Reviewing the Comments of TD Jakes in the Elephant Room

So you believe there's one God, three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit. You believe Jesus was fully

God, fully man. You believe he died on the cross, in our place, for our sins.

You believe he bodily rose from death. You believe that he is the judge of the living and the dead.

And you believe that apart from Jesus, there's no salvation. Absolutely. Thank you.

Well, that's all we need, right? According to many today, that is all we need.

That was Mark Driscoll, asking Bishop TD Jakes those important questions.

Now, the one thing he didn't say yes to was, do you believe God exists in three persons?

Maybe he nodded his head or something, I don't know, but there was previous discussion. We'll get to that in just a moment.

We'll get to that in just a moment. But for many people today, that's all you need.

That's it. There's no question any longer. Everything that has been said, Bishop Jakes admitted that he had an experience of Christ in a oneness church, not a

UPCI church, but a oneness church. There are a number of them. And yet, he agreed to everything that Mark Driscoll said, so that should be it.

And all of us haters just need to stop our hating and we need to hold hands and all should be well, right?

Well, if that's all you had to go on, if there hadn't been, that's looking at here, that's 13 minutes into the sound clip that is now circulating around from the

Elephant Room 2, from two days ago now, I guess. From the same time period, it would be nice to ask

Chris Rosebro about it, but he was threatened with arrest if he didn't leave, so that's a little bit odd.

But be that as it may, there was things said before this.

There were a lot of things, many things said before this, and so if you're willing to just ignore all those things, then that should be enough.

But people who are concerned about truth have other questions. For example, if Bishop Jakes is saying that today he believes that God exists in three persons, then even as he admits, there are oneness people who would view him as a heretic for saying that, right?

Whatever it is he means by that. And I think he's probably referring to UPCI folks at that point.

But if you come to believe the Trinity, does that require you to identify as false those views that deny the

Trinity? Evidently, for the Elephant Room, it does not. And that is one of the biggest problems we're facing today, folks.

If you're listening today, it's because you're interested in these things, and hopefully not just because you want to be involved in disputations and stuff.

Todd Friel called me shortly after the whole thing started, and he was ready to start whatever the last crusade we had was, let's say it was number 12, ready to start number 13.

I mean, he's ready to go. And maybe he's right. But I'll be perfectly honest with you, I didn't even have the date on my calendar.

I just started seeing things on Twitter, oh, that Elephant Room thing. I'm not focused on this stuff. If you listened to the last dividing line, you know exactly what

I'm focused on. I'm focused on witnessing the gospel of Jesus Christ and the truth about who

Jesus is, and the entirety of the doctrine of the Trinity to Muslims. And of course, in defense of Reformed theology, there's lots of things that I'm focused on.

But this is, honestly, Mark Driscoll and James McDonald and these folks, just, they don't represent me.

They're not a part of my, you know, that's why I don't get invited to the big things, you know, because I just, I don't have any interest.

That's not where I am. But in listening to this, and in seeing that today there are some big names going, that's good enough.

Bishop Jakes is a Trinitarian, we just need to embrace him along those lines. That word -face stuff that he does, the prosperity gospel and all that stuff, you know.

But, you know, we can all hold hands, we agree on the Trinity now. Do we?

One of the things that concerns me is, even if that were the case, even if that's where he is, could someone please explain to me how you can actually be a

Trinitarian, but view that sort of like, well, saying this, and this is a true statement.

I was once a premillennialist. I'm now an amillennialist.

Now, there are some premillennialists that if you were once an amillennialist, became a premillennialist, if you did not condemn all amillennialists to hell, that means you're not really a premillennialist.

There are a few people like that, I suppose. But the fact of the matter is, that is a change in eschatological perspective,

I believe based upon a more consistent interpretation and hermeneutic of the scriptures.

But there are people like Squirrel and Channel, who remains confused on these issues.

And we still love him. I mean, how can you dislike a squirrel? But you know, it's a matter where people disagree with one another within squirrel growls.

Yeah, I've never heard a squirrel growl either. But it's within, it's an in -house debate.

Is the Trinity really an in -house debate? Is this a matter of perspective? Is this something that's, well,

I'm comfortable now with saying persons. I prefer manifestations. But I'm comfortable with that.

Are the core doctrines of the faith up for that kind of non -definition?

Well, you know, God's just so mysterious. He's so mysterious.

Oh, Shamgar. Well, see, Shamgar and Squirrel, they look the same. So, sorry. Squirrel was laughing. Shamgar was growling.

Sorry about that. Anyway, watching the channel is somewhat distracting. Are the core issues really just, you know,

I'm now comfortable. I've moved from oneness to a comfortable

Trinitarianism. But, you know, I don't think oneness is wrong. I mean, there's value in the manifestations idea too, see.

Now, we've all seen this happening with the gospel. I mean, there's an entire spectrum of people who believe that the gospel is sort of a, you know, it's a thing on the side there.

We can have disagreements about it. Does anybody really know? I mean, come on. All of this comes down to basically saying, you know what?

We don't know what we believe. No, no, it's just all mystery. I mean, can you imagine if a believing

Muslim walked into the elephant room, if he was actually allowed in, you know, he had his ticket and he was allowed in and, excuse me, gentlemen, but could you tell me really what you believe about who

Jesus is? Well, you know, it's a mystery and we, you know, we're never really going to figure out. It's just a mystery.

That's what's really concerning to me about this. But there's much more about it that should be concerning to us.

Let's start with this. Let's start with some history, shall we? Let's start with some history.

Bishop Jakes, this was not the first time he's ever spoken. Now, I know that a lot, I know a lot of, especially of my

Reformed brothers and sisters have never heard T .D. Jakes speak. Never. I have, a few times.

In fact, I'll be honest with you. The last time I heard T .D. Jakes speak was a couple of years ago. I was packing for a trip.

I think I was going back to St. Louis, so it would have been first weekend of December. And I just happened to be flipping the channels.

I went and stopped on, I never mentioned the channel, but it's between 20 and 22. And here was

T .D. Jakes and he was preaching on suffering and I was blown away. He was talking about the sovereignty of God and being conformed to Christ.

I was like, this, I, who's this guy? This cannot be T .D. Jakes. But then

I've heard sermons that basically completely contradicted that. So it sort of depends on where he is. Now I'm going to suggest something, especially to some of the big name scholars that I have heard, that I've been told anyways, have basically said, you know what?

What he said in elephant room was enough. He's Trinitarian. There needs to be an explanation about what he has said in the past and the relationship that has to what he said in the elephant room and was not challenged on.

That's the problem. So let's start with this one. Here's T .D.

Jakes. And I guess one of the things he does in some of his sermons is he has a woman read the

Bible and that he sort of does a running commentary on it.

Let's listen to T .D. Jakes and well, you'll see. going.

And I know the way. Come on. Jesus said, check it out.

I am the way. I am the way. The truth. The truth. And the light.

And the light. No man cometh unto the father. No man cometh unto the father. Look at this y 'all. No man cometh unto the father.

But by me. But by me. You got to come through this. I'm going to say this.

I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. And I been called. God, you want to know.

Get out of here. I want to speak to the head man. Come on. Jesus said, answer him.

Jesus said to him. It has not been so long. And you have been.

Well, there you go. Yeah, I think that was a excellent quotation. I tweeted earlier this morning if you want to hear more of that.

I took that from the March 16th, 2002 Dividing Line, Eddie DelCour and Simon Escobedo go into much more depth than we will have time to go into today in examining a number of these citations.

Notice John 14 .10, do you not believe that I am in the

Father and the Father is in me becomes I am the Father. The entire

Greek term and disappears and he talks about Yahwistic terminology, terminology about Yahweh with I am.

The problem is ego doesn't appear there. It's just ego. Hati ego ento patri kai hapatri en emoi esten.

So it's actually not one of those places where John uses I am terminology. But there you have

Bishop Jakes. Now I don't know how exactly how long ago that was and maybe Bishop Jakes has changed his view.

That would be good but if someone had once taught that then you would expect them to say

I once taught error on this and I no longer teach that.

That's not something I believe any longer. You would hope that that would be the case.

Let's listen to some more of what T .D. Jakes has had to say in the past.

One God manifesting in a multiplicity of ways. One God.

Now you don't divide all of those manifestations into different Gods. The God of bread.

The God of quail. The God of water. The God of trees. The God of clouds.

The God of fire. This one God who manifests himself in many different ways.

Okay. You with me? Your God is multiplicity.

Manifold. Many states. Okay. Now go back to efficiency.

Now I want you to notice something. Where is he going? This is the same time period as the other stuff.

He's going to 1 Timothy 3 .16. 1 Timothy 3 .16.

And he's talking about one God being manifested. Keep that in mind. Okay. This is the great mystery now.

Without controversy. Great is the mystery of Godliness.

For God was manifest in the flesh. So there evidently 1

Timothy 3 .16 as it's found in the King James Version of the Bible.

Because as most of you are aware, there is a major textual variant there. and unless the rest of the folks in the elephant room are using the

King James the New King James their Bibles say he who was manifest in the flesh or he who was revealed in the flesh but Bishop Jakes there is quoting from the

King James version of the Bible and there it is God was manifest in the flesh and so that was connected in Jake's is oneness teaching because clearly the previous clip was a oneness perspective when you can change the father is in me to I am the

I am in the father to I am the father that is his oneness period well in he's quoting first Timothy 316 in his oneness period right if that if there is a period let's try this one more time also from around that same time period where he's not preaching he's he's on a radio program or some context to where he's answering questions so you don't have all the audience noise which is the

Trinity the term Trinity is not a biblical term to begin with it's a theological description for something that is beyond human comprehension okay so years and years ago

Bishop Jakes when he talked to the Trinity says it's not a biblical term and God's beyond our comprehension all right but I'm not sure that we can totally hold

God to a numerical system the Lord should be God is one there he seems to think that the

Trinity is a numerical system I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean I guess threeness versus oneness but he's affirming the oneness of God which to a one this person is

Unitarianism and beside him there is no other when God got ready to make a man that looked like him he didn't make three he made one man however that one man had three parts he was body soul and spirit we have one

God but he is father in creation son and redemption and Holy Spirit and regeneration it's very important that we understand that okay so did you catch that we have one

God three different manifestations in fact let's let's let's listen to this one more time get this down because again this is this is from back then we have one

God but he is father in creation father in creation and son in redemption son in redemption and Holy Spirit and regeneration it's very important that we understand that okay so there is where Bishop Jakes was that was his perspective that's where he was coming from and what we're being asked to believe by many people today such as Mark Driscoll and James McDonald yeah someone in Puritan fan and channel just said the

Sun didn't create it exactly that that's one of the main problems here that's why

I tweeted yesterday if there had just been somebody on that panel that cared enough and I really believe it's a matter of caring enough it's not that they don't know

James McDonald has a d -man for Phoenix Seminary and a master's degree from Trinity Mark Driscoll has a master's degree from Western Western Seminary now interestingly enough they both have degrees from places where a very sub biblical gospel prevails unfortunately one

I mean one has a master's degree one has a d -man Phoenix Seminary and Western very lots and lots of anti lordship no repentance blah blah blah silliness exists not only relevant to this but it might be now

I would love to have listened live to a decent feed of the discussion but that was not provided but only a few hours after someone did post on YouTube from one of the satellite churches that watched it a record they had made so you got to listen carefully but let's listen to exactly what was said in the elephant room with with that background now with that background let's listen and if you're a person who does not think that we should be discerning if you're a person who does not think that we should concern ourselves about background issues we shouldn't worry about what

Bishop Jakes said in the past and in fact we really shouldn't worry about this well what do you believe in persons are manifested do we really know

I want to suggest to you that the attitude expressed especially by Mark Driscoll says very clearly to me that Athanasius was a fool

Athanasius was a fool in fact

Athanasius was sinful Athanasius on not unwillingly he willingly did this but in a improper way divided the body of Christ he was willing to make such strong distinctions that he was willing to be kicked out of his church five times because of his unwillingness to just allow for other perspectives and to allow that you know what

God's mysterious there's mystery here Athanasius should have allowed for mystery evidently here's what was said let's listen carefully and let's see if we can make some connections with what

Bishop Jakes has already said so you can have a true conversion to Christ under the preaching of the oneness gospel and in the worship of the oneness view of God that's what

Bishop you accept his perspective then that gospel and that view of God is sufficiently true to be salvific just so you make sure you're you're you're following an understanding okay so it wasn't

UPCI it's now UPCI back then as UPC but it's it's not the the st.

Louis group the very strong holiness group but it is Jesus only modalism which would mean baptism the name of Jesus only not baptism name of the

Father Son Holy Spirit and the belief that God is manifest in three ways but what that means and and you know some of you listening today are listening only because and you've never listened this program before if you go back in the archives this program which are available we stream we stream this program 24 -7 doesn't mean

I do it for seven but we stream all the way back to 1998 on the on the way through we spent hours and hours and hours and hours reviewing debates by mr.

Roger Perkins who is a oneness advocate carefully analyzing exactly what you're saying in preparation for the debate that I did against him in Brisbane Australia back in on late

October I have debated oneness folks in many different venues

I did a debate 1999 part of which is available on YouTube which is very well known amongst oneness people against dr.

Saban I I know a little something about oneness theology and I was just chatting with Richard Bacillus pastor in Palmdale California he is going to be doing a give -and -take with a former oneness person who's been converted out of oneness there is a language that exists amongst oneness people and when you understand what they're saying you can detect it many people including great scholars the faith don't spend any time studying cults and isms and so they can be easily taken in by their language because they don't know what the language is so it's important to note that in looking at how people are examining things and how people are dealing with things all right so just just listen carefully so you have traditional

Trinitarians traditional oneness and they do they just they describe it differently

I would suggest that it's more than just a description and in fact

I would say that most oneness people would say it's more than just a description which by the way maybe why

Bishop Jake says that he's considered heretical by people in like UPCI churches because there is this middle group where we're basically you just sort of throw up your hands and say well

I don't know there's this mystery it could be this it could be that you know we just the

Bible and this is really one of the points here folks what they're saying is the Bible is not clear enough to actually make a decision it just it's just not there and a large number of scholars would agree with that but of course they also would not agree that the

Bible was inspired by God so they don't look for harmony they don't they split up into parts and you split the

Bible into parts sure it coming up with a meaningful coherent message from it's impossible if that's where you want to go just go all the way and I think that's where this elephant room stuff leads is to a fundamental well it is a downgrade controversy really is similar to what happened in England it is a downgrade controversy and that's what you're always fighting every generation has to fight downgrade that there's nothing new there is nothing new there at all but just just keep that in mind and I was in that church and raised in that church for a number of years and my problem with it as I began to go on and as I began to develop my ministry

I started preaching from that church and from that book and that sort of thing but I'm also informed by the infiltration of my

Baptist experience and my Methodist experience so I ended up like Methabapticostal in a way

Methabapticostal okay so is he saying that he has he's come up with his own view it's sort of a mixture of things is you know

I can understand that if you're talking about arguing fine points of eschatology or something like that but is the

Trinity something where you can pull from a little bit here and pull from a little bit there and just come up with something new remember we're talking about the very revealed identity of God himself is that something we can just go well there's there's different parts and pieces you can just it's like you can put together different ways to Rubik's Cube may

I suggest that as soon as you start doing this I want to throw rocks at folks you are once again showing a tremendous amount of disrespect to the history of the church and to those who have come before us who some of whom were willing to die for these issues and were willing to be driven out of their churches and were willing to give their lives in the sense of the entirety of their ministries to the defense of something they thought was absolutely definitional important that is really what we're being told here is that you know what if you look back at the history of Christianity there's a lot of really of people who did really dumb things and one of the things they did was they actually thought that that the truth on this subject excludes variation from it they were just wrong evidently so you want to be a bridge builder and that's why you have the ecumenical movement and that's why you have people trying to build bridges to Mormonism and you have the the silliness of Chris long and you have the the inroads of postmodern thinking that cannot handle that there is objective truth in certain areas that cannot be manipulated and and turned into something other than what it is

I think you need to recognize that Driscoll despite the fact he'll take on Justin Briarley not now look

I love Justin but Justin was a little cheeky in that interview by the way I last questions about his wife that was

I was surprised to just that I actually listen that and I had enough balance and fairness to say you know

Driscoll wasn't completely off in everything he said not saying that he was right about everything either but okay he goes after Justin Briarley on his egalitarianism and I would go after Justin, Justin doesn't want to debate me on that and he would say that but maybe because I'm just a nasty yank but he'll go after Justin Briarley on complementarianism versus egalitarianism but now we're sitting here and we're talking the

Trinity and he will not challenge on anywhere near the level that he challenged

Justin Briarley hello can someone see imbalance here can someone see a lack of of balance and and proper perspective

I think so does that mean like the

Aryans folks when we talk about modalism we are talking about the earliest heresy ever dealt with by the church do you know that was a hundred years before Nicaea okay 75 years the century before Nicaea the

Eastern Church in particular had to deal with this concept and it was rejected from the start so yeah it's been hundreds actually it's been almost thousands that this has been an issue no question about that but when did modern man become so brilliant that everything that has already been settled in the past can just be brought up and put back on the table again

I understand that some of the dogma that I was taught was in abundance movement was very dogmatic and very narrow and really not the best description of how

I now understand the Godhead now did you catch that did you catch that let me let me replay that because this is vitally important I guess

I didn't go far enough back it's very small screen here really not the best description of how

I now understand the Godhead really not the best description

I mean that's again this this raises the very same question that I have in regards the gospel for many people and that is when you encounter

Rome's gospel is that just not the very best description is the

Roman mass just not the best description of the sacrifice of Christ are the solos just a little better description than the non solos is it just a little bit too dogmatic just a little bit too narrow if we could just widen it out just a little bit this is not how someone speaks who has come to understand the absolute necessity of recognizing that the

Sun as the Sun has eternally existed this is someone who's seeking to be ecumenical and to allow for all sorts of different views that's why

I don't think this is a rehabilitation of oneness the oneness folks would find this to be offensive anybody who believes an objective truth should find this to be offensive reconcile in regards to personal sin not compromise in regards to revelational truth people hear this and they they they they grab hold of the emotion but don't realize the words are being used in a completely foreign way reconcile the unity of the body of Christ is based upon truth what did

Jesus say in John 17 yes he prayed that we all be one and what was the context of that sanctify them in the truth your word is truth reconciliation and unity is vitally important but it's always based upon truth and the difference between saying that the

Sun came into existence at his birth in Bethlehem and saying that the Sun is eternally been

God he is the God -man is night and day night and day before we even get into and I think what you're leading us into is wise and helpful and it reflects why we're here how we relate to people who differ is on the subject before we even go to that I'd love to give you an opportunity to just like there were some particular scriptures that began to inform you you began to move and develop and what you personally believe

I like to just where you articulate that this church was in several passages sometimes the doctor fits sometimes it doesn't and when the doctor becomes a primary thing you force it into fitting places where it doesn't fit

I really at this point in my life don't want to force my theology to fit within my denomination

I'm open to hear whatever God is saying Jesus baptized in the Jordan River for example coming up out of the water the

Holy Spirit descends like a dove the father speaks from heaven and we see all three of them in one occasion or in Genesis let us make man in our own likeness or Elohim then he is the one

God who manifests himself in a plurality of ways or when Jesus says I am in the father and the father is in me an understanding or attempting to understand did you catch that I am the father and the father is in me now that is a phrase we just heard only a few minutes ago

Bishop Jakes translate into I am the father so it would be very interesting to understand well how have you changed that perspective and what about what about your use and the use by oneness people in general first Timothy 316 in fact what about and here's a citation listen listen to this citation quote while the primary sources of confusion this matter is related to the word persons the doctrines of Trinity states the

Father the Son Holy Ghost are three persons who make up one God in actuality the Father Son Holy Ghost are three manifestations of one

God this word manifestation means to appear and it is quite scriptural the Bible tells us God was manifest in the flesh first Timothy 316 and where is that from that's from the

Inquirer's Handbook by Randy Phillips ministry the world of Pentecost Randy Phillips of Phillips Craig and Dean that is a classic oneness presentation and it doesn't like the word persons it uses the term manifestation and it draws it from the

Textus Receptus reading God was manifest in the flesh most of oneness folks are King James only of first Timothy 316 that is directly from Randy Phillips ministry and I think that will be relevant as we listen to this now by the way you might say see that no one no one is person said no everyone this person could say that since these are different manifestations they have different roles the father has different role in the son the son is the human being the father is the deity that indwells him the father has taken the role of the

Holy Spirit one is people can and do say exactly what

Bishop Jakes just said I'm very comfortable with that I'm very comfortable with that I'm very comfortable in particular genes but that doesn't mean anything about truth

I don't care what makes people comfortable I want to know what they confess and that what they confess when it comes to who

God is is clear and understandable there is very little difference in what

I believe and you believe that does not sound like we are all

Trinitarians I've never said to other men on a panel where we are presenting the

Trinity you know what you know there's very little difference between what we believe really that means there is a difference it may be little but it depends on what you think little is

I don't think the difference between a divine eternal person and a manifestation is a little thing evidently

Bishop Jakes does think it's a little thing okay here we go with the theological agnosticism theological agnosticism

God is bigger than any of our descriptions well there's a truism that doesn't take much does it but folks you have to be able to see through this stuff you've got to be able to think through this because if you take if you take a

God is bigger than any of our descriptions so that stuff in the Bible about the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob over against the false gods of the peoples around Israel it just doesn't matter who were those prophets thinking they could define

God and put him in a box oh that's terrible you mean the same prophets that Jesus affirmed were sent by God and spoke by the

Holy Spirit the same prophets that Jesus quoted as having prophecies concerning himself those prophets do you want to hold the view of scripture that Jesus held or the view of scripture that postmodernists hold

God's so big hey God's so big that the

God tent so big everybody could get in there let's all bring in the Jehovah's Witnesses and the

Mormons and the Sikhs and the Buddhists and the Muslims we can just all get together and sing kumbaya oh but you draw a line too narrowly

I draw the line well the prophets drew the line and I got a line where the

Apostles of Jesus Christ drew the line Paul talked about false Jesus's that means just because someone says

Jesus three times doesn't make him a Christian does it I don't know who the sarcasm guy there is sorry

I don't keep up with these guys I can tell who Mark Driscoll is but the rest of them I don't know and honestly don't care because whoever that was

McDonald okay because I mean I was just silly and it's insulting

I'm offended by that guy and I'm offended by what he said and how he said it because what he's actually saying is that scripture that Bible don't tell me it's clear enough to decide these issues don't tell me it can actually reveal who

God is and who we're worshiping no no no no no no God needs us don't tell me about this biblical sufficiency stuff don't talk to me about persecuted scripture no

I don't want to hear any of it it offends me well sir if you're offended then I don't know why anybody's listening to what you have to say anyway okay

Driscoll finally feels like you know he's got to be feeling some pressure here he's written a book on systematic theology now

I'll have to admit I ran across a quote someone sent me a quote by Twitter yesterday where in his book on systematic theology he actually he actually is not much of a

Calvinist by the way in case you're wondering he's he's a little bit he's wishy -washy on a lot of stuff but he the quote basically said that what the early church worked out in the

Council of Chalcedon in regards to the relationship of the father that was beyond beyond the

Bible God don't worry about that stuff went went off went off course really okay that's interesting but clearly he's feeling some pressure to finally get around asking a meaningful question and that's where the the important stuff here happens and it's coming up right mystery and it's like a dimmer switch you know how much certainty how much mystery thank you for you you know the issue between Trinitarianism and modalism at its essence is one

God manifesting himself successively in three ways or one God three persons simultaneously existing eternally so okay there's there that's pretty good it could be made much more forceful it won't be that's as close you're gonna get and why the the

Simon the simultaneously versus the other because what's important to understand is that the one this person can say all the sons eternally existed as a divine plan in the father's mind same thing with the spirit in that way these are roles the father's always planned to take or manifestations that were part of his plan and and so on and so forth so if you say simultaneously then at least you're starting to touch on the real issue here and that is did the

Sun as a divine person exist distinguishable from the father in eternity past before before the birth of Bethlehem was there such a person as the

Sun at the same time as you have the father was is that what you will confess he doesn't get asked that he doesn't get asked that he has now at least been given a slight sort of wimpy but it's their challenge so your best understanding now and I understand there is some mystery for sure would you say it's one

God manifesting himself in three ways or one God in three persons now he's

Driscoll's question contrasts it contrasts the manifestations versus persons as it as it must be let's hear remember all the remember the quotes remember the quote

I read you this few minutes ago from a oneness source while the primary sources of confusion this matters related the word persons the doctrine the

Trinity states the father Holy Ghost are three persons who make up one God and actually the father and Holy Ghost are three manifestations of one

God this word manifestation means to appear and it is quite scriptural the Bible tells us that God was manifest in the flesh first Timothy 316 now by the way that is confusing a noun manifestation with a verb final

I was I recall in first Timothy 316 yes has if oneroth a and sarky first Timothy so it's confusing the the action with the noun in first Timothy 316 that's a oneness source oneness theology let's listen to Bishop Jake's neither one of them totally get it for me so the historical position of the

Christian Church on the Trinity doesn't get it for him not enough it's not not enough the latter one that's persons that's where I stand today why is that enough there you go there you go how is that any different the way said before persons doesn't do it

I'll go there I'm comfortable with that but I prefer manifestations because first Timothy 316 says

God was manifest in the flesh and that's a mystery of godliness so we really we really shouldn't be drawn these lines see that's why he says he's considered radical by both sides and appropriately so I bet you dollars donuts the

Roger Perkins identify him as a heretic course Roger Perkins identify anybody's a heretic so I guess it doesn't really matter but the point is that from a historic oneness perspective no oneness person is gonna say well

I'm comfortable with that and no Trinitarian is going to say what he just said that doesn't do it for me

I'll go ahead and say that but you know it's a mystery God was manifest in the flesh first Timothy 316 what does that mean does it mean what he said it meant in years past is is is that this

Bishop Jakes and Holy Spirit and regeneration it's very important that we understand that is that where he is now he's one thing is absolutely certain he does not abjure as an error the teaching that God is manifest rather than the existence of three persons in fact if you look at the

Potter's house right now Potter's house org about us belief statement

God there is one God creator of all things infinitely perfect and eternally existing in three manifestations father son and Holy Spirit now the belief statement follows beneath that is neither thoroughly accurately or biblically

Trinitarian or oneness it is a mass of confusion it doesn't answer any of the questions it would not be a foundation upon which anyone could give a meaningful defense of the

Christian faith apologetically to the rest of the world to Buddhism or Hinduism or Islam or atheism for that matter you couldn't do it but there it is there is one

God reading it from brought it up this morning this is the current belief statement of the

Potter's house there is one God creator of all things infinitely perfect and eternally existing in three manifestations father son and Holy Spirit now what

I'd like to have heard some meaningful questions asked could does it bother me that according to Twitter reports at the end

Mark Driscoll fist -bumped Bishop Jakes and that there are well -known

Christian scholars they saying that's good enough good enough a can't get you know I mean

I'll how many times have I said over the I don't know how many years now that I've been addressing oneness theology in the trinity that a large number of evangelicals in the church today are functional

Unitarians and functional modalists they are we don't teach

I know what was that what was the one statement in my book The Forgotten Trinity that everyone glommed on to and caught hold of it was

I love the Trinity you don't hear people saying that because we don't teach on it how can it be the object of love and passion when we don't teach on so I fully understand fully understand this issue and that people go hey look if most evangelicals don't care about it why should

I but that's the point that's the point my friends these men are supposed to be leaders these men are supposed to be modeling discernment and what are they showing us what are they modeling for us it's not discernment it is a fundamental collapse in discernment and a fundamental collapse in a recognition of what is truly central in the

Christian faith this isn't something where you just go oh well hey you know what this just doesn't matter who died on the cross what's the relationship of intercession who is appearing in the presence of the father for us who gave his life for us who is the fountainhead of salvation who is indwelling us now what's the means by which the father and son make their presence available in the life of the believer these are all

Trinitarian questions they are all Trinitarian issues and just because there are people willing for the sake of some show of unity or some show of boy we can really be open -minded and the rest of this stuff none of that should to a true believer have any any weight at all any weight at all 877 -753 -3341 877 -753 -3341 is the toll -free number and I've had a number of people on Twitter Twitter and Facebook who have really been coming after me

I had a young man you know sort of come after me over overnight and I've responded to a few times and I've invited him to call in I'd like to hear a fellow by name of you see here

Chris Dell I'd like to hear from these folks I'd like to understand you know

Chris Dell said to me what's the saddest part of you is that you study to prove people wrong you're absolutely pathetic well

Chris you just said I'm wrong and you didn't bother to study me so which is better for me to study and say people are wrong or for you to say

I'm wrong without even bothering to study which is which is better we have a lot of people who have come into the church but they still think like the world the world that actually is is putting up with the claims of people who say that they are tolerant they're not tolerant at all did you hear about the young poor young man oh

I want to do a whole story on this I was listening to Michael Brown and Frank Turek talking about this the young 15 year old man who is he was asked to write a counterpoint perspective on gay marriage for his high school newspaper and when he did someone complained and the superintendent of the school district brought him in and according to his attorneys the young man bullied him threatened him with expulsion and called him ignorant and the world goes oh yes what a tolerant man he is we need to be tolerant that's not toleration anybody can see that now we can see it out there

I bet you everyone would agree with me about that oh there's there's stupidity oh boy you know

I mean I'll bet you this audience if I came to you next time and said you know what we have an opportunity to debate that superintendent up in Wisconsin if you all will just get me to Wisconsin I'll debate we would we would cover that in in five minutes because everybody'd love to see that they'd love to see that but all of a sudden we look inside if this is inside I don't know that it is

I mean I'm talking about dress school and stuff like that and all of a sudden the discernment disappears discernment absolutely disappears eight seven seven seven five three three three four one or dividing line dividing dot line via Skype the lines are filling up very very quickly which is a good thing to see we are going to be going for another half hour hey if the phones keep us going longer than that that's fine too but we're planning on doing a jumbo edition today so we'll be going for another half hour on the program eight seven seven seven five three three three four one let's talk with Bill in Alabama hi

Bill thanks for taking my call yes sir my question my questions related to the issue of TD Jake's and his views on Trinitarian Trinitarianism I agree with you that his views are outside Orthodox evangelical belief of the

Trinity I disagree with him completely my question is how do we determine which interpretation of Scripture is

Orthodox are correct and what is heresy or incorrect and I will context this question by I'm starting to read through dr.

Greg Allison's book historical theology and this is quite this is a question that came to my mind in the first chapter well

I'm not sure exactly what you're what you're referring to I mean there are there are certain fundamental revelations in Scripture and basically heresy and error always involves a denial of certain revelations that are found in Scripture and you can normally the person who starts a heresy doesn't intend to do so they simply have an imbalance or they detect an imbalance in the church in their day and react against it the other direction so you know if you read historical theology then you know that a lot of people who eventually would be considered heretical we're simply very concerned about what they seem to see as an imbalance for example

Nestorius was very concerned about the term Theotokos because it could result in an exaltation of Mary and a a that was one of his concerns wasn't the only concern but an exaltation which it eventually did but he went too far the other direction in trying to correct that even though he himself thought that the

Council of Chalcedon actually vindicated him so when we talk about how do you know that your interpretation of Scripture is correct regarding monotheism well because there is a consistent testimony in Scripture about the fact there is only one true

God and it it's it's expressed in many different ways and presented to us in many different ways and so you you look at that and and to do what the

Mormons do they have to fundamentally deny that there is a consistent revelation of Scripture on these issues when we talk about modalism we see the clear differentiation of divine persons as divine persons there's there's no way to have just a idea in the mind of God who is the son when the son is the creator and when the son is involved in doing things as a divine person prior to his birth so it is the you know historically called the analogy of faith it is the consistency of Scripture itself in fact

I had a conversation with a good friend number of years ago we were talking about a particular text I think it was in John chapter 16 as I recall you're saying how do you

I mean just on a grammatical level you know that could be interpreted in the wrong way and I'm like you're right you're right it could be interpreted in the wrong way and there's nothing in the immediate context of this one verse that you can use to keep it from being interpreted in the wrong way but it exists as a part of the entire revelation of Scripture and it is that entire revelation that then becomes the the connection the the safeguard the rails that keep the the train from going off the tracks so it all goes back to Scripture and allowing all of Scripture to speak and maintaining a belief that there is a consistency in Scripture one of the problems in the earliest church was for example someone like Justin Martyr never ever quotes

Paul so think about that I mean we don't even know that he had Paul's writings so is there is there a reason to understand that he might there as a result not have as full an orthodoxy and as balanced orthodoxy as we could have when we have the entirety of the canon well of course because it is the fullness of that revelation and Toto that must be taken into consideration and unfortunately what you're seeing today and much of modern evangelical theology in seminaries is a breakdown of the faith that there is a consistent message of Scripture and once you no longer have that confidence then that's why

I've said many many times and people aren't sure why I keep saying this but in many seminaries today the systematic theology classes have moved from being the center of the curriculum to the historical department because you look back at the fact that people once believed that you could come up with a consistent teaching of Scripture but that that's no longer an issue any longer that's that's what that's not what most people believe anymore

I still do and that's what makes me odd and unusual. I agree with you

I've just had some conversations with some friends that have kind of taken the approach of how do we is it do we know orthodoxy simply because the majority wins the majority of the early church won no and that's how we decide what is orthodox and what is heresy no and in no way shape or form it's not a matter of majority wins the truth is rarely overly popular

Paul's teaching on grace will always be the minority opinion because of false profession and the fact that it takes a work of grace for us to believe in that work of grace so no it's not a matter of majority opinion anyway shape or form it is again the the reason

I mean think about what happened the Council of Nicaea you you have the victory of truth however for the next 40 years that was not considered by the majority of people to be the truth and someone like Athanasius was in the minority so what gave him the foundation and the strength to eventually be victorious in that situation well if you look at his writings it was in fact the teaching of Scripture itself and it was the consistency of that teaching you cannot consistently preach and teach the

Word of God and not come up with the Orthodox understanding of these things that it's not a matter of majority opinion the there will always be

Semper Reformanda because there will always be imbalances and every generation will have imbalances on both directions and it's that is the absolutely consistent experience of the church over the course of of history okay

Bill hey I'd love to talk more about that but we've got a lot of folks online so we're gonna need to get to them okay thank you

Dr. White thanks Bill God bless bye -bye 877 -753 -3341 let's talk with Manuel hello

Manuel hello Dr. White how you doing this morning doing good good what do you think about T .D.

Jakes well if he's seeking to be in a club he's in the wrong and if he's seeking their favor just for their favor it's wrong do you consider him me

I think he's copper he's compromising his doctrine to say that this or that you know he's trying stuck between two worlds there it seems like to me what have what what has been your understanding in the past of where he was did you did you consider him to be teaching oneness

I thought he was I you know what is that the understanding amongst most honest people not wrapped up into T .D.

Jakes I'm sorry to interrupt you but I'm just not I know I wasn't either I I don't really pay a lot of attention to him either but you're coming from the oneness perspective and so my my question really is in that world was he at least considered to be within the orbit in light of the fact that my my recognition is maybe you can confirm this but I thought that the fact the reason he's called

Bishop is because he was consecrated and ordained in a oneness church wasn't it no that has nothing to do it do with him being consecrated in a oneness church he wasn't consecrated in a oneness church no no you're talking about his title that right

Bishop is why he's consecrated in a oneness church well no but I mean that there's no truth about that what so ever no no what

I meant was that the church that ordained him and gave him that title their official theology was oneness wasn't it the way

I understand it like I said I don't know you know I don't know all that much about him I thought that he was oneness you know but it it sounds to me like he could be compromised and I you know

I don't really know all the whole story I heard what you had played and it sounds to me like he's trying to compromise his position and be a member of a club okay so you're a oneness guy so so let me see if you could confirm this could you ever say what he said when he said

I am comfortable with saying God in three persons no absolutely not

I could not be comfortable with that whatsoever and so he would when he said that people on the oneness side would consider him heretical you'd agree with him that that probably would be the case that most oneness folks would say that yeah you know if he's saying that God is three persons and God is a

Trinity then that you know then yeah I believe that that's not correct I don't believe that anywhere found in Scripture okay all right well

Manuel I know you call frequently when I'm talking about Islam and other things like that but I think it's a good step forward that we were actually able to have this conversation about TD Jakes and we actually agreed

I think that the this may this may be the great event predicted by the

Mayan calendar for 2012 I'm not sure but it's a possibility that this might be what the

Mayans were we're looking at was that the end of the world and so so Manuel I really appreciate your phone call today hopefully you'll let me talk call back we can actually have a conversation

I believe well and maybe talk about some doctrinal issues because I would love to discuss some of these ducks especially first Timothy 316 you talked about not all oneness people are

KJV only well I know I you know what I'm aware of that but you will admit that the citation first Timothy 316 is very common in the statements of faith of oneness churches well sure because it's a matter of common sense who was manifest in the flesh right

I understand who do you or who do you who do you believe was manifested in the flesh

God the son yes okay right but I mean the point is the point is that the the the terms that us well it's found the majority of manuscripts is not in the earliest manuscripts and the interesting things feel though dr.

white I mean you admitted that yourself it's what by saying the word very word variant you know it's there

I mean you know yeah but you have a hard time you have a hard time defending the us as the original reading though that's sure okay that's hard to do and the thing that the thing that caught me is that I would imagine that every other man sitting in the elephant room around that desk with Bishop Jake's they were not carrying the

King James or the new King James which means their translation would have read differently but no one ever said a word about it and that's that club thing where you don't you didn't you don't talk about that stuff because if you talk about the differences then well the club sort of breaks up pretty quick and that's that's my concern and I Manuel one thing

I can guarantee you are not looking to be a member of a club I am NOT I guarantee you I'm not I can

I can tell that man I got a lot of calls thanks man well we will do that we will do that conversation sometime thanks okay thank you have a good day sir bye -bye like I said that has to be what the

Mayan calendar was pointing towards right there that's funny all right let's let's talk with John over in the

City of Angels hi John hi Dr. White I'm so glad that you can take my call yes sir um

I just got an email this morning from one of the folk that come to my way to my site

I do into the word apologetics here in Los Angeles to african -american as a matter of fact years ago back in the 90s it was my ministry that got the interview with TD Jake said we passed on to the

Bible Answer Man that proved that he was a modalist and I it was kind of refreshing to read the article

I just wanted to run something down and run it by you because friend of mine from back east asked me to tune in to your show this morning and it's a question about his orthodoxy now since he says that over time that he had to reconsider his teachings and his teachings in my opinion were heretical and he

I believe that not only is he trying to be a member of the club not only has he compromised himself but how do we know what would you tell your audience how would we know if he is truly leaning towards the orthodox faith look at the position that he's in right he's a he's a very popular man in this country most african -americans would tell you that they believe that he is genuinely saved and a man of God speaking

I did a quick five or six minute clip on my website today and at the end of it is he fully

Christian as I am I left that open what would you say I think

I think one of the tragedies of the elephant room is that at least in the person of Mark Driscoll I would like to think that there could have been a means of advancing truth in regards to Bishop Jake's if the right questions had been asked and if the response from TD Jake's was

I don't know or that's just mystery then you could advance the biblical revelation of who

Jesus Christ is by explaining well it's not mystery in the sense of something outside of divine revelation it is a part of divine revelation let's look at the text if if someone had just been willing to break the mold of the club thing we are charting a new path and we sort of like the fact that there are all these people out here that don't like this thing if they've just been able to put that aside for a while and say look what we're talking about here is the biblical evidence of the pre -existence of the

Sun as a divine person that's not mystery that's revelation would you be willing to have to wait to engage in a conversation with Jake's of course roundtable of course but I'm well in the in this it but not in that not on the basis that the elephant room put it

I would I would see that the basis of the elephant room was we're all getting together and we've already made the decision that everybody here is on the same page and now we're going to talk about no

I'm not I don't I'm not going to make that kind of a statement I would love to I have proven my ability over the past starting in 1990 so for 22 years

I have proven my ability to engage in respectful debate and I don't think there's anything wrong with debate

Paul engaged in debate it is apostolic it's biblical and and anybody

I I would direct anybody to the video of the debate between myself and Abdullah Kunda in Sydney Australia in October of last year to see that that can be done in a respectful fashion but I would be happy to dialogue with the man and ask the meaningful questions you need to be realizing realizing dr.

white that Jake's does not have a theological background to answer those questions as a seminarian would realizing also that as an african -american pastor he may take that as an affront because he is a black pastor albeit popular as he is

I believe that the indisputable question that each of us has to deal with is this man in attempting to become a member of the club really why has he made this decision to come out with this now yeah this is in particular what

I'm looking at as an apologist myself dealing with african -american issues well now

John John assume assuming that you yourself are african -american right yes okay what you just said help me to understand this because I think this is important and folks online do not bail out you can still get on and divide that line if we have to go along we'll go along that's fine help me to understand what you what you just said when you talk about his finding something to be in a front help me to understand that yeah all right listen listen the african -american

Christian community believes in its pastors in a most adamant way fiercely

TD Jake's has a lot of issues not only with the

Trinity but a lot of preaching issues a lot of subjectivism in his preaching when

I listen to it I'm very critical of what he's saying but his affront to be a Trinitarian doesn't take care of the rest of his jargon okay and and I'm saying how do we weigh a person's intentions because he claims to be orthodox no we weigh that intention right by being by the objective that he's aiming towards what is he trying to do now you see this is what

I want to discover not only as a pastor but as an african -american and why the switch now now

John living in that community then as an apologist you know the importance of a of the clarity of the expression of the faith the importance of communicating to the next generation what the

Christian faith is first Timothy to to entrust those things that you've heard me speak in public to men who are worthy

I mean all that stuff vitally important but the way that you described

Jake's why is it that he has the position that he has if it is not because of his ability to accurately handle the

Word of God no because he is accurately using a dialectic to get people to believe something that he is really not connected to and this is how a traitorous people come into the

Christian faith and do that they use the language of the faith but really in heart and mind that is not their true intention and I believe that if one is a true apologist he's looking at the objective of the person's words what is the objective what is he trying to do now we know that the economy is shot folk are not giving money mega churches are suffering and now all of a sudden

I'm orthodox come on what does that mean in other words you're preaching hasn't changed your methodology hasn't changed you're using a dialectic to persuade people to believe something and then you get with people around a roundtable and appear to be orthodox and then you start this debate back and forth because I know when people hear about this they're gonna contact me and say well

John what do you think yeah I just leave this big question mark on my website

I don't think anything different than I've always thought about him now because when you look at a man's preaching and if that preaching is consistent over as you said about your ministry over the years dr.

James White is a consistent apologist we know what we're gonna hear when we listen to you and it should be the same in every true man of God so this drastic change so -called that has come about is just another dialectical ploy to put

Jake's in a favorable position that's my opinion on it well John you you know much more about the man than I do and I appreciate the insights that you that you provide and I just I just hope that folks understand that if if he were if if what he communicated was that you know what

I've been studying this and I have I have discovered that I was in error or I have discovered the beauty of the truth these things that be something completely different I would not want to crush the bruised reed

I would not want to in any way discourage someone I've I've obviously worked with people who've come out of oneness churches and and come to embrace the

Trinity and that's one of the reasons I wrote wrote my book and all the rest that stuff I would never want to discourage that sure but my concern was what we heard was an issue of well

I'm comfortable with this but I'm not gonna say that's wrong

God's just a mystery it's just the the big tent thing and that's not the same thing as coming to conclusion well

I have I have found out that I was wrong about these things that absolutely I think we're tracking on the same course thanks

James for coming thank you very much John all right god bless you over there thank you very much all right less 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 we still have dividing that line via Skype is wide open and let's talk with Justin hi

Justin how you doing dr. white doing good I haven't heard from the Bible Baptist squad up here in Rochester yet no response on that dividing line from back in October okay yeah but I just wanted to ask you a quick question on something

I mentioned on Twitter yesterday to you about separation issues what do we do in response because like for instance in my church a lot of the young people listen to Driscoll right and Piper for instance with Rick Warren what do we do as far as you know recommendations books you know what are your thoughts on that well

I think you have to be honest I mean if someone if someone were to say to me well in light of elephant room and not just elephant room there's now a a pile of issues that you could you could point to I would have to say look there are times that Mark Driscoll says true things but the fact the matter is there are imbalances here that are that seem to indicate you have a man here who enjoys engendering controversies and just goes the flow with them and the same thing with now with with the things that McDonald was saying it and especially come to important issues central issues concerning the doctrine

Trinity but my big concern is a lot of our young people and a lot of people were talking to don't understand why the

Trinity is central in the first place that's why this this is important because it does illustrate a fundamental problem along those lines it does illustrate that people will listen to this and they will not discern what's being said and that means we're not addressing these issues properly within our churches we're just not doing the job we need to do there and that is a that that's that that's a problem so you know am

I am I kicking Mark Driscoll out of the kingdom no but look my list of recommended authors today is very small and let's put it this way the list of men that in my church could stand behind our pulpit is microscopic because we honor that pulpit as a place from which

God's truth must be presented in a balanced and proper way and so if someone's gonna ask for my recommendations you know it's sort of like I will have people read books in a class in seminary that I would not

I would never recommend preach in my church so there's a difference there in other words there are writers who might cover a wide you know it might be able to be very good at communicating particular pieces of information and the background of certain issues but that's not the same thing as trusting them to then make godly and proper application of those things all right and so it's a matter of being balanced and and being open and saying look you need to you need to have discernment and their example of discernment should be being modeled from the pulpit every

Sunday morning Sunday night and Wednesday night and so on so forth so would you would you have

John Piper at your church what he preached in light of the Rick Warren incident because I'm in charge of the bookstore at our church and I'm trying to be discerning with what

I recommend yeah a number of people well that's a good question the the

Rick Warren thing you know did did Rick Warren actually see

I differentiate between someone's participation in a conference and actual ministry from the pulpit of the church so if that was a actual function of the church as in filling the pulpit

I would never have Rick Warren and I've never talked with John Piper as to what he was thinking about in having

Rick Warren for the desiring God thing now I was told yesterday I don't know this I honestly folks

I can't keep up where everyone's speaking and so I can't address some of these issues in a knowledgeable fashion but I was told yesterday that John Piper was at a at a conference where the big banner behind everyone is speaking was something along the lines of God speak to us or something like that and they had this section where someone would would read a

Bible verse and then everyone would just stand there and they would say Jesus speak to us and they would say how many hurt got a word from Jesus and everybody's applauding and stuff like that I that really concerns me

I don't I can't confirm whether he did or didn't and that probably would I watch the video on that okay

I've seen the video so you so you've seen it okay that concerns me that concerns me that really does concern me like I said the list is microscopic there's a there's a couple guys in channel right now that I know we would we would have speak

I can just think off top my head Jim Renahan has spoken at our church Richard Brassellus would be welcome to speak at our church but the number would be small because when it comes to that what we're trying to model is a consistency in your approach to the

Word of God and in your application of the Word of God to the things of life and that to me is is extremely important so every

I think every body of elders is going to have you know you we're going to be responsible for God for the decisions we make on that and I can't judge somebody else along those lines

I can simply say what we would do and that would that would be very important but when it comes to the fact that you're saying well our young people are listening to Mark Driscoll well

I would I would say I sorry I just noticed

Richard Brassellus said are you saying I'm small small list of people not a list of small people

Richard a small list of people there's a difference there sorry about that anyways I would say to them you need to be extremely discerning and ask yourself the question why are you listening to Mark Driscoll what has he done to earn and really it should be earn your ear earn your attention that's that's the question

I would ask okay yeah just we got three more callers to get to and we're going past time so thanks for your thanks for your phone call today and we're gonna get to our other we'll get these three more and we'll wrap it up after that how does that sound okay so we'll go ahead and close the close the phone lines on those we'll get to Matthew David and Seiko so let's talk to Matthew in Houston hi

Matthew hi dr. white thank you for taking my call yes sir I you know

I kind of been listening to this dialogue from you and listening to the dialogue from you know between some other brothers in the

Lord about this very issue and you know just to give you a little bit just my background

I came out of you know word of faith movement just seven years ago and of course

I was totally lost totally lost because I after a while I figured that a lot of the teachings that were coming forth were securing the truth so to speak yeah we're using the

Bible but we are we are redefining the truth so to speak and not teaching what the early church and the

Apostles in Christ himself taught so we were straying away from the doctrines of Christ even though we're using the scripture and what bothered me about this whole thing is that I'm listening to I'm here thinking that you have three supposed to be orthodox

Christian people that have are supposed to warn us against wolves in sheep's clothing and you're sitting down talking to one and you refuse to they to refuse to point out all the many errors that come out of TD Jake's his ministry and I have to agree with dr.

John Coleman who was on earlier that this guy is a heretic and yet he might be you know playing with words right now with manifestations and I just don't like to use the word manifestations but I believe it you know

I think it's all it's it's all where's all this heading it seems to me that the waters are becoming more and more muddier even in people who you would think one time was what's holding to the truth well you know well two things

Matthew first of all I have had a number of people in there contacting me point out that well let's say

Jake's even gave a well just just now just in in Twitter even if Jake's gave a biblical definition of the

Trinity why would it matter his prosperity teaching is absolutely heretical okay that didn't come up that wasn't discussed you would think that it would be but you would not think that it would be in the room because the elephant room isn't about orthodoxy in those areas it's about blending everything together and having peace and harmony and things like that and so to even raise the question of prosperity teaching and you know

I've got a I've got a quote so I was said it I was said a clip by a brother in New Mexico of him talking about how he got his big huge house and and what

God taught him and giving him this big huge house and all the rest of it obviously I find that reprehensible and certainly it would be something that would need to be addressed but I haven't gotten into it here because I don't claim to be an expert on that particular area that's that's not

I mean every one of us is called to have a particular area I've written on the subject of the Trinity I haven't written on the subject of the prosperity gospel so I just don't have the background to be able to speak with any level of expertise to those particular issues but clearly there is confusion out there amongst many people it's it's a confusion that is is based upon Christian superstardom and the fact that we we don't have a situation where the people that are the most important to you as far as modeling and and giving guidance are the godly elders who are part of the church where you were instructed in the

Word of God on a regular basis but instead there's somebody out there somewhere and that is the problem and so Matthew I fully understand why you especially would say look even if he you know what does it matter look at all the other stuff that he's saying why isn't anybody talking about that well because it's not the purpose of the elephant room to even attempt to address issues in that fashion

I mean they talk about the gospel all the time as you know the prosperity gospel is a violation of the gospel and it would require someone to address that but they didn't do so we wouldn't expect that they would because well that's not really surprising to us right and it seems to me and I understand your point dr.

Smith exactly I know the purpose of it at the purpose of it but at the same time as you listen to even the clips you were playing they are dancing around this thing for the sake of unity and it's sickening to my stomach that they dance around this this very issue you know for instance

I if you're found I just believe if you have if you start off with bad foundations you're going to end up with with a wrecked house period the whole house is gonna fall down and Jake has bad foundations and this is just one of the many foundations but it seems to me that these

I guess because of their popularity whatever it may be that they are that they are slowly moving away for the sake of unity to you know they're slowly moving away from orthodoxy to truth and and and the things that are coming out is becoming sickening and scary at the same time because these people got a huge following well they they they have huge followings but Matthew if it makes you it won't make you feel any better and until you really wrap your head around it but I'm not one of those people that believes any of these polls that talks about 60 % of the

American population being Christian they may have a lot of followers it doesn't mean that they have a lot of Christian followers truly

Christian followers so don't ever forget the fact that God's one building his church and he will he will guide his people every single generation has these people to deal with it is part of God's purpose we must stand for the ones for all delivered the

Saints faith it is something we must agonize am I for is a term that Jude uses and so we shouldn't be surprised by it and you know

I told Todd Friel when he when he called me and and he was chewed on one ear then he started working on the other ear as well

I mean he was he was really up in arms about all this and I think he was a little surprised

I wasn't nearly as up in arms as him now I not not not say that I am not not to say that I am not in any you know concerned about this

I am correct but I recognize this has been going on for a long long time and you wish

Matthew we got to get to our other colleagues brother I just want to say this real quick I really appreciate what you just said about God building his church because that's one of the things

I noticed in the elephant room they talked about we build a church and that that's something else that bothers me but I'm not going to go into that but thank you for making that point all right and thank you so much and have a wonderful day

I thank you God bless bye -bye I have got a special request mr.

board operator sir that you answer the phone from someone who is actually related to me and therefore gets special dispensation so go ahead and take that call and we will add it to the list because I have to because as people have said many many times you know little girls wrap daddies around their fingers so oh

I keep getting rich on voicemail well go ahead and try it'll come through this time meanwhile let's talk with David in Van Nuys hi

David hey how you doing boy you're in California that's it is it more confusing to understand theology in California I'm just sort of wondering yes yes because you have everything floating around here oh yeah when it comes to I mean when it comes to what happened in the elephant room now

I didn't watch it I I tried to look forward on you know on YouTube or I have no idea where I could actually watch it but I read a lot of excerpts of what

TJ had said me the exchange between Driscoll McDonald and and and honestly it really you said you said previously to I forget which caller you were you were speaking to but you said that it really has raised a lot of confusion and smoke and and I'm a

Bible student and you know we don't really have you know when you're a you know yeah

Bible colleges and Van Nuys there is no no no no there is a nearby seminary that you had visited oh yes yes

I'm well aware of that I mean I'm actually I'm graduating 2012 well congratulations it the question is did you get out with a shred of Orthodoxy left no no it really there was some little points of you know things that I think that could have been you know pushed through the you know the discussion like you know explaining that you know that having like forced

Bishop Jake's to you know really you know to answer and I just but it really just raised confusion even when

I was just reading it I mean it really I'm just being honest it really confused me as a as a student it just seemed like he it just like a mishmash between Trinitarianism and modalism by how it really confused me yeah he's clearly still a modalist he's he's not a part of he's not pushing the oneness distinctives concerning baptism in fact

I was looking at the Potter's House statement of faith here and under baptism water baptism by immersion soon after accepting

Christ as personal Savior is a testimony of death the sin of resurrection new life I would be very interested if anybody knows anybody out there knows do they baptize the name of the

Father Son Holy Spirit or in the name of Jesus only wouldn't that be interesting I mean I think

I think it is necessary to ask that question and I've not seen anyone talking about it so I'd like to know but he's clearly still a modalist but he isn't trying to you know do the oneness thing and stay in that particular group he's he's is in a middle area which is why he's taking fire from both sides yeah yeah and the problem was that the questions asked well

James McDonnell wasn't even bothering but the questions asked by Mark Driscoll he did not press them he was not specific enough to expose the modelism yeah yeah that's all there is to it

I mean that's the fundamental conclusion it seemed to me I mean correct me if I'm wrong here but it seems to me as though he were as Bishop Jakes was taking you know our to some level or another our understanding of you know persons he was saying well

I believe in this distinction I think he referenced that I did a couple times but but my overall my understanding was he was he was using some

Trinitarian language but yes saying oh yeah they're distinct but there's still manifestation it's still manifestation he like you said he's still a modalist he didn't say anything that would indicate that foundationally he has come to understand embrace and find central to his theology okay the doctrine the

Trinity that's the problem because what he said about distinct roles again a oneness person could say all that okay that that's where you have to ask specific questions

I've asked the specific question Twitter I haven't gotten a response to that specific question Twitter but I would love if someone could open up a dialogue

I'd like to talk to look if the man is trying to move the right direction and is open to correction not discussion but correction in regards to the

Trinity and the issues of the gospel then we should be stumbling over ourselves to graciously offer the correction the problem is that seems the fundamental concept of the elephant room is that no one can offer correction you can only offer dialogue and opinion that's the difference that is the problem as I see it

David it really really is and congratulations on your graduation like I said

I just hope that you can do something with that degree that will keep you from being a bad person and I have one quick question and maybe you can please because the elephant room caused so much confusion even to some level even in my own mind as a seminary student could you recommend some articles books defending you know the you know a classical understanding of the of the

Trinity anything would be really especially for the confusion I think you mean you mean aside from the one that I wrote that used as a textbook in a lot of places but probably not where you went to school yeah it's called the

Forgotten Trinity yeah and that'd be very useful and I also think if you would listen to the debate with Roger Perkins and with with Dr.

Sabin and the run -up to those debates so the dividing lines in August and September of this year

I painstakingly went through these issues and was it before or after October that I did the

Christology class I did a two and a half hour so it was afterwards so I did a two and a half hour dividing line on Christology on these very issues so it was it was basically a seminary level class okay and I recommended books at that time as well so there's a lot of stuff online available okay all right thank you so much hey

David thanks a lot have a good day all right two more calls real quick let's talk with Seiko hi

Seiko good afternoon or good morning Dr. White how are you doing good thank you man thank you for taking my call

I met you one time here and I in Humboldt Texas you had a big you did like a theology conference at a little small church here in Humboldt I do

I do recall that of course from my perspective it was a big church but that's okay yeah a couple of things

I wanted to just point out I attended the the elephant room conference me and another brother of mine we went to the location on the satellite sites that they had and ironically ironically

Dr. White out of all the locations here in Houston that this conference could have been held at it could have been at a

Trinitarian churches as well but it was held at a one -nish church really yes only church this is the only church in the

Houston area I think other other than Dallas or Fort Worth I believe a look at the map and see exactly but and I was trying to find other churches that were

Trinitarian but it was the only one that they actually had a satellite feed for an elephant room conference so I went and me and brother of mine went to the conference and I'm glad I did in hindsight because what

I found out of course the whole the big draw was Jake to see was he gonna renounce or affirm you know oneness and Trinitarianism so so were there a lot of oneness people there that you could tell yeah absolutely a lot of one but there was more

Trinitarians than what I expected as well too and so the funny thing about it was it was it was a mixture of Trinitarians we had we had we had white had me and my brother was only two black guys there and I'll touch down in just a minute that's my other concern as well regarding this doctrine issue in our community but there were there were of course oneness people there very nice very cordial very warm people very hospitable at the end of the

Jake's session the the oneness pastor approached me and my friend my brother and he said so what you think about the

Bishop I said I believe he was uh you know playing a plan you know footy with the with the doctrine that this was his words otherwise he said you know what yeah you're right he did man

I really wish he would have came out and just said what he said you know what he believes he said now this is what this one this pastor told me he said

I'm comfortable I'm better at saying manifestations than I would probably never really say persons

I would say manifestation and I told the gentleman I say you know what I can respect your conviction you know

I extremely disagree with it really disagree but I can release respect because you're being consistent with your theology although we differ on this very crucial essential issue and he he basically said that he has talked with the bishop before they have met him personally have had dinner with the man and he said he has drawn fire

Jake has drawn fire from even but no one this people before they went down about his convictions and about his views and he basically does not want to take a side on that but I but we attended the conference and so I felt it was more of a setup than it was something that was basically this let your hair down let's just you know deal with these issues you know biblically doctrinally and unless you know right bring correction where correction is needed right now you had mentioned something about the the racial issue yeah the thing that was the thing that was concerning to me that what

I know there's some variables you know people may have to work and all that but within that within the african -american community especially about the way in reform circles there are not too many african -americans that embrace the doctrines and grace but the majority of our people in our in our community are mostly

Armenian word of faith or whatnot and can care less about doctrinal issues I'm not saying all about you know all of them at all african -american like that but I'm saying majority it's far between that you'll find a black person that basically would say you know

I hold the doctor's degree I understand the Athanasian Creed I understand you know what what took place with Aries and Athanasius you know in the third or fourth century it's very rare and so when you talk about issues like this

Jake's is pretty much on the same par if you will with Barack Obama when it comes to people that our communities adore and admire and it's a shame that we don't you know sound the alarm or bring awareness to this because people think biblically and I know

God changed the heart by the power of the Holy Spirit but it's still frustrating when you know when you can go to churches and you would like to see a mixture of brothers and sisters in Christ that understand that doctrine is important it's not something that's just in you know for the elite it's for any all of us have a doctrine all without a theology the question is is it biblical well

I know I've spoken to conferences with some brothers that are reformed who are african -american and things like that but why is it why is what you just said why is that the case why why is

Bishop Jake's like Barack Obama why isn't there more discernment in your opinion just briefly okay you cannot get my information out because our culture is inundated with entertainment and you know if you if you if you watch the cold orange revival that Jake's attended with Stephen Furtick it's all about the charisma you know and I have no problem worshiping

God I'm not I'm not talking about that but if I'm going to rejoice if I'm going to clap if I'm going to shout

I want to be informed biblically what I'm what I'm shouting about what I'm saying hallelujah thank you

Jesus about you know I don't think that orthodoxy have to be dry but it needs to be informative and it needs to be based on biblical truth that is objective right and so in our communities the majority of our black churches unfortunately

I use that word but you understand what I'm saying the majority of our black churches lacks spiritual depth and understanding in the

Word of God I'm a house church pastor and we have about maybe about 10 to 15 people on a good

Sunday that comes to our church mm -hmm okay so you're talking about reformed and you're adding reformed doctrine do you tell my church discipline talking about accountability right no most most of our churches don't want to hear that Dr.

White. They crammed into that. Wow all right a lot of folks so really appreciate your insights

David thank you very much for holding on and thanks for calling today all right well let's let's go to Phoenix and let's talk with summer hi summer hi so this this topic got your interest huh not really

I was kind of dragged into it I made some popcorn

Christian friends on campus earlier this week popcorn Christiany okay they're full of hot air and love and not too much theology and come to find out that they think that Mark Driscoll is the great reformer oh and he has introduced them to reform theology and he has brought him in all these things so unfortunately that kind of forced me to finally listen to Driscoll which

I've been avoiding for some time but I had to face it so anyways I was listening to a sermon of his not too long ago and he said in the sermon and this is why

I'm calling because I don't get this I truly don't get it and I know I'm gonna be talking to these kids today what does

Driscoll mean do you know when he says that Jesus died for all and for some people in another sense yeah

I actually encountered that exact same phrase in fact that's that's found in his

Wikipedia page where he wants to differentiate himself from Calvinism and says he's following Calvin rather than Calvinism I don't expect

I don't claim to be an expert on all aspects of Mark Driscoll's theology but generally that kind of a assertion is meant to try to avoid the fundamental issues of particular redemption you can there is a there is an orthodox way of saying that and I'm not sure that's what he's saying however in other words there is the there is the substitutionary aspect of atonement which is specifically intended to bring about the redemption of those people for whom

Christ dies that must be limited to the scope of the elect on any logical level but there is the demonstration of the justice of God there is the demonstration of the love of God there is the the general restraint of evil demonstrated by the sending of the

Spirit of God that has universal or at least all mankind ramifications and so there are reformed theologians who would affirm that there are aspects of the atoning work of Christ that can be seen in a universal sense but the issue in a sense in a sense even though common grace exists prior to the atonement there would be a special demonstration of that in in the giving of God's Son but in essence what many people would limit that to would would make that distinction between the redemptive work of Christ and the specific intention of the atonement and those other elements whether that's what

Mark Driscoll is referring to or not I'm afraid I can't tell you that because I don't know

I would ask them to ask your friends to maybe explicate that and because what

I've heard Mark Driscoll sermons are quite long and so I would be surprised if he did not go into great detail on that but I I confess

I don't know the details of it Oh, it's all very confusing for me. I just don't get it.

Well, the nice thing is unlike everybody else in the listening audience after you meet with your friends today you can call me and ask and we can talk about it.