Clement and Leighton Flowers Walk Into a Bar…

Alpha & Omega Ministries

Subscribe

Download

Share

10

Comments are disabled.

00:34

Greetings, welcome to The Divining Line, James White along with you on a Thursday, third program of the week.

00:40

It's not like I took yesterday off. I was on with Chris Arnson on Iron Sharpens Iron.

00:46

We were talking about the debate from 19 years ago with Peter Stravinskis on the subject of purgatory.

00:54

And that was fun, because that was, if you have not seen that debate,

00:59

I do highly recommend it to you. What happens when a priest, not a

01:06

Roman Catholic priest, he's an Eastern Rite priest, but it's Roman Catholicism. What happens when a priest with two

01:13

PhDs from Ivy League schools goes into a debate on the subject of purgatory with a

01:20

Reformed guy that he has no respect for, and hence hasn't bothered to read anything that he wrote or listen to anything or none of that kind of stuff, and in fact spends his opening statement talking about a conversation he had with Jimmy Swaggart.

01:38

That's not going to go well. That's going to go really, really, really poorly. And it did go really poorly.

01:45

And he discovered that during the cross -examination period on 1 Corinthians 3, all of which is on YouTube.

01:52

If you get the opportunity, I think you would find it to be a useful discussion. In fact, we made the point yesterday,

01:58

I think that debate exposed more about Rome's doctrine of justification than the debates on justification did.

02:07

And I mentioned on Iron Chalmers Iron yesterday, the reason for that is that Stravinskis, I believe to be a lifelong

02:17

Catholic, the guys that have debated on justification were former Protestants, former

02:22

Reformed Protestants, and so they use the language to spin stuff. It lacks clarity. It lacks the clarity that you end up getting from what?

02:32

Why are you getting a mask out? Yeah. Yeah. No. No.

02:39

Stop it. Why are you doing that? I'm not doing the program until you take that off, okay?

02:45

This is not correct. Yeah. It's great. Do I look like I'm asymptomatic over here or something?

02:53

But a vector, a carrier, is that what's going on here? See what I have to put up with?

02:58

How do you expect me to even keep a train of thought when that's the type of stuff going on across the window, huh? You all don't know.

03:05

You all sit there everywhere I go, you're so mean to Rich, and you just have no idea. On the way in here, on the way in here,

03:12

I'm listening. I started listening to Apology Radio because it's Luke and Jeff and Joy and my daughter.

03:21

They're doing a Sheologen's mashup, and they didn't even tell me. I mean, my grandkids are there.

03:26

I was not invited, and they did not even tell me. And so I'm complaining loudly in the chat, you know?

03:35

And then I fire it up in the car on the way in, and you know what they're doing all the way in? They're talking about me. That is dangerous.

03:42

Think about it for a second. What if your daughter was on a radio program talking about you?

03:48

Would you be just a little bit nervous? Because I mean, what stories is she going to tell? It was fun, though, because Jeff actually texted all of us elders.

04:00

He was listening to The Last Dividing Line when I got to the part about how the elect are helping to redeem the earth through digestion.

04:06

And they replayed that on Apology Radio.

04:16

I'm not making it up, folks. I'm not. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, okay, all right.

04:25

You're preparing for the Manichaeans by putting the face mask on. That's understandable. I am not making this up.

04:32

When we get into it, the Manichaean idea was that the elect, and remember, there's supposed to be this parallel between the

04:41

Manichaean elect and the elect in Augustine, and hence Calvin never saw a

04:47

Bible, never translated from Latin or Greek, Hebrew, anything like that.

04:54

He just, whatever Augustine says, I believe. And so you can't have any influences other than the

05:02

Manichaeans. And so you've got this connection. And the fact is that because they believe that in this three moments cosmogony of Manichaeism, that this light, sparks of light have been trapped in these physical bodies.

05:23

It's a very Gnostic idea, but it's actually, the battle between light and darkness is pretty universal in all religions.

05:29

This is just a weird way of putting it. And so it's also found in anything that's alive. And so you had the elect, and then you had the hearers.

05:39

And the hearers were not as strict adherents. And so they would prepare food for the elect.

05:50

And the elect, to prepare food, obviously totally vegetarian, and obviously just very limited vegetarian range of things could be prepared.

06:03

But to prepare any food, you have to, you know, kill it, pull it out of the ground.

06:09

So you'd be doing damage to the light sparks. So it had to be done in a particular way to do the least damage.

06:16

And then the light sparks are released back to the realm of light through digestion of the elect as they eat and as they excrete.

06:28

And so as they free the light sparks by eating and digesting, then the light sparks go up and that's where the

06:36

Milky Way comes from. So it's going to the moon, the moon becomes full, and then the moon wanes and the moon becomes full.

06:48

And all those sparkly thingies that you would see on a particularly dark night, we call it the

06:56

Milky Way, which we know is the rest of our galaxy. Those are the sparks of light that were going back to the light realm.

07:06

So if you died as one of the elect, that's also could happen. But then you're also freeing the sparks by eating and excreting.

07:17

And for some reason, Jeff found that particularly noteworthy, noteworthy,

07:23

I think it's a term. So anyway, how did I get on to that? I don't know. Anyways, so I had some thoughts.

07:31

Oh, you're the one that distracted me with that silly mask. I had some thoughts and then so much stuff has happened so far today, developments taking place today, that I hope you will find this to be interesting because this is ongoing developments, okay?

07:51

When you're tackling something, when you're tackling a subject, you dig into stuff and that leads to something over here, leads to something over there.

08:02

And then in this instance, I was forced to go back and to listen to some stuff and go,

08:13

Hey, wait a minute, what's going on here? We have been doing a lot on church history and some people,

08:27

I haven't done like a poll or anything. I may do a poll. One of the complaints that the provisionists are putting,

08:37

I was like, just get to the point. The problem here is the reason that certain theories can be floated amongst people today is most

08:53

Christians don't know anything about church history. They've not had the opportunity or taken the opportunity to familiarize themselves with church history and let's just be honest, for independent style

09:11

Baptists, church history goes back to Billy Graham and even that's starting to get into ancient church history now because he died.

09:20

And then for Reformed folks, pretty much Martin Luther, maybe Wycliffe and Hus, if you know where they were, chronologically speaking.

09:31

But for most Protestants, that's about as far back as it goes. What percentage do you think, if we were to do, if we did a test, a quiz at the next meeting,

09:49

Sunday morning after church, and we were to ask evangelical

09:56

Protestants to place Ignatius of Antioch and Ignatius Loyola in the correct centuries of church history, what rate of success do you think we would have?

10:15

If I were to ask you, you individual listener right now, to put

10:22

Ignatius of Antioch and Ignatius Loyola in the proper context and centuries of church history, do you believe you could do it?

10:34

How about Tertullian? Ambrosiaster? You better have

10:40

Augustine by now. When did Gottschalk live? The reality is that once you get past the

10:52

Reformation, going backwards, there is a lot of confusion and therefore, as long as someone comes along and uses an argument from authority, they can get away with almost anything.

11:09

We've been dealing with errors like this for a long, long time, decades.

11:15

We really have. Let me prove it to you. Well, I guess, yeah, okay.

11:27

Is the more of my brother? If you, I was looking for the other edition of it,

11:34

I guess this is the one I have in here. In here, I deal with a doctrine called theosis.

11:45

Why do I deal with a doctrine called theosis? Why starting on page, this is an appendix, starting on page 207, going to 227, so 20 pages in this book, got a real delay on the video today, noticing that?

12:06

I hope the audio's synced up. They're doing good? Okay. 20 pages in a book on Mormonism on theosis.

12:16

Why? Well, because Mormon apologists utilize the

12:22

Eastern Orthodox concept of theosis out of context to substantiate the concept of men becoming gods.

12:31

And so, this was written in the late 1990s. This was actually, I forget what the original, yeah, 97, 1997, late 1990s.

12:45

So over 20 years ago, dealing with church history issues, and to do so, you had to provide context.

12:55

You had to talk about, you can't just say, this is why it's wrong. You have to provide some type of a context to be able to make meaningful historical statements that will have relevance to today.

13:12

So, we enjoy teaching church history, but in this instance, what we're doing is teaching church history, not in the sense that you would in a class, but how to do historiography.

13:26

How to recognize bad arguments and abuse of history. Because there's so much of that out there.

13:33

The less we know about it, the more that area can be abused. And we're also seeking to demonstrate that when you make references to church history, you need to do so with care.

13:48

We only have so much information that we can't go back and interview these people. There are some people we have so much material.

13:59

In fact, some people we have too much material. And in others, we have just fragments. And if you treat the people for whom we only have fragments the same as someone that we have 6 ,000 volumes for, then obviously you're making a mistake.

14:16

You can be significantly more certain about someone when you have 6 ,000 volumes of their writing than you can when you have fragments quoted by someone secondhand, obviously.

14:32

So there are fundamental things that have to be done in doing church history in a meaningful fashion.

14:41

And some people just want us just to cut all that out. And I'm like, I'm going to make this a educational thing.

14:48

I want, you know, we at church just a few weeks ago, we started, we've been doing catechism questions since before I got there.

14:59

But a few weeks ago, we added to the catechism section a thing we call voices from the early church.

15:05

We've looked at two quotes from Ignatius, and we just happened to be looking at Clement of Rome on justification right now.

15:13

If you look, if you grab one of our bulletins, there it is. And that's one of the things that I do.

15:21

I get to do a little mini historical sermon every week, basically, as I look at these quotations from early church fathers, we want to see the connection that we have to those who've come before us.

15:35

It enriches our faith to see those connections, to see those vital connections.

15:42

And I think one of the greatest impoverishing things in modern Christian experience is how little connection most

15:52

Christians have to those who've gone before them. We say Jesus has been building his church. Do we believe it?

16:01

Not if you think that everybody in the medieval period was just a pagan or something, you don't believe it. Independent fundamentalist

16:07

Baptists don't believe it. Well, they've got the trail of blood thing, so they'll say, well, yeah, he was building his church, but it was in a secret place and no one can find it.

16:18

So I'm not in any hurry, and you guys can't hurry me along.

16:24

Because actually, the more slowly and fully I explain things, the more clear the problems really are.

16:30

That may be part of the problem. But could I point out something? A year at Oxford with access to the library, and I'm supposed to have an answer in two weeks?

16:42

It's amazing that I've come up with so much already, especially since I'm doing other things at the same time.

16:48

Isn't that weird? Anyway, so what we've been doing, if you're just tuning in, we started with this book.

16:56

People were calling Rich and saying, are you going to talk about this? Saw some reviews, and so I'm like, all right.

17:06

It's not like I don't have a million other things going on, but okay, we'll do it. So we got this, and I started reading through it, got it on Kindle as well.

17:18

And I was stunned by what I was reading. Not because, oh,

17:24

I've never heard this before, but how are you making the connections that you're making?

17:30

This is really bad. What am

17:36

I missing here? And so when I started making some comments, what you get is, well, you've got to do the dissertation, the $100 dissertation.

17:45

And I'm like, well, I'm sorry, if you can't summarize your 400 -page dissertation in 80 pages and make it accurate,

17:55

I've done it with all sorts of stuff. God Who Justifies, I've pointed out the books, I've done it.

18:04

If you can't do that, then you never mastered your material. That's just a fact. That's just how scholarship works.

18:11

And then I ran across the interview from 2018 when

18:17

Leighton Flowers interviewed Ken Wilson. And at the end, in fact, let's go ahead and play this, just because this is relevant.

18:24

Right at the end of the interview, we have,

18:32

I think this is it right here. And we look forward to seeing more.

18:38

I don't know if you're ever game for something like this, but our generation, unfortunately, is not real good about reading large, thick dissertations.

18:49

But they're really good about reading small manuals or small books, popularized, that if you ever sat down and took maybe some of the best and most poignant points of your dissertation and put it in a book.

19:02

I know Trinity College of the Bible and Theological Seminary, Trinity Seminary would probably publish it for you if nobody else would.

19:07

But that kind of thing could be, I think, real valuable to the church to have just an easy, popular teaching on the doctrines of Augustine and historical teachings.

19:19

I don't know. I know you're busy. You have surgeries to do and all that stuff, that little nonsense stuff, if you want to save people's lives and all.

19:26

But if you want to stop and pare something down into a popular book, I know there would be probably people interested in publishing it.

19:34

Thanks. That's a good idea. I may end up doing that. More CPEC should allow me to summarize something, because it won't be as scholarly, obviously.

19:44

Sure, yeah, more popular. Well, thank you, Dr. Wilson. So I don't know if that was the genesis of this.

19:56

Sounds like it. He didn't say, you know, I've had a lot of people telling me that. Yeah, I might do something like that.

20:03

That's where it came from. So here's the point. We're listening to this interview to see because what was the objection?

20:11

Well, you can't just deal with this. That's not really the scholarly stuff. So this is inaccurate. So if we're listening to an interview talking about these very things that came about before this, when only this existed and the same stuff that's in the interview is in here, then this is accurate, right?

20:38

Yeah, that's right. Okay, so, and I need to bring this up while we're playing something else because I forgot to pull it up, but I apologize.

20:52

Yesterday, Leighton Flowers posted a screenshot.

21:01

There it is. James White's fallacious approach with Dr. Ken Wilson. I'm going to be looking at this.

21:10

And, you know, all the fans are going, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's great. Oh, it's wonderful. And so I wrote,

21:16

I left a little note that I will debunk all of this, which we will because it is very easily debunked.

21:25

But in the process of looking at that, one of the issues that I, you know, the early church fathers and stuff like that, one of the questions that came up as I was marking the last of the things that I wanted to deal with in the interview had to do with the subject of Clement of Rome.

21:55

Now, I think it's the next one. So could you bear with me here for a moment? Let me see if this is what this one is.

22:02

I'm even going to pick up the pace a little bit, the speed of the recording, so we can listen to this a little faster.

22:07

Let me see if this is the one. Prior, even during the time of Jesus, and, you know, you have Phariseeism, you've got

22:14

Sadducees, and you've got— That is not it. You know, the debate between foreknowledge and free will—

22:22

I'm looking forward here. I've got stuff— —very important to distinguish that omniscience. I'd like to point out that God is a— It doesn't even exist hardly, which is also just, it's like that first 300 years or 400 years of church history.

22:34

This debate can't be found, really. And in Eastern Orthodoxy, it's almost the exact same way. You just, you don't find this parsing of Romans 9 and back and forth and determinism, all that.

22:44

But in Western, obviously, in Western Christianity, you find it all over the place. Why is that? Why is Eastern Orthodoxy, though it has its other issues, obviously, every stream of Christian thought, because it's made up of human beings and sinful human beings, that that's going to have its problems.

22:56

But why is it that Eastern Orthodoxy, it's just like this debate or this issue almost virtually doesn't exist?

23:02

Good question, Leighton. So it's— Okay, it was the section, and I actually need to pull up something else before I deal with that one, too.

23:09

It was the section where— So if you do that, if you're really honest about it, actually read the whole—

23:15

That you find yourself having a bias to say, I'm looking for the free will stuff. I'm just going to skip over anything that doesn't sound like it supports my view.

23:22

Or were you objective in really studying both sides from both perspectives to try to find the true meaning and intention of the author?

23:31

Sure, Leighton. I mean, I didn't know. When I started this, I had no clue what these guys were— Boy, I might have a comment on that one.

23:37

So it was very simple. All I did was categorize and say, okay, I read the whole thing, here's what this person says, here's what this person says, and why.

23:43

And so it was not a search for, hey, I got to prove free will against Augustine, it's what did these people say, and how do

23:50

I know? Say that Augustine was the first to clearly— I don't know why

23:55

I'm missing it. Sorry, because I don't believe I've played it yet. Sorry about that. Anyway, let me just summarize it.

24:03

During the interview—we'll probably run into it in one of these other ones—during the interview,

24:09

Leighton made a statement that he was asking

24:14

Wilson about these quotations from early church fathers that are presented as if they are supportive of Calvinism.

24:24

And he made the statement that he struggled with me in our debate on Romans 9, because he gave a quote from Clement of Rome supporting free will, and I said, well,

24:41

Clement of Rome spoke often of the elect as if Clement of Rome was a Calvinist, and they all chuckled about how silly that would be.

24:52

And so I was going, well, you know, I wonder what he said, and I wonder what

24:59

I said. I don't generally go back and listen to debates, but I thought, you know,

25:07

I wonder what actually was said in our debate in 2015 on the subject of Clement of Rome, and would this have relevance here?

25:23

And lo and behold, it did. It did. So let's get in our time machines, and let's go back to 2015, okay?

25:37

And this is the section of Leighton Flower's positive presentation, and see if he hasn't already been in touch with Ken Wilson.

25:54

Let's see what we can hear here. Okay, ready? Here we go. Teach that this wasn't clearly taught until Augustine, who doesn't even teach this view of election until the fifth century.

26:06

In other words, the way many people understand election today is not the way it was understood throughout

26:13

Old Testament times, the New Testament times, or any time until a former

26:18

Gnostic Manichean philosopher from Africa, who did not know Greek, came along 300 years after the time of Christ to systematize it for us.

26:27

The earliest church fathers, men like Irenaeus or Ignatius, who Ignatius was actually taught by the

26:34

Apostle John himself, and we have some of their writings, they never taught an individualistic,

26:40

Calvinistic view of election. In fact, they repudiated this kind of interpretation in much of their writings.

26:47

For instance, I want us to look at one early church father, the Clement of Rome. We're talking about a letter written to Rome, and he was likely in Rome, and would have been very familiar with this letter.

26:56

Clement is actually referenced in Philippians chapter 4, verse 3. We're told that the Apostle Peter himself likely commissioned

27:03

Clement, and he followed Peter probably sometime as a bishop there in Rome. So it would be good to know what a first century person of the first church, an early church father, thought on this subject.

27:14

Well, we don't have to guess. We have a lot of his writings. I picked a short quote just for time's sake. He wrote this, it is therefore in the power of everyone, since man has been made possessed of free will, whether he shall hear us to life or hear the demons to destruction.

27:29

You see, very few students, in my experience, are even aware of how the church understood the nature of man or the doctrine of election for the first 400 years of the church's existence.

27:40

Okay, so that was not a extemporaneous statement.

27:48

I can tell you, I was sitting on the stage, all of Dr.

27:54

Leighton Flower's presentation was written out beforehand. All the questions, all the rebuttals, closing statement, not only written out beforehand, but encased in plastic.

28:05

Okay, so this was not, oh, you know,

28:11

I just looked something up quick or off the top of my head, answer to a question type thing.

28:16

This was part, you can tell it's being read. This is part of the formal presentation. So there wasn't any time pressure involved, anything like that.

28:26

And I want to go back through, there's some fascinating stuff there. But he said he struggled with me because I wanted to turn

28:34

Clement into a Calvinist. And so I'm like, why did that happen? So here's the questioning that I gave, and here's, see if I tried to turn

28:46

Clement into a Calvinist. Ready? Here we go. Professor Flowers, you said that Clement, you quoted from Clement of Rome, yes?

28:54

Yes, sir. And you said we have a lot of his writings. Did you list them? List them all?

29:04

Isn't the fact that we have one epistle of Clement to the Corinthians and the rest are pseudo -Clements.

29:12

Thus, although we are born neither good nor bad, we become one or the other, and having formed habits, we are with difficulty drawn from them.

29:20

Yeah, that's the quote. But you said we have lots of his writings. I've got five more. You want me to read them?

29:26

No. Okay. Where are they from, sir? Clement. Okay, so we have one epistle.

29:32

Did he exegete Romans 9, that epistle? No, not that I know of. We've got quotes that support his view of free will.

29:40

We've got quotes that denounce the concept of individualistic, Calvinistic type of interpretations.

29:45

And as you interpret it. Among Irenaeus and others. As you interpret it. Well, obviously, yes. Okay, all right. You said that Calvinists.

29:55

But Dr. White, not only as I interpret it, as Lorraine Botner interprets it, Stan Storms interprets it. I could list other

30:00

Calvinists who admit that Augustine is the first one to clearly teach the Calvinistic concept. So you can show me where they've interpreted

30:06

Clement's epistle to the Romans, to the Corinthians. No, what I'm saying is that I have quotes from other

30:12

Calvinists who admit that Augustine is the first one to clearly. Which would be different than the application you're making.

30:17

They wouldn't agree with the application you're making, right? Oh, no, no. They would probably try to say that, well,

30:23

Sam Storms, for example. Okay, so we went on from there. So nowhere did

30:30

I claim the Clement of Rome was a Calvinist. Did not turn him into it.

30:36

In fact, I didn't say anything about the elect there. So there might be, maybe something else came up afterwards.

30:42

Because I didn't even mention the elect there. So maybe there's something afterwards. I'm gonna have to, I'm gonna have to buzz through the rest of it.

30:48

He seemed to have a very strong recollection that there's something about the elect there. There are, by the way.

30:55

And I've made that statement. We're gonna look at some of the references to the elect in Clement's. This is what I was preparing.

31:03

Is I wanted to spend some time positively listening to what is found in that epistle.

31:13

That plainly is drawn from Pauline theology of the elect. And I think it's important to see those things.

31:22

So I was trying to find the background. Now, let's note some of the things that came up here.

31:31

Let me pick up the pace a little bit. But let's, now that you heard it, let me point a few things out for you.

31:39

Teach that this wasn't clearly taught until Augustine, who doesn't even teach this view of election until the 5th century.

31:45

In other words, the way many people understand election today is not the way it was understood throughout

31:51

Old Testament times. Even though Paul interpreted it that way. The New Testament times, or any time until a former

31:58

Gnostic Manichean philosopher from Africa, who did not know Greek, came along 300 years after the time of Christ to systematize it for us.

32:08

Yeah, he did not know Greek or Hebrew, though he picked up some Greek later in his life.

32:13

That much is true. To be honest with you, Leighton, I'm not sure how much of it you know. Is that somehow relevant at this particular point?

32:21

Because you're not, and we're going to find out here in a moment, you've never read Clement in Greek, so does that somehow vitiate your conclusions?

32:30

You just used it, you're the one that raised it. So, just wondering what the connection is. The earliest church fathers, men like Irenaeus or Ignatius, who

32:38

Ignatius was actually taught by the Apostle John himself, and we have some of their writings. They never taught an individualistic,

32:45

Calvinistic view of election. In fact, they repudiated this kind of interpretation in much of their writings.

32:52

They repudiated this interpretation. Well, that would be interesting to see if he could substantiate that.

32:58

We're going to find Clement teaching what Leighton says he doesn't teach. But anyway.

33:04

Since I want us to look at one early church father, the Clement of Rome, we're talking about a letter written to Rome. It is not a letter written to Rome.

33:12

First of all, we don't know who wrote this letter. Clement's name has been associated with it traditionally.

33:20

And, of course, then it was connected with the Clement that is mentioned by Paul.

33:27

And then tradition ended up later, 100 years later, associating

33:36

Clement as one of the earliest presbyters. And then eventually, once it was lost sight of the fact that the early form of church government in Rome was not a single bishop.

33:48

It was a plurality of elders, as is seen in Ignatius's letter to the church at Rome.

33:56

These are not things that would be a part of Leighton Flower's world, because it doesn't debate Roman Catholics on the subject of papacy, on the basis of early church history.

34:04

But those of us who do are aware of these issues. And so, we would know that the identification of Clement in this way is traditional.

34:16

It's not in the text. It's not in the text of the epistle itself.

34:23

It is a letter written by the church at Rome to the church at Corinth. It's not written to the church at Rome. So, he's wrong immediately.

34:30

He's not even aware. And I don't know how you could have read the letter. And I'll be honest with you.

34:36

I do not believe that in 2015, Leighton Flower has ever read Clement's epistle.

34:43

It's called First Clement, Clement's Epistle. And of course, there's all sorts of other

34:49

Clementine writings that are either pseudepigraphal. They're forgeries of later centuries.

34:57

And then a lot of people confuse Clement of Rome, one epistle, with Clement of Alexandria.

35:05

Lots of epistles, but a lot of weird stuff in those epistles, too. And so, you have an epistle written from Rome to the church at Corinth.

35:17

If you read it, how could you not know what it was about? Because it is about the

35:22

Corinthians having kicked their elders out and basically have divided the faith. And we'll be looking at that in just a moment.

35:30

So, it is not written to the church at Rome. It is written from the church at Rome to the church at Corinth.

35:39

And he was likely in Rome and would have been very familiar with this letter. He was likely in Rome and would have likely been very familiar with this letter.

35:49

That does not make a lick of sense. If he wrote it, probably would be familiar with it.

35:55

But if it was written to Rome, why would he be in Rome? It makes no sense.

36:01

Clement is actually referenced in Philippians chapter 4, verse 3. We're told that the Apostle Peter himself likely commissioned

36:07

Clement, and he followed Peter probably sometime as a bishop there in Rome. Okay, that is all much later tradition.

36:14

Much later tradition. And in fact, what's strange is how many things that both

36:21

Leighton and Wilson will say that are fundamentally Roman Catholic in their orientation.

36:28

I don't think either one of them knows that. I see no evidence that either one of them has had any meaningful interaction with Roman Catholic apologists or anything.

36:37

But they're buying into material. It looks to me, this is my interpretation as I see it, that they're just grabbing everything they can to get as big a pile of stuff to defend provisionism, whether it's consistent or not.

36:55

And one of the things that has helped us to not engage in that type of activity is we have to deal not only with the

37:03

Roman Catholics, we have to deal with the Mormons and the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Unitarians and the

37:08

Muslims and everybody else dealing with church history. So we have to be balanced because we've got people all around us that'll get us if we become imbalanced.

37:18

That really helps. I'm really thankful that's how we've ended up having to do things. It would be good to know what a first century person of the first church...

37:24

Okay, so he's saying first century. So there is only one work of history associated with Clement of Rome from the first century.

37:37

Now, where in the first century? Like I said, we talked about before, some people argue for a pre -70 date for it, some people say it's in the 90s, both would be first century.

37:46

But he's talking about a first century sorcerer, and there is only one epistle. There's nothing else.

37:55

There are some pseudo -Clementine stuff from the second century, then you can go to the third, fourth century, and get like fourth

38:00

Clement, which is what he ends up quoting from. But there's just one epistle, just one. Early church father thought on this subject.

38:07

Well, we don't have to guess. We have a lot of his writings. I picked a short quote. We have a lot of his writings. I picked a short quote.

38:16

We have one epistle. This was plainly taken from the web.

38:22

And I think I've found the source. I think I tracked it down. I found one version of it, because all the same version, exact same order.

38:32

I found a version of it from 2012, three years before the debate. I found another version from 2018, by someone who specifically identifies as a provisionist and links to Soteriology 101.

38:45

So I think this list has been passed around amongst Leighton's group.

38:52

And I think this is where he got it. Because he didn't get it from reading Clement. He didn't get it from, this is, you know, here's my,

39:02

I'm showing my datedness here. This is the life at Harmer. There have been some great critical editions of the

39:09

Apostolic Fathers put out over the past number of years. Holmes and stuff like that. But you'll notice this is a

39:17

Greek -English. It's got not facing pages.

39:22

You've got the Greek and then you've got the English. But it's been sort of a standard work for a long, long time.

39:29

This is what I used when I taught Development of Patristic Theology at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary.

39:35

You can check with them to verify that. And that includes Clement's epistle, you know, right here.

39:45

If you read it, then you'd know this quote isn't in it. So what's the quote?

39:51

For time's sake, he wrote this. It is therefore in the power of everyone, since man has been made possessed of free will, whether he shall hear us to life or hear the demons to destruction.

40:02

So we've been told here in the debate that in the first century, as a representative of this consistent denunciation of Reformed Theology, and by the way, this was in a debate on Romans 9, that this quotation appears.

40:24

Now, you've already gathered, I'm sure, that that is nowhere to be found in Clement's epistle to the

40:33

Church of Corinth. It is from a third or fourth century work called

40:40

Fourth Clement. It is found there. The list of quotations didn't have much in the way of actual references.

40:53

So it would be easy to become confused if you didn't check your sources. But so when

41:01

I then asked questions of him, what I was asking him was, you say we have lots of his writings.

41:10

What do you mean? And you can tell by the responses that he had no idea what

41:16

I was talking about. He had no idea how many genuine works of Clement we possess.

41:28

Now, that was his opening statement. I had never seen it before. Be nice if I had been able to, you know, maybe if we did things like the

41:39

Iglesia Ni Cristo does, and I had, you know, five guys, I could have said, you look that one up, you know, you

41:44

Google that one. You know, that's maybe that's the advantage of doing stuff like that. But you rarely have time to really get into all of that kind of stuff.

41:54

But the fact of the matter is the quotation comes from a much later source, and it's a pseudepigraphical source.

42:01

It was very common in the ancient world for people to write books and to attach the name of someone with authority to those books.

42:19

And in fact, church history is filled with that. It's absolutely filled with that. And I've made reference to this many, many times before regarding what's called the

42:28

Donation of Constantine and the Pseudo -Isidorean Decretals. And I recognize that sometimes that stuff just goes flying by because people aren't familiar with it, but I've used it as an illustration.

42:39

The Donation of Constantine is a forgery that was fundamental to the development of papal power, as were the

42:45

Pseudo -Isidorean Decretals. You could... It was far too frequent an experience for someone to create a list of citations.

42:56

They would include real citations so that you could go, yeah, I've heard that one before.

43:02

But then they would insert the false citations. And most people just...

43:08

If you think it's tough enough to look things up on the internet, try before then.

43:14

Try before even the organization of universities. It was next to impossible to do critical analysis of literary sources in years past the way that we can today.

43:27

And so, as a result, the Pseudo -Isidorean Decretals, vitally important in the medieval period in the development of the high -water mark of the authority of the papacy under Innocent III and people like that, especially in the struggles that they're having with the emperor and that kind of thing.

43:47

And so, all sorts of quotations in there that were just completely bogus.

43:54

And I mentioned on Iron Shepherds Iron yesterday, Chris Aronson set up a debate with Chris Ferrara a

44:03

Roman Catholic attorney on Long Island a few years ago. And during that debate, he used a fraudulent quote in regards to Augustine's view of Mary and the

44:14

Immaculate Conception. It's a fake quote. You'll find it in various books.

44:19

You'll find it on websites. But then when you dig into it, you find that scholars recognize it's a forgery.

44:28

It was made up much later. And remember, up until the time of the

44:35

Reformation, really the Renaissance, people suffered from something called anachronism.

44:41

They thought things had always been the way they were now. And Erasmus was one of the people who, reading the works of Lorenzo Valla, Valla had come to recognize the reality of anachronism.

44:56

And he started going, a lot of this stuff that we accept, there's really good reason to think that it's fraudulent.

45:04

And he was right about almost everything that he had identified as being fraudulent. It was very dangerous to say those types of things in those days with the

45:12

Inquisition running around. It could tie you to a stake and burn you for doing that. But Valla and others were extremely important in breaking

45:21

Western society out of the anachronism that had taken it over. Okay, so that section there, there's just basic background.

45:32

This is important stuff to know to be able to recognize these things. And what happened was

45:38

Leighton Flowers used an internet -based secondary source, is my guess.

45:46

I've been told, and I just looked it up right before the program, that he live -streamed about two hours ago a 45 -minute discussion of this.

46:00

This is the tweet. It says, Here is my confession that Dr. James White and scholars,

46:07

I guess I'm not in that group, may be right, may be right, if you may be right, you may be wrong, may be right about my quote from the recognitions of Clement, book four.

46:21

That's not what you said. What you said in the debate is the epistle of Clement.

46:27

You said of the Church at Rome, but you were wrong. It was the Church of Corinth. In the first century, the recognition of Clement is third or fourth at best.

46:39

And remember, you're the one saying, Ah, Augustine was hundreds of years later. How could he know? You're quoting from something that's hundreds of years later, right?

46:49

The recognition of Clement before, and a call for compromise regarding the scholar's claims.

46:57

Now, scholar is singular. What scholar? Because above it's plural, but here it's singular with a possessive.

47:08

The scholar's claims about the ECFs extolling the ability of the will.

47:15

Now, I haven't had a chance to listen to this yet. I have a whole list of things to listen to.

47:23

I may end up having to listen to it. I don't know. I'll be honest with you. I don't want to.

47:30

But for completeness, I might. But what's funny in all of this is that in Kenneth Wilson's dissertation, or would you like me to show you the

47:44

PDF? Yeah, we bought the PDF. Much easier to search.

47:50

It's available in PDF format. It's still 106 bucks, but it's available in PDF format.

47:56

We could show this to you, but let me just read it. Chapter 2, Traditional Free Choice.

48:02

Talk about importing your conclusions into your language.

48:09

All through this. I don't know how this survived critical review.

48:16

You're not supposed to do this, but Christian authors from 95 to 215. So he puts

48:23

Clement in 95. That's traditional. First Clement, the author of First Clement, believed humanity's creation in God's image provided current opportunity for moral behavior.

48:32

The Imago Dei allows the Corinthian rebels to utilize their own desires to conform to God's desires. This rhetorical strategy could only be effective if the author and readers shared a commonality of God's icona and or homoiosin retained within humans as free choice.

48:49

That's image or likeness. This appears in numerous passages as the author appeals to scripture.

48:55

So he quotes First Clement 32 -3. In Clement's interpretation of James 4 -6,

49:01

God's grace does not choose its recipients unconditionally. It only comes to those who humble themselves and fear

49:08

God. He simultaneously emphasizes God's sovereignty. First Clement 27. Now, that's all he says.

49:16

So he doesn't say that Clement condemns the reform view of election, any of the stuff that Flowers put in.

49:27

And that's the entire thing. Next thing, Shepherd of Hermas. That's it. That's all there is. Now, but I would point out, in Clement's interpretation of James 4 -6,

49:39

God's grace does not choose its recipients unconditionally. It only chooses those who humble themselves and fear

49:45

God. As if that was Clement's point. That is, this is the kind of hyper -biased,

49:52

I -have -my -eye -on -what -I'm -going -for type interpretation that scholarship is supposed to avoid.

50:04

So now I'm really wondering, in the back of mind, did this come up again? Because I figured, you know, this was everything.

50:14

But now I'm going to have to listen to all the rest of it, see if it came up again. If someone knows, could you...

50:21

I'm going to get off of this tweet here. If someone knows if it did come up after... Because I have the time index here.

50:29

After 1 -28 -31. If someone could help me with this, because I just got a lot of stuff going on and don't have...

50:41

I'm just doing all... Rich, am I doing all this myself? Thank you very much. Okay. If someone would like to tell me about that, after 1 -28 -31, so one hour, 28 minutes into the 2015 debate, was anything else said about Clement?

51:00

Because it really seemed to me that it struck me that Leighton was remembering something specific about the term elect.

51:10

So did I make a comment later on that I haven't found yet? Because I was going through it at 1 .8, so sometimes you, at that speed, you miss stuff or an email comes in or something and distracts you.

51:20

Tell me if there's something more there. I'd be really, really interested in knowing. Okay.

51:26

So with all of that said, I do want to get to Clement before we go back to the recording.

51:34

Oh, and before the recording, I've got the James White's fallacious approaches

51:40

I need to look at briefly as well. Let me just give you a section.

51:47

From the beginning of the epistle to the

51:53

Corinthians. Again, remember, this is the church at Rome writing to the church at Corinth.

51:59

What is fascinating is there is no name of a bishop given. This is one local body remonstrating as equals with another.

52:12

That is extremely important in the analysis of Rome's claim that Peter establishes

52:21

Petrine primacy in the bishops of Rome. It's very important. That's part of the background to the epistle.

52:30

Moreover, you were all distinguished by humility and were in no respect puffed up with pride but yielded obedience rather than extorted it and were more willing...

52:39

Oh, that's... Well, if you're going to do that... Of course you're going to do that.

52:49

It's a little bit easier to read there. There you go. And were more willing to give than to receive, content with the provision which

52:58

God had made for you and carefully attending to his words, you were inwardly filled with his doctrine and his sufferings were before your eyes.

53:04

Thus a profound and abundant peace was given to you all and you had an insatiable desire for doing good while a full outpouring of the

53:10

Holy Spirit was upon you all. Full of holy designs you did with true earnestness of mind and great godly confidence, stretched forth your hands to God almighty, beseeching and be merciful to you if you had been guilty of any involuntary transgression.

53:23

Day and night you were anxious for the whole brotherhood that the number of God's elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience.

53:34

You were sincere and uncorrupted and forgetful of injuries between one another. Every kind of faction and schism was abominable in your sight.

53:41

You mourned over the transgressions of your neighbors, their deficiencies you deemed your own. You never grudged any act of kindness, being ready to every good work.

53:49

Adorned by thoroughly virtuous and religious life, you did all things in the fear of God. The commandments and ordinances of the

53:55

Lord were written upon the tablets of your hearts." So here is a description and this is in the context of saying to the

54:06

Corinthians, you were doing well, now you've had this rebellion, you've kicked out your elders.

54:13

How could this be? And the fundamental argumentation of the entire epistle is going through biblical stories and Old Testament examples and basically saying you need to repent, you need to restore the proper order, this is the proper way things should be done.

54:31

But please note how in passing you have the utilization of language that is very similar to, for example,

54:42

Acts 13, 48. Remember Acts 13, 48? After Paul preaches, as many as were ordained unto eternal life believed.

54:54

Luke doesn't stop, he doesn't give a sermon on the subject of election and predestination, he just mentions it in passing and moves on.

55:07

This is similar to the many references to the doctrine of the Trinity as being the common possession and understanding of both writer and recipient of writing in the

55:20

New Testament. There doesn't need to be an explanation of it because it's already the common possession of the people.

55:27

So notice what is said here, day and night you were anxious for the whole brotherhood that the number of God's elect might be saved with mercy and a good conscience.

55:38

So let's look over and see, this is what I was, this is what I was doing, is

55:44

I was looking at Clement in the original language, and that's what got me wondering, so I mentioned elected, what was that in the, and so I downloaded the, had to download the debate, convert to mp3, put it in Audio Notetaker, that's what led to all of this and going, you know,

56:08

I typed out the quote and went, I ain't in Clement anywhere, and that's when we stumbled on all this stuff, but here, here is the section in Clement, and so here you have ton, arithmon, ton, eclecton, autu,

56:30

I'll blow it up here, so the number of his elect, and so you have, ais ta sozo, so that's sozo, to save, so that the number of gods elect together with mercy, and some people feel like there might be a textual issue here in regards to sunai deis seos, but again, if you think textual variants are difficult in the

57:01

New Testament, wait till you start trying to do stuff with the early church fathers, where you have very, very, very, very, very different textual flavor as far as the number of manuscripts and how old they are and things like that.

57:15

Anyway, the point is, in passing, Clement can make reference to the doctrine of election, to the number of the elect, that the number of the elect might be saved.

57:33

The terminology is used throughout the book. It is not uncommon whatsoever to read of the elect, for example, in the previous chapter, and especially that shameful and detestable sedition, utterly abhorrent to the elect of God, which a few rash and self -confident persons have kindled to such a pitch of frenzy, talking about the sedition that had taken place in the church there in Corinth.

58:03

And so, you do have regular references to the elect.

58:10

Now, this can't be the Manichean elect, because Manny hasn't been born yet.

58:18

So, you can't have that as your source. So, let's think, you're at Rome, and you're writing shortly after the apostolic period.

58:30

The New Testament may not even be completed while you're writing. What would be the greatest source for you using terminology such as the elect of God?

58:45

Maybe Romans 8? Maybe Paul, you know, that epistle he wrote to your church, which

58:54

I'm sure has been well -read many times already, having arrived what?

59:01

Well, if you take a pre -70 date, less than 20 years earlier. 95 date, 40 years earlier.

59:12

But you know Paul's epistles. That's where this is coming from. That the number of the elect might be saved.

59:23

Not that they might save themselves, but that the number of the elect would be saved.

59:31

Is that a denunciation of Reformed theology as we were led to believe by Layton Flowers in the debate?

59:42

Doesn't seem to be. What? I'm sorry.

59:49

What is that supposed to mean? All right.

01:00:01

Get that out of the way. This is a live program, folks.

01:00:10

Well, but that's, that's right after the section that I, did I go back to that?

01:00:18

All right, let's see what we got here. We can all discover together. No, I'm not. Okay. Would you be surprised to discover he speaks on that time and that we're continually learning, at least the podcast.

01:00:29

Okay, okay, okay. Boy, the quality of the audio is not, is it all right on that end?

01:00:35

Because maybe it's just the small earpiece or something like that, but I just,

01:00:40

I just didn't keep listening far enough. I thought we transitioned on, so let's go. Oh, no, no, no.

01:00:47

They would probably try to say that, well, Sam Storms, for example, argues in Progressive Revelation that we have learned more since that time and that we're continually learning, at least the podcast, the

01:00:57

Unplugged podcast, those guys talking, that's what they... Have you read all of Clemenson? I'm sorry? Have you read all of Clemenson? Um, no,

01:01:03

I've not. Okay. Would you be surprised to discover he speaks often of the elect? Well, so does the Bible. That doesn't mean it would obviously...

01:01:09

So you must have understood it in your way. Well, how do you interpret then the passage that I just wrote? The one that says everyone has free will.

01:01:15

How do you interpret that? You can ask me that question when it's your turn to ask questions. Okay, so it's the next couple of sentences.

01:01:23

So I asked him, so we now have the equal statements. But wait, there's more.

01:01:32

Yeah. Okay. All right. I don't know why, but Twitter just refuses to update for me here.

01:01:42

I don't know why it is, but anyhow. All right. So let me just run through these quickly.

01:01:49

James White's fallacious approach with Dr. Ken Wilson. I've listened to the last five or six divining programs where White addresses

01:01:55

Ken Wilson's thesis on Augustine. Here is what I've witnessed thus far. Please give your own feedback as well.

01:02:02

One, focus on all the ways Stoics, Gnostics, and Manicheans are distinct from Calvinistic Christianity instead of addressing the one thing they hold in common, i .e.

01:02:10

introduction of deterministic philosophy and denial of LFW, libertarian free will. Stop right there. Leighton, are you listening?

01:02:19

Rich just said no. You're not listening to what I'm saying? Maybe you can't hear.

01:02:25

Maybe you are so invested in this theory, and I've talked about this with other people, that there are going to be people who are not going to hear a word that I'm saying.

01:02:37

I get it. I understand it. When this is your big scholar guy and someone starts going, that doesn't work, that doesn't work, you're going to double down.

01:02:50

Instead of the one thing they hold in common, Leighton, the reformed understanding of God's decree flows from the

01:03:04

Trinitarian understanding of God as the creator of all things who through creation is glorifying himself.

01:03:17

The Stoics, the Gnostics, and the Manicheans, each of which have major differences between them as to the nature of time, cosmogony, the nature of creation, and man.

01:03:35

None of them have a personal triune deity that can produce a divine decree that is self -glorifying.

01:03:48

Two of them don't even believe that the God who creates the universe is truly good, but is in fact an evil demiurge.

01:04:00

One of them thinks that beings who sprang out of semen and aborted fetuses falling on the earth mated and made

01:04:10

Adam and Eve. If you are unwilling to recognize how that fundamentally vitiates the assertion that there is a similarity in the nature of the decree with some form of naturalistic determinism,

01:04:31

I can't help you, but rational people will make that distinction.

01:04:40

Okay? So, there are multiple forms of determinism.

01:04:47

There is natural determinism, that certain laws are going to be followed, and cause and effect, cause and effect, that's something completely different than the idea of a divine decree forming the very fabric of time on the basis of the omnipotent power of a

01:05:11

God who is working out his will in creation. Naturalistic determinism is not the same thing.

01:05:23

Logically, philosophically, or any other way. And in fact, you must understand,

01:05:29

Dr. Flowers, that you as a Southern Baptist are considered a determinist.

01:05:39

Why? Because the Baptist faith and message denies that a Southern Baptist can faithfully be an open theist.

01:05:48

Hence, the Baptist faith and message asserts that the future is fully known to God. That is a form of determinism.

01:05:58

Is it the same form of determinism as what I believe? No, it's not.

01:06:04

Not by a long shot, but it is a form of determinism. And if you make the distinction between a determinism based upon mere foreknowledge over against what

01:06:17

I believe the Bible teaches of God's sovereign decree, then you have to make a distinction between the forms of determinism in Stoicism, Gnosticism, and Manichaeism and that within Augustine.

01:06:32

That's called being fair. That's called being logical. And if you're not willing to do it, case closed.

01:06:42

Debate over. Especially play up the really strange views held by these differing systems of thought so as to keep the audience's attention on those strange, unrelated views.

01:06:52

Red herring. So it's a red herring, folks. It's a red herring for you to understand what

01:06:59

Manichaean cosmogony was all about so you have an understanding of what the light principle is and the father of goodness in the light principle.

01:07:10

And we haven't even gotten into this. I've just been giving you bits and pieces of it. We're going to get much more into it. And the three moments of creation and the different Jesuses, that's all red herrings.

01:07:19

Because what you should do is you should ignore all that background stuff and you should just be focused upon the fact that you're a

01:07:26

Manichaean. You don't want to know what a Manichaean actually was. I was stunned.

01:07:35

I can't believe that you're doing this. Do you have any idea once we lay all this out how bad y 'all are going to look?

01:07:44

I mean, just... I mean, this is going to be... This is going to be coronavirus,

01:07:51

COVID -19, and the collapse of Soteriology 1 .1.

01:07:56

The big issues of 2020. Because if you're going to... Are you going to go down swinging? Or are you willing to go, you know,

01:08:05

I've never even read Clement. I... Sorry.

01:08:11

I... Yeah. You sound like you're going down swinging. You don't see how it's relevant? That in one system, you don't even have a

01:08:20

God that can create? And yet you're going to insist that that's the system that gives us our understanding of the decrees when we say

01:08:29

God's the creator of all things, including time itself? And you're going to go, red herring, red herring.

01:08:37

Okay, Leighton, did you take a class on logic? Because you're using... You're using red herring, red herring, straw man, ad hominem, chest thumping.

01:08:46

You're using all these argument stuff. What classes did you take on that?

01:08:52

I'm just going to start asking. Because right now, you're giving me a lot of reason to go, it sounds like you're just going with whatever people tell you that fits your system.

01:09:03

You're not doing any checking of your sources here. Number two, focus on all the ways

01:09:11

Stoics, Gnostics, and Manicheans are different from each other instead of addressing their commonality as it relates to claims made by a former

01:09:16

Manichean named Augustine who had a great influence on the Church's theological development, i .e. his introduction of deterministic philosophy and a denial

01:09:23

LFW red herring. That's a repetition of what was just mentioned before, already been refuted.

01:09:29

Number three, focus on Dr. Wilson's simplified generalizations and summaries in an interview and booklet geared for laymen while ignoring actual scholarly citations from his

01:09:42

Oxford thesis. We haven't gotten to it yet. We have established a logical reason to provide all the background and you're scared to death that once we do that, we're going to rip it to shreds, and we will.

01:09:57

But we're going to do it very carefully because you've challenged me to do it and we're going to do it.

01:10:03

I just read you what he said on Clement, which isn't what you said about Clement. At least he didn't quote the wrong stuff from Clement.

01:10:11

I will give him that one. Red herring.

01:10:18

No, straw man. Wait a minute, I didn't get there. Then, overstate Wilson's generalized summaries to draw absurd conclusions clearly not meant by Wilson.

01:10:27

Ah, wanted to get to this. Okay, so what we're being told.

01:10:36

I've read you, very plainly, the conclusion, haven't

01:10:42

I not? Almost every program. Almost every program. Here it is again.

01:10:48

The Reformed theologian Benjamin Warfield commented the Reformation inwardly considered was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the

01:10:55

Church. Warfield's statement is pinpoint accurate, but unfortunately, due to Luther's and Calvin's reliance upon Augustine, the unmerited grace of the

01:11:03

Christian God did not triumph in Augustinian Calvinism, Reformed theology.

01:11:08

It was the radicalized grace of the Manichaean God that triumphed. Augustine was the father of TULIP, total depravity, total inability to respond to God.

01:11:17

Unconditional election, Gnostic, Stoic, Gnostic, Manichaean, dupied, that's his divine unconditional predestination of individual destinies, limited atonement,

01:11:28

Christ only died for the elect, irresistible grace, violent Manichaean grace. Just stop, just really quickly.

01:11:35

Think about it. Think of the logical chasm that exists between the

01:11:41

Manichaean religion, which thinks that the historical Jesus was a fraud and has other cosmic

01:11:47

Jesuses that are a different Jesus, and the idea of irresistible grace and regeneration, and then, of course, the idea of limited atonement.

01:11:58

If you can even start to connect those things, you're trying to find something that doesn't exist.

01:12:04

That's exactly what's going on here. Irresistible grace, violent Manichaean grace. Grace in Manichaeism is pooping out light.

01:12:19

You just don't like me pointing that out. But that's what it is. It's pooping out light so that the little sparks from the veggies you eat can go up and become part of the

01:12:31

Milky Way and go to the moon, into the sun, and then into the realm of light. That's grace.

01:12:38

If you think that's what we're talking about, that explains why you've been missing stuff so long. I continue.

01:12:49

And the gift of perseverance invented by Augustine to explain the extreme differences in how persons live their lives following the following salvific infant baptism.

01:12:56

Therefore, modern Calvinism in these deterministic distinctives has more in common

01:13:03

Listen to this. I didn't write this. This is Dr. Wilson.

01:13:09

Therefore, modern Calvinism in these deterministic distinctives has more in common with ancient philosophies and religious heresies than with early

01:13:18

Christianity. And objective evaluations of the facts cannot avoid this startling conclusion.

01:13:24

Because current Calvinistic deterministic interpretations of scripture passages are interpretations brought into Christianity through Augustine's Manichean past.

01:13:36

So when you all listen to the hours of exegesis of John 6,

01:13:42

Romans 8, Ephesians 1, you didn't know that this was actually

01:13:49

Manicheanism brought in by Augustine. There I stood for 20 minutes in Dallas with nothing but a

01:13:59

Greek New Testament in my hand making my opening statement. And it was all because of Manny.

01:14:06

You didn't know that, did you? Yeah, I just have to interpret it. I know

01:14:12

I was reading the Greek. I know that it was straight out of the Greek text, but no, no, no. The Greek text had nothing to do with it.

01:14:18

I was just giving you whatever Augustine told me to believe. Excuse me, but I have no respect for that level of absurdity.

01:14:29

And no one should. No one should. Brought into Christianity through Augustine's Manichean past,

01:14:35

Calvinism is built upon the teaching of ancient Manicheism. Calvinism leans upon Manichean interpretations of key scriptures.

01:14:42

Calvinism lacks a solid historical and biblical foundation within early Christianity. It rests upon unstable sand of ancient heretical and pagan doctrines.

01:14:50

For these reasons, the tiny foundation upholding the impressively logical structure of Augustinian Calvinism should be pronounced unstable and condemned as unsafe.

01:15:00

Oh, but that's not for scholars. So are you telling me he can't express himself with clarity?

01:15:07

Hmm. Well, then maybe you could explain the statements made here.

01:15:15

I think it's the red one. Let me see. You say that Augustine was the first to clearly articulate these views.

01:15:22

Um, that coupled with what you found, it seems to be an insurmountable argument against a more deterministic understanding of the text.

01:15:33

Yes, if you want to remain a traditional Christian. If you want to go be a Manichean Christian with Augustine, then it's fine to take a deterministic view.

01:15:42

But for a traditional Christian, you should hold a free will view. Were you lying?

01:15:51

Is that consistent with what I just read? That was said before these words were written.

01:15:59

These words were written as a summary of what's in here. So are you telling me? Which one's the lie?

01:16:09

Which one's the lie? Or is there a consistency all the way through? There's a consistency all the way through.

01:16:16

Yeah. So, um, overstate Wilson's generalized summaries to draw absurd conclusions clearly not meant by Wilson.

01:16:25

Um, I just read it. That's what you're promoting. Um, I think

01:16:32

I need to take that section, transcribe it and post it and just say, just read it again. There's the quote.

01:16:40

There's here's here. Let's let's just one more time. And remember what's interesting here, and this is vitally important.

01:16:48

Think about this. What does what does Leighton ask here? Did you catch it?

01:16:55

Leighton doesn't ask about interpretation of early church fathers. Did you catch the shift?

01:17:02

Let's listen to it again at regular speed. Say that Augustine was the first to clearly articulate these views.

01:17:11

That coupled with what you found, it seems to be an insurmountable argument against a more deterministic understanding of the text.

01:17:21

A more deterministic understanding of the text, the text of what? It's got text of Augustine, Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Tertullian, Justin Martyr.

01:17:35

No, of the Bible. Of the Bible. Do these non

01:17:42

Roman Catholics realize they're arguing as Roman Catholics? That it's the teaching of the church that determines the lens through which you read this text of scripture.

01:17:51

Do they not realize? I think they should. They should realize they, they reject the

01:17:57

Reformation. They reject the Reformation. They're popeless Catholics. Because at the very point that Luther identified as the hinge upon which it all turns, they are saying

01:18:12

Luther and Calvin were mannequin. They're mannequins. That's their argument. They are on Rome's side, and now they're on Rome's side epistemologically, saying that the interpretation of the early writers needs to be the lens, an insurmountable lens in the interpretation of the text of scripture itself.

01:18:33

That's what you just heard, which then resulted in...

01:18:38

Yes, if you want to remain a traditional Christian. If you want to go be a mannequin Christian with Augustine, then it's fine to take a deterministic view.

01:18:47

But for a traditional Christian, you should hold the free will view. I didn't make this up.

01:18:55

This is exactly what they're saying. I'm not overemphasizing anything. I'm letting them speak for themselves.

01:19:07

For example, pretend Dr. Wilson is attempting to argue that Calvin and all

01:19:12

Calvinists completely ignore the Bible and get all their theological views only from Augustine and the mannequins. Strawman, what did you just say?

01:19:20

What did he just say right here? What did you just ask him? Is this not an insurmountable argument that you cannot interpret the

01:19:28

Bible this way? Well, yeah, if you want to be a mannequin Christian. That's what he just said.

01:19:37

I mean, the thesis here is that the interpretations that we give... Remember he said, oh yeah, on the back,

01:19:44

I've gotten a whole thing about the verses that were used by the mannequins and how they were used by Augustine.

01:19:58

Whole appendix does. So, without the demonstration, not only of what mannequin exegesis would even look like, what is a mannequin hermeneutic?

01:20:16

And the demonstration that not only is that identical to what Augustine does, but then it becomes identical with what

01:20:21

Calvin does, and then it becomes identical with what Turretin does, then your thesis is not substantiated.

01:20:33

Reference an unknown Lutheran. No, he's not unknown. You've actually been having conversations with him who supposedly provided over 150 pages of apparent contradictions about Augustine's view on baptisms as it relates to early church fathers, which has little to do with White's actual point of contention with Wilson regarding the introduction of deterministic philosophy within the early church writings.

01:20:49

Red Herring. It's central to his own argument. It's central to his own argument.

01:20:56

He's the one that brought it up. He's the one that said this is what started the argument with Pelagius.

01:21:05

Leighton, have you even read it? Leighton, do you have this?

01:21:13

Yes or no? Because you're complaining, I only got this a little while ago. I know how the

01:21:18

PDF, I'll bet you dollars to donuts. I've read more of this than Leighton Flowers has. Let alone this.

01:21:28

What are you talking about, man? Oh, by the way, like I said,

01:21:39

I am encouraging this young man and another fellow he's working with, I think they need to put, they're talking book.

01:21:46

They need to do the book. Because while it's not my primary focus, it's central to the argument.

01:21:53

It's central to the argument. There is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature.

01:22:00

And one of the first things I said, how many hours have I been on this? One of the first things I said, if you go read

01:22:08

Scrawley works on baptism, what you find is in that area, my experience, you find in the early church, what reflects your tradition.

01:22:22

Because I've read Ferguson, I've read all sorts of major works on the subject of baptism in the early church.

01:22:31

And the Catholics find their views and the Orthodox find their views and the

01:22:36

Lutherans find their views. And the Baptists actually find their views too. So you can, you know, grab

01:22:44

Pelican and things like that and check these things out. But it is a massively broad subject.

01:22:55

Something this small couldn't even start to summarize it. Couldn't even start to summarize it.

01:23:09

Tell your audience, you're not going to provide the material because you want to let the Lutheran provide himself. I didn't make it an argument. I'm just telling you the facts.

01:23:15

We'll get into it when we get into the dissertation. Provide quotations of Pelican.

01:23:21

There's especially stuff about the idea of faith as a gift. That we will definitely get into because that's not even a question.

01:23:31

You know, he says Augustine's first one to come up with this, go all the way back to origin. Not difficult to do.

01:23:38

Yeah, we'll get to it. But you're assuming that we're done. We ain't done, son. We ain't done.

01:23:44

Question Dr. Wilson's integrity by insisting his motives were not what Dr. Wilson claims they were when beginning his studies, i .e.

01:23:50

Wilson said he started the study to find out what the ECFs taught but is accused of going in with a view and seeking to prove it, ad hominem.

01:23:56

If I said you are to reject his conclusions because of that, that's fine. I'm saying this is just bad scholarship.

01:24:02

It is obvious to me in light of the utilization of language in the dissertation itself that instead of having no conclusion and allowing the material to drive that, the conclusion is what's driving the material.

01:24:16

That is not an ad hominem. That is my conclusion upon looking at what the argumentation itself is.

01:24:22

Question mocked Dr. Wilson's credentials and scholarship by making hyperbolic, audacious sweeping criticisms without a single refuted citation from his actual

01:24:29

Oxford thesis. Not there yet. Give me time. You'll have to back every one of these things. You won't, but you should have to back.

01:24:36

Keep promising your audience you're going to get to the scholarly citations. Tell them there are hundreds of mistakes without actually citing a single one. They include

01:24:41

Dr. Wilson won't even want to debate after these refutations finally come to light. Chest dumping. If you want to call it chest dumping, that's fine.

01:24:52

You are just simply being premature. You're just, you are acting like a person who is desperately afraid.

01:25:00

You are afraid that the man you have put forward as the proponent, the scholarly proponent of your particular unique new view, provisionism, didn't get it right.

01:25:18

Didn't get it right. You're, you're afraid. And that's how you're acting. Why would you put this out?

01:25:24

This is premature. We've said we're going to go through. What is, can you imagine, think about what this, the argumentation here is, folks.

01:25:34

It's actually being argued that I should just cut to the chase and not deal with all the background issues, not listen to an interview

01:25:42

Leighton Flowers himself did with the author. As context, as background material, man alive,

01:25:52

I wish people would be that thorough in responding to most of what I do. The complaint is you're going too deep.

01:25:59

Stop. You're just scared to death and you've got good reason to be.

01:26:06

Given what happened today, you've got good reason to be. Did I miss any? Yeah, well, there you go.

01:26:12

There you go. Okay. So we actually played a bunch of stuff there.

01:26:19

What? I, my, I don't know why this doesn't work this way.

01:26:28

I, I, it doesn't come up for me. Twitter just doesn't work for me. It's still giving me the stuff that I saw 20 minutes ago.

01:26:37

So I have to, if I've got, if I want to do that, I have to literally go in, go to search, go search

01:26:43

Twitter. Well, they're short. I can read them for you. Although some of these things

01:26:48

I can't see. And this is, so Augustine believed

01:27:01

Grace was pooping out light for a decade, according to Dr. Oakley, 16. I learned something new today. Congratulations.

01:27:07

I'm glad you did. You also learned what Clement actually did and didn't say. There's three more there.

01:27:16

My reference to the letter to Rome was in reference to Paul's letter, the letter we were debating, not

01:27:22

Clement's letter. Okay. And he did show familiarity with it, right?

01:27:28

Okay. You were very unclear. Are we admitting? Let me see if this next one.

01:27:38

So, okay. Point I've already conceded. So you've, you've conceded. Yeah. Clement never said that.

01:27:44

Good. The scholar that says all the

01:27:51

ECF save Augustine extolled the ability of the will was John Calvin. And yes, you did bring up Clement and his reference to the elect again later in the debate.

01:27:58

That was actually, it was 10 seconds later. And so we already played that. So that must've been posted during the time period.

01:28:06

As I suspected, Dr. White ignored Dr. Wilson's thesis once again to focus on a point I've already conceded. You got to come up with something, huh?

01:28:15

Because you're scared to death about what we're going to do when you get into it, aren't you? You really are. You got to do it now.

01:28:21

No more background. Don't tell people what Manichaeism is really all about. Don't, don't provide that foundation to be able to analyze what's being said.

01:28:30

Just, just get into a situation where it's one authority versus another authority.

01:28:36

That's what we want. That way we can just simply go, well, we'll go with our authority. You see, this is, you know, one of the reasons to really press this?

01:28:45

Because it's the audience that needs to be making these decisions. And we need to provide all the information upon which to do so.

01:28:54

And it's not just this subject. See, what's neat is when you go deep on something like this, then someone who's witnessing to a

01:29:00

Roman Catholic, the Roman Catholic starts using Clement's letter to Rome. And all of a sudden you go, hey, I know something about Clement's letter to Rome.

01:29:08

I know something about its background. In fact, I know that it demonstrates that Rome at that time was not run by a single bishop, that there was a plurality of elders and that that's contrary to Rome's claims.

01:29:21

You see how that works? And it was, yeah, you know, definitely, definitely.

01:29:30

Okay. I wonder why that stuff doesn't come up, even though it had my name, my nick in it. I sort of wonder about this shadow banning stuff at times.

01:29:40

Because I'm just on twitter .com. I'm not using the programs. This have never worked for me. So I'm actually on twitter .com

01:29:46

and none of that came up in my feed. I had to go searching for it. So maybe he's shadow banned. I don't know.

01:29:56

Yeah, well, you, yeah. Anyway. So I think we played a good portion of this stuff.

01:30:05

There's just, but there are a few more because I have not, if I played it and didn't catch it, there is a section here where Wilson talks about the

01:30:17

Eastern Orthodox view of Augustine. And I've been waiting. I've got material on that.

01:30:24

I've had material on that for two weeks that demonstrates that he's an error on that too. But it didn't come up in what

01:30:33

I played. And so it's already been an hour and a half. We've covered a lot.

01:30:39

But there's very little left in the interview. So the game plan, not tomorrow.

01:30:46

Okay. I might, we could probably play the rest of what needs to be played in 15 minutes tomorrow.

01:30:54

Tomorrow, I want to do some stuff on the resurrection. I want to do some stuff on other topics. And we will do so, but we might play the last few things toward the end of the program, just to get them done.

01:31:09

And that will allow us to get into the book itself. And so what I will try to do, 99 % of my audience does not have access to this.

01:31:22

When people were calling you, were they asking about this or this?

01:31:30

Yeah. This is what people are reading. And it's what they're talking about.

01:31:39

If you want to, if you want to go on, if Layton, if you want to go on Twitter right now and say, yeah, the dissertation and the book are completely different things.

01:31:49

One is bogus. One is real. Go ahead. My assertion is this is consistent with the interview, which means this could be consistent with this.

01:32:01

And this is what people are reading. So this is what I'm going to deal with. And what I'll do is

01:32:06

I will pull from the dissertation, the material that substantiates or contradicts material that's in here.

01:32:14

I'm dealing with everything. Wow. That's a good way to do it, huh? Forgive me folks for the sarcasm.

01:32:22

But when folks post stuff like that, that is so plainly meant to undercut meaningful historical analysis of claims that fundamentally say

01:32:35

I'm a heretic and that the God that I preach is the Manichaean God. When they themselves don't know anything about Manichaeism.

01:32:47

Okay. My heart rate goes up. Do forgive me for not being absolutely calm in the midst of all of that type of thing.

01:32:56

But I get tired of it. I really get tired of it. So with that, tomorrow we'll be back.

01:33:06

We will be back. And we will not start off with this. I promise. Because tomorrow is

01:33:13

Good Friday. You know what? Remind me. Please remind me.

01:33:19

Make a note. I had one of our deacons. One of our deacons asked me about the

01:33:28

Friday, Saturday, Sunday thing. And the people saying that the crucifixion was on Wednesday.

01:33:39

Well, what are you talking about? Yeah, I've talked about it before. I tried searching for it.

01:33:47

Tough to find. Well, yeah, you say so. You know where everything is.

01:33:55

Well, regular human beings need to be able to find that kind of stuff. Not weirdos.

01:34:03

No, no, no, no, no. We will do it. We'll do a discussion of it.

01:34:09

We'll keep it short. We'll keep it brief. But we'll do a discussion. Why do we say that tomorrow is

01:34:17

Good Friday? That tomorrow is when the crucifixion took place in the Passion Week?

01:34:23

Because you would think three days, three nights doesn't fit. It does.

01:34:29

It's necessary. We'll talk about Parasque. If you want to know what Parasque means, tune back in tomorrow.

01:34:37

And we will take a look at that issue before we do anything else. And then I might have a few comments because I am preaching at Apologia on Sunday.

01:34:47

And I am preaching on justification. But because of what day it is, did you know that the

01:34:54

Bible connects justification and the resurrection in a very important and special way that is rarely emphasized?

01:35:02

It's right there in the text. We'll talk about it tomorrow. Hope to see you then. Thanks for watching.