November 20, 2003

Yet to give that answer with gentleness, this is a live program, and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with Dr. White, call now at 602 -973 -4602, or toll -free across the

United States. It's 1 -877 -753 -3341. Here is

James White. Run to the battle.

I have a really funny story about Steve Kemp singing Run to the Battle, but I don't think we should start the program there this morning.

Oh, goodness, we've got to have some fun today, because Tuesday night spawned two web pages from Roman Catholics within two or three hours of the program.

You know that you hit a home run when that happens. We set all new records for how many connections we had, all new records for how many people we had in channel.

It was pretty incredible, no two ways about it. Of course, then we blew up a channel on our soundboard, so we're running on a backup soundboard right now.

If everything just goes kapooey in the middle of this, you'll know what happened. It's going to be one of those days, no two ways about it.

So far, so good. Everything's working, at least as far as we can tell. We're going to throw the phones open.

I do have some things to talk about. I've got a clip to play, but I have a feeling there may be some folks who'd like to comment on Tuesday evening, because we didn't take phone calls.

There have been lots of developments since then. Eric Svensson is going to be ...

In fact, you know I should fire up Yahoo Messenger. Watch this blow us right off the air. All of a sudden, silence, because I fired up Yahoo Messenger.

Fire up Yahoo Messenger and see if Eric's online, because he mentioned yesterday he is likewise putting together a ...

Yeah, he's idle, but he's there. Let me see if I can track him down and see when he's going to be posting an article that he's started putting together in response to especially

Robertson, Jenis, and John Pacheco and their, look, we found an exception stuff.

It's really funny, but I'll leave that to him. He's doing the research on it, so I won't spoil his fun, but we'll be talking about that.

Also, you may recall, if you can remember past Tuesday night, and those of you who didn't listen to Tuesday night are going, what is he talking about?

Last Thursday morning, I discussed, we read a question and answer from Dave Hunts, Brian Call, and I narrated for you, and I told you

I had looked, could not find, I narrated for you the statements of Bishop Eddie Long regarding 1

John 3 .2. I said, man, I'd really rather have the actual statement here because I just like having, let them say it.

I think I accurately represented what he said, but let them say it. Well, lo and behold, someone who will remain nameless for his own safety and protection, given some of his connections, tracked down the video of the program that I've been watching on TBN a week ago last night, and I guess it replayed.

I was wondering if it was going to replay, but there wasn't anything listed on the TBN website saying that it would or something. We have the clip of what

I was talking about last week. I want to play it for you because I want everybody to know I was accurate, I was being fair, and so I have that available here, and taking your phone calls at 877 -753 -3341.

For those of you who did not hear last week, I mentioned that I watched this on this teeny tiny little screen.

I had this tiny, maybe three -inch black and white TV in our kitchen, and so I had not noticed what was behind him.

I could tell he was in a big place. There are thousands and thousands of men there, but I couldn't tell what was behind him.

Just now watching it as we were MP3ing this so we could play it, everything behind him, and I couldn't even really tell what he was wearing.

I knew he was wearing something fairly casual. He was wearing a muscle t -shirt underneath this vest and workout pants type stuff, and behind him is all this exercise equipment, machines, like Cybex leg extensions and lat pull -down machines, and that's what's on the stage is workout stuff, and right in front of him is a dumbbell rack with some, you know, a knife.

I'd like to have the equipment. I actually have some of that equipment, but I'd like to have the equipment he had, and so I don't know what was going on before this, but it was some sort of thing.

I don't know. Maybe the power team was hiding there someplace. I don't know, but Deion Sanders was there, and there's a thing here where he talks about TD Jakes.

I'm probably not going to play that part unless you force me to by not calling in with your comments from last week, but anyway, but he's getting toward the end, and so this is the section that I was talking about, so here's

Bishop Eddie Long and his ... Now, note something. Catch a few things. First of all, he puts this in the realm of revelation, which in and of itself should say something about why we need to not only believe solo scriptura, but maybe practice it, you know, believing it, practicing it, two different things it seems, and then listen to the music.

Maybe we need to start doing this. Maybe we need to hire somebody to come in. It'd be pretty easy,

I'm assuming, to hook in a synthesizer, a keyboard over there, and then maybe

Rich has learned how to do website stuff, and script, and print, and do videos, and all stuff.

All you've got to do now is learn how to play a piano, and listen to the music, because when

I'm talking like this, the music would be soft and slow, but then as I get excited, it would get faster, and faster, and louder, and louder, and then it would go back down with me, and it would really add a lot,

I think. I think that's what I need. I think that's where I'm missing it. That's why I'm not much of a preacher or anything, is I don't have the cool musical background.

I wonder if we could do musical backgrounds during the sermons at Phoenix Reformed. I mean, I... Oh, never mind.

So let's listen to Bishop Eddie Long from the Trinity Broadcasting Network program,

Taking Authority, and 1 John 3, 2, the word shall ain't in the

Bible. I'm going to say this scripture, and then, I need some folk, because you know what all we need is a revelation.

You don't need to see Bishop Long, you need a revelation of Christ, you need to see Christ. And I need some brothers who will back

James, and you're going to be able to deal with it. I need some brothers that are ready for this revelation, this people of Christ, to run up here to this altar right now.

I need some. I need some. Hello.

Hello. I tried to give you a warning there, but you can go ahead and turn that down. Well, you know,

I was trying to mention in the chat channel that you have this revelation stuff going on, and then in the middle of the revelation stuff, you get this application.

And this is where the false doctrine comes in. You know, this is how, and this is the common way it works, and I don't know if you heard that, you know, following the music along, the music goes up and down, and you get the emotions going, and he had had all these people come running down to the front, and so you've got all these people who are now standing down in front of thousands of people, and people waving their hands, and they're right down where he is, and he's, you know, he's a good communicator.

I mean, you know, he's, he's, you know, getting, looking right at him. He's very good at communication.

He's learned a lot from TD Jakes and things like that, and then he, you know, I've got this revelation.

I need you. I need you. I need you. I need you. I need you. I don't know how many times I've said it, ten times, something like that. They all come running down there, and so now you get this, this idea that, you know, something's coming.

Something's coming. And, you know, people in the channel were commenting, I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense.

When he be appeared, we be like him. I mean, okay, but that doesn't make any sense, and are you really asserting?

It sounds like it was, and he said, don't have time to go into it, so it would be fascinating to hear this. I would love,

I would just love to hear this discussion that would take place about the

King James translators. I wonder what the idea here is. What is the idea that's being communicated?

Were they really, is there sort of a conspiracy theory going on here?

Am I finding myself in the position of defending the

King James translators? Well, I will, because there's no reason for me not to. The King James translators were not King James only.

They were on my side on that issue. But it almost sounds like the assertion is being made, they did this to sort of keep us in bondage.

Well, sort of, sort of. What do you do with sort of? But the word shall isn't there, and we mentioned last week, yes, it is.

The Greek term is esamatha, that's the future of Aimi, and that's the only way to translate it.

And it's a perfectly valid translation. We can use the, you know, any other translation, we can use the word we will be like him, instead of we shall, if you want to do that, that's fine, it doesn't really matter.

But in the long run, the point is, it's a perfectly good translation. To call this revelation knowledge is, in essence, to accuse the

Holy Spirit of not being able to understand the language in which he himself inspired the writing of the scriptures themselves.

And then you have the application. And here's where it really starts to bother me. Here you have the application.

Well, when you see a Jesus, when you see Jesus, and you are to be like him, well,

Jesus isn't hooked on drugs, so you shouldn't be either. Well, okay, you know, if, you know, the

Lord can draw a straight line with a crooked stick, and if he uses that to help a new believer to be off drugs, that's fine.

But the problem is, it's the foundation that's being presented. Because then you hear, and if you're sick, and you see a healed

Jesus, ah, see, there's the problem. Because, you see, being on drugs, that's one thing.

That's a choice a person has made. That's an abuse of their body that that person has chosen to engage in.

But what do you say to the person in the wheelchair? What do you say to the person who is afflicted with a lifelong disease?

They don't get to see Jesus the way other people get to see Jesus? Is that what you're saying to them? Do you see the suffering servant?

Do you see the Jesus who is with the sick people? Do you see the

Jesus who is at the bedside of the person who is afflicted their entire life? Do you see the

Jesus that Paul talked about when he talked about the thorn in the flesh? Is that the Jesus you see?

Do you see the Jesus who talks more about suffering than anything else? No, that doesn't sell books.

So we don't see that Jesus. And all of it based upon what? A completely false presentation of 1

John 3 .2. It cannot be substantiated by the grammar. It cannot be substantiated. He said use

Strong's Concordance. You can't use Strong's Concordance to come up with that. It doesn't give you that information. Ask me where he got it from.

But anyway, I just wanted to play it. There was obviously a lot more. I mean, there was there was even more that we recorded.

He goes on, he talks about TD Jake's, you know, slamming the brakes on a car because he said he felt like he was a failure and all this stuff.

And again, you know, very good in getting people all ramped up and excited and all the rest of that stuff.

And hey, you know what? He's got a church of 25 ,000 members and I go to a church with around 60.

So from the world's perspective, I'm the one who's, you know, completely off beam here.

And I don't know if he's written any books, but I can pretty much guarantee you that if his congregation bought two copies of all his books, he'd outsell anything

I've ever done. So, you know, how do you how do you measure success?

How do you measure the, you know, there's there's there's the situation we face in our world today.

And so is it any wonder is it any wonder that these, you know, you contrast this and we look at this and and we go, oh, man, it's just so sad that this is so far off the base and it's so easy to recognize where it went astray.

And then you turn around and you look at our society and you look at what's happened in Massachusetts and you look what's going on in Australia and Canada and England.

Look at our blog page for some of the information about that. You see these this absolute cultural meltdown, this this this hatred of God's law, this hatred of the idea that God has revealed what is right and wrong in human behavior.

And you wonder why people don't listen to the church. Well, the vast majority of people in our society, when they think of, quote unquote, conservative

Bible believing Christians, this is the stuff they think of. They don't think of people who are serious about about studying the scriptures and the history of the scriptures and the context of scriptures and and putting forth the effort to be consistent in a

Christian worldview and all the rest of that stuff. They think about this kind of stuff, what they see on TVN.

It's a blight. It's a plague. And if anyone thinks that God is not concerned, by the way, just in passing,

I mentioned on our website, I saw a political leader.

Most of you can probably figure out who it is, a political leader over the weekend.

And the discussion was on judicial nominees. And I don't care what political party you're part of.

It is obvious beyond all question that one of the two political parties has decided that you will not sit as a powerful judge in this land if you do not, as an unquestioned element of your worldview, believe that it is proper and absolutely necessary to be able to murder unborn children.

One of the two political parties has decided that's it. There's no question about it. You will not be a judge unless your worldview includes the ability to shut your mind down to all rational thought, to all scientific evidence, to all philosophical argumentation and murder unborn children.

You will not be a judge. We will not allow it. And I think they're going to be successful. I think they're going to be successful.

And I watched this man smile at the camera and say, oh, there's no, we do not have any agenda in blocking these nominations, none whatsoever.

And I said to myself, if that man will not be held accountable for God, for his actions as a leader in a nation, then there is no justice.

There is no justice. I could not help but think of the fact that the nations in Canaan before the

Israelites, before the Exodus, the scriptures tell us that their transgressions were being filled up, that they were, they were horrible people.

They were, I mean, they were involved in the most debauched sin. God never sent him a prophet, did he?

God didn't start off by sending the Israelites out to the far side of the

Jordan, setting up a camp, and then we're going to send mission teams in. We're going to send mission teams in and they're going to slowly instruct the people on what

God's law is all about. And so maybe they'll stop doing all this stuff.

No, the iniquity was filled up and the time came, you destroy them, man, woman and child and the beasts that are theirs.

And there was probably reasons for that too. They didn't have the scriptures.

They didn't have the law in a written form, but they did have it written upon their hearts and they were held accountable for it.

And they were destroyed for their behavior. And God has destroyed many a nation for those very same things.

Well, so you think about Massachusetts, you think about what happened there and what's happening there. And you just, you just, well,

God brings repentance in his own ways and it's very frequently through judgment. And my, my goodness, well, 877 -753 -3341.

I don't see that anyone has picked up the phone. That means that probably just means that I'm babbling on and I apologize for that.

But it is, it is fascinating. By the way, something's going on channel.

I really have not had the opportunity of following it. Someone with some unusual views has showed up and I'm not really sure.

If your sins were actually, oh, it's someone who doesn't believe in limited atonement, I guess, or, or maybe it looks more like substitutionary atonement, actually.

Hmm. Interesting. Uh, well, anyway, um, Tuesday night was, was something else.

There were a couple of, um, a couple of articles that were posted.

First of all, it was fascinating to me, for those of you who listened, uh, one of the things that Eric Svensson had to point out to Mr.

Matitix, who I just, what can you say? Um, when

I asked Mr. Matitix for the name of the scholar that he was, he was pushing in his debate, uh, with Mr.

Murphy, uh, that took place a week after our debate. When I asked for the name of the scholar, he said, well,

I don't know. And I said, well, how can you not know?

Well, I had just read the article that day on the internet. Can you imagine walking into a debate and making one of your main points, repeat it three times, an article you just read on the internet.

You've not checked it out. You certainly haven't had time to look at the sources and the use of the sources.

And you've never heard of the author before. You can't even remember what his name was, but I'll pass out copies of it.

And then when I asked, Jerry, these scholars you've talked to today on the phone, did, did any of them read the actual material that you were asking them to comment on?

What did we get? It's called dead air. Uh, I don't know.

You don't know. So you are presenting to us as scholarly refutation of particular research, these opinions, these men, but you can't tell us if any of them have ever actually read the research in question.

Nope. Don't know. But there's a, but there's a, there's an article at catholiclegget .com

and you just go over here and I'm looking at it. And, uh, uh, uh,

I, uh, I started, I wish, you know, it's, it's not easy to, to look at things on, on the internet and do the program and have clips going and all that stuff all at the same time.

I wish I had gotten, I had scrolled just a little bit farther down than I did, because if I had gone just a little bit farther down on that page, the very page that Jerry was promoting, we encounter.

And I remember what, how did Jerry, uh, describe this page? Well, look at all of these tremendous scholars, all of whom outrank any of us.

Well, you read Jerry's website, read the, um, the stuff that he says about himself. And I'm really not sure if he believes that, uh, the stuff that he posts from other people about himself is, you know, great scripture, scripture scholar and the greatest of our generation, all this stuff.

And, you know, I, I don't know, but, um, you, you get down about 60 % of the way through this article.

And here is a quotation from Dennis Huckel, critical consultant, translator,

Lockman foundation. And as soon as I saw that, I went, Oh, because you see,

I'm a critical consultant. With the Lockman foundation too. And so I contacted my, uh, superiors there and I got an email address and I immediately wrote to Dennis Huckel.

And, um, I said, um, could I ask what specifically you were asked about this?

Have you ever seen the research of Eric Svensson on this? Was it offered to you?

I'd like to offer it to you if you haven't seen it, but, but what were you asked? And I got the answer back this morning.

Well, I don't have the original emails. Uh, but no, I've never seen that research. I was simply asked whether it has a particular meaning.

So in other words, these people, maybe it's John Pacheco directly. I don't know. Probably was contacting all these folks.

They're not providing the information, not providing the research. And you know what? Jerry Maddox knows this.

You know how I know Jerry Maddox knows this because I asked him a direct question Tuesday night on the program.

And I said, Jerry, is this not exactly like what would happen around the year 1800 with Granville Sharpe's rule?

Now, Jerry knows what Granville Sharpe's rule is. And he knows that it's a perfectly valid rule.

It was not identified. Actually, the complex of rules, five or six of them together was not identified until, uh, the late 18th century, the publication toward the end of that time around year 1800.

My particular copy of things from 1805. And if you had gone around and didn't provide

Granville Sharpe's actual study, but you wrote to various Greek scholars who had not yet had an opportunity looking at it, you could have argued against Granville Sharpe, not on the basis of what he wrote, but just on the basis of the fact that not everyone had seen it yet.

And remember what his response was? Christian truth is not, it's not under the control of biblical scholarship and study.

It's apostolic and all this stuff. And it was so obvious that he couldn't answer the question. So he knows this.

He knows that's a perfectly accurate application. And he has no response for it.

But I'm really wondering, I wonder if John Pacheco, if he's going to say, well, all these people in this list, you know, by their position, by what they've done, they've demonstrated that they're great

Greek scholars. Well, I have the same position. I wonder if he'd, nah, nah, that would, that would require consistency.

And that's sad. That ain't going to happen. But then after that, it's not like John Pacheco could be the only person to post something.

So Bob Syngenis, Bob Syngenis weighed in too. And I'll tell you, like I said on our blog spot, on our main page,

I really think Bob should, should leave this, leave the titling for others.

Because ding dong, the witch is dead. It's just lame.

Okay. That's just really lame. All right. That's bad. And what was the entirety of his response?

Does he deal with all of the silences, all of the questions unanswered, the complete inability to read a simple lexical entry on the part of geriatrics?

No, no, no, no, no. The entire thing is on one alleged exception in a source that's not only unbiblical.

We don't even know when it was written. Of course, they don't mention that part. And that's one of the things their expense is going to be addressing.

But, but see, there's this one source. And so James White, the deceiver that he is, knowing that their position has been exploded by this one citation.

Folks, have anyone ever really given thought to the fact that these folks are so desperate that not only they send emails out to all these scholars without providing them with the original research to examine, but then they will grab on to one extra biblical thing as if they are actually believing that grammatical rules are determined solely on the basis of whether they're absolutely exceptionless.

And anyone who knows the language knows that is absurd. Absolutely absurd.

I'm really starting to wonder about the abilities of most of these people to even muddle their way through 1

John, let alone actually do serious exegesis. And I have good reason to do so.

Absolutely amazing stuff. Well, I've gone past my time of the break. We need to take a break. And then we're going to talk with Steve and take your phone calls at 877 -753 -3341.

We'll be right back. Hello. There you go.

Under the guise of tolerance, modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality.

Even more disturbing, some within the church attempt to revise and distort Christian teaching on this behavior.

In their book, The Same -Sex Controversy, James White and Jeff Neal write for all who want to better understand the

Bible's teaching on the subject, explaining and defending the foundational Bible passages that deal with homosexuality, including

Genesis, Leviticus, and Romans. Expanding on these scriptures, they refute the revisionist arguments, including the claim that Christians today need not adhere to the law.

In a straightforward and loving manner, they appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to God's plan for His people.

The Same -Sex Controversy, defending and clarifying the Bible's message about homosexuality. Get your copy in the bookstore at AOMIN .org.

Answering those who claim that only the King James Version is the Word of God, James White in his book,

The King James Only Controversy, examines allegations that modern translators conspired to corrupt scripture and lead believers away from true

Christian faith. In a readable and responsible style, author James White traces the development of Bible translations, old and new, and investigates the differences between new versions and the authorized version of 1611.

You can order your copy of James White's book, The King James Only Controversy, by going to our website at www .AOMIN

.org. In his book,

The Potter's Freedom, James White replies to Dr. Geisler, the

King James Only Controversy, by going to www .AOMIN

.org. And welcome back to Dividing Line.

We've got about 22 minutes or so left on the program today.

And so we're taking your phone calls at 877 -753 -3341. Interestingly enough, we only have one phone call so far.

Maybe it's time of day. I thought there'd be more folks who would wish to ask questions or make comments on Tuesday evening's program, but that's what

Steve wants to do. Steve is in the small nation with a weightlifter as governor, but I won't go any past that because being a member of that particular society is sometimes embarrassing and we don't want to in any way make

Steve feel uncomfortable because we all know his background and where he lives. So hi Steve, how are you doing? All right, how are you doing?

I'm doing all right. Hey, I've been listening to your real audios for I guess about two, three years now.

Really? Yeah, I go to Calvary Chapel in Lake Elsinore. Okay, but see now you just told everybody where you live.

Yeah, that's fine. Most people, the way I found out about you was on Steve Ray's Catholic message board.

Oh yeah, uh -huh. And they all know me as Agape Steve, so. Oh, okay. So they know where my address is.

Anybody who can keep up with that board has got a lot more time than I do.

Well, actually at the time I owned an ISP and I'm the system administrator, so I have plenty of time.

And you could always excuse it as well. I'm testing the system, making sure the system... Exactly.

Well, I had my own message boards for a long time and that's how I ended up over there. But since I sold that ISP, I'm not doing that anymore.

I don't have time to get on there, but I can listen to your real audio stuff. Well, I did until it disappeared.

Oh, well it's back. Well, on the straight gate, the debates aren't there anymore so that we can listen to them.

And that was a big help for me to be able to listen to both sides because I was just hearing one side.

I think they still are, but all the URLs changed. So you might just need to refresh your

URLs because... Well, I do all the time. I'm pretty knowledgeable on that kind of stuff. Well, I thought for sure they're still there, but we'll ask

Steve's channel. They're not there. You can go look. There's links.

Go look at them. But it lists them, but they're not linked. And so it's kind of a drag because I want to point people over and say, well, listen to this debate.

You can hear both sides. Right. Well, we do have them available in mp3 on our website. So those,

I mean, and I think... The thing is, people probably, you know, personally,

I would never buy an mp3 from someone that I didn't know about. I found out about you from them.

You know, I don't think that I've seen your books in the Calvary Chapel bookstore. Well, actually, there's one or two that they sneak into.

But other than that, yeah, it's true. Yeah. So I found out about you from the Catholics.

So without being able to hear your... You know,

I read your postings and so forth in the forums and the debates. And a couple of times,

R. Sipo was in there when you were there. Oh, yes. That's always fun. Yeah, yeah.

He's not one of my favorite guys to listen to, so... So you got to listen in Tuesday night then?

Yes, I was able to hear... I listened to it last night, actually. Oh, okay.

And my question was, because I've been waiting for it, you know. My question was on the age of James.

Did you guys ever come to any conclusions where that's at? I mean, is it there? Yeah, well, it is not in Josephus.

And that was one of the amazing things, was, you know, Jerry says, well, I have to apologize.

Apologize for what? For being unclear. No, Jerry, you got the wrong guy. And in fact, you got the wrong source.

You see, if Josephus, who is a first century source, had something like that, that would carry more weight.

But in reality, it's not there. We have found... And first of all, Jerry said it was in the 80s, as far as his age.

And then you go to Eusebius, and eventually we track down a source that said...

And in fact, if you go to the AOMN .org website, if you go over to Pete's blog, it's linked on my front page.

Yeah, I saw it, but I didn't go to it. Yeah, he's put all of the relevant citations on his blog.

So you can read them right there. And when you read it, there's this discussion of James and...

Do you have all the places that Jerry Madovich quoted? No, the only source, ancient citation, he's got it there.

And it talks about how James was a virgin. It's in a book about how great virginity is.

And so it's talking about how James was a virgin until the day he died at 96, and how holy he was.

And then the amazing thing is, it says that he had access to the Holy of Holies. He was so holy that the

Jews would allow him to go into the Holy of Holies, which... As a Christian. Yeah, which...

Yeah, immediately everybody's going, yeah, sure he did, uh -huh. But this is the context in which it is found, and it's from centuries after the original.

And of course, the point that I want to try to make is because Jerry spent the first 20 minutes giving us

Jerry's book corner about paperbacks and hardbacks and all the rest of this stuff. The point is, is that in his public statements for years, in the context of saying, this is the kind of historical material that converted me to Catholicism, he told people that Josephus, who is a first century writer...

Well, I heard those debates, too. I listened to every one he had. Yeah, but not only that, but see, he repeated that not just in debates, but remember,

Jerry speaks all over the land. Right. And as he would tell people about his conversion and what converted him, and especially talking about Mary and the perpetual

Virgin Mary, this is the kind of quote -unquote historical information that converted him to Catholicism.

And I think it's important for people to recognize that what Jerry should have said is, you know what? I don't have a first century source on that.

I've been wrong for years about Josephus. In reality, it's hundreds of years down the road, and I've got to admit, it's in the middle of stuff that doesn't sound overly historically compelling, but this is where I got it from.

But he's not going to say that. Instead, he said, I apologize for being unclear. Actually, my argument's stronger than I thought it was.

That's not an apology. That's a way of trying to avoid admitting you've been wrong all along.

And so Josephus didn't say it. He didn't bother to look it up. It's from hundreds of years later in very questionable material.

Somebody said he was 96 years old, but they didn't actually, at that point, give the date of his death.

Was it a church father that said that? You know, I'd have to pull up the...

I think it was... Wasn't it Eusebius? Somebody popped the URL up for me.

I'm not sure. Well, Pete's not in shame right now. Eusebius was quoting it from someone else, though. It wasn't something... Right, right.

It's mediated through another source and that kind of thing.

It's absolutely amazing to me that people would try to put this out as if it is somehow something that is compelling or something along those lines.

It just amazes me. It really is. I thought you brought up a good point, and I've tried to bring it up before, too, is that a lot of the sources are

Gnostic in the way they sound and so forth. And some people have presented that to me because, you know,

I'm open to listen to what the truth is, okay? I have to be in order to hear both sides of what people have to say.

And they bring up these things that sounded really Gnostic to me because I've read a lot of those early writings and so forth, and they use that as proof of the church, you know, this was the thinking in the church.

My question has always been, well, can't that be proof that there was heresy in the church, too?

And you brought that point up. Yes, there's a tremendous amount of heresy in the church, and people who were untaught and unstable...

Here it is, by the way. It's from... That's right. It's not Eusebius. Epiphanius, some people pronounce that Epiphanius.

7814, one through six, and just to read the section here, this is at blog .peatweb

.com if you want to read it, and just a whole section over here. Section three says, you see then that this house was in every respect most noteworthy, for if Joseph's sons revered virginity and the

Nazarite life, how much more did that elderly honorable man guard with reverence the holy virgin, honor the vessel in which the salvation of the human race dwelt?

Does not nature itself teach you that the man was elderly, greatly advanced in age, grown great among men, faithful in his ways, and reverent in appearance?

For the gospel says that the God -fearing man sought to divorce her secretly, but James, brother of the

Lord and son of Joseph, died in Jerusalem, having lived twenty -four years, more or less, after the

Savior's ascension. Now, wait a minute, twenty -four, that doesn't fit, yeah, that doesn't fit either, does it?

He was, yeah, yeah, he was ninety -six years old when he was struck on the head by a fuller with his club, flung from the pinnacle of the temple and cast down, he who had done no wrong, knelt and prayed for those who had thrown him, wait a minute, wait a minute, check this out, knelt and prayed for those who had thrown him down, saying, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing, thus even

Simeon, his cousin, the son of Clopas, who was standing at a distance, said, stop, why are you stoning the just one?

Behold, he is uttering the most wonderful prayers for you, and thus he was martyred. So let's see if we've got this figured out, he's bashed over the head with a fuller's club, thrown off the pinnacle of the temple, survives all of this, and begins to pray, and then they stone him.

It sounds like a little bit of conflation of various and sundry myths and stories here.

Oh, goodness. Again, you know what strikes me, actually? He was just spry for an old dude. Ninety -six year old dude gets bashed over the head, thrown off the temple, and he's still going.

Boy, I wish I was in that shape. But you know what, hopefully, aside from the amazing sources that are used, hopefully what people are hearing in all of this is like, wait a minute, wait, wait a minute, this is a dogma that Rome pronounces.

Jerry said this is as absolutely true, historically and factually, as the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And this is the kind of historical information that is brought to bear to defend it?

That should make anybody go, wait a minute. I mean, Jerry said, and I don't know if you've probably heard the debate between Jerry and I and Mary back in 1997, and in that he said the bodily assumption is a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is the kind of sources that they're going to use? Absolutely amazing. Well, I asked the

Catholics before, you know, if that's part of the gospel, was

Paul preaching that, and were the others preaching that? And Paul said that anybody that, you know, teaches another gospel than what he teaches, then it's a false gospel.

Oh, very much so. Well, I think Jerry's response would be, how could he preach it until Mary herself had been bodily assumed?

But you're right about the provincial virginity of Mary, that would have had to have been a part of it, and obviously it was not a part of the apostolic message.

But again, this is why I mentioned Sola Ecclesia in my presentation in Salt Lake City, is it explains the reason why someone like Jerry Matytix can look at these passages and come up with such amazing interpretations.

That's why he can look at Bauer, Donker, Arndt, and Gingrich and read, he would not read almost any other entry in that lexicon the way he reads that one.

The reason being, there's an ultimate authority that's driving it. The way I look at it, you can't come to that conclusion unless you're told the conclusion beforehand.

Exactly. Very much so. That's the way it works. Hey, Steve, we've got other callers online now. Thanks for getting us jump -started this morning.

Keep on listening, and God bless you very much over there. And we now go to Aaron, also in the same state, with a weightlifter as governor.

Aaron wants to talk about Tuesday evening, too. How you doing, sir? Fine. I couldn't hear the callers, so I hope

I don't overlap my questions. Oh, okay. Let me put something new up here concerning the debate.

It's not necessarily the content, but what do you think this means for future possibilities of having

Catholics on your show, or even getting on to Catholic shows? You think this is kind of... I don't think I'll ever be on Catholic shows.

That's not even an issue. Catholic Answers has known from day one that I would certainly be more willing to do so.

They have no interest in that. They don't do that kind of thing. I know EWTN has a policy that says there will be nothing like that, and so that's not going to happen.

So that's pretty much irrelevant. And Jerry has aligned himself now with the ultra -traditionalist, almost, you know, he denies this, but there are people that are set -a -vacantists in that camp as well.

And so, in reality, I've already said we're done with Robertson Genesis.

He does not represent mainstream Catholic apologetics in any way anymore, and given the Mr. X debacle, that's it there.

So, unfortunately, Jerry has aligned himself with those individuals, and if Jerry, you know,

I don't know if you heard the beginning statement that I read. I did not read everything

I could have read from Mr. Matitix in regards to, in essence, saying, look, if you do your review of our debate without me on, you're being craven.

It's a cowardly thing to do. Be a man. Have me on. He wanted to be on. And so, if he's going to be on, then

I'm going to play the clips, and I think everyone can tell, you know, when we started off,

I just sat here, just waiting. Okay, this is a simple question. Josephus didn't say it.

Admit it and move on. We went to 20, 25 minutes after, and never got a clear answer.

That's just, you know, I think people can see that, and, you know, I never expected that Jerry would want to be on in that context.

But, hey, he chose to be. Fine and dandy. I think it was very educational for folks.

Might he never be on again? Yeah, possibly. I don't know. But it's not because of anything that we did.

It's because he wouldn't provide meaningful answers to, you know, he knew. I told him I was going to be playing clips.

I told him that we were going to ask. All I had to do was look at our website. He knew we were going to be asking. You could tell by all the phone calls he had made and by the people who were posting articles and the whole nine yards.

So, you know, I don't have any problem with the fact that, you know, for at least people who were listening and listening for content,

Jerry certainly gave them reason to question the type of research that he does.

Okay. Well, he should have known that that was going to be coming. So I don't know. Right off the bat, the three topics were almost completely in hopeless positions.

But I'm at least happy that at least Jerry would at least go on because I'm seeing that this is like shutting the doors and basically the

Catholic Church turning itself into nearly a Mormon type cult where, you know, just completely shut your ears to any criticisms.

Just do what we say. And I'm just, at least Jerry will come on and talk with us.

Yeah, he will, whether it actually accomplishes anything. I mean, there is a fellow, let me just mention,

I won't mention who it is. There is a Catholic fellow in our channel. We had 63 folks in our channel, but there is a

Catholic fellow in our channel who has attended the University of Steubenville. In fact, I think he graduated from the

University of Steubenville. He studied under Scott Hahn. He's a very intelligent fellow. And he was embarrassed as a

Catholic for the way that Jerry was behaving and the answers that he was giving.

He could see through this. I mean, this man can open a lexicon, read it and go, that's not what it says. And so he was embarrassed at that point.

And so basically what I'm discovering is the people who will engage in apologetic dialogues are the real conservatives.

And if you're not a real conservative Roman Catholic, either you're going to limit your phraseology of quote -unquote anti -Catholics to cultural anti -Catholics, where they have a very valid complaint against the media for being quote -unquote anti -Catholic and anti -Christian in general.

There's no question about that. And not even get into this theological stuff, because the theology really isn't what drives you in the first place.

It's more the practice and things like that, because you're really not wedded to the dogmatic teachings of the

Church. Those folks, they don't want to engage in apologetics. They don't really think there's any reason to.

It's the ultra -traditionalist or the strong conservative who's going to be engaging this type of thing.

And it is getting harder and harder for us to find opponents who can engage in a debate without engaging in this kind of, you know, well,

I've said for a long, long time, you can go back in the archives, I have said for years, I believe

Jerry is the king of the cheap debating tricks. And there is a clear example of that.

When you say to someone, and we've documented this, when you stand up in front of an audience and say, you look at Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Donker, and you will see that they do not say that the main meaning of sunericumai is sexual in nature.

Well, that is purposeful misrepresentation, because no one said that. That's not the issue.

And it is very frustrating, and I don't enjoy engaging in debates with people where I am constantly having to battle that kind of simple dishonesty and misrepresentation.

I would much rather engage in debates with people who simply present their position, and we let the audience decide.

That's why I like debating Mitch Pacwa, because he doesn't do that kind of thing. There's a huge difference there.

And interestingly enough, that's why certain of those kinds of apologists say that Mitch Pacwa shouldn't do debates, because he doesn't engage in that kind of obfuscation.

They seem to think that you need to obfuscate to be a good debater. You know,

I don't know what it's going to mean. I think the gates are closing down. The scholars of Rome are going to realize that their position is becoming completely untenable, impossible to defend.

I don't know if I can really blame Jerry, because when you stand against the truth, this is really the only hope you have for trying to at least look like you're winning at something.

But you've got to keep one thing in mind, Aaron. I think he thinks he did great. No, no,

I'm not. I am. People say, what? I said, no, I honestly, I would imagine that Jerry would actually refer people to the program.

Robert St. Genes is. I mean, he's actually isn't interesting. They don't give links. But, you know, you Robert St.

Genes post. Oh, we've oh, it was over the ding dong, which is dead. That great deceiver, James White's been refuted.

You look at these folks and you just you just have to step back and go, oh, well, they're second

Thessalonians. If you refuse to love the truth, you will love the lie. Really level.

You will. You will. And you it should it you should it should sober you to look at that and actually realize people do honestly believe listening to that type of interaction that the there are people who believe that the

Catholic position was vindicated in that in that conversation. And and I just I just have to step back and go, you know, as frustrating as that is and as much as I just want to scream out in frustration, say, can't you see my theology tells me, no, they can't.

That's why people will do the things that they do. People ask, how can someone be a graduate of Westminster Seminary and and and all the rest of stuff and and have that kind of thinking?

And I go, well, there's there's your answer. There's your answer right there. Hey, Aaron, thanks a lot for your call today.

Thanks for listening. Sorry, Chris, we didn't get to you. But that's what Tuesday nights are for, too. I think you've got a great question there, and we'll hopefully be able to have a chance if you'll call back in to address that kind of thing.

Thanks for listening. Divine line. Remember, enjoy them all you can, because once I head out after Thanksgiving, it's going to be a little while till we get back.

Please make sure on your prayer calendar if you have such a thing. December 5th, the debate in Tampa against Greg Stafford.

Keep that in prayer. I'd very much appreciate it. We'll see you Tuesday evening here on the dividing line. God bless. The dividing.