February 26, 2004

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

t plus one i guess is what you uh... what you call it uh... february twenty sixth the day after february twenty fifth and uh...

here we are and uh... we all are still uh... in one piece uh... managed to get in and out of the theater without any difficulty and uh...

probably some of you did too but others of you uh... haven't uh... yet made that journey and uh...

some of your choosing uh... not to make that's a journey and uh...

i was i was speaking with uh... my fellow elder church last night and uh...

he mentioned he had seen a local a pastor of a of a large church very large southern baptist church and uh...

they had uh... had a showing there at the church and they'd even done a satellite hookup uh...

interview with mel gibson amazingly enough not sure how the world you do things like that but anyway uh...

uh... i was unaware of this but he told me that uh... in the comments the pastor had said that it would be in moral of a christian not to go see the passion and uh...

let's face it folks uh... that is a an element of what's going on out there there is a there is there's two extremes uh...

there's the one side that has made it very clear that because of various reasons sometimes uh...

in regards to the second commandment uh... for other various reasons that uh...

it is absolutely immoral to see the film that there is there's no there's no middle ground here you see you simply could not uh...

possibly uh... come up with a a basis uh... for not for seeing the film if you're a christian it would just be absolutely positively wrong for you to do that that's one side but on the other side it's a much much much larger side uh...

that would uh... extend well let's just put it this way i mean if a church uh...

shows it in its sanctuary if a church buys huge blocks of tickets uh...

if a church you know engages in that type of thing there is uh... let's face it very few of those churches and maybe your church did if your church did i'd like to hear from you uh...

taking your calls your impressions today eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one if your church uh...

uh... took the time to inform people of what they're going to be seeing of the issues of the uh...

incipient and uh... and rather prevalent roman catholic elements within the film the theology behind the film if there is a discussion of atonement and purpose of the atonement and the issue of wrath and sin and uh...

all the rest that stuff and in fact encourage you to be praying for mel gibson and and uh...

seeking you know praying that god would open up avenues instead of people just sitting there and shaking his hand and and treating him like a christian uh...

but uh... as a brother i guess you know that that term christian just has almost no meaning anymore society doesn't need to come up with something else and now brother doesn't have any meaning either uh...

fellow regenerates individual holding to the truth of christ and an air of eternal life of that good grief we have to get very uh...

expansive anymore on these issues but uh... if your church mentioned all that so let's pray for him let's let's have folks actually sharing the gospel with him and talking to him uh...

concerning the finished work of christ in opening up the realms of dialogue there then you know i'd like to hear from you but something tells me that's not what was going on in the majority of situations huh and instead there is this tremendous pressure don't not only don't saying get in the herd uh...

move a few times and uh... you know uh... you know get with the program and follow along and stream into the uh...

into the movie theater and uh... watch and and make it the biggest opening ever and and uh...

let's let's stick our fingers in the in the eyeballs of the liberal media elites which you know that this finally uh...

but uh... let's just all this year and don't criticize anything don't don't you know those the two extremes uh...

in the middle uh... are the listeners this program or many of the listeners program i know we got a lot of folks who listen anymore who actually only listening just try to you'll find something to complain about ur right in and and and grouse about or whatever but uh...

for the vast majority of folks to take time to uh... not just turn a little radio dial but actually have to you know you fire up a computer program and you have to follow links and uh...

guide to all that kind of stuff for uh... for you folks uh... you're in the middle and and there's a number of you who are going well you know of i've heard both sides and uh...

i said i certainly uh... recognize that the concern some people have i mean uh...

there are some folks i recognize that are so visually oriented uh...

that's to be honest with you it it might be really difficult for you to see the film not just because of what you see not just because of the violence in the in the graphic violence in the blood everywhere in and tissue everywhere in and uh...

since so on and so forth uh... but it might be very difficult for you because of the fact that you do not want to go through the rest of your life uh...

visualizing christ as jim caviezel uh...

i've mentioned on the blog the random thoughts i posted yesterday and they were just random images through them out there and and i'm looking at the right now myself just remember some of these things uh...

would not be an issue for me i really uh... uh... as i mentioned i i uh...

i said well i envision jesus is jim caviezel this is point number twelve uh... no not for a moment not once during the film that i make that connection that was jim caviezel up there not my lord uh...

that was that that was never ever once an issue i was watching an actor and i never made that connection uh...

and most the time even when i see people in roles that i i know they are i can get past that i can see uh...

the actual character rather than the actor but not this time not this time couldn't do it and uh...

but for some people that might be a real issue that might be a real struggle for them uh...

to avoid that in the future and so if you're that type of person the well then you know that uh...

all of this you know you folks in this audience at least you have uh...

both sides to listen to hopefully you have uh... moderate sought views from both sides not just the far you know i i was someone gave me the u r l to a website last night and the uh...

anti -passion website that was almost gail rippling arrest that i think it had king james only background to it some things was good railed unsigned atticus in vatican is to as if that was somehow relevant this last mailman so there's you know there's the wackiness on the left of the wackiness on the right there's the strong believers on both sides uh...

and then there's this this groundswell of of joined the herd just come on in and uh...

don't even think about the theology don't think about the issues and uh...

that's what i was concerned about all along we've mentioned that before that's that was my concern and i think that it was uh...

a well -grounded concern having now seen the film myself uh... there were a number of things i i just i throw my hands up in the air and i do not understand not the sense of i miss what the connection was i did figure out one of the connections only after the film thanks to folks in the chat channel were former catholics and who had said the rosary sixteen billion times in her life uh...

but uh... that that wasn't the issue there are some things i just you know okay for example there are only two characters in the film uh...

who can seemingly see this this uh... the satan figure and it's jesus which you expect uh...

and mary yes mary is able to see this now it's fascinating i should have kept that up where was that thing uh...

where's my email program oh yes uh... where did i put it though and the did the did the dim there is a book i've ordered it and uh...

yeah here it is to do to do to do to do to do and we fly off into the internet you know it back at twelve hundred bod days this would have been a very slow program there's a book out there called a guide to the passion uh...

one hundred questions about mel gibson's the passion of the christ now this is not listen let me read this to this because this will give you a little a little context here for what i'm saying uh...

a guide uh... to the passion uh... well let me just back up a little bit uh...

uh... the passion the christ offers a once a lifetime opportunity for you to spread strengthen and share the catholic faith with your family and friends unlike any other this movie will inspire hearts change minds and will go questions a guide to the passion one of the questions about mel gibson's the passion the christ is the definitive catholic resource book for this momentous film offers an insightful scene by scene analysis from a uniquely catholic perspective how can you do that if it doesn't contain them until i don't know the one hundred answers provide a powerful catechesis that will enrich the moviegoing experience and lead seekers to deeper faith in christ and so here's some of the some of the questions and anyone who's seen it uh...

would be very very it'd be very interesting uh... you'd you'd follow these questions uh...

how do we know jesus really existed at the events trade movie extra place uh... in the garden of gethsemane did you just know he's going to die uh...

who was the fifth figure in the garden the devil uh... did jesus have to die why couldn't god has simply declared humanity's relationship to him restored uh...

in the garden jesus crushes a snake under his foot what is the symbolism here uh... then it's a goes on to talk a little bit about here why does the director that's mel gibson choose to have peter fall at mary's feet and cry out i have denied him mother that's something many people have been asking the disciples called called mary mother and confess to her that's fascinating uh...

why is pilots wife claudia portrayed as being so concerned concerned about jesus is fate uh...

well we action that from the end catherine emmerich book uh...

that's the here uh... that it did it did it yeah as jesus carries his cross the director cross cuts between the devil and mary walking along with him on opposite sides of the crowd at one point their eyes meet in an amazingly powerful silent exchange what exactly is going on here cc the stuff that i saw uh...

even at the end says that what is the devil do a crazy dance after christ dies on the cross etc etc etc uh...

so it's that this stuff i did random thoughts actually reflect very clearly what is uh...

found on the uh... uh... you know the questions are asked there in that book was just made available so there is a number of things just really briefly where i got one call we can take more calls eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one uh...

i just would this shows my background of course as far as the dvd of christian and issues concerning that but i am just i was blown away the first time i turned to uh...

my friend john who went with me and and and went what uh... was in the garden when the soldiers come and jesus says i am and uh...

what's supposed to happen after that i mean the only gospel that records that specific exchange they had was john john chapter eighteen and as soon as jesus says that the soldiers fall back up on the ground what they do in the film they keep surrounding them it's it's like it has no there's the entire meaning of that which would have really added to the scene i mean it just from a artistic perspective would have been really cool uh...

zip zero nada jesus can say i am to these soldiers all day long it has absolutely no effect upon them uh...

just uh... first they went out please come on that was that was what are you trying to say with that i mean if you're trying to hang up uh...

it is accomplished is a wonderfully bad translation of to tell us that it is finished but then again we are talking about a roman catholic film here and finished an accomplished two different things in that context uh...

i was completely wiped out by the very end of the film the forty five second resurrection scene only shows jim caviezel's face for a few moments and then he stands up you see the whole his hand and he's also completely naked thank you very much for putting an ending on the film just makes you go excuse me hello the gospels in record that part uh...

what was that all about uh... that the mary is mother mary has supernatural abilities relics all over the place saint veronica and uh...

and her veil in the face of jesus which by the way i looked up last night the earliest reference at the fourteenth century but it was just thrown in there the vast majority of people saw had no idea what's a former catholics what the world i was all about but to make it so uh...

obvious like that to make it's just uh... in the sense of just throwing in there no introduction on the assuming the audience is gonna follow says a lot about you know where the film is coming from in the in the things we were you know we we look at regard that i've got a lot of response to the number eight point that put up there what on birth was that hideous baby thing in the devil woman's arms and uh...

everybody's been telling me what's that's why you need to get eschatology because obviously it was the anti christ come on and i'm like excuse me i don't know silly me went here and i still remember all those emails have been fired my direction about how wonderfully accurate and historical it was just the gospels and nothing more and so during this horrific beating scene that the whip discouraging scene and and uh...

the special effects and and and and blood and everything else all the sudden here comes this this creature and this this i mean it looked like something i'd like star trek or star wars or or something along those lines this hideous creature uh...

that just that was another one of the pope poke john the revs go what on birth that he's a look to me as i was a big like i don't know uh...

it was it was pretty is pretty amazing so i don't know uh... but uh...

uh... it was uh... it was uh... something else to see that so you know uh...

i am not the best uh... person to even be concerned about as far as the emotional response the film uh...

i had a in essence i sort of it is a job to do uh... i had to uh... i had to be watching everything very carefully uh...

evaluating it trying to understand backgrounds uh... issues like that it was not a uh...

it was not a in a emotional experience for me uh... that was jim caviesel and i knew that and yes as i've reflected upon it and you think about the the uh...

that tremendous suffering of christ yes you you can make that connection but the the real elements of of the suffering for christ well with christ was was not what was shown i mean i was really disappointed when very very early on the program that jesus is is thrown off this bridge wrapped in chains and then he he's caught you know what a broken half the bones his body but he's caught which of course could break bones because it didn't break anybody's but anyway he's caught and he's hanging there was over this bridge and he just happens to follow right where we're judas is new looks at judas in a uh...

demon comes screaming by judas as he runs away it was all very very very you know uh...

artistic and and uh... completely outside of the scriptures but it was all artistic and things like that and i was really disappointed that kind of stuff and and the the extra stuff is thrown in along those lines uh...

uh... because it really i felt detracted from the actual suffering that would have been his but the point is in that in that's one place where there is the suffering of of christ in the garden in the sense of the prayers uh...

you haven't quite gotten used to because i think i mean there is this movie to start just boom there's uh...

there's uh... uh... the stuff concerning the you know there's uh... citation by the fifty three four and then boom you're right into it i mean there's no it there's no introduction it was just the film started at least where i was maybe maybe you had something different i don't know but it just started it was ten minutes late getting started there having some problems with it it was the first showing of the day anyhow you're you're really not accustomed yet to the fact that you're gonna have to be following this film only with subtitles uh...

in fact i was i was very happy i i caught a lot of the aramaic actually because it's so closely related to hebrew and and uh...

but still at that point you just really haven't tuned in so you're having to read the subtitles and when jesus is praying he looks you know i i i don't know what the biblical description of what he was going through would actually look like on screen so it's not like i can really criticize it but uh...

the impression you get is someone who who is extremely and in fact by the dialogue they put in the in the mouth of peter and the disciples uh...

extremely afraid uncertain uh... uh... certainly not in control of the situation and what was missing was that the idea that most people get from that is that he was tremendously frightened of what was coming in the sense of all the beating and everything they would see that that wasn't the issue uh...

the the issue was he made him who knew no sin to be sin in our place that we might be made the righteous of god in him that's the substitutionary atonement that it's that union of the elect with their with their substitute and his bearing in himself the wrath due to their sin but you see that central element of the theology is so completely mitigated by roman theology and by roman false teaching that it can't come through it's not a part of the experience of the roman catholic who's looking at that and so it was missing it just wasn't there that's why in my mind there was such a disconnection between between the events being portrayed and and the biblical truth of those those events and so it was a uh...

it was it was uh... it was something to watch so anyway uh...

many people today debating the issue uh... the the dividing line uh... intent has been has been drawn truly uh...

you've you've now probably got more information and more articles and more discussions about this one film than any other film that's ever been produced without a question i mean you go online right now and you can read the most extreme of either side and everything in between uh...

certainly no one can walk in there and go well but i didn't know uh... i didn't have any way of knowing you may walk in there going i didn't know but that's because you take take the opportunity of looking and uh...

as someone mentioned to me last night that uh... i was being misrepresented in some context which happens pretty much every day uh...

but uh... that uh... i had i forget which one it was i either told people not to see it or to see it i don't remember which one it was i've never told anyone either way i have never endorsed this film and said go see it and i've never said that god's gonna strike you dead if you do uh...

i have said that as a christian you have a responsibility to be something more than a lemming and you do need to think about these things you need to recognize that for a lot of folks uh...

there is a danger of imprinting upon their mind jim caviezel as jesus and uh...

not getting that very imperfect perspective out of their mind and that has to be considered there also has to be consideration of interacting with all the people that are out there promoting this stuff in the the danger of roman catholic apologists and then the positive possibility of speaking the truth i said in the beginning it's gonna happen and we need to be ready to address the issues and to fill in the blanks and to correct the misapprehensions and uh...

whether you have to actually watch it to do that is another question many of you listening don't have to uh...

you don't have to go see it to be able to correct the misapprehensions i mean just simply some of the descriptions i've given already would be enough for you to be able to address the issue so uh...

it it's really uh... up to you as an individual believer but my point from the beginning has been don't approach the situation out of simple ignorance and don't approach it out of the herd mentality it says hey everybody else is doing it uh...

the church has bought you know ten thousand tickets and so that must mean the church endorses this film i've not endorsed it neither have i said that god's gonna strike you dead for seeing it uh...

i saw it i had to see it for lots of reasons uh... but uh...

would i allow other people in my circle of influence to see it yes if they wanted to but you see people in my circle of influence are primarily theologically aware concerned committed individuals uh...

and i i do think there is a danger uh... for individuals who um...

in essence are uh... theologically either tremendously naive uh...

or have no theological foundation within themselves at all and of course that's that they're in danger every day that's just simply one further aspect of it so uh...

there's there you got it so uh... if you're expecting me to say yes go see it no don't go see it uh... that's that's not my place it's not my role and i would never uh...

adopt that uh... that type type of an attitude it's not uh... not for me to say eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one we're gonna take your phone calls today and it doesn't have to just be on that subject that obviously is the discussion of the day but there are other things going on we are trying to get our debate set up for salt lake city and we had it all set up and then somebody and i you know i'm not even certain i'm not even certain the person who wrote was actually a mormon but uh...

we made the mistake of mentioning on our on the uh... calendar uh... concerning the debates coming up in salt lake city and uh...

so immediately uh... actually i mentioned it on the nineteenth uh... off to atlanta on the blog really somebody writes up there all this this does that means an end to nasty anti -mormon indeed you did you do that and uh...

so just want to be whether mormons are supposed to whether christian supposed to build temples and they're all upset that uh...

i mentioned in the article where i was going after the street preachers where i was talking about the abuse of mormons i mentioned that and and i didn't go detail about but but many many years ago i don't want twenty years ago now i think i was given a pair of lds temple garments the and the undergarments by a former mormon a person who left the church and when i used to and i haven't done this many years when i used to do classes i would explain significance the markings and and the whole issue of the uh...

of the uh... uh... temple ceremonies all the rest of stuff and i was doing that in the context of saying but there's a time and a place and hang them from your sign outside the mormon temple is lunacy it's stupid and these people should be ashamed themselves well since i dare to say that well i think we need to make uh...

we don't have what was the how about do you do a forty five minute presentation will do a forty five minute presentation and take audience questions about debate and i could do that so i don't know what's gonna happen there but uh...

it's like is a anybody up there that has the courage their convictions it's it's amazing the the inability of uh...

of of some folks to to even allow for there to be strong differences of opinion and to say well actually what i believe is true is there somebody up there a scholar of some rank who actually believes the christians are supposed to build temples and that that's a truth that should be defended amazing to me that the people would and and it's like it's like it's like christians and well i don't really know if i should debate the issue that the bible is the word of god you know i mean we don't want to offend anyone you know this is like oh wow what uh...

what what is going on our society seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one uh...

boy bad timing as far as this goes uh... were prior quite ready to take a break but starting right now we'd only have like thirty seconds or thirty five seconds or forty seconds or whatever uh...

take phone call anyway so is there some way to speed things up in there or do we just simply make poor jeff who's already has been sitting on hold for twenty minutes uh...

start and then stop or what do do do do do do do thirty seconds to do do see there's a program folks that that that uh...

to read yeah what do you have all those uh... this is the the new cds installed all delete that quickly now let that go out on their make things goals for all of the but the star trek there it is they just got to be right with you right after the break the rest of the eight seven seven seven five 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 right 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 the 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 a omen dot 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 sixteen eleven you can order your copy of james white's book the king james only controversy by going to our website at www .aomen

.org what is doctor norman geisler warning the christian community about in his book chosen but free a new cult secularism false prophecy scenarios no doctor geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called calvinism he insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent philosophically insufficient and morally repugnant in his book the potter's freedom james white replies to doctor geisler but the potter's freedom is much more than just a reply it is a defense of the very principles upon which the protestant reformation was founded indeed it is a defense of the very gospel itself in a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate james white masterfully counters the evidence against so -called extreme calvinism defines what the reform faith actually is and concludes that the gospel preached by the reformers is the very one taught in the pages of scripture the potter's freedom a defense of the reformation and a rebuttal to norman geisler's chosen but free you'll find it in the reform theology section of our bookstore at www .aomen

.org i will get it in whether i'm allowed to or not it's it's seven five three three three four one that's what i was trying to say before the microphone went dead in the middle of giving the number out it uh...

excuse me alright uh... let's uh... talk with jeff in uh... in south jersey hi jeff paid at the right time to uh...

i'm doing okay good uh... uplifting movie okay movie four stars okay that's good i'm not assigning any stars i mean you have to sign that you have to sign stars for production politically which uh...

yeah yeah sadly uh... which uh... obviously as far as production goes it was what you would expect from mel gibson uh...

mel gibson isn't gonna you know put out some stinky movie uh... it it did strike me as a little bit rough at times as far as some of the edits and and things like that but it i hear from how he managed to kill some british unknown actually the uh...

story ice the story i saw last night was that a manager of a clear channel radio station had a heart attack during the uh...

the crucifixion scene and uh... didn't make it to the hospital a woman uh... somewhere in about the midwest or ohio or something like that that that was a story read last night on yahoo so uh...

i don't think that has you know if that happens in the middle of terminator uh...

or braveheart or something like that no one would ever give a second thought because tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people are in movie theaters any given point in time from noon till midnight you know for half the day and people have heart attacks you know they may be rushing to get there they may be throwing throwing uh...

cholesterol -laden popped up popcorn in their system you know who knows i never thought he was anti -semitic i always thought he was anti -british well you know patriot and braveheart uh...

make a well you know i've got to tell this story you know uh... sinclair ferguson is uh...

is uh... is a scotsman and uh... when braveheart first came out uh...

he uh... uh... uh... you know some of the students were telling him about the film and how wonderful it was and he said to him i will have to go see it and they said oh well well well doctor ferguson you need to understand it's it's extremely violent and and uh...

very graphic and what you know we're not we're not really sure you can handle that kind of violence you'd want to see a kind of violence and his response to the students was uh...

want you to understand that any time that someone is killing the british is not an act of violence for a scotsman so i guess he went and saw it and probably enjoyed it immensely but anyway on on production value yeah but that's not ever been the issue i mean that was sort of a given from the start i mean gibson's not going to put out a film that's bad in production value the question's going to be what is it going to contain and uh...

i think we've learned a lot more about the discernment level of quote -unquote evangelicals then we have almost anything else in this particular film it shouldn't shock anybody that mel gibson is going to have uh...

saint veronica uh... a whole scene of saint veronica just flying in out of nowhere uh...

and taking her veil off and wiping jesus's face i mean that shouldn't shock anyone mel gibson is mel gibson that's consistent with mel gibson uh...

what i didn't see really was much uh... uh... effort on his part to not offend the sensibilities of evangelicals because let's face it once he started screening this thing he realized they don't have any they don't have any sensibilities it's not it's that it's like there's they're completely ignorant of what the entire issue was all they see in the veronica scene is a compassionate jewish lady uh...

taking some kind of uh... uh... of compassion on a a man who's being crucified they don't they don't make the connection with the with the rosary in the stations of the cross or anything else so why should you worry about hello you still there still there okay go ahead you had a question yes question my main question was based off of the sermon you posted and also what you just said which one which which which sermon uh...

i think it was muller i didn't have you mean martin martin maybe i just simply linked to it i didn't say that i agreed uh...

because yeah you said something very similar which was the uh... uh...

the focus on the physical instead of the spiritual well yeah that's actually not only in in in uh...

that that's in in andy webb's that's in a and martin's uh... my concern again goes to specific roman catholic theology in reference to the concept of the merits of physical suffering which is part and parcel of of the this the whole concept of uh...

penances and indulgences and purgatory and and sodas posse o in purgatory all that goes back this concept of the physical suffering uh...

having merit before god and folks don't seem to realize this but that's why suffering and that's why the souls suffer in purgatory because suffering is meritorious in of itself i had a question my question about that was what would what would you say would be the biblical view because you know it the bible simply says stuff like uh...

you know jesus died for our sins we can see the spiritual suffering in there but you know it being accomplished through uh...

historical physical act and with physical suffering it's kind of hard to kind of understand all the complexities going on obviously you know you have the interactions within the godhead you know things that will definitely blow your mind and i was wondering if you could speak to that well the orthodox view would be well it i'm certainly not suggesting that that you can separate the two out and no one to my knowledge has has suggested that it is wrong to contemplate the uh...

the physical aspect of the suffering of christ of the demonstration of the depravity and hatred of man and and uh...

the whole nine yards uh... that that is a bit as a part of that but what makes that physical suffering real and and relevant and balanced in the biblical perspective uh...

is the spiritual reality that is going on in the physical suffering obviously the romans were not sitting there attempting to seek to help in the retention of the world they they did not see themselves as as as helping the wrath of god to come upon christ or something uh...

they're just looking at at uh... at beating up on a on a jewish person and and they did that all the time in jesus not the only one to be so treated uh...

so if physical sufferings meritorious there are other people who have been who had suffered in in a similar way they just weren't perfect in themselves uh...

but the connection between the two is what makes all that suffering meaningful i mean outside of that and i said this in december when i first starts addressing this issue outside of the spiritual reality of the purpose of god in the cross and i'm not saying that that there was not some uh...

you know it it is fascinating uh... uh... gibson is so conservative that he's old style and uh...

the result of that is that uh... at one point mary runs up to jesus when he's on when he's carrying his cross he's fallen down she runs up to him says i'm here now there's there's obvious significance to that uh...

that that a lot of folks don't see uh... but his response to her a unbiblical but it does reflect interestingly enough a an element that would not be included in modern roman catholic teaching as far as the their theologians were concerned and that is he says to her behold i am making all things new and there is in that anyways the purposefulness the the the recognition on his part of the the the meat meaning and necessity of this that was sort of there in the garden but wasn't really well portrayed and it just would be a part of what a lot of modern roman catholic theologians would say but is actually closer to what we as conservative evangelicals would believe over against uh...

uh... liberal roman catholics or liberal protestants for that matter so it was interesting to see that the rest of his theology precludes him from seeing in toto what that really means and what the result of that would really would really be and so it's a it's a situation where where one of the things that just grips at my heart is i really would like to see uh...

i would really love to see someday mel gibson on a program somewhere though if you ever did this is probably wouldn't be a programs and want to talk to him but mel gibson a program someplace saying you know when i made that film it was an act of penance but i've since come to understand that all my acts of penance are nothing ike that i i was actually insulting him by trying to add what he did he didn't say it is accomplished he said it is finished it is one sacrifice and i no longer go to a man who calls himself a priest for a representation of that sacrifice to get a little more grace and a little more grace a little more grace and hope i make it i'm resting in him alone and it's finished and it's accomplished that's what i'd like to hear the people who have his ear who should know that aren't saying it to him and for what reason well because their theology is wishy -washy and people say theology doesn't matter well here it's actually impacting who you preach the gospel to so it's uh...

you know uh... the two go together it creates dissonance in the film that they're not there uh...

that's why isn't it interesting you look at matthew and matthew the story of the crucifixion is two and a half three chapters plus resurrection which only got forty five seconds here uh...

but that's it that's that's the entirety of it he'd the the the the gospels do not make it the central they lead up to it the cross is the central point in human history but they explain the reason they explain what it's all about and they put it in its context and it's not in its context the way that's being presented and some people say well it's just art he's just doing he just you know you can't put it on the movie he's right you can't put on movie and i couldn't have stood much more than what there was as far as that the amount of time the the fact remains in the bible that suffering was significant for a particular reason and he is saying in other contexts especially roman catholic context that it is meant to be theological it is meant to communicate theology and so without the wholeness of that message well it's not uh...

it's not all there alrighty sir already have a another question i'll give you next week i spent most of my time uh...

you know making fun of braveheart i'll call you next week alright thanks a lot god bless alright bye bye let's uh...

move on to steve in san antonio hi steve hi dr white can you hear me okay yes sir spoke to uh...

i think last week i had a very nice conversation with you i just want to tell you how much i appreciate it uh...

resort calling is of course the passion of christ i thought yesterday till you know as soon as i got a chance to uh...

i thought i could wait and this is the problem up to that point i've been hearing all sorts of criticism like uh...

jewish groups and now i'm hearing a lot of criticism from evangelicals and i think here's the problem after saying i i can tell you how much i enjoyed that movie and how much it meant to be spiritually but i wish that the people could could view the movie and take it for what it was instead of what they fear that certain groups will use the movie for their own benefits would you agree with that well i don't know what the evangelicals you're talking about uh...

i have said that uh... these particular of this particular uh... film has been seen by roman catholic apologists is a tremendous uh...

opportunity all you have to do is go to the websites and see if they've been advertising it for uh... for months uh...

that there are books are being put out that's our specifically designed to make that connection uh...

that the dollar is passion of our lord jesus christ the emmerich book uh... is being printed as fast as ten book publishers can print it and people are being roman catholics are being encouraged uh...

to now utilize this bridge that the film uh... represents to introduce the marion material uh...

people who read the dollar is passion will now have a visual connection directly to the fulfillment of this and uh...

so i i was simply point out the obvious and that is that uh... the vast majority of evangelicals who go to see this uh...

have no knowledge of marion dogma they have no knowledge of the issues of sola scriptura they have no knowledge of the issues of the atonement the mass uh...

the whole nine yards and so i'm just simply saying that uh... if they're if they've just gone in there uh...

without any background of these things just simply in a herd mentality because well does everybody's doing it so i'm gonna do it too uh...

then they're exposing themselves to that very kind of situation and most of time they're not to be in churches right where that people to be warning them right well that's my point and and like you said of course the catholics are using it as as a tool but so the protestant i mean if you watch nightline if you watch that in india bc shows i for one i sat with a group from the local church of christ i mean they're using it as a as the greatest they call it the greatest evangelical pool evangelization tool in the last what fifty years so they're using it as well everybody's going to take a piece of that movie because it was so well -made so powerful well when you when you say so powerful uh...

you know i i wonder if that power is the power of uh... visual emotions or the power of the message that is communicated uh...

that's the question that i would have for for anyone is that do we and i've said again i'm at least i'm a can i'm consistent this point because this is a point of made from the beginning uh...

i said that it will be an emotionally powerful film uh... but we dare not confuse emotional power with communication of spirit born truth there's there two different things yeah i i i know but that goes back to what i originally was saying was and it is a movie and there is there is a certain amount of poetic license that goes on with the movie as you mentioned earlier christ getting thrown off the bridge in their he sees judas cowering and then a demon flies by uh...

and then what when judas realized what what he he did the little kids are all performed in their chasing them off a cliff i mean you know that is just part of the movie that makes it dramatic it makes it entertaining well to a point unfortunately that uh...

as i've mentioned the uh... the first emails that i received of of uh...

all the people that are being dramatically changed by the film all contained the same assertion and that was that this was uh...

this was just the gospels it was jealous historically accurate it was it was there was nothing else in it and only over time did it start to come out that in reality uh...

there was more to it and certainly one understands that one could not uh...

have no one saying anything uh... as far as uh... uh... uh...

just going with the the words of scripture i suppose it could be done they're doing with the gospel john which unfortunately is pretty much been eclipsed by this one but uh...

but the point was that uh... the it's the extraneous material that is uh...

the origin of that material especially in and catherine emmerich and the the place that it plays in the in the continuation of a particular theological uh...

uh... agenda and that agenda is there uh... we've played mel gibson speaking uh...

directly with the w t n on this program before uh... where he speaks of the issue of the uh...

the atonement the sacrifice of the alter being the same as the sacrifice the cross that's where mel's coming from that is his tradition that is his religion and that is the film and that's the film that's right but here's the here's here's the thing on tuesday i was trying to listen to your program via the internet i was also on your website and i got into a situation with uh...

maybe you know the two gentlemen balthazar and the centurion and and i thought i said how can can you guys not want to see this movie and the very first point that they brought up is i wouldn't see any movie that has christ crucified and then in then interspersed is clipped to him at the last supper that's blasphemy the eucharist is you know all that all this other stuff and i think that i think it was a even if you didn't consider the eucharist the actual body of bloody blood of christ you would admit that it is symbolic of that so he shoots back it is what you were saying with with christ at the last supper was uh...

just the passover feast so i try to answer back look what you at that time it was doing the passover would say this is the book my blood of the new covenant this is my body uh...

you have to grant to me that he is using symbolic language at the very least of what is got a couple of hours you know i think no gets in was very very uh...

in the right of putting that in just from that point of view just for a pure some uh...

symbolic uh... allusion to what was going to happen to it well obviously no gives himself told us what his intention was his intention was to communicate the sacrifice of the cross is the same as sacrifice the alter and evidently that's what uh...

the folks were attempting to uh... communicate to you uh... is that that perspective not no no one's no one would ever argue that you can you can misinterpret mister gibson he's giving you the freedom to do that you can interpret him outside of what he is intending uh...

to communicate and that's what and i've been i've been said uh... in regards to the random thoughts on the on the uh...

the blog to uh... yesterday i said uh... number fifteen couldn't evangelical successfully filter out the extraneous stuff i suppose so but it would take a conscious effort in other words you're having to make a conscious effort uh...

to redefine the parameters and purposes of mister gibson in representing things the way he did uh...

to fit it into something that does not end up promoting the idea uh... that is very clearly seen the film itself and mister gibson makes his one cameo appearance by holding the nail that is uh...

driven into the uh... jim caviezel's hand uh... you're having to put out effort and you have enough knowledge to put out that effort the problem is the vast majority of folks who are going to the film in the lending mode uh...

don't have the basis to do so don't know they need to do so and there is a as a result can't put that effort out uh...

to be able to make that's that's uh... correction in the purposeful theology of what is being communicated well with all due respect i don't agree with that i think you take any mainline protestant that sees that scene any and they're gonna say it is symbolic of what was about to happen to him how he was his body was gonna get broken of course what was gonna pour out and it's pure symbolic but i don't think they're going to have to have a conscious effort to filter well sure if you don't mind them repeating utterly ignorant of what mister gives and was intending and then putting a position where those who know what he was intending can then take advantage of them communicate to them what uh...

he was actually intending of what the whole purpose of it was sure if if you don't mind that that's great uh...

but the fact the matter is it's not a question what mister gibson was intending we've played his words i could but i had to have heard from myself i i agree with you that was that's what he said was his intention okay so are you saying that that should not be something are you saying that that that no christian has the freedom to look at that and say you know what as a result of that uh...

just because i am maybe i'm a former roman catholic i'm not but let's say i'm a former roman catholic i'd truly embrace and love the finished work of christ that's what gave me freedom and because this film portrays it in that way i know that's the purpose of betraying that way i'm just not gonna see it they don't have the freedom to do that they'll have the freedom to tell us that sure they don't okay so that's all i would just a lot well why would you express it in in the channel is how could you not go and see this they have the freedom not see it because it scandalize them don't think not for that reason why not it for the reason why i just said take it as f cure symbolic play on what was going to happen okay so you're saying that that balthazar and centurion do not have the right themselves to not go see the film because scandalizes them i don't think it's going to work and i i i i don't i don't think i don't think that's what i'm saying how can you say that what that how can you say that how can you say it doesn't scandalize and how do you know what's in their heart how do you know it was a flashing light during that scene and under where they have the subtitles if it would be if it was going to say this is what's actually happening here we are trying to make the connection that this is his body this is his blood you must accept that that i would say yes it's got a lot but when you see it from sit from a a patron movie theater seeing that scene i'm making that point well wait wait wait they these individuals both of them have listened to this program they've listened to mel gibson uh...

specifically make the assertion that the sacrifice of the alter in the sacrifice of the cross are the same so before they would ever have a chance of seeing this film they have listened to the director say this is my purpose this is what i was doing and you're saying that they could not possibly that no person who has seen the destruction of personal lives based upon the false teaching that the mass is a perpetuatory sacrifice that perfects no one that no one could be so scandalized by that false teaching so in love with the finished work of christ that they would be scandalized enough to not go see this film but that's impossible that you'd have to have flashing lights and subtitles warning of roman catholic content for a person to be scandalized enough to not see this film yeah that's what i'm saying well that's absurd that is absurd when you were sitting there and you put yourself in the position of judging the intent of that film and because you know you're a professor so you know what the average person is going to think and the most sophisticated is going to think did you actually sit there squirming in your seat saying oh my god i'm so embarrassed this is what the average person is going to take away from this scene i sat there fully aware of what was coming and fully agree with those who have the freedom in christ to not expose themselves to something that scandalized them it amazes me that you would this is this is this is far to the other side of those who would say that you sin to go see it i can't i can't believe that anyone would make the argument that a person does not in christ have the freedom to not expose themselves this film they do have the freedom they do have the freedom what i'm saying to you is if they're so scandalized and you're of like mind with those two gentlemen after you saw the scene why are you telling people it's up to you obviously because i'm not going to put myself in your position of telling people what to do i have communicated the facts of the theology i've communicated the facts of what is being said here and i believe christians have the freedom to act under the direction of the holy spirit when they have the facts i'm simply trying to tell folks that these are the issues what you came on here saying was that those individuals could not be scandalized by having that kind of information i say to you you better believe they could be scandalized and if they choose not to see it that is their freedom if you knowing what is there decide to see it so that you can glorify god by sharing with others the finished work of christ and go ahead and do so i'm simply saying people need to know what the issues are and we need a dialogue about it and we need to go in there without being lemmings that's that's what i have said from the beginning well listen i am all for people being informed of what to expect uh...

to change topics here for a second the disciples calling mary mother have you ever been with a with a group of friends and one of them is the dominant friend and everybody goes over to their house and they hang out and they look to the person as a leader and therefore they're over at the person's house so much they get close to their parents and they might refer to them as mama or mother yeah that would be a a fascinating uh...

explanation but it has almost nothing to do with the fact that a that very question appears in a roman catholic book designed to help roman catholics evangelize evangelicals based upon the film and two we know what mel gibson believes about mary we know that he is specifically said that at the cross scene when john nineteen twenty six to twenty seven is being played out that in doing so he believes that jesus assigned mary to be the mother of all christians by making her the mother of john john representing all christians and hence the meaning of terminology is defined by the director himself just like it was in regards to cross and the last supper so uh...

there's no reason to look for the context that you just suggested when the director himself has given us a different context and we should go with the one that he offers shouldn't we well well i'm coming from the point of the average person going to see the movie yeah i don't think anybody's gonna go see that movie and see all these little symbolisms well that's a shame because they are going to see them they can't avoid them they're on a big huge screen they may be ignorant of what they mean and if they're ignorant of what they mean those then become the catchphrases those then become the context that can be used to draw them into further error in regards to the subject if they're ignorant of the theological issues that are being addressed by the film exactly but see that goes back to what i originally said i think the movie should be should be viewed as on its own merits for the average person going in there to see it so what i was my sentence before i didn't get to complete it what i was going to say was i don't think the average person the average christian is going to go in there and view that movie and because of these little innuendos are going to say that's it i'm going back to holy mother rome well of course no one would suggest that the mere viewing of the film would do so it and no one has i've i don't know who in the world you'd be referring to it even says suggest such a silly thing but obviously the listeners recognize that's they're going to be conversations and hence the conversation to go along the lines of this in essence well you know uh...

did you did you notice how peter showed deference to mary how he uh... in her presence uh...

broke down in weeping and confessed as denials of of christ what did you notice did you notice i'm talking about the roman catholic who's speaking to an evangelical if you were a personal friend of jesus christ and she always seems to be there at important moments okay mary's always there and that they're very close to jesus they know it's mother you wouldn't show her respect if you just denied it you're you're really you're really hurt you're really hurting your case here because they're not listening knows that i haven't said anything like that that obviously you are listening very well how about it because i'd pointed out already the fact that the director of the film provided the context in which we should interpret this i reject your let's go over to somebody's house and call her mom excuse that's not what mel gibson said that's not what the film says and so to insert that in there is just simply special pleading uh...

that makes no sense in light of the context already provided first of all secondly there's nothing biblical about peter encountering mary third of all the biblical account does not say that mary was there for all these important things she's all there to the film but she's not there in the new testament accounts everything she is you might want to show those to us uh...

and so you put all that together and this special pleading uh... sounds more like a roman catholic apologist attempting to defend uh...

the film than it does someone who's actually trying to deal with whether or not this should be something that individuals should should view and should be involved with uh...

let me let me she wasn't there at the foot of the cross uh... again you just uh... he you keep switching the context that doesn't work well for me because for some reason i try to follow context well you first said she was there for all these important events in his life uh...

to change from that to what she had the bomb the foot of the cross as if it's relevant is uh...

a very very cheap debating trick that does not work well uh... basic logic would indicate you take my first statement which would indicate that through all the activities of christ's life was mary in the temple of matthew twenty -four note was mary in the temple john ten know what she had set three filipino and that once you start putting all the important events of christ's life in a list then you demonstrate that mary was not there in the biblical text for the vast majority of them we're going to not mean that she was not there for some of them you set up a room when he came back to the apostles uh...

you're talking no you'd not not max she's in actions there when the holy spirit comes yeah right that's what i meant well that's not the same thing is when he comes back for the apostles after the resurrection of the two different events ok well she was there at the foot of the cross and she was there for the entire day following along that's not what you had said before if you want to change your position that's fine i'll agree with your changed position not the original one i'm not changing my position ok if she was only there during the cross that would not provide you the basis for going over to somebody's house and getting used to their mom and calling them mom so let's not shift the grounds here let's stick with one particular subject here at a time doctor white what i'm saying is your criticism of the movie okay is you're looking at you're looking back at mel gibson and where he's coming from from a little religious point of view yeah that's because he made it as a religious film right and for exactly and i'm saying that the average christian that goes and he's the movie doesn't matter that's fine well you know i mean i'm not going to judge so we don't like for going to the mood excuse me ignorance has nothing to do with intellect does it you can be a brilliant uh...

astronomer and know nothing about political science right that's right so i don't know how they like that we what what i'm talking about is the person uh...

people understanding about their christian faith and when they go in to see that movie they can judge that movie based on what is taking place in the movie they can days as i've said from the beginning people are gonna watch this film with their traditional lenses firmly implanted upon their face the problem is that the film contains a number of elements that find no place in evangelical tradition or biblical teaching and it is those elements that then become the basis upon which individuals can introduce them to further information concerning mary mary's role media tricks et cetera et cetera et cetera and that there are already books being distributed that are designed to help catholics do that should i not be mentioning this should i keep that quiet you can also mention the other side which is why the protestants are adopting the movie as well for their specific intent well there's no question i've said how many hundreds of times have i said evangelicals are promoting this film and that from the very first sermon that i presented on this we should be involved in giving a fuller explanation of what god's intention was in the cross of jesus christ i've said that from the very first sermon i delivered on the sunday after christmas on this subject there's nothing new about that i'm simply saying the vast majority of evangelicals are not approaching it that way i would approach it like john piper has his book is excellent on the subject i welcome the conversations the problem is many of those who are promoting it from an evangelical perspective are not prepared for the right conversations they're not prepared with the right theology of the cross that's what i've said from the start don't you think that that would be the job of their religious instructor or their local parish uh...

you mean their pastors? yeah sure that's the whole point and if the pastors aren't doing it then they're going to be exposed to needless uh...

needless danger in their own souls so but again i would i'd just simply repeat the fact that uh...

that the individuals of whom you spoke uh... were referring to the very thing that i was just referring to and i i still am amazed that you would actually state that they would not have the right to be scandalized concerning than the intentions of mel gibson every time i say you go back to yeah well the average i'm not talking about these guys aren't average they they actually have meaningful theological knowledge of the backgrounds and have made decisions based there on i still understand this how they could not be scandalized and my point was they have every right in the world uh...

if if they hear of mel gibson's intent on the scenes but when actually viewing the movie you don't have to draw that conclusion it's it's not that clear cut yeah you can you can ignore the intention of the director and come to your own conclusions no one's ever argued otherwise alrighty man thanks a lot thank you uh...

bye bye okay uh...

okay we're going to try to get everybody in we're going to go along today is that what we're doing? alright let's try to make it quick let's talk to brian hi james how are you?

hey brian we uh... we're going to try to wrap everybody up here pretty quick because we're already about ten minutes over okay i'll be i'll be brief uh...

that was frustrating by the way but thank you for doing a nice job uh... my question has to do with two things number one could you explain what a papal bull is in relation to uh...

ex cathedra uh... and is it an infallible statement the second part of the question is uh...

just to help me with an argument with a friend a couple of papal bulls such as the uh...

pope eugene cantante domino when he says the uh... nobody's saved outside of the catholic church and also the bull in the sanctum which says essentially we have to be subject to the pontiff my argument is hey these have never been recanted this is official catholic teaching and my catholic friends said no no we don't really feel that way anymore and i'm just wondering your view on that yeah well what they feel and what's official are two different things but uh...

a papal bull uh... is is an expression of of teaching it contains doctrine and if it contains words such as we define uh...

we teach we establish uh... as unum sanctum did uh...

then it would be very difficult to argue that what was being said there was not meant to be taken infallibly when when uh...

unum sanctum said that we define pronounce and defend the concept that you must be subject to the uh...

the bishop of rome for salvation uh... everyone knew what he meant at that time what rome has done since then is to in essence ignore the historical uh...

uh... context and to redefine what that means so in other words now you can be a buddhist and you're still subject to the pope in essence uh...

which was not what he meant at that time but that's basically the the mechanism that's now being used it's not well we just don't feel that way anymore now what you do instead at least the more nuanced defenders of rome you just redefine what he meant back then and say we still feel the same it's just that you've misunderstood what he was actually feeling and so a papal bull can be infallible but you see the problem is when you boil this down i remember writing to a certain used to be a roman catholic apologist now he's a hyper -traditionalist and i i uh...

quoted for him i think it was unum sanctum and i also quoted for him a statement from pope john paul about how if you just follow the light of the religion that you're a part of etc etc uh...

that you will have eternal life how do you put these two things together he said how dare you pretend to be able to interpret the history of the church and i said what do you mean and he said well the church infallibly interprets scripture and the church infallibly interprets history and so it's the church interprets her own history and so if her history uh...

if she interprets her history in such a way that those two are not contradictory then as a faithful follower of rome they're not contradictory now historically they may be contradictory linguistically they may be contradictory it may be nineteen eighty four all over again uh...

but they're not contradictory because of sola ecclesia the church is the final full authority in all things and so it's it's sort of the you know you you go you head into the looking glass and go down the rabbit hole when you start trying to figure out what is what is not infallible teaching according to the roman catholic church and you can almost find no two individuals who end up agreeing one hundred percent on what is and what is not infallible teaching uh...

i can't think of any two apologists who are actually in one hundred percent agreement with one another as to what is what is not infallible teaching from rome's perspective so it's a it's that's why it becomes next impossible to refute it because it's a target that does not exist it's like trying to shoot fog uh...

you can you can fire with uh... with great accuracy but there's nothing to hit it's like nailing jello to a wall uh...

there's there's nothing there's no substance that you can actually uh... uh... get hold of so that's the problem that you're dealing with there james i really appreciate it thank you for your ministry thank you sir god bless all right let's uh...

let's get mike in real quick here and then wrap things up hi mike uh... hey how's it going uh... it's going that discussion was uh...

something else kind of just took my breath away but ok well i've got a few bruises on my forehead from banging against the desk here but uh...

i muted the microphone while i was doing that i understand uh... yesterday we had a panel at the university of uh...

six evangelical pastors discussing the passion and so i stopped in and generally uh...

the presentation was absolutely meaningless despite what the caller said about evangelicals criticizing the movie the only evangelical criticism i've heard is that of anybody who dares to criticize the movie on any grounds uh...

basically all six just very clearly stated that everyone needs to see this one presented this argument that everybody's going to be talking about it anyway and it's part of the culture intrinsically so if you don't go see it you'll be left out of the christian water cooler talk i suppose i don't really know what was going on there but um...

we had a pastor of k2 the church which is some kind of church here i suppose i don't know what kind of name that is k2 the church?

yeah as in like the mountain or something i really don't know anyway we had him here and he said that watching the movie gave him a firmer reason and more basically like a purpose for being in ministry in utah and it was just it was revolting i mean my blood was boiling by the time i got done listening to all this garbage because it's like you have a set of christian leadership up there they're professing to be anyway uh...

they're appealing to a movie for its accurate presentation of the gospel and it's made by a guy who would declare both them and their entire congregations under gods wrath and it's just like this makes no sense yeah but he didn't do that on the diane sawyer interview so all is well right i mean it's horrible because there was uh...

the entire panel there was no discussion among these pastors of the roman catholic element no no no that's uh...

you're not supposed to do that if you do that you'll end up being uh... said to be a mean terrible horrible nasty man like me and no one wants that therefore you don't discuss those things you just keep people in ignorance yeah it was absolutely horrific just to sit there and observe this because i mean they're saying that they would send their seekers to see this uh...

they didn't even touch on the second commandment because none of them ever opened the bible they never quoted scripture anywhere well you know unfortunately the second commandment issue has not really been discussed much because it's either assumed yes that's a proper application or no we're not even going to think about it so i mean i'd personally uh...

have issues with the application because of the incarnation but no one talks about that it's just like we're not gonna open the bible discuss this word that this is not what our culture wants to see us doing anyone who's gonna be stopping at a university to hear a discussion like this does not want to hear a bunch of bible thumpers reading pastor's scripture ever notice on uh...

on radio uh... that anybody can call in and they can curse and they can swear and they can tell nasty jokes and do all sorts of stuff if anyone even whispers that they might take a moment to actually quote a verse of scripture everybody just automatically shuts them down just just and we're not going to have that it's almost like that's illegal because that might somehow avoid the separation of church and state so you just it's it's gone and we all know that and therefore we fear doing it we fear even uttering the words well the scriptures say because we're the the glass eye effect hits you know this is like uh...

well i'm not gonna listen what you have to say because now you've offended me look by quoting the bible i think that might be illegal in the united states now too so i mean in this case there's this perception that the movie is just there the bible is sort of irrelevant it's kind of like the caller was saying you know just take it for what it is just as this pure movie or whatever and whatever mel wanted to do by including mary that doesn't matter just watch it however you will and it's like the movie that's good post -modernism by the way right absolutely and because ignoring that the movie did not fall out of the sky i mean it was made by a person it was made for a purpose everything that's in there has the director's definition in it and so you can redefine it all you want so when mary is there it's just uh...

i don't know a picture of the need for maternal love or it's a picture of yeah i don't know you can just interpret it whatever way you want to interpret it and it is not what we do with the constitution you interpret it the way you want to interpret it original intent is irrelevant context is irrelevant the purpose of the director is irrelevant you just interpret the way you want to interpret it all as well all is good everyone's happy let us hold hands and sing kumbaya together well we went uh...

sixteen minutes long today actually more than that but hey you know it happens once while it's one of the nice things about doing a webcast and not having to worry about being on radio anywhere is that we can just go and if we need to go and go farther we can do that and that's what we did today hey thanks for listening today the next dividing line lord willing will be tuesday night five p m and i'm gonna try to do something amazing i'm gonna try not to talk about the passion film uh...

maybe we'll talk about something else there is other stuff going on out there you know and we'll try to do that and i'll be here lord willing you be there god bless see you then by alpha and omega ministries if you'd like to contact us call us at six oh two nine seven three zero three one eight or write us at p .o.

box three seven one zero six phoenix arizona eight five zero six nine you can also find us on the worldwide web at AOMIN .org

that's A -O -M -I -N dot O -R -G where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks join us again next