman Church Well You can sort of tell by the

Artwork where they were going with that, but well, I kind of struck that saw that as an illustration of my point

Yeah, see these three guys, you know Well their artwork. There you go.

You know is is that even period? No, that's Yeah, well, what period are we talking about?

Exactly. So anyway, well, there's you mean theology for today we'll go ahead and take that down because I'm about to take that down one way or the other and There it goes.

There we go. All right now I was sent a

Yesterday The the young man who debated should be early. I have not heard the debate yet I have

I'm getting behind on stuff because I'm I'm doing something weird for nine days. I'm doing what's called the tour of Sufferland Ria It's killing me.

I mean it is tough I'm Having to push my literally and talk about a blessing.

I'm having to push myself to eat enough to stay at weight

Because I'm burning 1 ,500 to 2 ,000 per day without a break.

There isn't gonna be a break for nine days and Isn't it a blessing to be in a land where I don't have to worry about finding?

3 ,500 calories a day to eat sadly a lot of people do that without trying to but It is good that I can find

That kind of sustenance to keep keep things going but anyways because I'm doing that I'm I'm I'm losing my on bike study time because What this involves it would be the workouts just too intense to be listening to anything.

You're you're just You're dying I mean you might I suppose I could listen to something

But I wouldn't remember any of it because when you're About to fall off the bike and throw up You don't remember a whole lot of what you were just doing

So anyway, I'm I have this in the list the debate that took place with with Shabir Ali.

It's it's in the list Anyways, he sent me a tweet last evening and I Looked at this article the folks listen up Every single person in This audience and I I love getting the pictures.

I really do. It's amazing where this little webcast goes I love getting the pictures of families watching the dividing line

Especially the kids And I love that, you know the tweets about you know, my two -year -old gets excited

And here's the dividing line theme or you know, whatever else and stuff like that. That's really cool even you young people

You need to cultivate the discipline of listening to an argument and Recognizing what it's based on and Analyzing that basis and then responding to it from a presuppositional

Foundational level. I don't care who you are. I don't care what you're called to do

God gave you a mind. He's giving you the Spirit of God. He's giving the Word of God. Don't tell me that's not sufficient

To allow you to think with discipline to be a disciplined thinker

Which is not what is taught in Caesars Caesars minion making machines called public schools in it.

So I'm gonna read you an article not a long article and what

I want you to do is I want as I read it

Be analyzing the foundational assumptions That either have been made or needed to have been made foundational factual issues that were ignored

Sometimes it's both it's just either an error in the assumptions that were made or An error in bringing certain data in that would fundamentally affect those assumptions

So listen this article that was forwarded to me and tell me how you would respond to this

Text analytics program proves Quran less violent than the Bible To hear right -wing politicians and pundits tell it the

Quran is the most violent religious book out there If this were the case though, it only makes sense that text analytics software programs that can almost instantaneously review entire books

Would find countless examples this violence instead it found something even more compelling Data mining is a strategy that fortune 500 companies use to discover patterns

They can then use to improve their business text analytics is one of these mining processes and Tom HC Anderson's Odin text is on the cutting edge that of the technology these research tools are mostly used in the marketing world

But Anderson decided to showcase some other uses of Odin text To understand any religion one must start with its literature

So we thought it would be an interesting exercise to compare the primary books of Islam and Judeo -Christianity using the advanced data mining technology at fortune 500 corporations government agencies and other institutions routinely use to comb through large sets of unstructured text to identify patterns a

Another words like the NSA To put it simply Anderson entered the entire Quran along with the

Bible into his text analytics program He then set the tool to see how specific words and phrases to convey Emotions and actions such as anger fear joy destruction and killing we should point out

Odin text initially scans all data with the exact same Assumptions this allows for completely fair and 100 % consistent coding within two minutes

Anderson had his answers When compared with the entire Bible the Quran showed higher rates of emotions joy and trust

Conversely it also showed more mentions of fear and anxiety It's when the Old and New Testaments were examined separately though the more enlightening data came forth

This was done in an effort to separate Judaism Christian Islam and the results were illuminating to say the least

Of the three texts the content in the Old Testament appears to be the most violent

Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament 2 .8 percent than the

Quran 2 .1 percent But the Old Testament clearly leads more than twice that Quran in mentions of destruction killing 5 .3

percent You'll often hear right -wing Christians say that the violence in the Old Testament is no indication of Christianity because the birth of Jesus Christ Gave us a clean slate

Sorry Even if this is the case though this text analytics study shows that even the

New Testament contains more violence murder and destruction than the entirety of the Quran Side note recent studies have shown that Christianity may have been based on popular fairy tales

Considering the violence of some of those none of these findings are at all surprising though really Wow that was

That one really gave you an idea of how fair this is You'll only find the most uninformed among us denying that violence exists in religious texts and while it might be surprising to some the

Bible Is more violent the Quran at least New Testament is all about forgiveness, right? Jesus Christ comes to earth to save us from our own sins

The New Testament should definitely win in the forgiveness and grace categories, correct awkward The concept of forgiveness grace occurs significantly more often in the

Quran 6 .3 percent than the New Testament 2 .9 percent or the Old Testament 0 .7

percent We've done stories before on things more likely to kill you than Islamic extremism and the results of this new data

It seemed to explain why Forgiveness is a central aspect of the Islamic holy book and religious texts the three

Abrahamic faiths undoubtedly the cornerstone of each worldview show That Christian and Jewish texts share a larger propensity for violence than the

Quran Sadly results this text analysis will likely mean nothing to the most extreme white ring white white

Haha, right -wing religious fanatics We've seen numerous studies that strengthen the dumb conservative stereotype and they go a long way in explaining why these new facts won't alter any

Opinions, unfortunately, we can only present the science to the uninformed. We cannot make them Accepted this is from reverb press .com.

I don't know much about reverb press .com But Here is

Here's the argument. All right, and I was told last evening that this is making the rounds amongst

Muslim apologists And I'm sure that it would In many sadly many

Muslim apologists will use Any argument That they can

You know when I said that You see Twitter When I said that the thought crossed my mind someone's going to repeat what

I just said as I was uttering the final words and Stephen Myers just posted a meme

There are stupid ideas in the world and it is stupid to honor stupid ideas. I I had a feeling

I had a feeling that that was that was coming when I said it but you know what

I stand behind it and That's not gonna get me elected to anything anywhere at any time, but I stand behind it anyway back to the article

Now there are so many problems With this that I will have to be brief simply because I want to get back to why ill

Ibrahim today So many problems it is really really bad really really really bad let's let's think about them first of all

We're talking about data mining well, that's that's that's an interesting concept but What's the first?

First thing that pops into your mind You're comparing because they break it up between Old Testament New Testament and the

Quran. All right How long is the Quran again 14 % the length of the

Bible 14 % It's only 56 % the length of New Testament It is a much smaller text that contains significantly less

Differentiated styles of writing or material any first year

Bible student is Taught to recognize the kinds of literature that are found in the text of the

Bible so You don't simply compare Historical material

About of which there is almost nothing in the Quran at all to Didactic material to apocalyptic

I mean Most of the Quran is in poetic form

So if you're if you're even gonna try to be serious with this you'd at least try to compare genre with genre

You try to compare poetic with poetic But they don't do any of that they're just doing blocks of text without the slightest concern

For the fact that you're talking about a book which from the Islamic perspective is written over two decades

Versus a collection of books Written in the

Bible's case over 1 ,500 years Dumping that kind of stuff without looking at language without looking at background

Into a computer program is simply stupid But in our day as long as it's done by a computer then it must be right

This does help to explain Bernie Sanders anyways, but doesn't it

I mean honestly how did You know molar this morning was was talking about how did we?

How did we get to the point where we have an avowed socialist Making a serious run this fast.

I mean the Millennials Seeming well You know,

I'm tired of watching the YouTube videos holding up pictures of Abraham Lincoln or George Washington or Joe Biden and they're all like, oh no show up.

Well, hold up Lady Gaga Lady Gaga, you know, I mean Wow It's just Eventually That's that's that's what happens anyway

So the first thing was the just the abject ridiculousness with some analytic software program having just blocks of text thrown at it and Then what we're gonna look for certain words ignores context language background genre everything that is unfair to Every one of those religious texts every one of them secondly, you only look to come on How about throwing

Sahih al -Bukhari in there for the fun of it because anybody Anybody who knows anything at all?

about the real ground of Disagreement debate warfare even amongst the

Muslims on the issue of jihad the nature of jihad what is

Appropriate in a state of jihad what constitutes jihad all the rest that stuff. It's not the

Quran It's the Hadith So throw Sahih al -Bukhari in there it's available in English translation you can get any text and Then add that in that would actually put it much more in in a one -to -one correspondence size wise

Well, actually that would become huge It'd be a much much more on the on the Islamic side

Even if you if you could somehow I'm not sure how you do it filter out all the doubles triples quadruples because the same stories told over and over and over and over again and Sahih al -Bukhari so actually what you need to do see that Yeah, right there see those two volumes right there those are that is the collection of the

Hadith that appear in both Bukhari and Muslim that gives them sort of a special authority and Use that instead that would actually

I think probably get you it'd be interesting to see I wish I could get that electronically if any of you

Experts out there happen to know that it whether that set is available electronically. I would really really really like to get hold of it

Because I that'd be that'd be the the best way to review the Hadith would be to get that Because that would give you the key the ones that are you're not gonna have a mutawattir or universally held

Hadith That's not found somewhere in that set But anyways, so the point is that that the issue of violence in Quran in in this in Islamic faith is

Primarily an issue that is based upon the interpretation of documents that weren't included in this

In this quote -unquote analysis and so the whole

Concept not taking the consideration when you're putting words of violence or hatred or destruction.

Are you talking about? God Acting in judgment. Are you talking about men who are?

self -destructive aren't those different things I Mean, I mean it is it is stupidity again.

Sorry to be using that term, but it is stupidity to think That there is well if my text

Talks about violence six point three percent of the time that's going to make me violent.

What if all those times it's warning you against it? I mean, isn't that obvious?

Just the basic assumptions that went into this or that didn't go into this absolutely stunningly

Bad bad bad bad bad very very bad And of course recent studies have shown that Christianity may have been based upon popular fairy tales.

Okay that again Sorry But as soon as an atheist or a

Muslim does the Start down the list

Dionysius Horus Addis whatever

That whole line of Foolishness all that proves to me and me is this person has zero intellectual integrity none gone negative numbers negative numbers

And since it's right there then then there you go so Then of course at the end it you know

Obviously, this is some kind of left -wing blog or something because talking about extreme right -wing religious fanatics well, that would be me evidently, but the difference is that I actually think about my faith and Have done some serious study of it along the way.

So I'm getting all these requests somebody in channel and I already had this queued up, but I'm gonna have to Do something with my

Thing here All right, it's short so it's worth doing it. We're gonna we're gonna shift over here

Rich to Safari Able to grab this it's only a minute and 35 seconds.

At least Dan Wallace is all over the right -hand side there. That's good Better a lot of stuff you see on Facebook.

I mean man, sometimes I couldn't even show something on Facebook on the feed cuz so bad

What? All right.

All right. I can do that if you want me to do that. Okay Let's uh, it's a

Kent Hovind correcting the Hebrew with the English demonstrating. He's actually a full -blown Rachmanite I've told you before Kent Hovind promotes the cultic form of King James only isn't by the way

I'm tired of King James only us who carry a chip on their shoulders a you say

I'm a cultist well, if you're a part of cultic King James only isn't you are but simply being King James only doesn't make you cultic and You say well, but you call some people get look

I wrote this in 1994 it came out in 1995

All right We're talking 21 years ago since it came out and I think it's probably the best.

It's the best known book on the subject I'll think it. I don't think I'm not bragging to say that it's just a fact

If I spent an entire chapter defining the movement and showing the differentiation between the radical

Ruckman Rippling or GIP stuff and The less radical forms and then the non

King James only forms that are TR only and so Why don't you remember that part?

Do you think I'm I'm ignoring that? There are forms of King James only ism that are absolutely cultic they

They will utilize any argument no matter how inconsistent they are beyond correction.

They will not listen to others and Kent Hovind is a part of that and if you want to see the cultic form

King James only ism, it's when they actually go the point of promoting the Reinspiration of the

Bible between 1604 and 1611. Well that even that doesn't work Because Kent Hovind doesn't use a 1611

King James. I Bet he used the 1769 Blaney revision, but whether he uses the

Oxford of Cambridge edition I don't know but once you start saying you can correct the original languages based upon the

English translation First of all, you're clearly demonstrating you don't care a bit about what the

King James translators themselves taught or believed They were just overridden by God and they had their wrong ideas and God still re -inspired the text

But I mean that's where you know, no every single one of the King James translators would absolutely reject this movement as Heretical Absolutely heretical every single one of them every single one of them so and Once you get to the point of saying well

You can correct the Hebrew by the English There is no reasoning with such person

The reasoning faculties have been turned off at this point It becomes just one very very tight little circle

The King James Word of God because the King James or is God because King James or is God and and there's there's And of course, it's utterly destructive.

These people cannot do any meaningful apologetics none That they cannot engage in a defense the

Word of God that's one of the primary reasons I oppose this movement expose this movement and Thankfully have seen many many many many many people leave that movement

Even though it will always exist as long as there is an Internet because the

Internet Breeds this kind of stuff. It just it just breeds ignorance and that's what this is.

All right, so here's Here's Ken Holman with correcting the

Hebrew with the English The Henry Henry Morris defenders study

Bible is excellent I love that his got the Bible and then his footnotes at the bottom which are generally really really good and I enjoy those

However, he also falls into the trap of saying well in the Hebrew this word really means blah blah blah

And he's always correcting the English with the Hebrew or the Greek No, no, you can correct the Hebrew or the

Greek with the English God preserved it there and it was corrupted in many other places

So Satan in the Garden of Eden corrupted the Word of God God hath said three words He changes it hath

God said First sentence out of his mouth. Yeah hath God said

He's corrupting God's Word. So do not fall for that Hebrew and Greek stuff Okay, and say you can correct the

King James with the Hebrew and Greek. No, you can't it's the opposite Okay, that's the same thing with this King James issue.

In fact, which we'll have something on next week Lord willing Do we have to go to a person? Can we just read the Bible ourself?

I Said I'll say it again very clearly you can correct the Hebrew with the

English Because there's conflicts over which Hebrew which Greek text. Okay, so I think

God preserved it and yes The English King James I think is where he preserved it

And if somebody says well, it says in the Greek Whoa, which Greek you talking about the Alexandria in the Antioch and which one the

Sinaiticus? Vaticanus one from Vatican Library. That's it. We'll get on to that in about a week and we'll straighten all that up, but Those people set themselves up as the guru you have to come to me to get the answers because nobody else can explain it like I can

You can just read your Bible and get it Okay, so there you go

Let's see, I think just there we go there again, it's indefensible.

Here's why Evidently that means the Bible didn't exist before 1611

Because there is no Greek or Hebrew manuscript in history that reads identical to the 1611

King James, so The Bible was lost for 1600 years. They'll always give you some vague.

Well, you know the Byzantine manuscript but again, that's not the same thing and Which King James are we talking about?

Are we talking about the 1611? Are we talking about a revision of the 1611 are we talking about the 1617 69

Blaney revision? Even then are we talking about the the Oxford edition or the

Cambridge edition because there are variants between them We need to know which one it is.

Wait, when did this inspiration take place? Is it did it start in between 1604 and 1611 and then continue?

I mean Ruckman Ruckman eventually when people pressed him on this issue You know Ruckman's answer was was that it was a process of purification

And the final Perfected version was the old

Schofield version of the the King James that was the end of the process of So, there you go

This kind of of King James Gnosticism Again unknown until only a few decades ago

King James translators laughable would have absolutely scorned anyone who made this argument they

Hovind and Rippling er and Ruckman and all of their minions as loud as they may be

Would have been laughed to scorn by the King James translators and appropriately so nobody in church history

Ever understood the Bible to exist in this way it is utterly destructive to the creation of Translations the

Word of God into other languages. It's utterly destructive. It is it is truly I mean I Can I begin to understand how any person who is multilingual?

Could even begin to countenance The foolishness of King James only as I'm of this form

King James. I really I can't I can't begin to understand it because anyone who is functionally multilingual

Knows that there is not just one proper translation That you can translate from one language into another and there can be two or three ways of doing it that will adequately and properly

Communicate the intention and meaning that was originally in the original text of the original words

So it does it certainly finds its audience primarily amongst people who are not multilingual and hence

Who are not nearly as well educated? Because they're not multilingual which is sadly a lot of Americans But it exists overseas.

That's that's what is amazing This the cultic form of it gets into churches and as far away as Uganda and Creates division and strife there because again, it breeds ignorance

It it can only exist when people do not know the process whereby we receive the text of the

Bible in the first place and Once they discover that then it becomes so obvious where it's where its errors are

But as I said, a lot of people don't know those things and so this whole idea is the most radical form and again, if you want to see what happens when these

People are actually put in a position of having to answer direct questions because it's almost always a monologue

We've noted that Hovind for example, I have documented beyond all question

His dishonesty and accusing me of lying about the encounter I had with Gail Riplinger in November of 1993 on KRDS radio

He will not accept correction he will not own up to his own and apologize for his own activities

But Those those guys, you know,

Hovind won't come on this program. I've invited him to Very rarely

Will these people put themselves in a position of actually having to answer meaningful questions go back and watch the 1995

King James only series From the John Ankerberg show. It was eight episodes as I recall and That's where I first met

Dan Wallace and And It was quite quite the experience quite the experience and listen for yourself,

I think it was plain and clear What happened when those people were forced to actually try to answer a question.

They can't answer the questions Why because they use double standards? They use one standard in defense the King James different standard to attack every the translation

They it they cannot do apologetics just can't do it Which again is one of my primary motivations

King James only ISM disrupts the fellowship of churches and is absolutely destructive of meaningful

Christian apologetics, I Think you can see why then I have very high view of the church and I'm involved doing apologetics

So that's why I take the time to respond to these do James Curtis Mullins asked do

KJV onlyists say that non -english speakers need to learn English to understand the Bible well

Some of course do not Some will say that what you need to do is translate from the

King James Into those other languages some will say as long as translate from the

TR into other languages, you're okay But then Sam Gip on the

Ankerberg show when John Ankerberg said if I live in Russia, are you telling me? I need to learn Russian To possess the

Bible and he looked right in the camera and said God has promised us only one inspired and inerrant Translation at one time right now.

It's King James Version of the Bible. So in other words, yes That's the cultic form of King James only and dip is definitely in the cultic form as well as Ruckman Ripplinger Hovind That's the cultic

Form of King James only ism. So there you go. There you go. All right Wow, I Forgot to bring anything in here to drink today, sir, if I could get a

Cup of water with some ice in it. It would it would assist me because I want to do some while Ibrahim stuff here and What?

Why are you looking? Okay. All right. All right. All right. Oh, I see what you're saying. Don't start playing what eel until You're back with the ice water.

Yes, this is I Got it. We have to learn to communicate by a you know, the look in the eye,

I guess Anyway, alright, so there's there's the Kent Hovind silliness

And I appreciate whoever put that stuff together I don't I hope I don't seem cavalier, but I'll be pretty honest with it's it's

Well, especially with Hovind. It's just so painfully obvious that he has never Taken the time

To seriously study the subject. He hasn't He hasn't read my book. He hasn't he hasn't even taken the time to listen to the 47 -minute encounter between me and Gail Ripling.

I hope he'll call me a liar, but he won't even listen to it. I just It's sort of it's sort of hard to have a lot of respect for anything like that.

Thank you very much, sir That will help me to wet my whistle a little bit Hmm Well 84 ties the high 85 will give us the high

Now 150. Yeah, that looks like it will break it. We'll break it So anyway, we press on I have wanted to get back to this

I apologize to what ill and I remembered while I was traveling someone in Twitter Did they the folks in Twitter ever send you that list of?

times for the dividing line Because remember that thing came across Twitter I think

I think it was a lady who said I Went through and I got all those time indexes and dividing line and I wrote back going.

I forgot what that was about and You even commented on that and so no one said anything in Wow, you look completely lost.

Okay, this is pretty sad. You slept since we last talked about easy. Okay I remembered later on what it was

I said I wish someone would send the time indexes in where I talked about what ale so I could send those to him so he wouldn't have to just be searching for Through all the programs to find where I talked about him and I remembered it later on But I just couldn't remember while traveling and teaching what it was.

So sorry about that And if you did that, please send it in I because we could just pick up with this this program here we got done with what else opening statement and He had less time for rebuttal because he went over time

And for some reason they turned the lights off so it looks a little weird for a while But then they turned him back on here. So for those who haven't been with us for a while or whatever

This is a debate which took place. Oh Sorry, I suppose I need to give you the proper thing here

This was a debate which took place back in October of last year in Hong Kong what l

Ibrahim and Its subject is the Lincoln loo is the

Christian and the subject is the Trinity here now is what else rebuttal period and we've been providing a response a fuller response than Lincoln was able to give in the time allotted to him on The subject of the

Trinity. All right, miss me now. Alhamdulillah salat wa salam ala rasool Allah Sallallahu Salam in the name of Allah may

God's peace and blessings be upon all his prophets now I was expecting From Lincoln to come on a stage to convince us that God represents himself as a

Triune God instead he launched a series of quotations of different scholars explaining who

God is and so on and And he didn't know that some of them

I disagree completely some of them they are from complete different sects now what happened I've obviously listened to the debate a number of months ago now and What Lincoln did was he did

You know when you're comparing two sides You can't you know, I suppose some people could just simply

Define defend the Trinity and assume that's a sufficient rebuttal of Islam But what Lincoln did is he said hey, here's what all these

Muslim sources say in regards to a law as an undifferentiated Unitarian one person not three persons so on and so forth

Which I think is perfectly fair, I mean both sides have to be examined I think in most situations I tend to default this way in most situations the

Christian tends to focus upon a defense of the Christian faith

Rather than a critique of the Muslim faith But it does need to go

Need to go both directions. That's all Lincoln was doing Including those who say that the Quran is created and he's and the

Quran is eternal and so on and so forth It seems that he didn't know that I'm following the majority

Of Muslims who are considered to be Sunnis and not any other sects for that matter

He began by saying that when I refer to God and I want you to make that very important note He say when

I refer to God, I'm referring to Yahweh So sometimes I say Yahweh Sometimes I say

I'm saying God and remember whenever the Christians say God they have in their mind three persons

Now again, we already corrected what ale on this Sometimes we do have three persons in mind, but normally in the

New Testament we have Father the term for us is the normative use of the term for father courteous for the

Sun There are exceptions there are places where all three persons are identified merely as God in a generic sense

But what Lincoln is saying is that Yahweh refers to the being of God that is shared by three persons

Which is why father son and spirit are identified as Yahweh in the text of the

New Testament Son and Holy Spirit now the Old Testament in first Kings 1838 it says that the people chanted

God is Yahweh God is Yahweh. I'm asking Lincoln.

Does that mean that? Jesus is Yahweh Not in that context, but yes

Jesus Yahweh Jesus identified as Yahweh John chapter 12 Hebrews chapter 1 so on so forth

Jesus is identified as Yahweh. The father's identified as Yahweh what ale Assumes a

Unitarian interpretation of Yahweh rather than a monotheistic Trinitarian interpretation of Yahweh, which is what you're forced to on the basis of the

New Testament Revelation if you ignore the New Testament Revelation don't allow it to speak then, you know, whatever but we're talking about what

Christians believe here and But Where is the Trinity revealed between the

Testaments? So no back in first Kings the people aren't saying Jesus is

Yahweh But the Yahweh that they are worshiping Was triune that revelation had not yet been made in the way it would be made in the incarnation the outpouring of the

Holy Spirit, but Obviously Yahweh has always been triune and there had already been indications of this in Genesis 18 and 19

The Yahweh walked by the Oaks of Mamre and and and so on and so forth Does that mean that the

Holy Spirit is Yahweh because according to Christianity that would be a blasphemy No, according to Christianity.

That is what we believe you just why ale Ibrahim just made the Bart Ehrman whoops

I want to do something on this because I I still I would still Love to see and the only way this has ever happened my way was ever happen is if somebody in this audience has a pile of cash and Because the only way that Bart Ehrman would ever do this was if he was promised a big payday a big payday

Otherwise, I don't think he's ever gonna Show up on a debate stage with me again but I would love to debate

Bart Ehrman on his statement and I need to get the The specific

I want to have the an mp4 from that debate I've got it right here.

I just need to pull it out of Bart Ehrman saying no New Testament author identified

Jesus as Yahweh. I would gladly Debate Bart Ehrman on that Right there in Raleigh if you would like I'm sorry,

Charlotte, North Carolina, wherever he'd like to choose. Whatever his favorite place would be

Or wherever else love to debate that because what ale just made the same same error and That's what's weird

Because what ale says even sent me a picture of him he sent me a picture like this going

Well There's a little problem with that and that is let's see beginning on page 131 we have a chapter called

Jehovah of hosts and What is Jehovah of hosts about It is about the identification of Jesus as Yahweh That's not a long chapter because I only focused on two primary texts so maybe it got skipped or something, but How can you say it's a blasphemy

To Christians to believe Jesus Yahweh when there's an entire chapter on Jesus as Yahweh in the book

That's that's a good question Mentioning about Quran 4 1 7 1 say not

Trinity the Quran condemned the Trinity and again It's It's fella three

Three Now I agree. The writer is trying to address the

Trinity. I just think the writer fails Because every time you have do not say

Hulu do not say That a three What's the very next phrase?

There is only one God Allah. There's only one Allah. So What is the author thinking?

that ordinal number three means God's three gods There's no understanding on the author's part of three persons

There's no understanding of the unique doctrine of the Trinity on the part of the author of the Quran. There just isn't

I Mean, I've seen some pretty desperate attempts on the part of some my

Muslim friends to come up with anything along those lines and Then work

In a very plain words again, I'm asking Lincoln Do you know what is the

Arabic word for Trinity to say that the Quran never mentioned the word? We have here an

Arab friend as well. I have the Arabic Bible with me and the word

Trinity is mentioned by the Christian Arabs, it's not mentioned in the Bible as we all know and Amazingly it is mentioned in the

Quran in the form of a command not to say about God Trinity Simple and clear we do not go into details.

We don't go. What do you mean by three if I but but you do I'm sorry, but but you do

And I've I've shown this before. Ah I Haven't fixed

Zechariah on this thing. I hate that. I Need to need to fix that You you do say that I'm sorry,

I I know what he was saying I know what Was being said by Lincoln and and I'm in agreement with it

And it's a shame that y 'all never came to an understanding on it but Here's here's the text.

Let me see if I can pop it over for you here real quick. All right, here's the text

Oh people the scripture Say the Allah Kitab right here

Do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah accept the truth the Messiah Jesus son of Mary was but a

Messenger of Allah and his word which she directed to Mary and a soul created a command from him So believe in Allah and his messengers and do not say three

Right there those of you who read keep it up there Because it's hard enough to read at that size.

They'll never read it that at that size Do not say three

Now those who can read Arabic will be forced to admit That at least

I can read enough of it to find what I'm talking about there Do not say three

Desist it is better for you What's the next statement? What's the next statement those of you who read

Arabic? Indeed Allah is but one

God Allah is but one God so I Could go into surah five

Wherever this command do not say three is given. The next phrase is there is only one

God You can go ahead and take that down. So I've used the illustration before I think it's a proper illustration

I've never had any to my to this point Now if you're a

Muslim and you wrote an article somewhere on the internet and I never read it I apologize but to my knowledge to my knowledge

I Have never had a Muslim come up to me and explain me why the following Analysis the following example is

Improper if I say And I've used illustration before I know it's repetitive but repetition is the mother of memory

Repetitio mater memory I'll pick on a particular person the channel would you like to kick out fairly regularly?

Chicago has two major league baseball teams just like Los Angeles has

I Does anyone even in Los Angeles knows how many sports teams I have anymore? It's hard to keep count, but Los Angeles has two basketball teams

Well one half these days How the mighty have fallen Anyway, if I said to someone from Chicago Do not say to there is only one baseball team

Would anyone have any problem understanding what I was saying? Would anyone have any problem?

Of course not when I said do not say to There is only one baseball team when

I say there is only and then the next phrase is going to define the category in which

I'm speaking So when the author the Quran says do not say three

There is only one God Then it follows of necessity

That what the Quran is saying is do not say there are three gods All right,

I haven't had anyone explain to me Linguistically or logically why that's untrue now what

Muslims some Muslims will say as well that the Quran really isn't interested in addressing those things Well, why not?

Why not if? Someone came along after Islam with their own holy book as there have been people who've done but address their holy book to the

Muslim people and Instructed you to stop believing certain things if if some holy book came along after yours it said

Do not say wahad do not say Tauheed, but then the text of that book shows

No meaningful interaction with what Tauheed wahad? means In the

Quran or in Islamic theology, would you? Give any credence to this revelation, so if a revelation comes along after Jesus The New Testament specifically teaches that there is not going to be another word from God after Jesus And you know,

I have a feeling if Muhammad knew that He would have tried to come up with an argument about it but there's no evidence that he had any idea of what the book of Hebrews actually said and So he doesn't respond to Hebrews chapter 1

Doesn't present an argument But in the same way there is no argument in the

Quran That shows any familiarity with the New Testament text and With what the

New Testament is actually teaching on these subjects so There you go.

That is one. You can't ask me. What do you mean by one? Oh Yeah, okay

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I hope they come up with a better Thing of a

Bobby here someday that sort of allow you to just sort of click on something and poof there it is but And I don't have to go and investigate.

Okay, let me let me divide that one into three. That would be better God is one and God Almighty say do not call him three simple and clear

I Was amazed that Lincoln say that the Quran didn't mention the word Trinity it is there in both quotations that he mentioned

And I want him to come here on the stage and tell me what is the word for Trinity that he couldn't find in the

Quran Again who is Ismail Faruqi? Any Muslim you have heard of the name

Ismail Faruqi, please raise up your hand Well now well be careful here because you're

You're a fellow practitioners of Tawah are very often guilty of Mining some of the most obscure sources ever known to man to make their arguments

Shadid Lewis, for example 2008 Virginia Started quoting from these modern -day

Gnostics. These are These are folks that Sell books on the internet make their money off of you know, they don't teach in any meaningful places

Because their their theories are just Inane, but they're out there and he started quoting that stuff.

Like we're supposed to believe it in regards to the the secret evidences in the

New Testament that Jesus wasn't crucified and all the rest is In insanity

So be careful, I mean, I don't know who that guy is but That doesn't that's not an argument against what he said

I think you're you're maybe going after the genetic fallacy here unless you know who he is unless you can say he belongs to such -and -such a sect and that sect is completely outside of Orthodox Sunni belief, you know if someone quotes some wild -eyed liberal

Roman Catholic Against me. I'm gonna explain to them why I don't accept that Or a while any wild -eyed liberal anything.

I'm going to explain why I don't accept that I'm not just gonna simply say anybody here know who he is.

Nobody here I mean, I'd be easy to do and when I do debates in mosques, it would be really easy For me to to do that Are you kidding me?

I just looked at Twitter a new Hovind video just hit Jesus is here.

Jesus is Lord in Alf Deutsch just tweeted a new one

Wish that what wish that had a Time index on it because while I'm on the air

I can't exactly go searching through the entire thing. Send me a time index on it and Who knows maybe in the next 20 minutes or less

I can still Do it live on the air. You can watch my reaction live on the air

Just tell me where it starts where it ends and We'll see what we can do.

I would respond to that man unless I read his book and see what what is his Akita? What what does he believe in? The Topic my brothers and sister if you have forgotten is

Trinity versus unity which represents the true God and as you have heard that speech of Lincoln he did not prove at any time

That God represented himself as a triune God in the Bible. That is our book of authority

For Christians the Bible is the book of authority When you when you when you talk to the people and try to convince them of your doctrines

You will use the Bible as your book of authority I will use the Quran as my book of authority to prove things not just opinions of scholars

Scholars may make mistake. They are human being They are human beings. We are open for making mistakes

We are faulty all the time and you believe in that that's why you believe that Jesus came

To die for your sin for your mistake So we had human beings we make mistakes and now now well ill sin

Can involve the commission of a mistake, but that's not what sin is Sin is rebellion against God Sin is an act of the will

It's not merely making mistakes We have a

Significantly I think significantly different fact. I mentioned to another

Muslim apologist just yesterday in an email That we have a significantly different harm our theology

That's the Greek word for sin doctrine of sin And It really does impact how we see things it really really really does impact

How we see things and and how we interpret things It's not just a mistake he didn't die just for our mistakes the glorious truth well is that The teaching of Scripture in its fullness and in its depth is

Is that Jesus is death upon the cross atones for The both the

Positive commission of that which is prohibited by God But then there's all sorts of things that God commands that We do not do

The greatest commandment is what love the Lord your God with our heart soul mind strength Who of us has ever done that even for a day?

And so there's all these things have been left undone and so Jesus gives his life upon the cross which includes the perfection of his having fulfilled all the father's commandment for him is positive righteousness

So when when righteousness is imputed To the believer when we receive the righteousness of God in Jesus Christ by faith

It's not it doesn't just take us back to a moral neutral point where all the bad stuff we did is is is forgiven and now our quote -unquote slate is clean and Now from now on we got to keep our noses clean, and we're not going to make it no

Though the only righteousness that will avail before God see this is this is why

Christians will Just recoil at that Hadith of The man that killed 99 people the

Jewish man that could be killed 99 people in most of the versions Because when he goes to heaven the basis of his going to heaven

Destroys the relationship between God's nature as holy and his law which represents his holiness because his law is done away with his law is is denigrated

It's not fulfilled There's no sacrifice. There's no atonement There is a fundamental disjunction the

Christian believes that the only righteousness that will stand before a holy

God is that righteousness that is ours by faith which includes the fact that our

Savior he Lived the law perfectly and then gave that perfect life in my place

So his sacrificial death removes my sin his perfect life provides me with that positive righteousness that I must have to stand before God and So my all -in -all is in him if he was only part of that then

I would be trying to add things on But Jesus is my all it's it's by him that I'm in Christ Jesus Therefore if I boast

I boast in the Lord 1st Corinthians chapter 1 verses 30 and 31 so I Think it's vitally important that you understand what l we have very very different perspective there very very different perspective

I'm gonna stop there because of two things first of all That's interesting

I Was given the time stamps, but it says 0 0 50 min and 0 5 28 min, but I think that's 50 seconds and 528

I think Now here's the problem let me see copy

URL Safari Try to get it over here.

See if I can pull it up Okay, all right there it is Let's let that load a second.

Um before I before we together Embark on a a journey of discovery together live on the dividing line

Danger all Robinson danger Let me get the

There we go all right There is something else that I want I needed to address today, and I I forgot

When to do it I forgot to do it um there was a

Little blow up in the internet the internet has little blow ups there once a while, but I Don't know how long ago.

It was that rich started telling me that we were getting notes from people saying that over on the

Puritan board I was being challenged to a debate by dr.

Maurice Robinson and You know

I started seeing some tweets of people You're when are you gonna debate dr. Robinson you're ducking out la la la la la la and I Said the rich I said well first of all

I I don't read the Puritan board I don't remember last time. I was on it and Honestly for probably at least a decade

I don't know I haven't looked but the only reason I've ever looked at it was because somebody was attacking me there

It's it just doesn't seem like a very friendly place to me and so I Have very little time for that kind of stuff and I said look and Rachel tell you one primary things

I said to rich was that's not Maurice Robinson I've met Maurice Robinson. We've corresponded over the years.

It's always been extremely Friendly collegiate

And I I just really don't believe that he's over on the

Puritan board If you we correspond we have each other's emails

If he wanted to contact me he knows how to do it. I've had the same email address forever So I just like nah,

I don't believe it Well, I'll sort of came to a head a couple days ago. I guess there was a video posted and All the rest is stuff and the funny thing is

I said to rich I said, okay. Okay. Okay. I'm gonna I'm going to write to dr.

Robinson now. Why would I what is dr? Robinson's position he's the primary promoter was called the

Byzantine priority the Byzantine text theory Byzantine priority Robinson Pierpont text and I Explained it and I I bet you anything.

Dr. Robinson would at least say James tried to be fair in his representation of it in Especially I even expanded

In the updated edition my explanation of that particular text critical theory which which says that the

Byzantine text is the best representative of the original text because it it represents because it's

There's there's a full argument that you can develop. They would say that the great bulk of manuscripts

Will represent the original more likely than a minority of manuscripts do okay and Dr.

Robinson will tell you I've corresponded with him in years past. It must have been I even looked for those emails It must have been right before I went to Mac So I'd have to go digging through old archives in Mail formats.

I don't have any more which is why I didn't wasn't able to track it down But I was really trying to understand the argumentation of That that perspective and and he's working on a on a textual commentary from that perspective the problem is

Byzantine priority is not TR Dr.

Robinson believes the Texas Receptus Contains readings which must be amended in light of the textual data.

So he doesn't believe in some ecclesiastical text If there is an ecclesiastical text if there is a

Byzantine ecclesiastical text is text to Eastern Orthodox It's not the Texas Receptus And Obviously, he would probably have almost more antipathy for the

King James only position than even I do Because being in the position he's in with his

Perspective he's probably always getting splatter From the King James only us

So I had started my an email to him on I'd have to look

Friday. Okay on Friday And had

Written a few paragraphs got up to go get a protein bar or something and sat back down and Guess what?

There Was an email from Maurice Robinson writing to me before I got mine written to him.

So I finished mine up and Responded to his and we've gone back and forth run round number three

Very friendly. He had not challenged me to anything He had told someone that If I wanted to have a face -to -face dialogue with him

That that might be helpful but that The reality is he's extremely busy.

I'm extremely busy. I haven't told him I can't even imagine Any any opportunity

I would have before over a year from now With Hong Kong and South Africa and London and what we're gonna announce on Thursday on the dividing line and and then next year

We're gonna do something that's going to be tied together With my speaking.

I love I love I love what this sounds like at the German Shepherds conference The German Shepherds conference, which is the

Shepherds conference in Germany. It sounds like a howling good time It's a howling good time and they always have it, you know where they have it.

It's held in Wittenberg So it's gonna be May of 2017. So Perfect, you know

So I've got Tons on my plate. It would be useful and dr

Robinson does not want to come on the program and I said look I do a good job with interviews and We've had

Dan Wallace on a number of times we can make it interesting, but that's just not his thing. So RC sprawl on Yeah, well, you know, yeah, so Anyway So we're going back and forth just mainly discussing other stuff but Any of you out there who are trying to stoke the fires or get a storm going or something?

Just stop it Okay It's not a debate challenge A discussion of Textual critical theory would be useful

He has suggested possibly doing something down at in Greensboro We'll see.

I would love to see something work out It's not the first thing on my plate but It would be done in a and I'm and one thing is for certain that TR only people would not appreciate it

Because we'd be ganging up on them We would be talking about the places where the TR needs to be amended and where it stands against both his understanding the text as well as mine, maybe for different reasons, so you'd have a

Double shot going on there. So let's keep that in mind So just relax people just relax

That wasn't going on. All right. So what we're gonna do here is

I have not seen this Jesus is tear.

Jesus is tear Who must be one of our German listeners

From Deutschland. Yeah I was

I was I was doing I was doing suffer fest today and Sometimes I have a little funny things on the screen

I had never seen in this video before that they put up on the screen how to say I love pain in German each leave a schmerzen and so I was screaming as I was riding along each leave a schmerzen and It just remind me of that one particular

YouTube video about How German sounds in comparison

It's fun anyway So I have not seen this evidently this was just posted

Kenthoven let's um It's supposed to be at 50 seconds. And once again at 5 minutes and 28,

I'm not sure what happens in between Riches riches ducking in the other room, but this is live man.

This is as live as it gets Let's go Turning Gail Ripplinger and James White is fraught with mistakes and errors.

I ask you did you listen to the radio show itself? I think I might have answered that one. If so, I'm off by one or two here, huh?

Yes, I asked listen to it now. Oh good He listened

Listen to the link that I sent in my first email. That's that's that's that's a major step forward.

Let's well That major step forward might be a major step backwards depending on what comes in the next few words

I have to still disagree. Gail has a long response coming out to that. I think this

Thursday um a long response is something that took place in November of 1993

Means it's coming out 22 years plus Now be 23 this coming

November so 22 plus years Now you're getting around to respond to it you you put an entire book out called blind guides and and and just now you're writing a

Response nearly a quarter of a century Later, okay. Well, I'm certainly looking forward to it.

I'm Okay, not really, but uh, it will be Entertaining At the very least let those two fight it out,

I just I would like to know where is God's Word This is the

Marco Rubio move Sorry to all you Marco Rubio fans, but you've got to admit you've got to admit

That in that debate it almost seemed Like there was a disc error

It's just But Barack Obama is not at that's a point. Listen, listen, listen, and that's what you get here

Here you have a guy who's called me a liar He's called me a liar and he gets called on it and What's his only response?

Well, where is God's Word? I just want over God's Word I just that's all I want to know is where God's Word is that I just I just and it's the old

King James only I need it in an English translation and don't don't confuse me with all the stuff about which

King James I actually use or I don't want to know anything about the history of it. I don't know.

I don't care but Where's the Bible Great okay, so Five minutes 28 seconds.

Huh? All right, dude, dude, dude, dude, dude. Let's go here and boom

All right, and it's not that I don't I'm not willing to look at other stuff. I just Listen, that's not true.

And it's not gonna waste time on it. Okay seeker writes in Peter Says I've listened to James White for a while since he refuted

Bill Nye's errors From February. I don't agree with him on everything, but he isn't a fringe wacko.

I don't ever say he's a fringe wacko I don't think I did I've never met the guy See The contention between you and him troubles many people including myself

We all have more important dragons to fight But reconciliation is important to fight for okay. All he has to do is agree with me and we can be reconciled

It's real simple. It's not complicated. I'd love reconciliation with everybody just agree with me and it's fights over God did preserve his words in the

King James Bible for the English people. Where was it before 1611? I don't know Where was the

Ten Commandments before Moses got him from God on Mount Sinai? Where was the Bible in French when

God where was the Ten Commandments in French when God handed up to Moses in Hebrew? The the people on the treadmills are going did did my did my recording cut out?

What what happened? What do you say? Where was the Ten Commandments in French there was no

French language That's like asking That's like that's like someone who comes along and says

I believe the inspired Bible is in Klingon And makes as much sense

I mean Wow Dr.

Hovind does not understand How he got the Bible process of translation process of transmission

Does not have it does not even have the beginning of an understanding of it And what's frightening is doesn't seem to be concerned about that And that's why people are getting so upset about this because if they've benefited from other things

He's saying now they're staying back and going. How can I trust what he said on other things? if I can see here this abject unwillingness to learn to be fair You want reconciliation then say

I blew it. I blew it. I should not have called the man a liar I had no basis for doing so doing

I've now listened to the entire program. It's painfully obvious that Not only did it take place.

He wasn't just calling in he was in studio, and I'd like to hear Kent Hovind explain

Gale Riplinger's Acrostic Algebra, I'd like to hear that so I'll tell you what it's obvious a bunch of you folks are writing in Keep writing in Demand he explained his support of a woman who claims

GA Ripley er God and Riplinger She knows what God calls the the

New American Standard Bible and heat for some reason He doesn't call the NASB. He calls it the NAB V How does she know that and how was she given?

Acrostic algebra did an angel give it to her. Was it a trance? Maybe she could explain this modern revelation

Do we need to do we need to make room for it after the last chapter of the book of Revelation is it divine revelation?

I'd like to know so keep asking him keep writing and Hold his feet to the fire and say you said

James White lied You've been proven wrong. Will you show integrity to admit you were wrong now?

I don't know if there's anything more here There weren't any God doesn't necessarily have to preserve them in every language

But they're preserved someplace on earth at all times, and I think we've got them Okay, or people are sitting waiting for God to reveal his word like for 400 years

They were waiting till John the Baptist came on the scene. So that's that's an oh get the heater on Hope that noise doesn't bother you.

Let's see More important dragons to fight reconciliation is important. Good. I agree. Everybody agree with me.

We can all be reconciled very simple Not a problem easy easy No one will force anyone to stop using

King James Version well Thank you, I'm glad okay

Now I would agree with that not gonna stop me it's just this only ism well

Peter where is God's Word? And that's that's all you're gonna that's that's the only depth you're gonna get

That's that's that's all there is I To bold -faced with a smile on his face if everybody agrees with me

We don't have a problem. Yeah, Travis Barry just memed it Just agree with me just agree with and we'll be oh, oh, yeah, the picture is me

Just agree with Ken Hovind and we'll be reconciled. Oh my word

Well folks you saw it here first Oh Okay folks on the dividing line on Thursday a

Very important guest will join me to make a very important Announcement, so you'll want to be listening and we'll want to make sure

Well, we want to try to make sure that it's live -stream. I was gonna say I would like to I would like to thank

YouTube for working today for working. Yes Especially for working for the entire show.

Yes. That's very nice It's been a while. It'd been a while. Maybe maybe it could do that again sometime

Yes, like that like Thursday. That'd be good Thursday would be good. Well, there you go folks wide -ranging program went

Six minutes past a jumbo. I'm not sure what that makes it. But anyway, we will be back with you

Willing if I survive the tour of several Andrea on Thursday right here.