Meme Theology and the Conclusion of the Simply Seerah Video on a Jumbo DL

Alpha & Omega Ministries

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

Comments are disabled.

00:34

And welcome to the dividing line do some air guitar here Wish I could play that.

00:40

Well, I haven't played in ages. I did enjoy it. It was it was a lot of fun, but You have your you make your choices.

00:47

I don't play chess anymore miss chess Should play it more often It's good for this thing up here.

00:54

What little is left of it actually But you know haven't gotten shooting and I don't know

01:00

We were we were gonna do that Remember, yeah, that worked out real well, didn't it?

01:06

We don't once did we go once they went once yeah Yeah You're supposed to it every month and went once that was good

01:15

Very expensive that year That was the most expensive time ever ever gone shoot man.

01:21

I could have bought thousands arounds what we spent for that. But anyway That's neither here nor there

01:29

Just One quick Let me mention it and then get out of the way.

01:34

We'll move on to more important things, but the only thing I mean aside from just being sad for Everyone who for example

01:45

Found Kent Hovind's materials in the past some somewhat useful to them I'm sad for all those folks seeing him just take his credibility and Shoot it and stab it and bury it and do all that stuff.

01:59

Um But the one thing in the video this morning where Kent Hovind Decided that now see that the story keeps changing and it's gonna keep changing but now there wasn't ever a debate and It was a program and now is in the studio audience

02:26

Yeah, I know there was a tiny little room. I know there was no studio audience, but Yeah, but the one things could come out of it that might be useful.

02:36

That might be useful and interesting is He says Gail Rippling er is going to do a full write -up on it

02:45

And That Everyone's telling me no video today, right?

02:53

It's struggling. I we're going back to the old method I don't know what's going on with our

02:59

Speed test says we're streaming great But so YouTube, I don't know.

03:05

Maybe this is a really high volume time of day for YouTube live or whatever I don't know, but uh, we're

03:12

Struggling to keep our connection. That's lovely Well, we are recording but we are recording.

03:18

So that's the important part. Yes. Yes, so I've got a bunch graphics today So you may have to catch it

03:27

Dead cast as we call it or whatever, but then I can do about that It had worked real well there for a while.

03:33

And now all of a sudden not working at all But the one good thing that may come out of all of this is

03:45

Gail Rippling er is going to write up an entire Story here now it does it will be a fascinating thing to 20 over 22 years after the event

04:00

To see into the mind of Gail interior designer

04:06

Rippling er That will be fascinating and Especially because we actually have the recordings of what happened and Obviously Kent Hovind Does not have the time.

04:25

I mean he just must be the busiest man in the world I mean, he does not even have 46 minutes.

04:33

I mean with all the driving he does it's only audio Doesn't he know how to use an iPod? Put on cassette man.

04:41

I bet you're somebody you post videos, you know how to use computers Um since he hasn't had the time to to actually listen to what happened

04:52

It makes me really wonder if Gail Rippling er Would actually go back and listen to that encounter from November of 1993

05:03

Huh? I Was gonna grab her Blind guides book. I forgot to grab it.

05:09

Oh, I know where it is. Don't worry about it but It would be interesting to see what differences there are even between what she wrote within a year or two afterwards and What comes out now 22 years later?

05:23

I? It it'll be useful one way or the other We'll be able to go.

05:29

Let's just let's just compare reality Documentable history with the flights of fancy.

05:36

It'll be it'll be interesting, but it has Reminded me that unfortunately there are

05:43

Well, there is a resurgence in some way of The worst forms of King James only ism and it's only for one reason anybody with a computer can now publish stuff and It does illustrate beyond all shadow of a doubt the fact that most even good churches

06:11

Do not do much in preparing their people to know something about the history of the

06:17

Bible where it came from and that's where stuff comes from and so We are going to start a

06:25

Well, we'll just call this section the program when we do it. I Wish see if we were if we were

06:33

Todd Friel or something we'd have graphics and sound effects Do you have an echo sound effect?

06:41

Not sure on echo sound effect. Yes an echo sound effect.

06:50

There you go. That's it. That's how it's done. I Think I've got a coffee can in the other room

06:56

Yeah, okay, and you have to turn Twitter off to everybody the videos not working

07:03

I know there's nothing I can do about it. Call YouTube, you know We're sending it.

07:08

They ain't they ain't distributing it. So there's nothing nothing to do that. Um If if we were

07:16

Friel we'd have all this cool stuff and we go we call this meme Theology theology theology theology theology that type of thing and would have the echo to it and it'd be really cool

07:27

We'd have music and stuff like that. We don't have any of that stuff. So, uh No, that's right meme theology and It does seem that that's where theology is going these days for most people is down to the level of a meme and What I mean by that is

07:45

I have one two, three four. I have five memes queued up here that I've pulled from Facebook that I'm going to be using as illustrations and responding to them

07:58

Unfortunately to respond meaningfully requires more than just another meme. I Am reminded once again of the wise words of Douglas Wilson in response to the young lady

08:12

When he said I often have thoughts that require more than one sentence to express them There was there is more than a small amount of condescension

08:24

Hidden into the into the tonal qualities of brother Wilson's comment at that point

08:31

But it's true. It is true. And when we're talking about the history of the

08:37

Bible textual transmission things like that Often requires more than a single sentence to express

08:48

The truth let's let's bring the first first example of meme

08:54

Theology up on the screen if we could There we go. It's one of the

08:59

King James versus NIV I love the the

09:06

Micah especially loves Micah wishes he could do graphic design like Because all of them are just really these letterbox

09:18

Things sometimes you wonder if somebody didn't you know still get the magazine out and cut letters.

09:25

Yeah. Well, well It does look like it's in the 1990s But that does seem to be the thing so anyway

09:35

Here is King James versus NIV mark 10 21 King James and Come take up the cross and follow me and IV then come follow me and then of course the bottom of all of all

09:45

These these two that we're looking at they told me all Bibles were the same there was this I forget right which one

09:51

I grabbed this from but One of the many many many many many King James only folks on on Facebook So if we can minimize that let me see how is it still?

10:02

Yeah, you can still see that it's it's big enough to figure out okay what

10:09

I want to do with Well, I'll probably have to switch back and forth now. I think about it

10:15

Just to be able to give you this information and there's just no way with what I'm looking at here.

10:21

Let me let me show you What I'm looking at when

10:26

I look at Why are you doing that to me? Oh, I see why never mind

10:34

When I'm looking at what I have in accordance I Have one two three four five six normal tabs in My regular

10:47

Accordance desktop setup the third one over here is called

10:52

New Testament textual Why don't we go ahead and make that bigger nobody nobody can see any of that so there we go

10:58

So here's here's the third I have JRW main, which is my main, you know

11:06

Normally New Testament text setup. I have the synoptics which is blank right now because I don't have a particular

11:13

Reference in there the New Testament textual tab the textual interlinear tab which places your

11:25

Your text into a A Interlinear form to where you can see

11:33

Sort of how it it's You know, like here's Greek New Testament the TR Westcott Hort Byzantine Sinaiticus Vaticanus Washingtonianus and Alexandrinus and What each one of them has in that particular?

11:49

Text so on so forth. So it's that's pretty cool. And then you've got your New Testament manuscripts pain right here

11:55

So I've got Sinaiticus Vaticanus Washingtonianus Alexandrinus and then if the papyri cover that which do not at mark 1021 mark is does not have a whole lot in the way of Papyri evidence to it and then

12:11

I have an Old Testament text frame where I basically have the

12:17

NESB the Biblia Braga stucartensia the Rouse LXX and then

12:22

I've got the Beale Carson New Testament use the Old Testament, which normally I end up doing that but It's it is a useful resource to have

12:29

I do have an excellent Accordance library and an excellent logouts library and sometimes you end up with things in both actually

12:36

Anyways, we go back here to New Testament textual. Here's mark 1021 And what

12:42

I'm just gonna have to do is I'm gonna have to take the textual commentaries out and then blow up The text so that it's actually visible

12:53

On the screen. There we go so What is in the graphic that we just saw that someone posted on?

13:05

Facebook is in reference to Let me see here 1021 and 1021 1021 1021 1021 1021 symbol right there why does it keep turning this thing on I can't find a way to take that out of my startup routine

14:00

I need to here's the insertion take up your cross take up the cross

14:08

Washingtonianus family 13 a few others have take up your cross interesting that the earliest exemplar of the

14:18

Byzantine text has you take up your cross the cross of you but take up the cross is found in Alexandrinus Washingtonianus with that addition the family's 113 25 2 is the majority reading whenever you see this right here that's the majority reading and then you have other translations like the

14:42

Syriac Zahidic Beharic and then that then you have the double dashed line and after that the text so the text without that insertion is

14:54

Sinaiticus Vaticanus C D interestingly enough Delta Theta Psi 0 2 7 4 5 6 5 5 7 9 8 9 2 24 27 few others old

15:06

Latin certain manuscripts of the sahidic so sahidic notice it says s a m s and s a m s s there's more sahidic manuscripts that have it then do not but it's it's a split

15:17

Baharic and then you get into your patristic citations like Clement and so on so forth which the this is actually the any 27 apparatus

15:27

I'm not sure why I don't have the any 28 up but that's what popped up I wonder were you to be to be to be to be to be well let's go with that for now it's good enough so oh

15:41

I know that's because it's on my other computer never mind I've updated things on the other computer but not on this so here's your textual evidence and what you'll notice is right here 834 mark 834 or what's mark 834 well here's mark 834 and in mark 834

16:06

Jesus of course is saying the disciples if you wish to follow after me deny yourselves and take up the cross take up his cross actually he must deny himself himself take up the cross his cross and follow after me and so the indication in the textual data here is that this phrase has been borrowed from mark 834 and inserted in some later manuscripts and Alexander's being the being

16:43

Byzantine in the gospel so primarily the Byzantine manuscript tradition at mark 1021 that could have been done purposefully it could have been done just simply because someone knew mark 834 so well take up the very phrase take up follow after invoke the concept of my cross and so it was done inadvertently by the scribe who maybe wasn't paying attention was going from memory even a person reading could possibly make that kind of mistake there are various possibilities now what this leads us to is the whole discussion which we've had in the past I'm not going to repeat it right now the whole discussion of how what weight you give to manuscripts we can go ahead and minimize that but wait you give to manuscripts and the issue of accepting a minority reading over a majority reading we've done the new test reliability presentation we've discussed textual criticism of the program before you certainly can go back and find those things in the in the archives but the vast majority of believing

18:03

Christian scholars believe that manuscripts that are the earliest carry the most weight it's not a matter of just counting manuscripts because if it was just a matter of counting manuscripts then two things would would be a couple things would follow the original readings of the manuscript tradition were primarily limited to one location to those that would underlie the eventual

18:37

Byzantine manuscript tradition and that that methodology would give you a different majority text depending on what century you're in now one of the ways it's been used to get around this is that various sundry folks who have promoted a majority or Byzantine priority position would say that manuscripts wore out over time that manuscripts in certain locations were more likely to destruction than the dry desert climate and so it gives a unfair geographical advantage so on and so forth the reality is it's a very it's it's incredibly complex to try to recreate the history of the transmission of the text over time we don't you know it would be a whole lot easier today with the ability to have meteorological readings and you know the kind of recording devices and things we have today but we didn't have any of that in the ancient world and so you had wars and famines and floods and fires and all sorts of things and so very often we don't even know where a manuscript came from we can speculate that it came from Egypt or Caesarea or whatever the fact is we don't know and so you you do have a whole lot of speculation shall we say the vast majority of believing scholars do not count manuscripts in the sense of well 487 read this way 27 read this way so obviously the 47 wins given that the vast majority of manuscripts come from after 1000

20:35

AD that kind of methodology ignores the reality of the history of the transmission of the text and so when you have the kind of evidence you have in mark 10 21 coupled with the appearance of the phrase elsewhere and by the way

21:01

I didn't show this to you but if the idea is if the idea is that the there's a conspiracy going on and the

21:13

NIV is trying to hide the call to discipleship and hide the call to take up the cross and so on so forth and I didn't bother looking but I can guarantee you that you can find sermons from King James only advocates specifically stating that that's what's going on no doubt about it whatsoever but the fact the matter is the

21:38

NIV says take up your cross and follow me at mark 834 so the call to take up the cross is right there it's it's right in front of us that's sort of important and very rarely addressed

21:58

I guess that the theory would be well they couldn't take it out all the time because then we might catch on to them but there is strong evidence that mark 10 21 is an addition and what's important is to recognize that we have sufficient evidence upon which to discuss the issue if we only had one manuscript if we only had two manuscripts this would be extremely difficult to even begin to address these issues but we have an entire manuscript tradition that allows us to to do things differently now

22:41

I'll pause oh I can't I can't do that and change it that's interesting let's go back to preview and try to find that one let's see what that one is now so when

23:05

I this is the only problem with this can you bring it up yep there it is here is another one let's get it large enough for people can see it this is the famous bloodless

23:24

Bible text that I I told the story of this in the

23:31

King James only controversy all these texts by the way I addressed 21 years ago 22 years ago in the

23:45

King James only controversy so if you want to read further on the subjects you can find them in in the book this is one that bothers people on an emotional level in whom we have redemption through his blood in whom we simply have redemption not through his blood at Colossians 114 and again

24:07

I can guarantee you there are numerous sermons out there speaking about the horrific modern translations that remove the blood of Christ and are scandalized by the blood of Christ everything else of course the reason that the

24:21

NIV or the NES beer the ESP does not have through his blood here is because the Greek version that they are the

24:27

Greek text they're translating does not contain it and there is a very good reason why that is the case and that is you can see it right here if we blow that up and here is in whom we have redemption the forgiveness of sins there's our insertion mark right there that's interesting on my screen the cursor is much larger than it is on that screen that's weird

25:10

I'll have to move it around more but either you can see it there but wow that's that's really weird anyway there's the insertion mark here is the insertion mark here and once again we have a text which indicates this is a what's called a parallel corruption a scribe familiar with a parallel text inserting it here is diya to haima toss out to via through by means of his blood one two three four

25:38

Greek manuscripts grand total earliest is the ninth century Clementine Vulgate Heraklion Syriac Cassiodorus and that's it now keep something in mind in the last variant the majority of text went against the modern translations and as we're gonna see in a moment very often

26:09

King James only advocates will trumpet the problematic nature of the minority text they're saying you're going with a minority of the manuscripts you should go with a majority of the manuscripts okay there are those that you know they're mature majority text advocates but in this case you're looking at the small minority underlying the

26:44

King James Version for predominantly irrelevant text miniscule is all from no earlier than the ninth century and in light of fact that the exact phrase appears in the parallel of Ephesians 1 7 and notice in whom blow it up there in whom we have the redemption diya to haima toss out to through his blood the forgiveness of our trespasses according to the riches of his grace

27:22

Ephesians 1 7 it's there in the NIV it's there in all modern translations no one's trying to hide anything about the blood of Christ there's no being scandalized none of the common stuff you hear

27:33

King James only advocates preaching about and screaming about it's right there so Ephesians 1 7 and Colossians 1 14 are parallel passages and over and over and over again

27:47

I wonder if I have it yeah it's down there

27:52

I'm not gonna reach all the way down there to get it but if you would take the time to look at the textual apparatus the bottom of the

28:06

UBS synopsis the the quattro young gallium that the four gospel parallel which is why

28:16

I've been preaching through for well teaching through for years in our Sunday school over and over and over again when you have close parallel text between the

28:26

Gospels you'll find some scribes somewhere that decide to try to harmonize things they they decide that they wanted

28:33

Matthew to say the way say it the way that Mark did or mark say it the way that Matthew did or make them all photo copies of each other which would make them useless and so parallel corruption is a very very common thing to find the

28:49

Gospels but there are other places where there are parallels this is one of them Colossians and Ephesians and so you have the exact same terminology and in all probability not purposefully but inadvertently because of memorization of Ephesians 1 7 maybe it'll is utilization of it in the liturgy of the church whatever you have the reins the insertion of this phrase into Colossians where it was not originally if you're gonna argue that that was there originally you're gonna have to say that pretty much everybody in the first thousand years the church sort of forgot about it or at least first 500 years minimally and that only later did it somehow pop back in in some strange and miraculous fashion and there would be

29:43

King James only folks believe me there's always a way as long as consistency of argumentation means nothing to you there is no position the world you cannot argue for easily though easily though but the important thing to realize is if you used the majority text argument before then you should reject

30:07

Colossians 114 because that's not the majority text in fact I have the majority text right here well actually

30:17

I probably have the majority text in accordance to but it's more fun to look it up in this so Galatians Colossians 1 14 in whom we have the redemption the forgiveness of sins there is a note the note does tell you through his blood and it says majority text part yeah four texts and TR but it's not a part of the not part of the actual text in the majority text by Hodges and Farsad and there's reason for that so consistency becomes the issue and I have said for a very very very long time the hallmark of King James only ism is inconsistency the standards that you apply to the

31:20

King James are completely different than the standards you will apply to everything else no

31:29

King James only us can apply the same standards of King James they apply to every other translation they can't do it because presupposition

31:36

Lee they have embraced the King James as their final authority so that's just all there is so you have a minority reading here small late minority reading that made its way into the

31:52

Texas Receptus reflected in whatever text Erasmus had available to him and that's why it's there that's why it's there now let me give you another example of this and that will be this one here let me see if I can bring that one up what you got now there we go now this is this is

32:24

King James only graphics the best of King James this is the best of King James only graphics and King James version out now this fellow

32:40

Luke Lefebvre I I made the interesting decision when

32:49

I grabbed these and I reposted them to my feed and said I'm gonna talk about some of these things

32:54

I made the decision of dropping him a message on on Facebook well

33:01

I was he excited that I had done that he he wanted to have a lengthy discussion about his interesting take on propitiation that's what he wanted to do and so it was interesting and I also mentioned to him that I noticed he was had made the assertion that son of man refers to human nature of Christ son of God the divine nature of Christ I said you you really no no that's wrong and so now because I messaged him that and we had that brief conversation now he just wants to talk to me all the time on Facebook but anyway

33:44

Luke 233 again all of these texts thoroughly discussed two decades ago in in the

33:56

King James only controversy but here again the the issue is the matter of what it means

34:06

Joseph and his mother marveled or his father and his mother marveled so this is verses 33 and 43 that are used here since it's in the book

34:22

I'm not interested in going through all that gone through this many times before what I want you to see is the form of argumentation the form of argumentation those it says the reading found the

34:33

King James Bible Luke 233 is that of the majority of all Greek manuscripts including

34:38

AEGH KMSU YX psi gamma delta theta lambda pi psi and Omega is also reading the old

34:47

Latin copies and so on so forth likewise the reading of the Syriac Bishita Heraklion and some

34:53

Coptic Boheric versions and the Gothic ancient translation so it goes on and on and on and what's the argument this is the majority reading and it is and so there's the standard majority reading you go with the majority reading right well here's here's the problem why don't we blow this one up now

35:26

I got to read this especially because some of you again we recognize YouTube has abandoned us yet once again but we're recording this time so you'll be able to watch this just not live

35:43

Revelation 16 5 now why would anybody be addressing this because I have addressed this and I have made the very strong argument that Revelation 16 5 truly gives the lie to so much

35:59

King James only argumentation and it does it really does

36:05

Revelation 16 5 King James says thou art righteous O Lord which art and was and shalt be because thou hast judged thus modern translation says just you are

36:20

O Holy One who is and who was for you brought these judgments so the difference is between O Holy One and and shall be as difference between ha ha see us

36:31

Holy One and a Salinas which means shall be now what the

36:42

King James only movement has had to try to do was deal with the fact that I have documented very plainly that says this is this came into the

36:51

Texas Receptus via Beza Erasmus didn't have it

36:57

I didn't get it out but Stephanos doesn't have it this is

37:03

Beza's doing Calvin's successor Geneva now that really bugs him I'm good so many of these

37:09

King James only guys are rabidly anti -catholic just foaming at the mouth anti -catholic you know they they wake up in the middle night going survey this

37:18

I mean that kind of anti -calvinist sorry that's anti -catholic well they're anti -catholic to anti -calvinist sorry anti -calvinist and they're just yeah well that too they just move so Beza Calvin's successor this came from a

37:36

Calvinist oh oh how can I speak but since we put it and notice even says you can it's sort of hard to see because the background but James White and Revelation 16 5 it's right where to go oh there it is yeah right there there's there's

37:51

James White and Revelation 16 5 again Micah just wishes he could do graphics like this

37:57

Beza's conjectural emendation now there's no question that this is where it came from the 1598

38:13

Beza was one of the text they had the five Erasmus the 1550 Stephanos and the 1598

38:19

Beza this is this is a text text that they use this is acknowledged this is history so which one had this reading

38:26

Beza did they went with that all right so what are they gonna do well this is one of the most amazing examples of straining at the gnat listen what's here

38:43

Beza's conjectural emendation there are two Latin commentaries with readings of Revelation 16 5 which agree with Beza in referring to the future aspect of God and shall be

38:56

Beatus of Lebanon and Heimo Halberstadt insists a

39:05

German bishop in the ninth century wrote a commentary on the book of Revelation titled commentaria in Apocalypse in so you have two

39:14

Latin commentaries allegedly and then listen to this there are at least two

39:24

Greek fathers who used the phrase to a person of the

39:29

Godhead Christ and revelation is also referred to as hot air common oz Revelation 1 4 1 8 4 8 11 17 what does any of this have to do with what the original reading

39:39

Revelation 16 5 was from any meaningful perspective zip nothing nothing at all it is purely throwing dust in the air then notice

39:55

Clement of Alexandria referred to God as ha Esamenah who is to come and Gregory of Nica referred to Christ as hot as ominous and on the baptism baptism of Christ can you imagine what these people would be doing if we made a change in the

40:14

King James and use this kind of argumentation well you know there's God about 1 ,700 years ago use this word in something completely different and so we should change

40:25

King James Bible yeah they buy it for a second all day just alright let's let's rip that out there

40:31

Betsy let's start writing a new page here for the King James Bible that's what would you right now desperation

40:40

I mean this is desperation and then what you can't see is looking over here on the side you can barely see this but says summary see here summary um which art and washed and shall be completes a formula oh so it's a formula see

40:59

Beatrice's excerpt mentions the future aspect of God oh there's a future aspect of God Haimo alluded this formula copies of Revelation were extensively corrupted very early

41:09

Bruce Metzger approved the use of conjectural emanations in principle I'm not here but in principle huh there is rabbinical and Greek authority for basis conjectural tratic formally we won't tell you what it is but it's there there are only four witnesses of Revelation 16 5 prior to the 10th century well that's important Sinaiticus that has confirmable examples of ascribed confusing similar looking words

41:33

I mean listen to this this is to me one of the greatest examples ever seen congratulations to Luke I don't think he came up with this he got this with somebody else

41:46

I'd be interested in knowing where it is but this is the most concentrated effort I've ever seen of anyone to try to get around to what

41:53

I documented the King James only controversy and this is what I love because this is the biggest example of abject desperation

42:03

I've ever seen there is not a single person on that side of that that this argument that would ever give a pico gram of weight to this kind of argumentation if it were used against the

42:23

King James reading they would laugh at it and rightfully so rightfully so this is someone who understands the weight of the evidence and is doing everything in their power to get around it they don't care what the evidence is they have one one job defend the

42:43

King James reading it's all you're gonna do one job so you can come up with anything no matter how abjectly and absurdly irrelevant throw the dust throw the dirt for most of our followers it will be enough because they're not concerned about consistent application of standards of textual criticism or anything else it's amazing absolutely amazing but what

43:15

I want you now to think about is how abjectly contradictory it is to the preceding graphic we looked at remember the preceding graphic let me let me show it to you here what was the whole argument here it's the majority reading majority of all

43:42

Greek manuscripts AEG HK blah blah blah blah blah that's what we should have at Luke 233 but when we move over here to the other one when whoops let me move over here to Revelation 16 5 yeah actually all the

44:01

Greek manuscripts we possess of Revelation 16 5 say the same thing but we will throw all of that right out the window why because we're not arguing from the facts we have a position and it's the

44:20

King James that's just the way it is so we'll go with it and we'll just throw stuff up in the air and just dust and dirt everywhere just try to obscure the fact that we don't have any basis none we're taking the reading that we're taking but it's what's in the

44:41

King James so that's what we'll defend there you go man is it core to four no it's not you messed my you messed my computer in here there is no way that covering only four of those little things has taken me 45 minutes well you know we're going jumbo anyways right well we've got to go jumbo gotta go jumbo anyway and if we've pretty much given up on YouTube oh you disconnected great all right well wonderful have you tweeted out listen audio and then we'll we'll you need to let the the

45:22

Twitter audiences is all really sad and depressed so yeah I have no words at the moment

45:28

I just you know okay I just I kept trying to connect and connect and it lasts for about 30 seconds and then start failing again and it's like this is if I keep doing this it's gonna mess up the recording again and I don't want that that's true that's true we don't want that to happen okay all right let's shift gears quickly

45:49

I did mention to a Muslim Rudolph Bushoff posted a picture of some books he was reading and a couple

46:01

Muslims decided to jump on it by the way did you see that the ya -ya snow video accusing me of bigotry you know what it was he accused a bunch of people of bigotry all it was was

46:13

Jay Smith and I both sort of know the same thing and that is and this is just this is a fact this isn't bigotry this is a fact

46:19

Middle Eastern people argue differently than Londoners for Middle Eastern people the the volume of your voice is directly relevant to the confidence you have in expressing it and things that we

46:37

Westerners do not find it all convincing a lot of Middle Easterners do find convincing and not because it's logical but because it is part of the argumentation and that's not bigotry that's that's a that's observation of absolute fact no one no one who's ever

46:55

I mean everyone has seen it it's it's obvious ya -ya snow I believe ya -ya's purpose in life is to just simply muddy the waters and try to keep any meaningful conversation happening between serious

47:08

Christians and serious Muslims I really do they watch this program hi ya -ya how you doing I don't know why you do what you're doing but I really do not have any respect for what you do really find it if you want bigotry

47:20

I think that anyway he jumped in on Rudolph's post and then this one guy just started dropping a bunch of stuff all these memes

47:34

Muslim memes on what he had posted so I grabbed just one and I tried to challenge him on it and it became very obvious when he responded that he does not speak

47:47

English so that was worthless but here's here's the mean you should have it okay let's bring it up here there we go

47:59

Jesus said and indeed Allah is my Lord and your Lord so worship him that is the straight path gone on 1936 that's sort of modium 1936 and so I'm seeing more and more of these things on on Facebook and so here's my challenge to my serious

48:26

Muslim friends and obviously you guys you guys watch because you put stuff up you know a day or two after it's been posted so you're watching that's good

48:35

I'm glad you are yeah yeah I'm even glad you are I just it just frightens me to think that oh by the way and you know where you know what he pulled it from this this is the amazing thing is from my criticism of Waleed Chobat I was saying

48:51

Waleed Chobat thinks that these long tirades are mean something and so here

48:58

I am and in essence I'm criticizing one of the people who are pushing for Christian jihadism and crusaderism and they he has the gall sorry yeah yeah it's gall to pull from that and say

49:12

I'm the bigot Wow I'm just like who did you don't you don't get much lower than that you really you really know that's that's a that's another

49:20

Ahmed move on that one Wow that was that was bad anyway I'm seeing these things on on Facebook and so here's my here's my challenge to my serious

49:34

Muslim friends suggest to me demonstrate to me a consistent worldview and methodology of doing historical criticism of our texts that would allow you to substantiate what that well here hmm what that meme says and it specifically says

50:06

Jesus said so you are making the claim that the words recorded in surah 19 were said by Jesus now let me point a couple things out a this is got to be a translation of what

50:34

Jesus said right who did the translation Jesus didn't speak Arabic so you all like to say well the

50:43

Greeks a translation of what Jesus said I'm reading a book right now on whether Jesus spoke

50:49

Greek and it's quite interesting strong criticism of the Aramaic hypothesis not done with it yet but there's a lot to look at because it was just sort of a given in my seminary years well why don't you do well

51:02

I'm learning more and more that you've got to look at what's a given in those situations but let's say it was

51:11

Aramaic that I mean there are a couple places where very obviously do you really think

51:17

I ever thought about this do you really think Jesus was speaking to pilot in Aramaic you think pilot spoke

51:24

Aramaic pilot would have spoken two languages Latin and what

51:30

Greek so given how many how massive the evidence has become of the predominance of quinn a

51:40

Greek in the homeland of Jesus at the time of Jesus life do you really think you didn't know it what do you think he was doing talking to pilot mm -hmm how about the remember the the woman the the

51:55

Gentile woman who followed after Jesus you know even even the dogs eat the crumbs of table remember her you think he was what language think he was talking to her in anyway just something to think about here's the problem you only have this in Arabic so who translate is this

52:12

God's translation and what evidence do you have the

52:19

GS ever said these words because you see now if you're a

52:26

Muslim who does not believe that the actual words of the

52:34

Torah and in Jill have been corrupted then you're in at least a little more consistent or safe position if you're not telling me my

52:45

Bible's been changed I'm just misinterpreting it then this really isn't a challenge to you but they're almost none of those

52:54

Muslims left that that was that was a position that was that was quite common in the past not so much today ever since it's our all hawk but anyway if you are amongst the ninety nine point nine percent of Muslims who for example we reviewed

53:13

Adnan Rashid Homs that sorts these video couple weeks ago on the alleged corruption of the

53:21

Bible all right so if you're in that group then if you accept the argumentation of modern liberal scholarship that we cannot know that what

53:42

Mark recorded Jesus saying is what Mark actually said it's too far removed they're all that there was all this time oral tradition get changed and yet no one seriously argues that mark is not a first century document and nobody seriously argues that it wasn't written in the exact language that Jesus would have been speaking or at least would have been from prominent in that day but if you say well we can't really know if you reject historically if you use a historical critical methodology that allows you to reject what

54:22

Mark says then tell me how you can believe that this is true because there is no historical connection whatsoever between the days of Jesus and the early 7th century when these words were eventually written down well you know if we take even the most conservative

54:54

Islamic concept under Abu Bakr dictated by Muhammad even if you accept that it's still the early 7th century where is the evidence where is the where the manuscripts were the citations were the quotations there isn't any you know that there's nothing in the 6th century that's nothing the 5th century doesn't fourth third second first there's just nothing there you believe what's in the

55:28

Quran because you believe the Quran scripture if we say we believe what's in the

55:33

New Testament because really New Testament scripture then we don't have any place to go do it except for one thing ours comes before yours and if ours is scripture then yours ain't and yours tells us to judge by what's in ours verify 47 48 so show me a consistent historical critical methodology that would allow you to say what's in this mean

56:02

Jesus said these words that would not in the exact same way confirm that Jesus also said what's found in Mark chapter 14 when at his trial when

56:22

Jesus is implored by the high priest are you the son of the

56:30

Most Blessed One his response was I am and then he conflated someone 10 and Daniel 714 put them together to indicate that he was the divine son of man was given dominion power glory authority servants who worship him and who sits at the right hand of Yahweh resulting in the high priest tearing his robes and saying you've heard the blasphemy deserves death you show me a consistent methodology that would substantiate surah 19 while allowing you to criticize what's in the

57:19

New Testament I'd like to see it I'd like to see it I've never seen it and I'll be perfectly honest with you

57:27

I don't think you can do it but those of you who are truly serious who actually believe that what you believe is true that's my challenge to you and if you can't come up with one will you at least admit the reality of the fact that you can't that you do use double standards you do you use uneven scales you have to it's the nature of your faith that you have to use a standard in defense of your position that you cannot use in criticizing others that's that's a problem that is a problem okay all right there's some meme theology how's how's the like you like the meme theology did you like meme theology rich you like meme theology all right

58:22

I do need to mention that on the program today there's a there's some more spices in the teabags

58:29

I have they're a little spicier I'm not sure what the spices are there's some sort of citrus or something in it but this is good for a bus tea and it came from rich is a bit of a geek so am

58:44

I that man what's the thing called it's called a

58:50

Keurig Keurig Keurig the rich got robust tea for the Keurig and you just stick it in there and and boom it does take a little the magic out you know the the dragging you know dumping the teabag and the constantly waiting for the water to boil well yes that's true and you know the mess that the bag makes yeah that stuff yeah you know and of course

59:17

I can make my coffee and you can make your tea out of the same machine that's absolutely incredible it's amazing it is amazing it is truly all right let's get back to this video because I'm falling behind and everything and everybody knows it for those of you who have forgotten we were responding to these simply

59:44

Syrah video and I actually have three minutes left in it so but I did want to mention something and that is that some others who will remain nameless simply because we don't want to get them in trouble someone pointed out to me and this does illustrate the the differences in emphasis and what you hear even between Christians who are seeking to reach out to Muslims I have noted

01:00:33

I don't know if I'd call it a shift I don't know exactly what it is but for example in my debate with Yusuf Ismail in South Africa Yusuf took a position on the nature of the

01:00:51

Quran that somewhat surprised me because I was pressing him on the nature of the

01:00:58

Quran and whether it really is you know whether it was written on the heavenly tablet whether it has eternally existed not just not just in the way that you know if you affirm

01:01:10

God has eternal knowledge of all of his actions that's that's not that wouldn't be insufficient to be the great controversy of the first few centuries of Islamic history the idea that the

01:01:26

Quran is uncreated is not just that it's a reflection of the knowledge of God it goes beyond that and when when

01:01:36

I was pushing Yusuf on the fact that there are that the same incident is narrated in different ways the same words expressed in different phraseology

01:01:50

I was surprised to find that he was willing to create wiggle room for himself in the sense of viewing the

01:02:00

Quran in ways that I don't think would be overly well accepted in certain lands like Afghanistan maybe even

01:02:14

Pakistan certain parts of Pakistan under the Taliban certainly under Isis rule these would not be accepted and in this video even though the focus for me again was this strange

01:02:33

Jesus Quran thing which which

01:02:39

I know that missionaries have used Jesus as the word yeah

01:02:44

I get it but as a theologian I'm not making parallels between the incarnate word and some written document that comes six hundred years later not not going there no matter how

01:02:59

I think that might be for someone not not gonna go there so the in other words what

01:03:06

I'm saying is this video represents one particular take and not necessarily a take that would go over really well in the world the

01:03:21

Islamic world but I haven't really been focusing upon that my concern is primarily what it's saying about Jesus and the argumentation that's making about Jesus but if you really want to be extremely thorough what you would do is you would also criticize it in regard its perspectives on Islamic theology as well and it does seem that these folks are not quite as conservative as a lot of the folks that engage in Dawa are so we were looking at they just quoted from John 519

01:04:03

I tell you the truth son can do nothing by himself he does only what he sees the father doing whatever the father does the son also does and remember they were they're referring to a graphic I'm gonna see if I can find it here real quick yeah right here fill this up so people could see it that man and God are different from one another and there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the hypostatic

01:04:31

Union that is being represented in the film not understanding that we're not saying that you know they rightly 100 %

01:04:41

God harbors that man but don't seem to understand what that would then mean because then the criticism they offer is of something other than that which is a bit of a bit of a problem so let's go back here to and pick it up right at this point which is a left off father does the son also does this would mean that Jesus was dependent on someone else and therefore weak now

01:05:11

I just stop it in a I wonder what nation that's a that flag is from weak what why do you say that again the presupposition the assumption is that if the son voluntarily takes on human flesh and then acts in perfect harmony the father that makes him weak or does that simply mean that God can engage in self -control of his own power does

01:05:45

God have to act with omnipotence in every situation that's like asking does it always does

01:05:57

God if God makes it rain let's have to flood the earth or can

01:06:02

God control the power of that rain so that you have that beautiful summertime or wintertime not that's right one more time springtime rain that is actually sort of fun to walk in obviously the answer that's fairly clear but I don't see how that falls someone's week then take for instance when

01:06:26

Jesus said but about that day or hour no one knows not even the angels in heaven nor the son but only the father now again we've covered this dozens times but if you're gonna talk to Muslims vast majority of them have never read the surrounding context but they know this one verse it's like talking to Mormons who've only read

01:06:50

James 220 and if they were consistent they would have to say

01:07:01

Jesus never said these words never said these words because he refers to God as father he refers to himself as son and according to Quran no prophet would identify himself in this way so they focus upon this text and the supposed inherent ignorance of Jesus even though they don't believe the

01:07:30

Jesus would ever have said it and they don't see that if they do use it this way then

01:07:38

Jesus is placing himself above men no one knows not even the angels of heaven above the angels nor even the

01:07:47

Sun so the Sun is between the angels and the father won't accept that either because the

01:07:54

Quran says he's a mere result so keeping those things fine and remembering that they think this indicates an inherent ignorance on Jesus part why do

01:08:09

I use the term inherent that it was necessary by his nature

01:08:15

I say it was necessary by his function what do

01:08:21

I mean by that no I've used illustration many times there were certain aspects of Jesus's divine nature that had to be veiled so that he might function way that he and the father and the spirit had chosen for him to function and that he had chosen to enter into that role voluntarily he made himself of no reputation he humbled himself etc etc so for Jesus to be able to bring out the many important theological truths that came forth from his encounters with the

01:09:13

Jews he could not have maintained the glorious state that he had pre -incarnate if if Jesus had walked through the streets of Jerusalem shining as brightly as he did in the mount transfiguration who would have debated him with the

01:09:37

Pharisees have tried to trap him would we have the discussion with the

01:09:42

Sadducees about the resurrection that teaches us so much about these things no of course not they saw a regular man so a regular man had to be before them and so the brilliance of his glory had to be veiled he could not walk down a dark street and not need a lamp to see by simply because he glowed now this one text now we know that he had miraculous knowledge we know that he knew it was then but it seems that you could make an argument that he did so by the power of the spirit to demonstrate the unity of father son and spirit in the ministry and then to act as our example as Christians as believers as those who follow today

01:10:40

I think you can make a pretty good a good argument that Jesus was dependent upon the

01:10:47

Holy Spirit for these things and so what you would have here is a veiling of divine knowledge a non inquiry of the

01:10:59

Holy Spirit into looking for into revealing this particular aspect of divine knowledge all so that he could function and interact as disciples and the rest of the world in the way that the triune

01:11:16

God had determined he needed to do so to give us the word the teachings to accomplish his ministry as a

01:11:22

Messiah now why would that be necessary I don't know why would be necessary but that's what he says and the emphasis is not upon his ignorance in fact this is this is a very highly exact of the

01:11:40

Sun but the emphasis is upon the father's particular control of this aspect of his creation that he is the one who sets that hour and no one else no one else and in fact

01:12:01

I think you could argue that to know here is is not just simply to it could be understood as not just being having factual knowledge but determining what the content that factual knowledge would be if so then it'd be referring to the fact that's the father and the father alone that has set that final time but anyways all of that sadly never enters into the thought process of 99 % of our of our

01:12:30

Muslim friends because they don't believe Jesus said these things and they don't study it in its context or anything along those lines either and this would mean that Jesus's knowledge was not all -encompassing and therefore he was ignorant of something and finally we look at Colossians 2 9 this is fascinating to me this is fascinating to me because this is this is without a doubt one of the most important texts teaching the deity of Christ in all the

01:13:09

New Testament and their take on it's fascinating scribes clearly

01:13:15

Jesus's nature stating and in him ie Jesus all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form and of course this would mean that Jesus then experienced manhood in all its shame and glory which includes eating which signifies dependency sleeping which signifies vulnerability and weakness and of course relieving oneself which signify impurity so this is this is the standard the thankfully

01:13:48

Abdullah couldn't have put it on a higher level but this is the standard Muslim idea

01:13:55

God could never become man because he would have had to have used the restroom and by our rules that's impurity and therefore there you go how you get that at Colossians 2 9

01:14:15

I don't know because if you were to actually interpret some level of seriousness you would recognize that it's referring to Jesus post -resurrection it's saying for in him is dwelling party and a toy katoi kai present tense ponta play roll the taste they are they tossed a maticos in his dwelling all the fullness of deity in bodily form it was an anti -gnostic argument it was an argument that that which makes

01:14:48

God God they are tatos was at that time as resurrected dwelling in Jesus form now

01:15:02

I don't know I've never asked a Muslim well they think that in the resurrection they'll need to use the restroom but I sort of doubt that they would say that and so it's a really dumb argument because Jesus in his exalted state so but again

01:15:24

I would I almost said we can't expect our

01:15:31

Muslim friends to interpret the Bible in that way but I stopped and said no when

01:15:38

I look at the Quran I try to make sure that I'm not making that kind of blunder

01:15:43

I try to read the context I can tell the difference between perfect and imperfect verbs in Arabic and even if you can't read

01:15:59

Greek plenty of online stuff plenty of programs I mean

01:16:04

I'm always looking for better put on programs I can show you

01:16:10

I can show you a program online right now excellent excellent website that if you have not gotten to it you you need to bookmark this thing that it did he did it did it did you right here and let's go to do let's go to 517 how's that just for the fun of it go and and let me give you

01:16:50

I'm not sure if it's gonna show it no I have to go to here there and then back to window and then back to safari and there it is good have it this is the this is corpus .com

01:17:03

and so you know here's sir 517 and so it has each you know they have certainly disbelieved kafara kafara verb third -person masculine singular perfect verb kafar the the coffers in the substantival form but that's kafara disbelieved those who

01:17:30

Kulu have said Allah who are la

01:17:36

Masihu Ibn Maryam that Allah is

01:17:44

Messiah son of Mary which is not what Christians would ever really say anyways but the point is it's all parsed out for you so on so forth very good resource if you if you want to track that down and utilize that but I think

01:18:02

I've mentioned before I wish I could show it to you I'd have to actually just bring my iPad in and hold it up like this to you but the best best program found the closest to what we would have

01:18:19

Gordon's Bible works Logos olive tree is called my cut on I think it's a thing it's all of six dollars which for a app is up there a bit but I think it's

01:18:34

I think it's all the six bucks and you know exhaustive concordance roots all sorts of stuff it's definitely worth getting if you're wanting to look for that kind of that kind of material let's see here should have the video back so anyway missed

01:18:54

Colossians 2 9 they're really really badly but we go on which brings us to our final checkbox and of course as stated before these things are completely contrary to God's true nature now

01:19:11

Christian apologists might say well isn't the Quran considered God's Word which means an attribute of him is also dwelling in an impure earth answer is again that the

01:19:21

Quran is a reflection of God's Word God does not exist now this is a problem this is you know

01:19:33

I'll leave it to them to fight it out amongst themselves but there's this idea of really a reflection of something that's not really here is is not what the

01:19:43

Quran says about itself the Quran says it has been sent down not it's not been reflected from something is not here but this isn't relevant because they've totally missed the concept of the hypostatic

01:19:59

Union reality of a perfect human nature so that all its total disconnect all the way along it's total disconnect all the way along physically inside each and every

01:20:09

Quran so when Muslims burn the Quran to dispose of it for instance they are not essentially burning a piece of God whereas Christians believe that in Jesus God or a part of God became fully united with the flesh of man and fully united in the hypostatic

01:20:27

Union so that he is the Lord of glory who could be crucified but it's not like he ceased being

01:20:37

God and it's not like the man was impure

01:20:42

God can create that perfect human nature who became one in the same so when

01:20:53

Jesus was crucified that was according to the Christian doctrine literally God who was there experiencing the crucifixion now of course they put up the the standard standard text

01:21:10

Eloy Eli Lama suboxone not understanding the quotation of Psalm 22 not understand and I've it was not three weeks ago that we said used be ready for this because this will be an opening for you that will be awesome it truly really will be awesome to be able to explain that but again they crucified the

01:21:39

Lord of yes what does that mean does that mean that God's nature could be destroyed by man or that the

01:21:50

God man voluntarily gave his life which is what can be crucified that is his physical body his perfect human life he gives voluntarily and I realize many people would like to say well

01:22:11

I just wish you give a better illustration of it it's unique nothing in this universe can give a per illustration of it it's absolutely positively unique and so if you could give an illustration from nature then it wouldn't be unique there's only been one incarnate one and that was the

01:22:33

God man as I as I mentioned the night for last I was what got me into that I was accordance

01:22:40

I was reading some of my early church stuff in Greek and that that phrase the

01:22:47

Anthropos the God man and I read from Ignatius and I had a few people say you need to know

01:23:00

I'm just posting this stuff and commenting on it and if I have to be doing all the rest of stuff then I won't post a comment on it so I'd rather do it for a few than nobody at all but anyway and this brings us to the final theological fallacy proposed by many

01:23:13

Christian apologists actually fallacy is spelled with two l's but we will skip over that which is a claim that the death of God on the cross is no less insulting or diminishing to God's status than when

01:23:26

Muslims dispose of the Quran by burning it uh well um yeah

01:23:32

I'm who they've been talking to I understand

01:23:41

I don't want to uh disrespect the

01:23:49

Muslims that have put this together like I said it was one of the better very well done graphically very well done really communicates to young people today um and you know what you probably have encountered some

01:24:03

Christians that made these arguments um I I get it um the death of God was a voluntary self -giving by that was the intention of father son and spirit from eternity past it was this very center point of history it is the means by which

01:24:33

God has been most glorified not by any stretch of the imagination something that is dishonoring to him he didn't cease to exist you don't believe death is the cessation of existence it is the greatest act of self -giving mercy love grace that the world will ever know so why a

01:25:05

Christian would even think of making the parallel I I don't

01:25:11

I don't even begin to understand I don't even begin to understand but the huge difference between the two concepts is that Muslims don't believe

01:25:17

God is physically present in the Quran and experiences its burning whereas the

01:25:23

Christian doctrine is solely based upon the point that God experienced the crucifixion because without that there would be no sacrifice and if we were to follow this line of thinking then one might conclude that God only needed to send down his book to die instead of man and then

01:25:42

I guess we'd find churches filled with pictures and statues of Qurans on the cross instead of Jesus for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten

01:25:54

Quran all humor aside though I'll see that the whole premise of this argument is false and is only propagated by people who have a shallow understanding of their own faith and theology if you like this video and want to see more so there you go um

01:26:14

I didn't comment too about the end because it wasn't overly um and it didn't really make much sense and it wasn't really a good way to stop and they haven't done much else but someone asked me to review it because I wanted to I want to review it um and it pretty much takes us the end of the hour anyways we want to try to respond to these things

01:26:37

I'm going to keep looking for man I'm almost afraid to say this but if you see interesting meme theology go ahead and send it to me uh that might help me out a little bit um just because you post it to me doesn't mean

01:26:58

I'm necessarily necessarily but if you seem interested you see interesting meme theology which is not memes about me by the way there are plenty of them um but it does seem to be that that is how people are making their points these days and I'm not trying to give in to the dumbing down of logical discourse because we did spend 45 minutes on only four memes um so we obviously are are sort of rebelling against the dumbing down of theology by expanding upon that but if you do see stuff that that you think might be relevant to the program go ahead and and send it via uh twitter and uh or and or facebook on the tube and uh twitter uh rich rich decide for the twitter route uh at that point did you see how many people um actually found the the clothing uh to the technologically damaged dividing line apparently

01:28:05

I have really bad uh accent there well I think well I said it too so I think I might have gotten

01:28:11

I might have gotten in uh you all the weakest link come on uh right toward the end this is probably better than mine