Jumbo Edition of the Dividing Line Despite Technical Challenges

Well greetings, welcome to the divine line it is Friday, January 3rd,

I believe Somewhere around there. Yep. That's what it says Friday, January 3rd.

We're doing things differently today Just technical stuff and who knows when we'll get back to doing it the normal way but Doing the best we can and got a lot to get to today

Let me just start off. I do need to mention I mentioned this on Blog and on Facebook and on Twitter, which are sort of our three ways of communicating with people the blog however, by the way

Might want to keep that in your URLs for when the other two means of communication go bye -bye

Because my assumption is that will be the last thing that anyone can get to Is is our blog so keep that a omin org

Active and I'm trying to write more there and then just cross post on on other forums, but anyway

Some exciting news about the upcoming cruise. I realize that late September sounds like it's a long long time from now, but it's really not

It's coming up very quickly. And really we only have to the end of this month as far as At that point in time we have to start giving cabins back and and the ability to come along diminishes

Once in a lifetime trip. I know that's an overused phrase but it will be and One of the things we're going to be doing and I this may be more for our

European friends to be honest with you Because I just a lot of people just can't get as long a period of time off as we're gonna be over there but By doing this, but there's going to be two pre cruise days in Rome because we leave out of Rome and So the two days before we leave and a lot of people have already, you know started making travel plans things like that and hence just can't can't do this but friends in Europe might be able to And if you have the freedom to do so, it's great, but we are going to be doing some special Stuff there in Rome.

You could be going to the Vatican You know, I've been there once before and It's really good to be able to see it is really good to be able to Have a context for some of the things that we say some of the things you see very often

There's all sorts of other things to see there in Rome that are very historically relevant and important and you you just you know,

I recently did a series a sermon series on the Lord's Supper and The fact the matter is if you want to understand

Protestant confessional language in regards to the supper You've got to understand the Roman Catholic doctrine of the mass that lays behind it in denying it

That's the language that was used and so it's it's a part of church history, it's vitally important that's gonna be fantastic the next day we get to see places like the

Colosseum and That was of all the things I saw in Rome. That was my favorite thing to see

When you think of how many of our brothers and sisters spilled their blood in that in the sand of that place

And to see what the Romans could do and that the Romans aren't there anymore There's there's a there's wisdom to be found in seeing the ruins of once mighty societies and to recognize that that time passes and That society's passed away as well.

So we'll be seeing that the Colosseum the second day as well as other things. So just really cool stuff going to beginning and then looking at Ephesus and Athens and Having time to visit

I guess I've not been to Ephesus I guess the ruins there are just the best that you're gonna see anywhere and then of course

I got really really excited when I found out that other than getting to to see

Capernaum and I Specifically asked that we see Migdal Mary Magdalene Migdal would be her home her home village they within the past number of years found the first century synagogue in Migdal and what that means is

Jesus went about in all their synagogues teaching and So Migdal was smacked out in the middle of it

This is the first century the Capernaum synagogue is probably a third century synagogue don't have the first century so if you want to To stand next to stones that heard the

Son of God teach Migdal is the place to go and I'm just really thinking about some special teaching to be able to do

There in Migdal. I posted one of the pictures that I took in Migdal on On the blog yesterday.

So take a look at that Yeah, it's it's a once -in -a -lifetime opportunity. But like I said

Capernaum Migdal Jerusalem obviously the old city garden of Gethsemane the wall

All the things that you you need to see to have the context and just I'm just telling you ahead of time

I'm just telling you ahead of time you stand the gate guard Gethsemane and you look up toward where the temple was and It's three rock throws really good rock throws, but it's that close and it it just For me the the thing

I took away for visiting Israel in 2018 was

Just how small Israel is it? just that small and You can you can walk around it and that that was that that's how

Jesus two things but We're also gonna see Masada and that means I'm bringing the

DVDs of the Masada a miniseries Because we've got we've got

Four days at sea And so it's two days over. So I'm I'm thinking

I'm thinking I'm sure there's a DVD player someplace on this ship And I'm I'm thinking we need to watch the

Masada miniseries on the way over so that when we get there and I haven't told

Mike about this yet because we've got it. We got to figure out how this works, but Those of you who want to do this with me, you just got to be ready

Because it only takes a few minutes to ride the cable car up to the top But then there's a snake path and I have unfinished business with the snake path.

I did it last time. I was there I Did it and I think just over 30 minutes

It If you've have you ever climbed A Squat peak once okay

Sure tough. Okay snake path is not that difficult. It's almost the exact same climb exact same distance but it's very even and once you get to the top, it's all nicely made steps unlike I Climbing squat peak is much tougher than than the snake path, but it is not easy and Only those who can pretty much guarantee you can do it in less than 35 minutes

Should even should even think about it Ask Amelia Ramos Ask Amelia how tough the snake path is it is it's it's challenge, but Masada is incredible absolutely astonishing, especially if you get to watch the video beforehand.

So, you know what in the world happened there and Yeah, so great stuff great stuff, but the link is on our website

Now's the time to act, you know between now and the end of the month is and after that things are gonna get more difficult

You're gonna have wait lists and and things like that. So I'm excited about it. I'm already thinking about really special teaching

Elements to tie in with these types of things And it's it's gonna be exciting

I don't think Jeff is thinking about any of that stuff right now because he's not sleeping He has a newborn in the home who evidently likes to party at 1 a .m.

So There you go That's that's how that works so That's what's coming up.

What are you doing? You're gonna look at something real quick Uh -huh,

I'll pay no attention. It's this is really yeah, okay, everything's

Yeah, I'm supposed to just ignore the man walking into the studio and walking around the cameras and stuff like that. It's great. All right,

I Need to jump on this quickly a couple things I'm gonna go ahead and and maximize this

Jamar Tisby 12 31 19 8 49 a .m.

Twitter just in case you didn't know it's James Cone's blackness More than his theology that some people are sorry to condemn and call heresy.

I Would imagine that this was prompted by The very strange tweets from dr.

8 Danny Aiken of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary who starts off with a tweet about I'm really concerned about James Cone's beliefs.

But if he ends up in heaven, then we're just gonna We're just gonna celebrate Jesus together and then what a couple hours later, but I think he was a heretic

There was no reason for the first one None whatsoever, and that's what prompted the second one and I'm I just I don't get it.

But in any case I Am NOT going to spend time today

Requoting the hours and Hours of James Cone's writings that have we have already provided on this program

It literally is ours. We are not we have not taken one little quote here and one little quote there we have read pages and pages and pages from multiple books and books that were published

And continued to be published and that he was promoting right at the end of his life Remember this man taught

Union Theological Seminary. Union Theological Seminary is not a Christian seminary It is it is a it is the

I call it the Walker seminary. It's the walking dead it died a hundred and twenty years plus ago and It's still walking around Pretending to be a seminary, but it's it's it's dead.

It's been it's dead Jim for a long time And he was a professor there because he fit in there

Because anything fits in there except for the Christian faith. That is Anyone who actually believes

Bible doesn't doesn't fit in there James Cone said that if you're a white man and you want to be reconciled to God You've got to do it through black people.

I mean there is Joseph Smith was

Was as Orthodox as James Cone okay, I mean it's just Just Ridiculously out there and there is no defense of it.

I Recognize that people will try to spin things contextualize things the very same people who will want

Jonathan Edwards thrown out of the Christian faith will put just as much effort into Spinning James Cone to try to keep him in the

Christian faith, but there just isn't any Way to do it. All I have to do is just go read his books.

That's all you've got to do The man is is Encouraging violence telling blacks to nurture the animosity that's within them if you want the most divisive racist

Theology has ever been provided to mankind. It's James Cone. That's it.

That's a fact that that is not even debatable. I Mean if I were to debate this all you gotta do is just sit there

Okay, I got another 20 minutes, okay beginning on page and just And and and there's there's no way around it.

That's just that's just the fact so For Jamar Tisby to come out and say it's

James Cone's blackness more than his theologians Some people are so ready to condemn and call heresy. It's just absurd.

This is race baiting on on steroids It's let's divide divide divide divide divide when there is no reason to I Mean there is not

Jamar just repent of it. You're just you're wrong. You know, you're wrong. You know what you're doing. This was purposeful

You know, you did it at the time. You did it for the reasons you did it, you know all about it It's just it's it's horrible.

So there's there's that that is that is that is said Okay, I was sent this and I Apologize to mr.

Israel Anderson for our technical problems yesterday because I had contacted by Facebook said we're gonna review it and then

We weren't able to the program. I Was sent this It's not a really long

People will sometimes say man, there is just so much false teaching in the world today in comparison to times past.

Well think about it There's twice as many people on the planet today than there was only a few decades ago so You've got that combined

Combined with technology combined with not only the printing press But today the

Internet so anybody with a modem and a keyboard can put anything out there and so Not very long ago.

You just wouldn't have heard of a lot of this stuff There just wasn't any means for it to be communicated

Now there's means for to be communicated and a lot of people just live their lives on the Internet. It's a sad It's a sad thing

But it's it's true. So a fellow up from Boulder, Colorado who I I looked at the website

Very directly says he's a former Christian former Christian minister of some type Is no longer a

Christian. So is technically an apostate is into strange

Akkadian Inscription stuff Just some way way way way out there stuff, but I wasn't able to comment on this on Facebook but this kind of thing you run into and Our response can't just be to go.

Well, that's weird. That's how a lot of Christians respond. And well, that's weird Yeah, it's weird, but That does not amount to a response

So, let me just run through this real quick Give you an idea of some of the stuff you're into out there and then give a response to it

One of the hardest things to accept that came as a result of the discoveries I've made so he's claiming to have discovered all this stuff is the identity of Yahweh The evil sadistic

God of most of the Old Testament is not the father of Jesus now immediately

Immediately Those of you who are at all familiar with church history go ah

Marcion rides again because Marcion the second century

Gnostic heretic was I mean if you if you were a Christian For 200 years you and you wanted to be known for doing something.

You wrote a book against Marcion everybody wrote a book against Marcion and Marcion said that Yahweh was not the father of Jesus.

That was a separate God. He He introduced this distinction where you know

He comes up with a a modified New Testament that takes out all the references to the

Old Testament The Jewish people and so on so forth and and tries to create this distinction saying no

The God of the Old Testament is not the father of Jesus so there you immediately hear that and I don't

I'm not saying that there is a direct connection in Gnosticism, but it is a common misunderstanding on the part of many people

I many people sitting in Baptist churches I Remember very clearly in a

Southern Baptist Church being in a small group where where someone said well, you know

Jesus comes and and he makes The mean God of the Old Testament like us

Just like oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no you you missed everything

You've you've fully missed the entire message of the New Testament But it's it takes lots of different forms and it's it's out there.

So The evil sadistic God of the most the Old Testament is not the father of Jesus Jesus actually says this three times in John 8 alone

But we skip over those parts because we didn't understand how why Jesus would be saying that to his own people

Jesus, of course didn't say anything like that, but we'll look at that briefly But we've since found many

Christian teachers that had also worked this out without any connection to the other things I have found gotta have something other

Finding blogs online to go into far more detail and evidence of this than I had found yet was something of a relief

Without any doubt coming to the acceptance This was the most challenging part of all this so far One of my favorite worship songs is

Yahweh by vineyard music It's been gut -wrenching to look at the growing evidence that Yahweh is not the father of Jesus but he's the very person that tempted

Jesus in the desert and The very same person Jesus calls the father of all lies and a murderer from the beginning in John 8

Even as you read this you can't accept this idea and I totally get that it took me two years to finally accept it myself

You probably want to defriend me right now, but hold on Here's something to help you one in the entirety of the

Bible Not a single text exists that claims Yahweh is the father of Jesus. I mean this the level of ignorance of the

New Testament here is overwhelming But people like this are writing to people on the internet who have zero knowledge of the

New Testament They don't know anything about intertextuality the relationship the Old Testament New Testament the relationship of the

New Testament writers Utilizing the Greek septuagint translation of the Old Testament and quoting it all the time the

New Testament They don't know the stuff that we talked about on this program fairly regularly and one of the things

I want to do in 2020 and we'll be getting to later in the program is we need to Make sure our foundations are strong you know just because I was thinking about and I'll mention this later, but We have talked about foundational stuff for so many decades

That sometimes like I want to go back over a series that I did and I started thinking about well that was 17 years ago and The vast majority of people watching this program they were not watching 17 years ago now some of you are

Weird enough to go back and listen to stuff but you're the minority the majority of folks are just picking stuff up as we make reference to them and so It is vitally important for us and Here's the danger.

There's so much going on in the world Wars and rumors of wars right now quite honestly To use language from a different time period and a different application, but there's so much going on Politically culturally things like that that the danger is that we won't

Build the foundations we need to build To be able to respond to everything that's happening around us

We need to have foundations within ourselves within the faith itself But the temptation is to be so focused on positive over here that we don't have these foundations

Firm and that's what we need to have We need to be putting out that effort So In the entirety of the

Bible not a single text exists that claims Yahweh is the father of Jesus that that of course is absurd Where does the idea come from?

You know where the same place all this nonsense always comes from Roman universalism

What? The early church fathers are teaching this stuff long before anybody in one

There were this was The belief of early Christians when there were still a multiplicity of elders in Rome before the monarchical

Episcopate even developed So to Jesus own words ought to be sufficient in John 8 devour that chapter go deep into it

Yeah, when you do that'll be the end of this look up the words Jesus is extremely plain about who the

Jews are following really is he says plainly your father is not my father He actually calls Yahweh the devil.

No, he does not Obviously, he says the father testifies of me you claim to follow him, but you do not know him

It is the false claim. They do not know who he is They are not following in his way but there is no way on God's green earth you can read

John chapter 8 and come up with the idea that he is identifying Yahweh as Satan that is just absurd on a level that's difficult to even begin to comprehend number three imagine never having to be embarrassed

Now here's here's the real reason Imagine never having to be embarrassed about Yahweh's treatment of humans ever again

Because new context has shown who he really is new context. I wonder what that is, you know some revelatory stuff that they're claiming from some

Akkadian source or something No more atheists throwing this in your face and you having to come up with rather illogical

Arguments to excuse the difference in behavior between Yahweh and Jesus So again, this is this is unhitching from the

Old Testament on steroids, okay This is full -blown Gnosticism in its in its in its desire to come up with something new

So as Yahweh actually the Christian Satan, although that will sound extremely offensive to you right now consider it for a moment

If you're able think back over the entire story. Why did Jesus come in the first place? Why is Jesus need to fulfill complete the law if it was his father's law?

Remember Jesus only does what he sees the father doing yet. Jesus has never acted anything remotely like Yahweh now, you know why?

So how did Yahweh become the father of the Jews? He stole them He stole them from Egypt and forced them to worship him or die

I'm just reading it to you. The Jews are not at fault. They are not to be blamed This is the veil that must be lifted off the

Jews and the Christians. Everyone's always got a hook Everyone's always got this is how you know, if you follow me

Here's my new thing It is important especially in today's Volatile society with anti -semitism on the rise that no blame of any kind is apportioned to the

Jews who are without any doubt Jesus's own people as Jesus himself declared. I came to my own and they did not recognize me

Once it's not what he specifically said John 1 John chapter 1 but anyways once you resolve this many many things are going to make sense

Yeah, you need that Gnostic knowledge. I expect this would be harder for you to accept than it was even for me though It might take you many years even this is a very very difficult thing to come to grips with It's not going to be easy.

Jesus didn't come to free us from his father But from Satan Yahweh Yahweh kills

Jesus saves end of story. Okay full -blown heresy we recognize that but Anyone seeing that you you just automatically know, okay, this is

Way out there, but how would you respond to it? Well, if you have a sound understanding the doctrine of Trinity, then, you know

The New Testament writers identify the father is Yahweh Who is the one who lays our sins upon the

Messiah and Isaiah 53 Yahweh Yahweh lays? our sins upon the

Messiah Jesus Jesus identified as Yahweh Jesus identified as Yahweh in John chapter 8 twice

John 8 24 and 858 Jesus used the phrase ego I me which is used as a Another name for Yahweh in the

Old Testament. He is the I am This is the identification of Jesus in that fact

That's why the Jews pick up stones to stone him John 8 858 because he says pin Abraham genocide ego

I mean before Abraham was I am and so the Sun is identified as Yahweh not only here and here in John 8

But in especially specifically as Yahweh in John chapter 12 We're quoting from Isaiah 6 where Isaiah sees

Yahweh sitting upon his throne lofty and lifted up sees his glory John quotes that and then says these things

Isaiah said because he saw his glory and he spoke about him Isaiah Who did you see I saw Yahweh John who did

Isaiah see he saw Jesus? So John identifies Jesus as Yahweh the spirit is the spirit of Yahweh You have the one name used of three divine persons if you understand

Trinitarian theology, it's very obvious that this gentleman never did You can see where the error is immediately.

He's assuming some type of Unitarian concept a lot of people do That's where you actually need to go a whole lot deeper into the text and this fellow has and so when you when you read

John chapter 8 what you actually discover is the the chapter beginning in verse 12 because remember 7 53 8 11 woman taken adultery is a major text of variants not original

John, but When you read it you see there is a first portion

Then there is the story of the people who believe having heard the words and then when Jesus says if you continue my words and my disciples deeds, no truth to set you free and As soon as Jesus says truth set you free

This is offends them we've never been enslaved anyone and by the end of chapter those false disciples are picking up stones to stone him and It is in that discussion then

That you have Jesus talking about the witness of his father Now the only person the

Jews would have understood His father to be was Yahweh No question about it

So when he says put an object on genocide ego I me before Abraham was I am

When he says Abraham rejoiced to see my day rejoiced and was glad probably referring to what happened in Genesis 18 and 19 when

Yahweh Walks with the two angels by the Oaks of Mamre meets with Abram and when the two angels go down to Sodom and Gomorrah, and then they bring

Lot out and Then Yahweh on earth

Rains fire and brimstone from Yahweh in heaven upon Sodom and Gomorrah so the

Yahweh on earth who has been seen is Jesus Pre -incarnates the

Sun obviously not incarnate yet If you want to use different term because of that because his name is given to him at the incarnation.

That's fine but the point is You have this incredible Yahweh on earth

Rains fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gomorrah from Yahweh in heaven You have a plurality

Seen right there It's very important. Is that the background to when Jesus says

Abram saw my day and rejoiced and was glad If so, you've got another

I didn't another further identification of Jesus as Yahweh there is no way to read

John chapter 8 in any contextual fashion that starts with John 1 and goes to John 20 and Then allows

John to be a part of the New Testament Where you can come up with this idea? That Yahweh is some evil

God not only that but if we're correct in the connection to Genesis 19 and Abram seeing

Jesus's day Then it was Jesus who brought fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah Which I would imagine is probably what people are thinking about that evil

God Yahweh that even there is no evil God Yahweh There is a holy God Yahweh that brings judgment upon evil people upon Pagan religions and that had child sacrifice and everything else

God does bring judgment, but you see most these people don't believe in a

God who has wrath Which means there's a whole bunch of sections of the

New Testament. They're not really gonna like either Because you know, and you know like Jesus talking about, you know

Bring me bring these men before me and destroy them and so they don't want to talk about that part either Because they're editing

God down to fit their their own perspective but again having a positive understanding of the doctrine of the

Trinity will help you to understand where these people have gone wrong where they've where they've missed things and That will be very very helpful

I'm not answering things. I've got a timer going to To know where we are time wise and in the program and that's why

I needed to take a look at it alright, so there's There's that you will find

Everything there's Israel Anderson Yahweh kills Jesus saves.

No, Jesus is Yahweh and Yahweh brings judgment and justice and Righteousness and power and grace and mercy and we just try to edit him down To fit into the things that that we want to fit him into.

All right Don't really have to I'll get to that one later on now,

I'll fill that one in a little bit later on Talking about Foundational issues,

I don't remember how many you know when I sit in this room sometimes I think about When we did a series last and I remember we did a series on solo scriptura, which

I would think was fairly Recently But when

I think it's fairly recent that's probably within the past ten years and Again when

I'm when I'm meeting people So often they'll say

I've been listening for two years for three years Maybe five years, but it's rare to find people who've been listening for ten years

And so it is important to be able to Revisit key issues.

We mentioned them. We talked about them. We talked about solo scriptura. It's sort of given as a

Starting point But one thing that I'm observing

There are a lot of people who have adopted the reformed label for themselves

But in reality they don't have a deep foundation in The necessary truths that give rise to reformed theology if you if you came to reformed theology from the standard perspective that basically you're getting to sit back and Decide for yourself.

I'm just gonna decide for myself What Beliefs I'm going to embrace and and I'm gonna try a little bit of this you try a little bit that well, you know this reforms of this is really cool right now the the cool kids are reformed and So I'm gonna

I'm gonna go that direction. I'm that's a very dangerous a Very dangerous path.

I I don't believe anyone who comes that direction will remain

Reformed their entire life. I just don't There is a necessary Point in time for someone who is reformed whether you're raised that way

Come into the reformed faith from some type of synergistic system There comes a point in time where you have to simply face the reality of Who God is and who you are and that you are not

God and that God? has the right To do with you as he pleases you you can't escape it you you deal with the

Self -shattering reality of Who and what you really are that you're a creature you're like the the the grass that the flower that Blooms in the morning and fades by the evening

You are in existence for a very brief period of time You know little

Very very little and You are dependent for every breath you take every beat of your heart upon someone else and it changes you and One of the reasons that I really when

I when I speak to apostates Who claim to have once been with us and they've now embraced some type of system where they're

They're adding to the work of Christ. So they're sacramental Activities and so on so forth. I'm just like you you just never you just never were there.

Were you? Because when I push them on that, you know talk to me about How you once?

fully Trusted in the imputed righteousness of Christ. You look to your substitute you you saw

The perfection of his work in your behalf and what was it that convinced you? That that's not enough

They they they have no answers for that they really haven't answers for that so I'm seeing people who claim wants to have been reformed and You know, they had been something else for a while and then there was something else for a while and now they've been reformed

And I just go yeah Well, we'll see where you are in five years or ten years

Because if you're really reformed you'll still be there And if you're if you get bored

If the when the newness wears off, there's always a honeymoon period for anyone who converts and it's always a honeymoon period

You know people become Roman Catholics and Rome can do no wrong and then you know a few years down the road

You've had to live with these folks for a while and it's like Yeah Yeah Yeah And of course then you start really seriously dealing with the politics and all the rest of stuff in Rome And and so a lot of people

What happens is they When the newness wears off and being reformed

They want something more and so they think that they can get that with some kind of higher

Ecclesiology, you know, let's let's get some liturgy going now if they came from a liturgical

Background this really isn't an option for them Because they were looking for something more and they've already recognized that you can only do the ceremonies so many times before the newness wears off there, too and So it's normally people who've come from a non liturgical background.

They become reformed and then they move into Wanting something more and so the it's the it's the smells and bells that starts getting getting to them and so they might go

You know some of them used to go, you know Into some of the higher

Churches maybe Anglican or something like that and then a real common route is

Protestant Anglican East Orthodox Rome But Nowadays, I'm seeing people that are doing the

Rome Eastern Orthodoxy thing that's normally it's not really normal way, but it but it happens and I think

Francis has something to do with that especially right now, I mean When you when you've got two living popes that are that far apart on matters of faith and morals

Yeah, okay, of course there is a Western form of Orthodoxy and then there's the real

Orthodoxy in the East and Not many of the converts here in the

United States really embrace the Eastern way because it involves a completely different way of thought completely different way of thought and It's it's difficult to really get into that while in a

Western culture Unless you're raised with it so I'm seeing

Guys who claim to have been reformed and they'll go off to some of these different different perspectives

And then you listen to them and the folks I've been doing this a few years now and One of the

Least pleasing satisfying enjoyable

Aspects of doing what I do Is the fact that I have to spend a lot a lot of time listening to Apostates Listening to people who've left the face some of you know, there was a rather well -known apostate

What was that seven eight nine years ago now? Presbyterian minister

Met right in my office right over here. We talked He ended up going way off into who knows what eventually

But I mean just total life collapse sad thing to sad thing to observe but I've talked a lot of these folks and I I have a lot of experience in Dealing with People who claimed have once I was once where you are that's a

You know the atheists who do it and the Muslims who do it and The Roman Catholics and the

Eastern Orthodox and the Mormons and whatever That is a that's considered to be the trump card and that trump card meant something before 2016 by the way had a different meaning back then

That's that's considered that that's Supposed to have real gravitas. It has real. Oh, you know and So I've got a lot of experience on this and I can tell you that there there is a honeymoon stage where the group that you've joined can do nothing wrong and The group you left can do nothing, right?

that eventually breaks down time Deals with it

And yes, I have met many a person who left and then came back and you know a pot was apologetic and came back for the right reasons and and Yes, I have seen that type of thing happen as well but then you also see the people who just they move from one religious belief another is believe because they don't have the root of the matter in them there they're the they're the shallow soil seed and Jesus warned about them and There's nothing you can do about them, that's

That's who they are that's that's the way it is now Number of years ago in 2009 in fact the first reference

I found on our blog was 2004 to follow by name

Jay Dyer and And Jay Dyer Was one of these former

Reformed guys Studied at Bonson Theological Seminary and Then my understanding is went to Rome and then eventually

Eastern Orthodoxy and So there was one reference in 2004

I think and then in 2009 Turretinfan wrote a 13 part series

Responding to Jay Dyer on Calvinism. He had Posted something

I remember if it's a video or an article on the subject Calvinism and Turretinfan did a 13 part thorough response

To him that I would that I would recommend to you if you want to Do some reading rather than just listening.

Well On I think the 29th of December Jay Dyer posted a video about reasons why he is not a

Protestant and It started making some rounds in Facebook And let me

I'm going I'm old enough to talk like this to those of you who are younger than I am

I'm not super old, but I've been doing this for a while if If you can watch this video and not immediately identify fundamental foundational errors of misrepresentation foundational misunderstandings of Reformed theology

Then you've got some homework you need to be doing and If something like this really

Throws you for a loop. You're not well grounded You're just not You you may think that you're out there, you know swinging your sword, but Sorry there are foundational issues in Why you are to believe in the sufficiency of Scripture That if you can't see through what

Jay Dyer says at the beginning of this video Well, we're gonna that's why we're gonna be dealing with it same thing with issues of justification and Let's just be honest one of the differences in my opinion between the old

Reformed and The new reformed I'm not using young restless reef. I've never hate that that Was horrible phraseology from the start

But one of the differences see I I became reformed when it wasn't popular to be reformed

When it wasn't a movement It was you were you

You were having to make a decision that was probably gonna cost you and it did cost us Man, it cost us

Today you can become reformed and it's you know, it's considered to be cool and and Hipster and stuff like that and and The one of the differences between back then and Now is back then one of the fundamental things that you were driven to immediately was you

Got some level of knowledge of church history into you and not just Luther and Calvin and the

Reformation That's important But the fact of matter is if you read this

Calvin's Institutes okay, if You know pretty pretty nicely marked up set here and I did that back in seminary.

And so if you Read the Institute's the Christian religion

You're going to get hit Constantly now,

I don't think I have My full size this is a somewhat edited down version.

I didn't include all of the I must have it in in the office Somewhere.

I'll have to I'll have to look for it. I've got a really Nicely done leather -bound full

Institute so it's you may be going that's not big enough. Yeah, it'd be about a much bigger if you read this and Not just to try to get through it, but to try to understand it you're going to be hit by patristic citations right left and center you're gonna be reading about Augustine and Chrysostom and Tertullian and Because the

Reformers took very seriously their claim to Catholicity They took very seriously.

They they they rejected the idea that what they were doing was starting a whole new whole new movement whole new church they believed very much in ad fontes back to the sources and They made strong arguments

Some of the some of the first books that I grabbed hold of Because I was

It's around the same time. I started dealing with Roman Catholicism. So I really saw The richness of this and the importance of knowing the the connections church history

Some of the best works that have demonstrated the aberrations and errors of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy Came from the

Reformers because they really knew the early church fathers They did not as Rome Tries to do and Eastern Orthodoxy to a lesser extent

Try to turn the early church fathers into mirror images of themselves You can't do that the early church fathers were the early church fathers they were a very diverse group in many ways

There were certain things that absolutely held them together and there were things that they did not share in common as well

You have to let the early church fathers be the early church writers, that's that's

Historiographically necessary and it's just simply the only honest way to deal with them but they took them very seriously and so That was a part of my formation

Was to see these types of things now there is a book I do not think it's in here no notice it is

I Don't know what it I don't Think I have the current version of this

Yeah, I don't have the current version of this. Maybe I do in the other room. This is what looked like originally So I'll scripture the proposition on the

Bible Michael Horton Robert Godfrey myself RC Sproul John Armstrong John MacArthur Sinclair Ferguson Joel Beakey Ray Lanning Don Kessler was general editor

I wrote a rather extensive chapter in here

Is right before our sees the establishment of scripture so mine

Extends from page 27 to page 62

And you will find it filled with numerous references to Athanasius Lots and lots of Greeks on so forth because it was important to establish these things

That element seems to be missing from a lot of The New Calvinism That historical connection that almost holistic element to it

Where you've not only got the theology, but you've you've got You've got the history not just back through the

Puritans but back beyond the Reformation and And a meaningful fair understanding of what happened in the medieval period

What was happening in the early church Why do you see The departures from apostolic teaching amongst certain early church writers

Make sure by the way, and I mentioned this to a dear brother just a couple days ago.

Here's the Three volume Holy Scripture set Make sure you've got material like that as well

Available to you. It's very very important Be I've seen when

I see what we're gonna watch here We will be able to watch it, right? Hope so rich says hope so If not, you'll be able to hear it and I'll try not to do silly things

While it's on just in case we end up if if we have a technical issue because we're having technical issues

So we're recording this completely differently normal If what you see is me still sitting here while you're listening to this.

Don't worry about it Just because we had issues putting all the video feeds together But I want to listen to What Jay Dyer says at the beginning of this video?

We may do more of it in the future. It's worthwhile And justification things like that The only the only hesitation

I have I'll be honest with the only hesitation I have I Have said for a very very long time that I I Do not have the time to get into the level of criticism of Eastern Orthodoxy that Someone needs to get into There have been a few books published.

They're not easily accessible. They're not Written in such a way and it may just be because of the subject

I cuz I don't even know how I would do it Reason, you know some some people

Will remember that when Hank Hanegraaff converted I Made some comments on the subject of Orthodoxy and If you recall what

I basically said Was that this subject is next to impossible to address?

because if you actually Understand the Orthodox mindset. It is not a

Western way of thinking and we're all Western thinkers We almost all of the apologetic discussion that we have on this program is deeply entrenched in Western ways of thought

Eastern ways of thought are not as wedded to a

Clear Commitment to What we would call logical categories there is a level of Experientialism and mysticism in Eastern thought that is only present in certain

Medieval writers spiritualists Devotionalists, I mean there there is an element of it

There's always been the interface between the two because it's not like You know, you could divide no one built a wall somewhere

Around Greece to keep all that type of stuff out But Western thinking the reason

We can't engage Roman Catholicism on dogmatic statements of belief and here's this catechism and this says this and here's the systematic theology is because Roman Catholicism is

Western thinking Protestantism is Western thinking Eastern Orthodoxy just Really doesn't have anything like that In Eastern Orthodoxy, real

Eastern Orthodoxy, as it's practiced in Russia, Ukraine You've got the

Greek Orthodox as well, but there's been more cross pollination there, I think

Because they're the ones that have to have the most have had historically the most interaction with the West and most influence on upon it

The liturgy and the prayers of the church are the statement of systematic theology

So it's hard for those of us in the West to understand

Energia the energies and how energies can be spatially located but only spiritually located but access through the liturgy and worship of the church and Trying to get

Westerners To have any type of meaningful Standpoint from which to even read

Eastern Orthodox writing to begin to understand it to then to be able to bring it to the standard of Scripture and Even to have a meaningful discussion as to the proper means of exegesis of Scripture massively complicated

Massively complicated and I know that to do it truly well

Would be a massive undertaking of time that I Hope the

Lord lays upon someone's heart that has the background to do it There are like I said, there have been a couple books written.

There's some I think there's some book on books on The Orthodoxy and the doctrine the

Trinity that are really useful and things like that, but I Just haven't seen

A lot that's I can just go. Yeah that that big book right there will do what you need

I just don't haven't seen that yet and It needs to be there

There there's a there's a need, you know, I could sit here and say hey if you know, you're a

Seminary student and you know, daddy Left you a fair amount of money so you can study anything.

There's just good topics that that really need Some Special attention,

I think and some of that just may be my own ignorance So maybe there is something out there and someone will tell me about it and I'll go.

Yay. Thank you Because I don't know everything and I'm dependent upon people pointing me to stuff very often to go.

Oh, that's that's interesting. That's cool anyway, so you can see that there is a

Unlike many people Who just assume that orthodoxy is popeless

Catholicism and therefore it's just all Just all wrong. It's all bad. Same same reasons that Rome is when

I addressed the issue of Hanegraaff's conversion, I tried to do so with some

Care Because I think that's it that's important to do just simply

Because I don't want to be one of those people that claims to know everything from afar.

I Think those who make those kind of claims will be judged by God someday and it will be a harsh judgment anyway with all of that said at the same time my personal conclusion is that Orthodoxy as it becomes a cultural

Experience which it does in Ukraine and Russia a place like that Dies, it becomes folk religion

The important vital I mean the weird the weird thing about orthodoxy is you end up with divine truths established in a culture

That don't end up changing hearts. So orthodoxy is inveterately Trinitarian and in fact most orthodox people

Understand the doctrine Trinity far better than most Protestants do Because it's all around them all the time

But it once at once at any point in time when the

Christian faith in any form becomes a cultural thing It dies Because the change of the heart is first and foremost

So once you are simply a Christian because you're born into it. We've seen what that results in Whether it's in the west or the east it's always a dead nominalism and dead nominalism in Europe went off into wild liberalism that bears almost no

Semblance Christianity at all in Ukraine and Russia. It becomes folk religion

Where you go to these places of energy and it almost it starts reverting back to a form of paganism

Whenever the heart's taken out, that's what's gonna happen That's what's gonna happen when the gospel and the gospel call of faith and repentance

Dying to self living to Christ on when that when that is gone The results become very ugly

So with that being said What you have with someone like a

Jay Dyer is a westernized orthodoxy That looks a lot like Rome but not quite

And when Orthodox folks try to do apologetics they just They can't avoid ending up sounding very much like they're just simply populist

Catholics Because they end up having to try to translate orthodox categories into Western Language and that's what

Rome's are doing for a long time so it ends up sounding very similar even if there is an attempt to make some kind of a

Difference and by the way, one of the things One of the common things and this is this

I think the first I think the first reference on our website to Jay Dyer Was about this Orthodox will love to use early

Christological terminology to criticize Protestants. They'll say that we're monophilized let's say that we're

Nestorians and one of the reasons that You know, at least the folks at my church know what what

Nestorius Was all about well, actually What Nestorianism is?

There's some fairly decent recent research that would say Nestorius wasn't actually a Nestorian, but poor guy. Anyway, be that as it may

I Just recently while doing the catechism instruction at Apologia specifically went through The early

Christological heresies and and what they involved in the denial the hypostatic Union stuff like that the

Orthodox love to use that kind of thing to Make I think grossly inappropriate accusations against other people because it's effective because They they know that the vast or the people are talking to you and even

Wouldn't even know why they should be offended by being called in a story in the first place I think it's in as I said grossly inappropriate.

It's not not proper. It's not it doesn't actually Make any sense, but they do it.

They do it rather frequently And I think one of the reasons they do it is it gives it's like when

Jehovah's Witnesses attacked the shape of the cross or Birthdays or holidays like a it's a it's a grab. It's a it's something you can hook on to somebody

Because there are at least some Orthodox. This is very very different in Ukraine But there are at least because I have much more experience in Ukraine than I do in Russia.

I've only been to Russia once But I've been to Ukraine many times they are not Into apologetics

Evangelism nothing like that So it's like no no no no not even no because I mean that was one of the first things

I said Hey, do you think we'd get a dialogue going you know? So in the

West They are trying to be To draw you know call somebody to Orthodoxy.

I've been going on way too long here This is one of the problems doing it this way is that you know

Yeah, you know I'm just So let's take a look at What Jay Dyer says here, and so here's my challenge to you who are reformed

Listen understand and If you don't automatically recognize

Where Jay Dyer is misrepresenting his former faith? Maybe he maybe he was ignorant.

It's possible. There's certainly lots of reformed people who are I You know this stuff existed it was available when when he was still reformed so But the point is you should be able to recognize it and if not then take it as a challenge

To be able to deal with this so let's let's take a look at what is said here

I don't know. I'll give you my top ten reasons as to why I am no longer Protestant haven't been a

Protestant since 2002 three And why

I ultimately found it completely unconvincing so there's there's not in any specific

Ordering to these it's not like this one is the clincher they all kind of go together and they were a process of Things that I realized over time as a

Protestant seminary student. Yes, I attended Bonson seminary the now defunct reformed institution after the legacy and lineage of Bonson which

I guess Went under I don't know exactly what happened to it, but it doesn't exist anymore

But I did learn some things at Bonson seminary So for that,

I'm happy. I'm appreciative But ultimately we're going to talk about How that system doesn't work.

So number one What is the first thing that comes to mind I would say the inadequacy and Unbiblical nature of sola scriptura itself the idea that the only rule of faith for Christians for the church

That it's the text of Scripture is itself a historical and unbiblical firstly because Okay, can can you tell?

Why we've done so many debates in this subject the past I He says there's no order but this is almost always the first thing and That's why it was the first debate we did against gerrymatitics.

We did multiple times of gerrymatitics. We've done it with numerous other

Roman Catholic apologists as well And it is central in We have responded by the way over the years.

There was there used to be an Eastern Orthodox radio program here in the valley and I played

Comments that they made on solo scriptura. That was probably sometime around 2000 early 2000s probably some it was a long time ago

But It will be fundamental approach and so it's a historical so that's why

I said You want the three -volume set there? You want William Whitaker's disputations of Holy Scripture?

You want George Salmon's infallibility church who on Shem? This is work on the Council Trent Not exhaustive but between those sources you will have literally hundreds of pages of Citations from the early

Church Fathers That you won't find in the

Jurgens set published Promoted by Catholic answers and people like that And that's why my chapter in Sola Scriptura focused upon key

Affirmations, but here's the question Do you know Sola Scriptura well enough to represent misrepresentations of it?

Because Sola Scriptura is not saying that scripture is sufficient for all things If you hear someone say that that's

Sola Scriptura, then you should know that they are either ignorant or purposely misrepresenting things one of the two

There are specific terms It's like this is when when we define the doctrine the

Trinity and talk about three Co -equal co -eternal person sharing the one being that is God If we played fast and loose with the terms being in person

We'd end up with immediate heresy if I said there are three persons in the one person is

God You shouldn't immediately go. Oh, but but but what and catch the error

Just as important when we talk about Sola Scriptura, we are saying the scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith for the church and That is intimately connected to the nature of Scripture being

God breathed what we're saying is there is only one God breathed revelation that has been given to the church that's what we're saying and If you don't know that and and don't see why that's central

Then the Misrepresentations the straw men will be piled up all around you

Then it's lit and you're you're toast was no canon of scripture in the early church for many centuries.

I stopped at a bad place Very very often what you have is canon and Sufficiency mixed together and obviously they're related, but they're two very different issues

And This again just as Jehovah's Witnesses go for the Trinity Because they know that Christians don't know the

Trinity very well, at least the ones they run into at the door These folks go for Sola Scriptura and canon

Because again, when was the last time you heard a sermon on the canon of scripture? You've probably heard sermons on the inspiration of scripture

But sermons on the canon Um, how many how many

Christian pastors do you know would be comfortable Enunciating their reasons for not accepting the

Apocrypha as scripture not many

Because the vast majority of Theological seminaries spend next to no time

On discussion of the subject now, it's not that there aren't solid good reasons I've one of the first debates

I did 1993 Boston College, Jerry Matic's Apocrypha one of the great debates

Gary Machuda Apocrypha It's not that the information isn't there it's just that even even most of our

Supporters and fans if you were looking at my list of debates Where would those rank in your oh,

I want to get some popcorn and watch that one list Not very high.

Let's be honest and So they go for where they know the weaknesses And it's it's an it's an efficient and effective approach the church actually took six seven centuries before The church had a rough outline of what the canon would be and even into the 7th century one of the great

Eastern theologians one of the first systematic theologian writers st John Damascus even his canon was different from the rest of the church, but most people don't reject st

John Damascus we certainly don't in the Orthodox Church so if you look at the progression of the formation of the canon itself, you're led to the conclusion that if you're a

Protestant a Fallible group of men put together an infallible canon.

Okay Not Gonna be spending a whole lot of time on all these because again,

I've given you references to To look at for some of these things But this will help you understand why

RC Sproul says some of the things he said that sometimes leave people confused and this is why

Michael Kruger and I two years ago. Yeah two years ago coming up week after next

At the g3 conference did what we did on the subject of the canon and Again, I would highly recommend that to you

That discussion that we had and Michael Kruger's books because the idea of infallible men as the source of the canon is

One of the key errors of both Orthodox Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic argumentation.

You need to know what the canon is And again, I don't know how many times I've given the presentation on canon 1, canon 2, what these things are with the theological nature

They're not my favorite presentations favorite for other people because they don't recognize

The importance of understanding that the canon is a theological construct before it's a historical construct

Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy will Use it as a historical issue

And Hence what this father said and what that father said and this person that person so on and so forth rather than recognizing

That canon is directly related to inspiration and to the actions of God and therefore it's

God that determines canon And the church is the passive recipient not of a divine revelation of the canon but of the canon itself so the the list of the canon is

What I've called an artifact of revelation God inspired at least one book but he didn't inspire all books therefore the canon comes into existence of Necessity by the limit by the action of inspiration and the limitation of that action of inspiration

Add that one to your list. There's two sections the bunches bunch of stuff

That's super relevant in scripture alone to this subject Very very important that you get some of those foundational issues down It's ultimately nonsense.

It's ultimately contradictory. It doesn't work. So what we have here is the assumption of tradition

And tradition comes to us in two forms. There's an oral Form, there's a written form the written form being of course the scriptures themselves and the liturgies

And this is something I didn't understand as a Protestant I didn't understand the importance of the liturgy That even went into the decision as to what books would be included in the canon of scripture

Okay, now that this is where you have the orthodox spin on this particular because the argument is very very similar to that which

Rome would use But this is the orthodox spin is because in orthodoxy see orthodoxy

I didn't say this earlier, but let me say now from my perspective orthodoxy is

Encrusted in the tradition of time and is

Essentially stuck at the end of the 8th century and Many of the problems that it faces and it faces many problems and once people get into it they realize just how fractured and divided it is and It you know, it's presented one way, especially to the

West you go to the East and it's it's lived out in a very different way But the divisions that exist there,

I don't think can be healed Because the fact that orthodoxy is stuck in history it is stuck in the liturgy and tradition of the 9th century 7th and 9th century and It can't go beyond that it can't get beyond that and that tradition eventually overrides the life -giving power of scripture as the living voice of Christ in the church and Overshadow scripture it becomes not just a lens, but it's like when a person gets a cataract

When you get a cataract the lens becomes foggy it becomes it's no longer perfectly transparent and so that's how the liturgy and tradition in orthodoxy functions in looking at scripture and The the voice of scripture becomes muted that's that's why

Rome in its infallibility Enters into a monologue. There's no longer.

There's no longer. It's just the voice the church sola ecclesia and In orthodoxy you end up with sola traditio that tradition and that liturgy becomes so fixed that it fossilizes and like the lens it becomes thick and No longer transparent and you can't see

What the scriptures are actually saying there can be no correction there Semper Reformanda Means always reforming because the

Reformers recognized the true nature of man, and this is one of the primary heretical errors of orthodoxy is it has a fundamentally unbiblical anthropology a fundamentally unbiblical anthropology doctrine of man and Because it does it cannot be corrected because the lens through which it looks at scripture filters that out

That's why sola scriptura is so important because sola scriptura allows the church to continuously

Hear the voice of Christ in scripture for each and every generation without that becoming

Muted Okay, now we're using hearing rather than seeing but you see that you see the relationship without it becoming muted through tradition

Without that lens becoming so thick that it filters out the things that would correct the errors

That the church is now embracing and when it comes to soteriology the doctrine of man and again

We're speaking as Westerners the doctrine of man is communicated and understood through the liturgy and traditions of the 7th through 9th centuries in the

East for the modern -day faithful Eastern Orthodox person and So there can't be a correction

Because you've denied sola scriptura There it is again Very important aspect to keep in mind and took many many centuries

So sola scriptura is not only an unworkable And and non -biblical and a historical now notice.

Mr. Dyer has not even given us a definition of sola scriptura He has conflated things

This is not a careful discussion by any means. He's going off top of his head So am I I don't have it in front of me right now

I mean, I'm pulling books off the shelf, but I'm not reading. I'm just showing to But still there is a lack of clearness here he has yet to deal and maybe maybe he didn't know he's inexcusable for not knowing but maybe he didn't know or very often my experiences apostates

End Up twisting their memories a good bit Maybe he didn't know the sola scriptura is fundamentally focused upon the nature of Scripture as they are new sauce

Remember, that's why I asked Mitch Pacwa in our debate in San Diego 1999 on solo scriptura has

Roman Catholicism Defined a single word that Jesus ever said that is not contained in Holy Scripture Well, of course not has it defined anything that any

Apostle ever said There's not a horse. Well, of course not then this idea of living tradition the the the oral tradition over against the written tradition

This becomes extremely problematic Because you can't trace it to the

Apostles themselves and The traditions claimed by Orthodoxy are different than the traditions claimed by Rome This is why we have gone back into the early church before and talked about the very first reference to apostolic tradition in Irenaeus is

The idea that Jesus is more than 50 years old and he died first time it's claimed Irenaeus claims

I got this from the decide from the disciples of Jesus. I got this from the Apostles Nobody believes it today, but that's what he claimed

So how can something that then comes hundreds of years later actually go back to the Apostles? The only thing that we know that is the anus toss that is

God -breathed is what is in Scripture? Now they would claim. Well, you don't know that scripture without us.

Well, that's different issue and The very fact that they don't have I mean he just said was seven eight hundred years for the can is complete

I think that's a massive exaggeration But if what you mean by decided means every single person agreeing on every single element, it'll never be decided

Because there's still people who disagree today So that doesn't mean anything So You can see these are issues that must be thought through and The Reformers had thought them through now

Luther had to think them through After the Reformation started that's what

Leipzig was all about. That's what disputation there. That's what You know, very very important along those lines

But especially by the second generation these things were being thought through very very very carefully

I don't know what the church history class was at bonds and theological seminary But I would sort of be surprised if there wasn't a fair amount of emphasis upon these these very issues

You know It's actually easy to refute just from Scripture itself by the fact that there was no

New Testament Kenneth so when you see the New Testament refer to The texts oftentimes.

It's citing the Septuagint the okay now Person who makes that argument has no clue what what soul scripture is and I just have to ask why why would suck?

There's no excuse for this. Okay, this is just a bad argument and To say it's easily refuted and then you give a bad argument

Leaves those of us who understand we're talking about going. Why should we give you much? Credibility here.

I mean your your bona fides as a former one of us are now gone Because you're misrepresenting the position you allegedly once espoused

There is nothing About the New Testament quoting from the Greek Septuagint and The fact that the

New Testament was still being written at the time that is even relevant to solo scriptura Why do you think that it is?

How how how is that an argument that there is something outside the canon of Scripture that's the honest us? that there's no connection there and There's obviously during periods of inscription you can't practice solo scriptura when further revelations being given

But we agree that Revelation ended So the question is what is the normative state of the church?

Not is what is the non normative state of the church during the period of time of Revelation? they they don't want to deal with issues like that and Maybe someone who claims to have once been one of us like Jay Dyer does

Maybe he never thought about these things. I don't know. All I know is right now that that statement

This is easy to refute Tells me Jay Dyer has either

Forgotten or not done serious thought on this particular subject

But the problem is if you're talking to people who themselves have not done serious thought on this then it sounds like wow

I've never thought about that and see they're getting to establish the categories So for example, he's already just asserted that you have the written tradition and the oral tradition

Has he demonstrated the continued existence of an oral tradition because I know where they're gonna go.

I know where they're gonna go to do that But has he demonstrated that? What do you do with the fact that?

the writings of the early church for the first 500 years will give us all sorts of different and Contradictory interpretations as to what that is.

I Mean there's there's a lot to be thought of here And so I don't want those of you who may be feeling

I've been mean to you by saying You need to be doing some homework And I'm talking about reformed people

I'm not being mean to you But I am Wanting you to make sure that to understand

Calvin didn't ignore this stuff Luther eventually did not ignore the stuff. He had to get around to it

Zwingli didn't have a lot of time to deal with these things But he did address some of these issues and certainly the next generation

Did as well We don't have to make everything they said inspired because it wasn't

But it is Very very useful to to look back at what they had to say and we can learn much from that We don't have to Agree with everything we can see there are times they overreached

Just as there were times when the early church fathers did Allow the people of the past to be the people of past judge them within the context in which they lived very very

Important aspect of things run out of time here But we'll try to get a little bit more in here Greek translation of the

Old Testament, right? And it never says that the Greek Subtuition translation of the Old Testament is all that's necessary Right when

Paul says that the scripture is sufficient to make the man of God ready for every work to Timothy Does that mean that there's not gonna be or there's no need for a

New Testament Canon now? Okay, let me We'll stop there.

I'll make a I'll make a mark because there's more more than I want to get to to catch that Because this is

I don't have it in here. I don't think But I Remember when

I first encountered this argument and it would have been 1988

Maybe even earlier than that, but right around then and it was in a book.

I that I have in the other room called Catholicism and fundamentalism by Carl Keating so this is

Most of the argumentation of Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism against Sola Scriptura will be the same their

Their proposed solutions won't necessarily be the same but the argument will be the same What about 2nd

Timothy 3 because Timothy had probably never seen

Mark or Luke and John probably wasn't written by then He he didn't have the

New Testament and so doesn't 2nd Timothy 3 prove too much now

If you have taken the time to listen to the debate with Patrick Madrid or Jerry Madita X or any of these other folks, you already know the answer to these things or at least

I hope you do If you've read scripture alone, I hope you if you've read Rome the

Roman Catholic controversy I've addressed it in all of those works of Necessity But You need to hear what the objection is

Because in my experience when you really feel the weight of an objection and then you discover what the answer to it is

You'll remember it if you're just Like a little bird in the nest with the mouth open feed me what my response is supposed to be

That in my experience doesn't result in long -lasting ability to then communicate that to the next generation the next generation next generation after that so What is?

What are we to say in? regards to 2nd Timothy 3 that Paul says to Timothy Go to the scriptures and they're able to equip you as a man of God for every good work.

I Almost hear in the back of what Jay Dyer is saying there a recognition he's heard and us address this before maybe myself included so How do you answer that question

I've given you enough time now to to give it some consideration. You might want to stop the recording and Jot down.

How would you respond to that? Because there are assumptions being made in the argument and this is

This is where believers today Must ask for God's wisdom and ability to hear the hidden assumptions of arguments when when people talk to me about you've done all these debates and you you

I Understand what you're saying when you respond, but how did you how did you how did you come up with that?

How do you do that? It is When I hear an argument, it's almost like it's a visual thing.

I can see the hidden assumptions the presuppositions behind the question and it's just simply an

Ability that we all must practice It's critical thought it really is vitally important.

So when you hear that, what is the assumption that? That you need to identify

Well, first of all, it is not Paul's intention to be addressing the canon of Scripture in writing to Timothy He's writing to Timothy during a period of inscripturation

Did was Titus written after this? Did did Paul even recognize which of his books because he we know he wrote other letters did did he himself know

Which would be in the canon of Scripture if he even was thinking about a can of Scripture there's no way he could be communicating with Peter or With Jude or with John or with Matthew or Mark or Luke?

Well, he Luke he could So he doesn't he doesn't know what the you know, the Apostles, you know didn't didn't go say hey

John, where are you? And okay. I'm just working on Colossians here. All right. All right, then you know that that wasn't a possibility

Couldn't couldn't be done So he's not talking about the canon of Scripture so if you use 2nd,

Timothy 3 to establish can of Scripture you will be in error and what they're doing is

They're making you defend that by the way, they make the statement. That's what Carl Keating did and I just saw so many

Christians getting pushed into defending something That that's what happened when

I when I when when Jerry and I debated the papacy in Denver and Keating in and Madrid debated two fundamentalist

Baptists the same night We've talked about this many times in the past. I know again. It's probably been 15 years ago

But this took place in 1993 Denver, right? Okay They destroyed those

Baptists just destroyed them and the reason they destroyed them is they they knew what they believed better than the

Baptists knew what they believed and They knew there are fundamentalists and they knew that they could use the fundamentalist mindset to force

Fundamentalists to defend statements. They should never defend and so that's what's going on here is

We're not making the argument the second Timothy 3 establishes a canon. We are not making an argument that The Can is being completed by this statement

Nothing like that. What we are saying is that when Paul says to Timothy Difficult times are coming false teachers are coming you

Timothy You remain firm on what you've become convinced of because you know from whom you've learned it and you know the scriptures

Which are able to give you wisdom leading to salvation in Jesus Christ. It's the same thing He said to the elders in Acts chapter 20 after he says

There are gonna be people who rise up from your own ranks dragging disciples away after themselves I commit you to God and the word of his grace

He says to Timothy Timothy if you want to be prepared for every good work go to that which is what?

They honest us God breathed They honest us God breathed the church does not make the scriptures.

They honest us God does Timothy go to that which is the graph a the

Hagia Graf a the Holy Scriptures Which may be still to come

That doesn't change anything Timothy if you want to be XR Tidzo if you want to be fully equipped

Then you need to go to that which is they honest us and you already know

That what you have in the Tanakh is they honest us and He has he knows that what he has from Paul likewise is authoritative in that same sense

Even if he's not thinking of issues of Canon The point is it has to be what

God has given to the church And that's why I asked Patrick Madrid in our debate

Show me how the scriptures Equip you to teach unique Roman Catholic dogmas such as the infallibility of the

Pope or the bodily assumption of Mary And you can't because a they're untrue be they're not good works and see they're not in Scripture.

So Second Timothy 3 is vitally important because it says that which equips the man of God is that which is they honest us and So you have to put the shoe on the other foot so to speak and say to the

Eastern Orthodox a person say to the Roman Catholic You show me what is they honest us outside of Scripture and prove your case

They can't do it you're simply saying I stand on what is they honest us and I can go to Jesus Who condemned?

The Jews of his day For elevating what they thought was divine traditions the status of being they honest us

God breathed and then use that as a mechanism of rebellion so What do

I highly recommend? For reading for you. Well I've contributed to the subject.

There's two right there Roman Catholic controversy is going to have some more there There is very

Important good stuff in Calvin's Institutes. Absolutely. No question about that whatsoever. Remember Calvin himself said

That if you want to know what his beliefs are you start with the Institutes as the lens

There are a lot of people who go to the commentaries Calvin is assuming he doesn't he is not taking the time in his commentaries to give you theological terminology

Those are his sermons. Those are him speaking extemporaneously. He's laid it out

The lens for me the Institutes that's if you want to know where I'm coming from read the

Institutes first then Webster and King very very very important Kruger's works on the canon of Scripture There are multiple copies some for layman some of his more in -depth stuff

You might want to be looking at The book that he edited on the second century church would be vitally important vitally important I don't have the title of it and I don't have it in here, right?

I don't think I do No, don't have it here right now Because this is my office by the way

So Kruger's work on the second century church very very important heresy of orthodoxy Will have a lot of stuff that will touch upon these issues

Then William Whitaker's disputations and holy scripture George Salmon's infallibility church There's the other one is escaping my mind, right?

Obviously Martin Chemnitz's work on Chemnitz isn't Sometimes Chemnitz is historically a little bit off on some of the sources he uses but still a good resource to have

And then the two volume starts to see I thought Brother King is out there screaming at me right now trying to tell me what it is but I'll We could when we continue

I'll Bring that up as well. These will be vitally important resources for you if you want to get started and have a solid foundation for responding to these things because it is important and Yeah, okay,

I was gonna say Yeah, just Almost sound like a helicopter heading straight for us.

It's the it's the Vatican helicopter coming at us These will also help you in dealing with so many other issues as well as well

So I think that's rich saying you've gone long enough. I've got to edit all this stuff. Anyway, so stop talking So I don't know what the next program is gonna look like or when it's gonna be able to take place

I am out of town Tuesday and Wednesday of Next week, so I understand some equipment's coming in on Monday We may have to do it the same way on on Monday if we do program on Monday.

I don't know We'll see we'll get it fixed. We'll get back to the regular schedule

That's his job. So Don't interrupt him Call him up and tell him you're praying for him that he'll he'll he'll have wisdom and how to put it all back together again