Today on the Dividing Line / Scott Hahn Book Reviews

desert metropolis of phoenix arizona is the dividing line the apostle peter commanded christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence our host is doctor james white director of alpha omega ministries and an elder at the phoenix reformed baptist church this is a live program and we invite your participation if you'd like to talk with doctor white call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll free across the united states it's 1 -877 -753 -3341 and now with today's topic here is james white thank you and welcome to the dividing line on a tuesday morning a little toasty one here in phoenix but uh...

hey you know it's uh... can you believe we're already this far into august oh my goodness what has happened to two thousand and six already a hundred degrees outside and it was sixty five degree dew point this morning i was i was uh...

struggling up the mountain and i was going to have a man what happened those nice uh... nineties or something it uh...

disappeared pretty quickly but hey what can i say uh... the cooler weather is around the corner i just keep that in mind unfortunately that means that the next summer is i think it would have to get to get older that next one this is right behind it it's uh...

it's not much you can do about it so anyway uh... lots to do today on uh...

the dividing line uh... some of you have uh... have noted i'm sure a little series i i i put up there fairly quickly responding to a fellow over on the envoy magazine uh...

web board i provided a three -part response to a a uh...

article that uh... little post that he put up i'm sure took him a whole lot less time to write it and it did for me to respond to it but uh...

i just want to provide an example of of how you can give a response of course he has uh...

his uh... nick is jerry jett he has not really responded to what i've said he's uh...

uh... unfortunately the response that uh... the only responses i've seen on the envoy uh... magazine web board have been someone along the lines of you're a servant of satan who would want to talk to you anyway uh...

you know uh... that's uh... you can't force anybody to deal with what you're saying and to listen to what you're saying and uh...

recognize the circularity of their own arguments so you do the best you can and you put it out there and you hope other folks hear that learn how to how to give a response themselves and there are times when uh...

the spirit blesses and a person actually hears and then there are those times when you uh...

you encounter that kind of response and you just go well you know you keep doing what you need to do i was uh...

asked by someone and we're gonna get back to the uh... to martin yoni we get back to uh...

uh... spong and uh... your phone calls and so on so forth but uh... i was sent a link and i've sent these links all the time and i i'm pretty certain i've discussed elements of all of this on the dividing line in the many many many years that have passed and there is a fellow out there by the name of malcolm l lavender doctor lavender who uh...

uh... shortly after my book potters freedom came out started putting together a book an internet book something uh...

in response to it and whenever anybody googles maybe the potters freedom or my name or something i'll get people have you ever heard of malcolm lavender he looks really smart as because he utilizes lots of uh...

electrical sources and uh... he can uh... he can discuss greeky makes a lot of stakes about it but he can discuss it and and throw it out there so i'm i'm pretty certain that uh...

i have at one point or another uh... put the various things up on the on the blog in regards to uh...

malcolm lavender and uh... i know that uh... one of our volunteers has written emails to folks in response to things that malcolm lavender has said and and we've documented stuff and there may be even article the reforms theology section i'm i'm not really certain i didn't look anyway i was sent to a u r l and i uh...

i i printed it out and just you know i did not go into a whole lot of depth here but uh...

when uh... i have noticed that even amongst those who who can exercise discernment in broad theological categories when when that there is still a uh...

uh... a need on my part to encourage non -specialist who's a non -specialist someone who maybe hasn't had the opportunity of of taking the biblical languages or certainly teaching the biblical languages things like that there there is on the the part of most people a uh...

and some of its good some of its bad but there is a need to emphasize a phrase i've used many times and that is to demythologize scholarship uh...

we have in in western society the tendency that once you hear doctor and uh...

so on so forth that well automatically that that person just just must be given the right to say whatever they want to say and for some reason are critical thinking capacity we sort of turn it off because well you know if he says this and it must be true and this must fall from that and the fact of the matter is while you may not be able to follow the the technical argumentation uh...

about uh... well for example acts thirteen forty that's what this one's about i was sent a u r l his comments in act thirteen forty called drones that's the course of error from the potter's freedom to love the world nothing like you know stealing somebody else's title and then just you know trying to play with it uh...

and i uh... we've we've talked about acts thirteen forty eight many times before we have uh...

discussed dave hunts many wild attempts to get around acts thirteen forty eight we've we've gone through the text and and all these things i understand that uh...

you know in act thirteen forty we have a paraphrastic instruction and there's different ways the paraphrastic instructions can be understood and you've got the issue for example of of uh...

putting together uh... tata men only with a particular form of of i mean and this comes out of the particular meaning the two perfect tense meaning of the paraphrastic normally once you get that point most folks especially time a grammar and syntax just turn off you know the mind turns off and i'll tune back in once he starts speaking my language yet uh...

the the problem is that uh... when when you have that kind of material all right you might not be able to evaluate what a person saying about a a a perfect passive participle or about a paraphrastic instruction or or whatever but even even when scholars are writing they eventually have to come down out of the clouds and make a conclusion okay they they they need to tell you uh...

what's they're saying and what this particular construction actually means that they need to provide a basis for it and so even in that context you can read something like this and go okay now here is the assertion he's making this assertion that this uh...

this has nothing to do with the decree of god are now how does he get their does does he provide me can eat can you at least demonstrate he can communicate with me and give me an understanding of why he's saying what he's saying and that's really where so much of this literature completely falls apart uh...

because you can you can if you've especially if you do know languages you can read along and go okay well that's true but sort of irrelevant and okay that's all right but that that that and then all of a sudden here comes this massive conclusion in the middle of all this and you know i know reading it there's been no basis laid for that there's been no foundation laid for that whatsoever and so uh...

it we we need to be you know i need to encourage folks regularly to demythologize scholarship just because someone put some you know degrees behind their name i went to princeton well you know what there ain't a whole lot of good theology princeton these days you know it's that's actually a a strike against you from an orthodox perspective anymore just because someone says well i've done this i don't think uh...

okay that the greatest proof of scholarship is that you can take what you've learned and can actually communicates other people if you can't do that i'm really you know i i suppose there's still some areas where people who can communicate well can be great scholars as long as they can communicate to other people but you know there's not that big a role i think for those folks and and i really think within the christian church especially within the leadership of the christian church if you can't edify the people of god with it if you can't explain what in the world you're talking about that might indicate there's a bit of a problem so anyway looking at uh...

the act thirteen forty i just wanted to read some of these sections i know it's not uh... all that easy to follow a discussion like this when i'm reading from something but i'll i'll do my best try to communicate to you we already have one uh...

one uh... line uh... taken up and we'll we'll take your calls at eight seven seven seven five three three three four one but just to give you a sense of the the shape of anti -reformed literature that's out there on on the web the title is act thirteen forty eight jerome sets the course of error jerome jerome sets the course of error and the uh...

he uh... quote some rch lenski who of course if you uh... are familiar with him a lutheran writer opposed to reformed theology and in the sense of calvinistic theology obviously would not want to use that term reform theology in that way uh...

there's an article where i interact with his i think grossly a contextual way around romans chapter nine but uh...

he makes a reference to jerome and the his uh... his rendering of act thirteen forty eight and uh...

then lavender makes this comment it is enlightening to learn the jerome gave ground to set the church on the awful predestinarian course with the latin vulgate also that he was roman catholic and advocated predestination and the sinning christian discussed below and immediately ago what well back up the truck here uh...

he would have even understood the term roman catholic it's an oxymoron of itself but uh...

aside from from all of that this is not exactly i mean augustine's name is considerably more connected with the concept of of predestination but the whole idea that translating one phrase in one place in the vulgate could have that massive an impact is just silly i mean let's just be perfectly honest it's it's it's silly uh...

to think that that he uh... gave ground to set the church on the awful predestinarian course uh...

as if rome itself is is uh... you know emphasizes predestination election uh...

i can tell you how many roman catholics have had is that that's why god is i'd never worship him and so it to do you read this you go what is he is he trying to do sort of the uh...

is he trying to do this or so the the poison the well thing well yeah he is many many times poisoning the well uh...

later on he uh... he quotes from b dag and he says the meanings of this lexicon cannot be reasonably assigned to a predestinarian sense and that's a simply untrue he again lavender either does not understand or is unwilling to understand or actively represent reform theology will see a number of red herring straw man uh...

bold statements that can't be made to fit uh... because they reject uh...

because lavender rejects and and those who write like him reject reform theology's own definitions so if god uh...

for example a class is someone among uh... if he ordains if he sets them up well the idea of ordaining ends and means is for his rejects that it just can't possibly be in self he just rejects it and and uh...

makes many statements on the line uh... page uh... to was really interesting because here my name came up and uh...

he's he's talking about the new american standard bible updated edition and the rendering of the taxes and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believe and then we read this and why would this bible not be suitable for the five -point calvinist doctor james are white a five -point calvinist who does not believe that jesus died for all adams fallen race is a critical consultant for the lockman foundation on the new american standard bible update many gives a reference to it so i guess that's saying that i was responsible for this and again i just i just it's hard not to laugh at some of the stuff really really is because because this hasn't changed since the nineteen seventy seven addition in nineteen seventy seven i was an eighth grader and eight so you know in eighth grade i was already in there you know twisting and turning the translation of the book i don't know i i just i have to uh...

uh... that uh... it uh...

he can and that he was on the the with the geneva by one fifty nine nine am i to be blamed for that as well it's on the list it's hard not to laugh at these things you can tell exactly where he's coming from from this paragraph and so the tradition after the manner of jerome continues thus the ambassadors of damnation have poisoned the well with their teaching of predestination and reprobation both irresistibly coming upon the human race like the nightfall we don't we should have some music behind that what you're reading something like that uh...

we need to get that stuff from uh... what was it the uh... wizard of oz you know the wicked witch of the west you know i don't honestly remember that i'm sorry i was much too young back then i just told you i was uh...

you know only in eighth grade in nineteen seventy eight uh... limit not now i wasn't really really really no no i i was wrong that i need to correct this because i'm sure malcolm lavender would uh...

would probably document this uh... not i started high school in the fall of seventy seven because i graduated eighty one so and i would uh...

that makes sense okay so actually i graduated eighth grade and uh... was not freshman at that time so need to get that one year in there or i will be accused of being a desperate liar by someone uh...

anyway he uh... he then uh... quotes me and he at least admits that the vast majority of translations render it this way but he just blames jerome for all of that i guess jerome is the one behind all this and uh...

he quotes from me and uh... he quotes uh... he actually said i got something right and so that's so rare that i like to read it because you know most the time i couldn't get anything right if i tried white goes on to note that uh...

a son to talk minnow is a paraphrase to construction forming a blue pit blue perfect or complete action pastime which is correct at our studio audience uh...

which we have to pay big bucks for uh... to have a studio audience once in a while uh...

yeah i got something right now he's not really gonna end up i think thinking about what that means as far as act thirteen goes but that's what that's okay then he has a heart and tire page where basically was trying to argue even though he's going to come down to uh...

its final conclusion is gonna he's gonna say he does take this uh... uh...

to talk mentally as a passive in act thirteen forty eight but he spends an entire page trying to argue it could be a middle uh...

and then he says the weather is middle or passive with respect to the divine decree is of no essence a translation either way has nothing whatsoever to do with a decision predetermined by god from eternity so the whole thing he's got to try to do whatever happened when paul preach the gospel in acts thirteen forty eight and and he says we are turning the gentiles we are proclaiming god's mercy the gentiles what non -reform folks have got to emphasize is that when those gentiles rejoiced when those gentiles believed that that had nothing to do with god all of man and i like to sort of bring that out so you can really think about what these people are really saying because the only other way to read acts thirteen forty eight is to be a pelagian it's to be a pelagian as many as were inclined they were better they were more spiritual they had they had chosen for themselves whatever it is they're better than the people who didn't believe and you really start seeing the man centeredness the pelagian the anti -grace anti -god attitude that really lurks behind this we've got to have free will it's got to be me not god well anyway that's behind all these things i continue on when he when he exegetes acts thirteen forty eight he goes back everybody else goes back to verse forty six since you rejected and you judge yourselves not worthy of eternal life behold we turn to the gentiles see they judged themselves to be unworthy of eternal life and so that means that when the gentiles believed that they had done that for themselves and see really the fundamental question you have to ask yourself about acts thirteen forty eight is what you believe about man if you are a pelagian if you believe that man has the ability in and of himself to do good and that you you'd haven't read jeremiah in a long long time long time and uh...

you you don't like romans three and that's about somebody else and and that stuff in first corinthians two about the natural man not receiving the things the spirit of god that really bums you out and and you're just basically a latent humanist then you're gonna look at acts thirteen you go well you know i think man has the ability to incline himself to eternal life and since it's a blue perfect intense that these people had already by their they're good and righteous attitude prepared themselves to believe for eternal life and you're gonna be a nice good humanistic uh...

something religious person but you have to ask yourself a question is that what luke believe is that what paul believed about the nature of man that man inclines himself to believe that man at the man outside of grace could ever do anything but be the enemy of god uh...

that's the question you have to ask yourself so he says accordingly god did not reprobate them they reject they judge themselves unworthy of eternal life so the eternal decree had nothing to do with the outcome here neither the circumstances verse forty eight contingent upon the eternal decree the decree is the calvinist tells it exist in concept but not in fact now that's not really attached very well to what's come before he doesn't demonstrate that well because the jews judge themselves to be unworthy of eternal life uh...

that means the gentiles judge themselves to be worthy of eternal life doesn't make that connection he doesn't recognize that since the bent of man is always towards sin and is always is an enemy of god that it makes perfect sense that they would judge themselves to be unworthy of eternal life and they would reject the message the amazing part is that those who are appointed to eternal life believed you see it's it's very similar to when people get all hung up with uh...

with uh... he saw i hated but jacob i love jacob i love you so i hate it all of that of the public for you saw the amazing statement there is jacob i loved not he saw i hated if you just understood the sovereignty of god the the uh...

the uh... the holiness of god that the reprehensible nature of man's policy all that would make perfect sense but you know where we are dealing fundamentally when we deal with with arminian ism and this is he is much more virtual arminian ordeal arminian ism we are dealing with a humanistic form of christianity and they don't work well together they really really don't then i'm almost done here that will get to our phone calls and uh...

and uh... jump in the stuff here uh... then he he talks about the the things the gentiles did the gentiles hearing these things were rejoicing glorifying the word lord and as many as believed as may have been appointed he says hat as had been inclined doesn't really provide a good strong basis that but had had been inclined to eternal life believe he says rejoicing glorifying believe note that the verbs rejoicing glorifying believe are all in the active voice the subjects are acting well dot uh...

that's that's called a complete irrelevancy no one would say otherwise this cannot be brought into harmony with the eternal decree and its irresistibility why and this shows just a complete ignorance on lavender's part of the function of the decree and it it seems to mean that he assumes that if there is a divine decree then there can be no secondary causes and there can be no secondary reactions to the decree i mean it's again just this surface level type of stuff but these gentiles are in harmony with god rejoicing not rejecting and in this atmosphere of god's presence they believed that they were inclined that eternal life with respect to which the jews judge themselves unworthy uh...

there you have your your humanistic interpretation of salvation so we can have a spirit in there and i don't i can't have a different eternal decree no i'm not sure why we're glorifying god for what they for what the gentiles freely in of themselves did outside of his decree why don't we glorify them since they did better than the jews right they were more righteous yeah well there you go the calvinists handle this statement to mean that because of an appointment to eternal life beforehand these persons believed but as we have shown one believes in order to be saved and not because he is saved now where do you know where we heard that mess before where we heard that in precise use of language assuming that saved means regenerate regenerate means save no no does no ability to discern between them uh...

the update on to you got it and so they believe as many as had been inclined that that's the absolute decree is not the result of eternal life but believing results in and having eternal life so believing not the eternal decree results in eternal life talk about eight complete red red uh...

red herring and straw man uh... the eternal decree decree results in believing which results in eternal life but see for him you cannot have the idea of ordaining the ends and the means just can't happen every reformed work you could possibly uh...

look at will discuss that but no they won't allow us to uh... in any way shape or form to find our own our own uh...

viewpoint there uh... real quickly this is the last page uh... he says it would be interesting uh...

to inquire what influence these renderings in a vulgate version had on the minds of some like agustin and his followers in the western church in treating the great questions of free will election reprieve reprobation final perseverance well given that the western church within uh...

four hundred years would be uh...

beating in prison got struck for holding agustin's viewpoint on this and the vast majority of those coming afterwards would have to struggle to get around agustin's influence and uh...

uh... given the nature of the reformation the differences between uh... reform theology roma catholic theology again one rendering one place it's not like this is the key text i mean if we go to romans nine ephesians one some like that okay maybe but one passing tax that i hardly i really think so gerome's contribution to apostasy then was the deception that ensnared those who trusted in the latin scriptures annex thirteen forty eight and to oppose those who taught righteousness of life in the now in these matters calvinist of followed gerome a roman catholic not the scriptures and again the uh...

anachronism of that terminology being used that period time that interestingly enough just so you know how far off the lavender is in house far outside of orthodoxy is calvinism is a major apostate theological system teaching the world that christ not die for all men the rest of the points of calvinism are based on the faults atonement theory known as penal satisfaction so he does not even believe in in the idea that christ's uh...

atonement is a penal atonement for sin uh... which of course again if that leads you to the concept of uh...

substitutionary atonement is not something that our minions of believe in self just uh...

mention that as uh... as we pass by just as another example of just how far off these folks could actually be and uh...

let's go ahead and they get to uh... our patient uh... caller bill before we uh... take a break i don't i don't okay and how's it going great it's uh...

are to be able to talk to you finally have to listen to you all these years yes sir what i do for you uh...

actually i was just i was actually calling in one week uh... still like to see on puritan board occasionally i'm the one that emailed you about two weeks ago that's the i'm student dallas seminary that uh...

of dan waltz's uh... uh... anyway and uh... so it we don't we would like to hear some but also unit made a comment i listened a couple years ago uh...

to an old at that point parted up five or six years now uh... they interviewed theodore leaders on uh...

larry spartan you know i believe it was uh... interviewed him and i recall you making a comment and i've heard this other places uh...

that leaders did not hold to an air and see it all yeah and that actually now you know that leaders is is dead uh...

he was in a car accident i believe last year uh... i responded uh...

point by point to the uh... uh... southwest radio broadcast programs on the dividing line i know this was quite some time ago because that was we are still in kp excuse so i uh...

i'd imagine it was early uh... two thousand thousand one summer and i don't remember late nineties i don't recall now but i i responded to each one and so there would be discussion of all of that point by point in uh...

in the archives but yeah leaders is thesis was that warfield in essence uh...

popularized the concept of an errancy and that it is a it is a modernistic false concept that uh...

that the actual concept needs to be that the that the uh... lack of air in scripture is rooted in in the uh...

ecclesiastical manuscript tradition and not in any theoretical original that we don't have any longer uh...

that was his his perspective and if you want to see him defining in defending that in a somewhat disagreeable fashion the very lengthy article on our website which he asked me to remove uh...

a number of years ago where he initially engages greg bonson on the subject and then i engaged him as well is still on our are on our website i've delivered the link is but should be in the general apologetics or maybe the king james only is in section one of those two uh...

you'll see in a very lengthy discussion uh... i don't know how many pages it is but it prints out to a lot of them and uh...

you'll that starts off with the discussion of his view of the subject of an errancy and and you will see that he he basically really uh...

attacks the concept of uh... uh...

even using the term in any way so uh... i would uh... i would go to that for his own his own words documenting that alright what i was trying to get to get clarification on a little bit but my first uh...

first time i'd actually heard of elitist was uh... our church a number of years ago as music director mississippi played the uh...

pensacola christian college theories that he was on and and had some well not so it constructed things to think about yourself all i believe me i know but but i was one of his favorite art target not not overly accurately i mean he he he actually made the made the amazing statement that the king james only controversy is nothing but a point -by -point response to go rippling and and anyone anyone who's who's read the book either one of the books knows that's just a bald -faced lie and you know so you know when you make when you can make that kind of a statement uh...

you destroy your own credibility you you really do so anyway yes so that he was his association with pensacola was really weird though if you knew his own theology i was always of the opinion that they did not know his theology and they did not really fully understand where he was coming from because his view of the ecclesiastical text was in no way shape or form consistent with uh...

pensacola's perspectives in regards to king james so i i thought i'd i'd personally found it really odd and uh...

you know if if i was interested in such things would have pursued a long time ago trying to figure out exactly how that happened but go ahead well did you are they actually really really said it wasn't quite as big because there was one that pcc release that bob jones university actually responded to the video tapes yes uh...

what will they actually released two more couple of years after that they didn't quite get the uh...

the hullabaloo about it but on the original one leaders had stated and i think i'm quoting but i don't have it in front of me that you what did you mister white were uh...

ignorant uh... something about bart airman's book the orthodox corruption of scripture because it wasn't in your bibliography or something right and i found it amusing i got the later video series and they actually when trying to explain their position without leaders there uh...

took a moment to disavow what we don't believe it i i i honestly only looked at at a at a small portion what he had to say especially due to the fact that uh...

he didn't seem to get the uh... the time frames uh... quite right as to what sources would be available when i was writing my book in and things like that but uh...

yet he uh... when i first wrote the book uh...

and uh... had contact with leaders he was very nice to me and was supported because he opposed king james only as a uh...

you gotta stand his his that the perspective the please the optical text is not king james only as a uh...

it it speaks to a in a clear the optical tech specifically a byzantine textual platform but it it's uh...

he himself wrote a little book at it not a very easy read it was very poorly put together fell apart after one reading and i had it but he wrote a little book and and he took on uh...

various the king james only folks cuz what people don't realize that he tried to get in with the a weight he tried to get into the into the berg on the dean berg on society and when they found out this theology was outside of their parameters there is a there's a split between them and uh...

that that impacted direction that that he went and so he he went all over the place he was uh...

uh... uh... difficult fella to you know the sort of nailed down and i always found if you read that article you do not article referring to on the website yes as a matter of fact i've downloaded i i've had it for a number of years it's huge and his comments about baptists in general uh...

he was extremely embarrassed by them for the reasons he asked me to take it down was because he was now getting all the speaking engagements in those contexts uh...

so it was pretty embarrassing to have one out there where he's demonstrating his real feelings that that baptist just don't really have any meaningful ecclesiology in any any meaningful biblical basis for this what they say about this that you know thing it was very dismissive and things like that so uh...

it it was he was an interesting fella and uh... very irascible i i i did you know my best to respond without getting overly personal about things but uh...

uh... obviously he didn't uh... have a qualms about being personal right up right from the beginning but uh...

uh... anyway uh... that's uh... that's the background of that and i don't understand why he'd be a pensacola either i'd never figured that out maybe you can find out someday maybe there was somebody he knew who knew somebody else i don't know i it always seemed a very odd combination to me it's it's very hard i've tried to do my own investigating on that and they're real tight -lipped down there about things anyway yeah at pc fact they weren't even always king james only right in my understanding what i've been able to piece together that whole thing is that uh...

it had something to do with jack hiles or something uh... had somebody pulled out of there because supposedly somebody corrected the king james or something at the school something along those lines and they originally endorsed uh...

gail ripplinger yes i know yeah well in fact gail's uh... if my understanding is correct gail's uh...

honorary doctorate uh... came from uh... hiles' school uh... and i believe that that's the same school that gave john r.

rice's horse a phd and uh... i'm absolutely serious about that i am not making that up uh...

they they gave an honorary phd to john r. rice's horse and uh... they gave one to uh... to gail ripplinger too so uh...

what can you what can you say about things like that the the king james only movement creates a very very odd bedfellows and uh...

of course from my perspective the issue today is uh... not so much king james only movement which is which has been i think severely damaged since the appearance of my book and some others uh...

d a carsons and and uh... just the continuing ongoing education of people in regards to simple factual matters but i see this kind of idea coming into uh...

more more what i would call uh... intellectual circles and not because it has anything new to to offer but just because the whole field of textual critical studies is is not well known to people and that that concerns me a lot because the bar airmen's that are out there and uh...

the materials that they're producing uh... that's that's a that's a grave danger i've been trying to to sound that alarm for a long long time uh...

we see we see islamic apologists utilizing that kind of material and and the king james only isn't is uh...

certainly uh... something that's uh... uh... just destroys any type of apologetic defense of of of the faith it just can't stand up to any kind of uh...

critique it's uh... quite circular and and very damaging to the cause so anyway all right sir all right uh...

yes sir one of the point but i'll go i'd like to go to work at all of it but uh...

if you could and working as a it's going to have a job yet i found out what to say with with uh...

leaders in the past i found it interesting uh... on pensacola and also about this part of you know show that he said that uh...

that he he declared bart airmen to be the leading authority on textual criticism and i thought it was kind of ironic that the people that use the theological a priori argumentation as leaders does would declare a man whose theology is agnostic you know to be the leading authority on text criticism yeah it it doesn't seem to follow uh...

you know unless he was saying see we've given up the field to the uh... to the to the critics but i i don't think that that is what he was saying uh...

i i don't know what his knowledge of uh... airmen was or what is contact with them and was raising along those lines but it does seem awful strange the man who would decry the secularization of the study of the text of scripture would then uh...

point to bart airmen as the uh... as the leader in that field who himself is not even a christian he's a he's a happy agnostic to describe himself in that way today so that that is rather fascinating i think that they give your call thank you are the god bless but i have a good day at work but i let's continue on and talk with uh...

bill high bill how you doing but that's what has gone that's going on right i had a question for you about the uh...

rule and the different ways that different people i guess different denominations or whatever sometimes define it uh...

sometimes they don't even define it is just kind of thrown out there almost jargon i've been looking at some of your uh...

you know you're apologetic stuff the last couple days interacting with uh... some of the the catholic apologists are i guess three level as you put it envoy board um...

it seems that you know a lot of the contention between protestant catholic is over what the rule of faith is you know the catholic saying that it's essentially the magisterium of their church protestant saying that the scriptures themselves are the rule of faith i've read uh...

matheson's book more recently the shape of soul scriptura he does a lot of interaction with the rule of faith and he seems to define it as being rather than saying that it is the bible emphasizes that it is kind of the teaching and tradition of the church that is coincident with the bible but functions as kind of a context like a hermeneutical guideline for interpreting it and that that rule of faith is what separated the true and authentic interpretation of the early church from the heretics people say that the bible is the rule of faith and i guess specifically when you say that because i've seen it in some of your writings what do you specifically mean by that given that the bible does have to be interpreted by somebody in light of something in order to drive the uh...

the principles from it yeah well that's why i disagree with uh... with that uh...

presentation and i i disagree with it in my book scripture alone i i pointed out that i i disagree with the idea of a uh...

external rule of faith that even if it is just a very basic statements of the fact is only one true god creator of heaven and earth and things like that that is that statement of tradition which you'll find in iran a s you'll find it in in the earliest sources where the term paradosis and tradition is even used of any type of confessional statement that statement itself is sub -biblical that statement was not derived from some external authority was not derived from some uh...

uh... preaching that's outside of the scriptures themselves i mean the the very idea there's only one god creator of heaven and earth is probably the first and most basic element of biblical revelation and so i i disagree with the idea that there has to be some external revelation that gives the context to the biblical revelation uh...

god can speak because god can speak god can speak because he created us with the ability to understand spoken language and we we anything that we possess in the ability to understand communication has to has to be found in god in in ever greater measure than that which is represented the creature and so if scripture is they are new stocks if it is what's it describes itself as being is the very speaking of god then the idea that there somehow has to be an external uh...

uh... standard by which the beginnings of interpretation are to are to take place would demand there has to be something outside of god's own breath god's own speaking they can define what he himself is saying and i i'd just reject that i don't see any reason in your nasa's use i don't see any reason in uh...

in any of the early writers use of that term tradition to define those those words that is there's one creator of heaven and earth and uh...

and so on so forth any reason to see it that somehow does not derive from the biblical revelation itself and so that's why i don't hold to that perspective uh...

as laid out in uh... matheson's book at that point and i i'd have mentioned that to him and i and there is a section in my book scripture alone right his reference to that and i give the response by quoting from your nasa others and saying i i see no reason to see this as some sort of a uh...

rule of faith outside of scripture uh... i would uh... would agree myself with uh...

uh... i like a gregory of nisa's statement when he says we make the holy scriptures the canon rule of every dogma we have necessity look upon that receive alone that which may be made conformable to the intention of those writings and so uh...

that that seems to me to be a consistent with uh... my understanding that the the issue of authority in the definition of dogma has to have a a divine foundation and the only the only thing that the church possesses today that is they are no stars is god's written word you can talk about all sorts of oral traditions all you want anyone who's even glanced at these copies uh...

is congress book uh... tradition and traditions from a roman catholic perspective uh...

or or taking the time to to consider the myriad of different opinions concerning the nature of tradition or traditions and how to define everything else anyone who's looked at that knows that you could never come up with with universal agreement uh...

maybe even i guess you could have maybe under boniface we had a big enough army uh... but that's not kind of agreement that really has any type of epistemological certainty just because you got a bigger sword uh...

on on as to what this tradition what the nature of it and the origin of it and the the genesis of it actually could be and so it's it's uh...

to me it's uh... uh... very easy i think and i i and i realize a lot of process today are doing this for various it's under reasons very easy to say well you know i as it sounds good i'll uh...

i'll go ahead and talk about this tradition in the church well now you're in the exact same spot rome has been spinning in for a very very very long time and that is uh...

okay what's the origin can you demonstrate it's its connection to the apostles of what's the nature of it is it inspired if it's inspired then why do you have the promises of god in regards to the inspiration of scripture in the preservation of that but you don't have the same process of preservation taking taking place here and if you're gonna have a different tradition in rome has developed over the centuries can tradition develop what's the nature of tradition uh...

are you gonna grab hold of eastern orthodoxy's tradition you're gonna run down to the coptics what what do you do i mean you're you're really not solving anything there at all and and really as far as i can tell what it eventually leads to is nothing more than what i illustrated the end of my debate with mitchell pack when san diego in nineteen ninety nine and so was returned and that is in my my final statement i i brought this big huge still got it in fact in the other room big silver bookcase not bookcase you know a case you put books in and can carry it i brought up the podium and i hope i've opened up and i started writing out these massive books about the code of canon law and i brought out the documents of vatican two in the commentary on the documents about it too and i brought out the documents and and and and the kansas decrees the council of trance and the the uh...

the catechism based on the kansas decrees the council of trance and and i just put up this this stack that must have been at least three feet tall of all of this stuff that rome has put out and i said now in essence what we're being told is that because one sides got this you've got a better handle on what paul meant when he said therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with god for lord jesus christ but in reality all this says muddles those plain words meant in the context of which they were first spoken and written and i don't see where the stopping point is once you step out of that which is the honest us what you step out of that which god has promised to give the church and by his spirit continue leads every generation of the church to be obedient to once you step out of there i don't see where the consistent stopping places until you've got your own pile that big and the catholic church isn't the only one that i mean there are a lot of uh...

churches that have come across even those who claim no creeper price to have as much if not more tradition than the catholic church while all the while claiming not to have any well yeah i i i think that's almost as if it's sort of a sham and i and i kind of wonder sometimes if they're even aware of what it is they're saying and kind of the absurdity of the position of putting itself in most of them honestly are not i mean uh...

certainly uh... i don't know how often you've had the opportunity of listening to the program but i have i've used as that illustration many times dave hunt who when he gave me that interpretation of the day that's your that's a tradition speaking his response was james i have no traditions and anybody who thinks they have no traditions is obviously a slave to those traditions and so yeah i know that i have my traditions uh...

but i'd make the purposeful epistemological effort uh... to recognize in special light of uh...

i think a fair reading of jesus teaching in john uh... matthew fifteen and and mark seven uh...

that's he's gonna hold me accountable just as he held those jews accountable for testing the corban rule which they thought came from god he's gonna hold me accountable uh...

for the role that i've allowed my traditions to plan i don't want my traditions to fall in the same category regio said you've nullified the word of god for the sake of your traditions right that's a those are those are scary words uh...

coming from the lord jesus uh... who will be uh... standing as judge so yeah i i know they're there and uh...

uh... i do not i'm not one of those folks who says all of you know uh... who cares about church history of just got the bible let's just every generation to sort of start from scratch no uh...

that's that's nobody does that and and uh... no one can practice that it's it's ridiculous but at the same time i have to be i'd have to put out the efforts and isn't it sad that for many many churches the very idea of saying it's put out that effort is considered to be a spiritual you're right shows a lack of faith in the lack of faith lack of zeal i've got to split well the exactly who but yeah i don't think that they're probably heard it too now with with uh...

quickly with respect to the rule of faith and uh... in my reading of it i i didn't think that's going to be suggesting that there was something alongside scripture that served as something that's governed over it it was an apostolic proclamation i think is that certainly and that there is nothing in that rule of faith that could in any way add to or take away from scripture because they were they coincided perfectly it's it's and whether his specific definition of it is uh...

something i guess they give you a little bit uh... one you just mentioned that anybody doesn't think they have a tradition is related to that tradition i agree with that and that's something that both uh...

first of all i think catholics and then post -modern you know mindset would point to and say if you know somebody take the book with a really is breathed out by god is perfect in every detail everybody interprets that immediately they start bringing in their cultural background their education there whatever the time period of living in everyone's going to get a slightly different in on their interpretation now at this point i think the catholic would step back and say now out of all these billions and billions of essentially a different interpretation how do you know which of those is actually lining up with the rule of faith and that's something that argument that almost kind of pulled me in went to a catholic university and and came from a the nominal protestant background they had no tradition at all and what i think started to draw me with the thought that at least here's a church that actually can make some claim to being historic when i started hearing the thing about how many different denominations and everyone got their own version how do you know which is right you know i'll admit it had kind of a strong pull to it and i think maybe i finally found something that can put me to rest right i can just trust in this until i started trying to figure out you know mary and the different doctrines and yeah and then discovered what they consider to be tradition actually has uh...

no bearing whatsoever on anything is believed in the first five hundred christian church yeah well and there's the and therein lies the danger is that once you start down that road and once you cc the very the very question and and the way you put it is was very well put and that's exactly how it's presented and i do fully understand that kind of attraction and i fully understand especially for a a minister or someone in the context where there's all this uh...

this bickering and fighting and why can't we have a united uh... front and and i would say i would add a context here and and i would i would say that western culture as a whole has so abandoned god on its on the moral level on the behavioral level uh...

is so intent upon spitting on his face that that i would say we we are seeing the judgment of god coming upon this culture and as a result one of the results of the judgment of god is a a multiplication of of religious perspectives and viewpoints we don't have a unified christian voice and the question is are we supposed to always have a unified christian voice or is that not a blessing upon a society i'd i would say that a growing discerning christian church the blessing upon a society and there have been times in history where the people who have continued to hold fast uh...

been firm to the faith have been a have been a small number there's no question about that and yet god continues to build his church in his own way so putting all that aside for the moment uh...

the issue that that you raise is a very very good one and the these the fact the matter is that it presupposes the idea that sense god's perfect revelation can be abused and misused that therefore there it in of itself cannot be enough there must be something beyond it but when you think about all that does is move the question back one step all you're doing is it's sort of you know the old game where you'd you draw the line i dare you to cross it when they get across is that you wipe it out and run a line wider across this one yeah epistemologically all rome has done is is is said well we we can give you the the certainty of this we can give you the tradition that defines all these things in scripture well okay now let's ask the question of you and this is what i can get roman catholic apologist to do uh...

almost ever uh... let's ask now let's let's apply the exact same standards to what you're saying that you're just applying to the scriptures and let's see you explain how it is that you can come up with these levels of certainty that which is they are new sauce can't you don't say that you are so how can something that is actually less certain on an ontological level uh...

epistemological how can that give you more certainty then what i'm talking about and they really don't have an answer for that because the fact that if they might say well you know the church is uh...

to uh... even the church's interpretation zone traditions consistent over the ages no it's not anybody who looks at rome today knows look at the papal so papal syllabus of errors from only two hundred years ago in comparative to even to the most conservative pontiff today massive shift in in understanding of of all sorts of things just in that a lot of what uh...

top -line and broke that uh... well thankfully i would feel like i don't like and i i started to think that this is great i found something that at the unified tradition and i started looking at it and realizing that it's been all over the map all it has what has involved but let's see people are told that it hasn't been right and it's really to believe that the exact and if you want to believe it then you you know we can all filter things but see the problem is when we look at scripture and we we go back to the to the original question is playing out the rome is messed up isn't totally an answer to the answer for roman catholic is it isn't only an answer and i've used this illustration i think it's a valid illustration when i speak of you know i'm a techno geek person here on a webcast so you have to be a semi techno geek to be listening to it on a webcast anyway so yeah exactly uh...

if you have perfect documentation does that guarantee that everyone that has documentation is going to use the software right of course not why not because we bring our traditions to it you remember the old way that the software worked and now you've got the new revision and no one really wants to read all this stuff and so you know i i talk to i t guys in our channel all the time and they're just pulling their hair out because these people just refused to listen what they're saying because they're bringing their own traditions in their ignorance is and things like that that doesn't mean that the the documentation itself would not have led to the proper conclusion and my belief is that the word of god is consistent with itself and while in this life i can never have a sufficiently wide knowledge of everything that's in the word of god to come to perfect conclusions and be perfectly consistent in every aspect of my personal theology my belief is that as i continue to listen to god as i continue to pursue god as i continue to seek to think his thoughts after him that he will bless that desire on my part and that he will reveal to me as he has in my own personal experience those elements of my belief that are inconsistent with the word of god and when we if we would just simply do what the church is supposed to be doing and we would instead of you know having these you know twenty minute sermonettes and uh...

just doing the four spiritual laws you know regurgitate each each sunday if we would go through the entirety of the word of god and try to preach the entirety of the word of god and if we have the uh...

plurality of elders where the elders can can speak to one another you know i i i've got a little thing on my blog right now about uh...

don hartley uh... who sent me this this this book recently he's he's done all the study on the use of isaiah six nine to ten new testament he's done more work in john and other places uh...

you know uh... years ago uh... when i debate stafford i forget what year was two thousand three i think it's two thousand three sometime in two thousand three he was a part of a little group we put together on the internet and i'm hurrying to bring out time uh...

in preparation for my my uh... debate with stafford and he's got this idea that the in second corinthians four four where it says the god of this world has blinded uh...

the mind the unbelieving he's got this idea that the god of this world there is not satan that's yahweh and when i first heard that i was like not come on but uh...

and then he kept he kept providing background for background for and i've linked to an article reese he's put a lot of this out you know it so you can actually think about it and i actually had to start asking myself will okay why why did i initially disagree it's not like it's i've ever considered that as an option before but since i had just you know it was my tradition there is there is a place where i'd always heard it that way and that i was heard that way that it was weird to hear something else and working through that and and listening to someone else and and going well what do you think about this and having the dialogue is that that is is not only something to extremely in enjoyable to do and it's such a rarity sadly uh...

in in the vast majority of evangelicalism today sadly uh... but it is a means that i think god has given us to to where we can learn from one another and iron sharpening iron and things like that and so uh...

i don't accept the idea that just because there are people who can and have uh...

perverted scripture or that by myself uh... will have traditions that doesn't mean that over time if the holy spirit of god can change my heart and if the holy spirit of god can change me for being a god hater to a god lover then obviously the holy spirit of god likewise can guide and direct me in my ever deepening search uh...

of his scriptures in coming to more and more uh... consistent conclusions on every element of his truth and i can stand i don't have to start from the scratch i can i can learn from preceding generations and that's a that's a great blessing but i'm out of time thank you very much for your phone call today bill and god bless you in your uh...

ministry back there in ohio god bless you thank you well that was great uh... two excellent uh...

excellent phone calls about us all the way through and uh... didn't even get back to spong and uh...

land that you know what i feel good that's a good well that's that's right that is just that uh...