Can You Trust the Bible with Bodie Hodge

I'll have to edit that out. I forgot that it wasn't auditing, didn't start recording the video. 520, okay. So for folks who don't know Bodhi much about you, because you're kind of, your name is like on a lot of books there at Answers in Genesis.

I know when I go to the bookstore and just go through, it's like, I think your name's on all of them, actually. It could be. It's in you and Ken Ham, I don't know. Or you and Ken Ham, I don't know, most of them.

But just give folks a little bit of a background of who you are, what you do there at Answers in Genesis, and then we'll get into some of the works that you've done.

Yeah, absolutely. You know, I've got a bachelor's and a master's degree in mechanical engineering, and I actually specialize in material science. But I've always had this love for history and theology.

And there is a connection between all that because theology, for example, is the queen of the sciences. It's kind of the foundation to look at any of these sciences so I get to see that connection. But I used to teach at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, I used to teach engineering.

I also used to work at Caterpillar as a test engineer, large construction equipment, things like that. And then I went into the ministry of Answers in Genesis. I've absolutely loved it. So I've gotten a chance to use the history, the theology, and the science all here together.

And I'm a speaker, a writer, and a researcher. The Lord has taken me to four different continents over the years. I've got to see sites you never dreamt to be able to see. I've floated down the Grand Canyon.

I've seen the Northern Lights. I've swam in the Great Barrier Reef. And all this is really just the Lord's doing the work and he's just dragging me along the way. But I have been involved in a lot of books, somewhere between 25 and 30 books.

I've got my name on it somewhere or another, whether I'm a contributing author, whether I'm a general editor or the sole author of the book. I've also been involved in a lot of web articles, magazine articles, technical journal articles, you name it.

I've kind of been all over the place. But when it comes down to it, all that stuff doesn't matter. I'm a sinner saved by grace, and that's the one that matters. So, amen.

Answers in Genesis as a Bible-Upholding Ministry

Yeah, so now you and I met, and we're out at Anselm Genesis, and you could probably laugh and bust on me a bit. Was I not like a kid in a candy store when we got up to the Ark Encounter and you were showing me the big...

So folks, I think I've mentioned this on a previous episode, they got a 70 foot by 22 foot TV that from the very... I mean, how big is that auditorium?

Because from the very back... Yeah, you can hold somewhere in the neighborhood of 22, 2300 people in there easily. It's just gigantic.

So the stage is huge itself. Yeah, it was very... I mean, because it's longer than a TV, so it's way over 70 foot. But how deep is that? I mean, because from the very back, I'm saying it like 100, 200 feet at least.

Oh my, I can't even remember the actual dimensions on it, but there's so much space up there. We can play a small game of basketball. No problem up on the stage.

That TV was so... I mean, it was like high def from a huge distance back. And I was like, so excited to like go up there. And you get up there, you showed me like, it's all just a bunch of LEDs.

Yeah, there are a whole bunch of smaller TVs put together to make a gigantic screen. The whole back of the stage is the screen. And there's so much we can do with it.

It really is amazing. It was... So I was sitting there like a little kid going like, oh, this is so neat.

Yeah, most people are like, wow, look at the size of the arc. He's like, look at the size of the screen.

Yeah, I mean, most people probably get up on the stage and look out at the audience to see how many people it holds. I'm like, I was... Okay, I'm nerdy. Most people would be looking at the audience. I'm looking at a TV going, getting excited about that.

But we met there and we started talking and found a whole lot of topics. You and I have written on some of the same topics, things like world religions, things like reliability of scripture. You've written on all things of dinosaurs, Tower of Babel, contradictions in the Bible.

I'm trying to think of some of the others. Anything from Genesis 1 to 11. I've been in and out of that up and down. Old books on the fall of Satan, a flood of evidence and you name it. Kids books, teens books, answers books.

So let's zoom in on one series of books you've done, which is, you've done two series that are close to my heart in a sense of one being on the world religions, because we've written on the same thing.

A second one that you've spent a good amount of time writing on, a series called How Do We Know the Bible is True? Basically, how to trust the Bible. Sort of with that, you've done some things on contradictions in the Bible.

But let's delve into this question because of the fact that as someone who does a lot of evangelism, I know this is the number one issue when you evangelize that people are going to raise. I am not a prophet, not the son of a prophet, but whenever I train people and teach people to do evangelism, I will tell them that you will be asked in one way or another, can you trust the Bible?

This question comes up over and over and over again. And a lot of people don't know that there's answers. They don't know how to defend it. So let's dig into that. First off, you have several volumes with this.

What are each of the volumes trying to cover?

Well, just as a big picture, we're trying to hit a lot of the apologetic subjects, what we call general apologetics. Anything from how do we know the Bible is true? How do you interpret the scripture?

What about the resurrection? What about miracles? Is the Old Testament trustworthy and New Testament trustworthy? These are the types of things that we're dealing with in this How Do We Know the Bible is True series.

We have two volumes in it, volume one and volume two. And they're just amazing books. I've actually got them sitting here. Let me hold them up so people can see what they kind of look like. And hopefully people can kind of see that.

I know sometimes things flip backwards and so forth, but it gives you an idea.

I'll put links in the show notes for folks as well.

But these are wonderful books. They're multi-author. We actually had a number of different people who are experts in those areas write those particular chapters. And me as a general editor, I got a chance to go through all of them.

Same with Ken Ham. And then at the same time, we're authors on certain ones as well. So it was really nice to be able to dive into this and work with some really good people to get some pretty good subject material out there.

Why the Bible Must Be True Before We Can Ask Questions

So why do you think, I mean, I gave the reason why I think this is so important. Why do you think this subject is so important for Christians today? Well, there's a couple of things.

First, I totally agree with you. When you're out there witnessing and talking to people, this is one of the issues that come up. How do you know the Bible is true? Because that actually is how you view God.

That's how you're going to view the nature of who Christ is. It all depends on their view of scripture, of course. Another aspect is the issue of authority. We're in a culture where people largely rejected the Bible as the authority.

And as a result of that, by default, man's ideas are then elevated to supersede God and his word. And so by default, that's the religion of humanism. So this subject actually relates to the religion subject here because all other religions, one way or another, are humanistic because they've elevated man's ideas to supersede God's to take people away from God and his word, whether it's Islam, Hinduism, atheism, you name it, all these different religions.

But particularly in the Western world, the secular forms of humanism are what are dominating. And in that mindset, the Bible's automatically thrown out. They've already tossed it out. So when we're witnessing to people, of course, yeah, we have to deal with the subject of how do we know the Bible is true?

But also a lot of those other general apologetics questions, they're all interrelated right there. That's why it's so important because it's the face-to-face evangelism. You need to know how to answer these questions.

So, I mean, the main question of the book, how do we know the Bible is true? Let's dig into that.

Yeah, well, I love that subject. In fact, that's a pretty deep subject. Sometimes people don't realize how deep it really is. I love talking to, say, atheists on this or even people who are Hindu just because I understand their worldviews.

I understand their religion. So when they come out and they ask the question, how do we know the Bible is true? They've automatically assumed a few things. They've assumed truth exists. They assume knowledge exists.

And they assume that we're made in such a way that we can actually understand truth and knowledge. So just to ask the question, I want people to realize the Bible has to be true. Now, why do I compare that to, say, an atheistic worldview?

An atheist, they are by definition materialistic. They're not out there saying maybe there's no God. They're saying there is no God. They're being absolute with that. And their religion is actually built on what's called materialism.

The only things that exist are the material universe, matter, energy, things like that. So they have no spiritual realm. They have no God in their worldview. But when you think about that and take that religion just a little bit further, if everything is material, well, then all of a sudden truth can't exist.

Knowledge can't exist. Logic can't exist. Because in their own worldview, those things are not material. So in their own worldview, they can't even ask the question. So if atheism is true, they can't ask the question.

They can't get an answer. A lot of times an atheist doesn't realize that. So what they have to do just to ask the question, well, how do you know the Bible is true? They have to give up their religion, stand on the Bible's truthfulness, because truth comes out of a biblical worldview.

We're made in the image of a truthful God. We can understand knowledge. God is all-knowing. We're finite in our knowledge. But the thing is they have to stand on the Bible just to ask the question, which is a great way to refute their religion on it.

Same sort of thing happens with Hinduism. In Hinduism, all is one. Everything is spirit. The material doesn't exist. This is the doctrine of Maya. So all the physical stuff doesn't really exist. And I know that might scare people's brains, but New Age, Taoism, all these are just rehashes of these Eastern religions.

And in those religions, if all is one, well, that means that truth and falsity are one and the same. And having no knowledge are one and the same. So you can't even ask the question in a religion that's an Eastern religion.

So they actually start to undercut themselves. Now, to bring that back then, how do we know the Bible's true? Well, the Bible has to be true. God has to be the truth in order to even ask the question.

And a lot of times we don't think of it that way. Now, we have a lot of confirmations that the Bible's true, and we can see that in a lot of different areas. But I like to hit the philosophical part first, just to get people's brains going right off the bat here.

And for those who are not familiar with certain terminology, what you're actually defining is a type of apologetics called presuppositional apologetics.

Yeah, I really am.

Presuppositional Apologetics and the Authority of Scripture

Yeah, and this is something I think a lot of people are confused with with Answers in Genesis. I've noticed this over the years. And most people think that Answers in Genesis is an evidential apologetic organization.

But listen to the arguments made. I remember the debate that Ken Ham had with Bill Nye. And it's like that, what was he doing? Making a presuppositional argument. Yeah. I think that a lot of people are confused with Answers in Genesis in that way.

I had, years ago, we had Chinese mission people, students at universities that were going to be Chinese missionaries in China. What they were doing in that is they were using, it was an exchange student program.

So they would go there with the purpose of being exchange students for a summer to do this leadership program with Chinese students. They lived with the students. So it was like this future leaders, they want to get to learn Americanism.

So they would talk about what it's like in America. But what these guys would do is all talk about things that led them to sharing the gospel. They talk about Christmas and Resurrection Sunday, things like that.

Well, one of the students, he was a physicist, actually did volunteer work out at CERN, if you're folks who are familiar with CERN. And he was very much against Answers in Genesis. And his argument was, because he does science and he was all into believing the science of things.

But I discovered he really didn't know much about Answers in Genesis. And I remember asking him, I said, so what's the purpose do you think of Answers in Genesis? And he goes, well, to prove that creation is right and that science is wrong.

And I said, no. So you missed the main point of it. The point of Answers in Genesis, as Ken Ham always says, is to give Christians trust that the Bible is accurate. It's not so much for the unbelieving world.

And that's what people think. It's not a ministry as much for the unbelieving world, but for the believing world. And so, go ahead, explain about that more.

Yeah, there is those misconceptions about Answers in Genesis. We're a Bible-upholding ministry. We often want to go out and preach biblical authority. That's what we're on about. As a corollary, you get a relatively young age of the earth out of that.

And the scientific aspects of creation. But yeah, first and foremost, we want people to walk out of here going, wow, the Bible's true. And because the Bible's true, the message of the gospel is also true.

And guess what? Things start lining up. But when it comes to presuppositional apologetics, sometimes we throw that name out there and people are like, well, what is that? Sometimes they haven't heard of it.

So sometimes I like to explain it before I talk much about the name. But basically, we start with God as the absolute presupposition. And by extension, of course, then His Word comes with the authority of God Himself.

And there is no greater authority than God and His Word. You know, I like to think of Hebrews 6, 13, when the Lord swore to Abraham, He swore by Himself because there is nothing greater. There is no greater authority than God in any matter.

And of course, His Word comes with that authority of He Himself. So that's what we're standing on. We're standing on the authority of God and His Word before we look at anything. Now, you know, there's evidential apologetics and classical apologetics, a lot of different methods people thrown out of there.

Those are methods that more came from the Greeks where you start with logic and you try to look at things from a, you know, you try to look at evidence from a logical perspective and you try to build on that.

And if you get to a certain point, then, oh, well, maybe the Bible is true or maybe God does exist. But those are all probabilistic arguments. We flip that around. A lot of times, you know, people who are familiar with presuppositional apologetics, I go back to Cornelius Van Til or Greg Bonson.

Greg Bonson was famous for the great debate where he debated an atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, and just left the guy speechless on the stage. And, you know, he pulled the rug out from under him, you know, because this atheist, he couldn't account for logic in his own worldview, you know, which is pretty powerful.

So let me clarify a couple of misconceptions here, though. You know, with presuppositional apologetics, we do use evidence. You know, in an evidential perspective, they do have presuppositions. I think a lot of people, they just don't understand the methodologies properly.

You know, as somebody back in my youth, I actually used to be a diehard evidential and classical apologist. And then once I understood presuppositional apologetics, I'm like, oh, wow, okay, this solves everything.

Let's flip it and let's let God be the absolute authority from the very first verse. And it really is a powerful apologetic when we do that.

Yeah, yeah, it's getting feedback from somewhere. Okay, that's not me. Okay. So we see, this is what we end up seeing is the fact that it's your starting point. Right. And if we have the right starting point, which is what Answers in Genesis has been about, right, the starting point is not the world has got the right answer when it comes to science.

It's that the Bible has the right answer. Right.

To start with for everything. And yeah, isn't the catchphrase defending the authority of scripture from the very first verse? Yeah, the very first verse is in the beginning. God, then that's where you begin.

That's where scripture begins. That's where we begin. And that's where our apologetics must begin.

That's right. And all this different scientific aspects or the different arguments that we make, whether it's general apologetics and so forth, those are nothing but a confirmation of what we expect to find in scripture.

And that's why I like to use that terminology. When we look at chemistry or biology or physics, these are a great confirmation of scripture. The secular world, because they're not standing on the authority of God's word, sometimes they can do some good science.

Sometimes their conclusions and things can go way off the mark. And sometimes they don't understand why. So the way we do it, starting with the Bible, looking at science, things actually make a lot of sense.

Let's look at the disciplines. Yeah. Yeah, go ahead. All those disciplines, archaeology, science, whatever it is, logic, reason, those disciplines only make sense.

In the theistic worldview. That's right. Just look at biology. One of the few laws in biology is the law of biogenesis. It states that life comes from life, not non-life. Well, that destroys an evolutionary worldview right there because they believe in abiogenesis, that life had to come from matter.

Well, that actually goes against the law of biogenesis. Well, life comes from life. That's what we expect in a biblical worldview. Even the very first life here on earth ultimately came from God, who is the ultimate life.

So even that law of biogenesis is a great confirmation of what we read in scripture. Second law of thermodynamics. Hopefully, I'm not scaring everybody. You probably have a lot of theological people out here.

Get a science guy on here. But the second law of thermodynamics teaches that things in a closed system go from an ordered state to a disordered state. Well, look at the universe as a whole. Where did the order come from in the first place?

The only way that could possibly occur is by God's hand. In the secular world, they want to say, well, it popped into existence from nothing. There was no time, no nothing. It popped into existence. It was almost infinitely dense and almost infinitely hot.

And then it's been degrading ever since then. That's all just conjecture. That's just arbitrary storytelling. When you look at it, according to their view, if you look closely, you cannot get the order in the universe.

There's just no sense within their own worldview. So that's a great confirmation of the Bible. But see, when we look at these different laws over and over again, when you have a proper understanding of it, they're a great confirmation of scripture.

Yeah. And I think the other thing that you end up seeing is that if you don't start with the Bible, and I know I've heard Ken Ham say this, not exactly this way, but if you don't start with the Bible, you start with evidence.

Someone else is going to have different evidence. The Bible's the answer. And that's what makes it so important to say, can we trust it? Because if we can't trust the Bible, and yet we're saying that's the standard, what does that end up doing with everything that we're going to hold to and believe?

Yeah. Yeah, the Bible's got to be that standard. Just when I was involved in that World Religions and Cults book series, it's interesting. I would see this in every other religion. They want to look at something, but they want to start with their own ideas to look at it.

Whether it's humanism, whether it's Hinduism, they're appealing to people. In an atheistic worldview or humanistic worldview, they're appealing to people like Charles Lyell or Charles Darwin and their viewpoints on different things.

You look at Hinduism, they're appealing to ancient sages. You look at different cults, they're appealing to a particular person. Even different religions like Buddhism and Confucianism, you're appealing to a particular person.

And in every case, they're taking people away from God and his word. And guess what? All those religions run into massive numbers of problems. It all comes down to authority. Either God is the ultimate authority or man is the ultimate authority.

And so that's where it comes down to. Now, that actually relates to a fallacy. I love logic. I've written a lot on logic as well. And there's a fallacy in logic called a faulty appeal to authority. Let me kind of explain that.

Let's say you got some sort of a medical problem. You can go to a doctor who is an expert on that particular medical problem. They've spent 20 years researching it. They got their degree specializing in that.

Or you can go to a kindergartner and say, what's my assessment? You know, the kindergartner, hey, go have some M &Ms and you'll be all right tomorrow. You see, that would be a faulty appeal to authority because the kindergartner has no authority next to that doctor.

When it comes to every other subject, the greatest authority in every single matter is God. And so when we reject God and go with some sort of man's ideas, you've already committed the fallacy of faulty appeal to authority right off the bat.

As soon as someone wants to object, so I don't believe the Bible or I don't trust Genesis, they committed the faulty appeal to authority fallacy right from the start.

Trusting Scripture in Textual Criticism and Translation

Yeah, well, most people don't understand logic and fallacies to start, but yeah. So let's dig into the question. I mean, can we trust the Bible? The argument that we'll get, and we can go through some of the arguments that people will give, the Bible has been edited over hundreds of years ago.

It's an old book. We don't have original copies. People changed it. How do you know you can trust it if people have been changing it over time? Yeah, that's actually considered.

A prejudicial conjecture because when people actually study that subject, that's not really what's happening. People aren't just going through, they're making changes, that sort of thing. And I love the fact that we have massive number of ancient copies of the scriptures.

If you just look at the New Testament alone, we have over 24 ,000 copies and fragments, over 5 ,000 just in Greek. So it's not difficult to say, okay, let's take a look at this and figure out what is the text actual saying?

And I know you've done some writing on this as well. This is called textual criticism. And textual criticism is not an attack on scripture. It's trying to actually look, what is the actual verses saying?

Sometimes words are spelt different over time. Sometimes the grammar is flipped around. But you can look at these different ancient texts and determine what it is easily. And a good comparison to that, some of the other writings of the ancient world, we don't have very many copies of their stuff.

Whether it's Plato, Plato, I used to read Plato and nobody ever questioned that Plato wrote Plato. And we only have a handful of copies of what he's done. And many of them are separated significantly from when Plato actually lived.

Yet the New Testament is nothing like that. But when it comes to the Old Testament, we have a number of different texts that have Old Testament texts. We have some early translations, the Latin Vulgate.

We have the Septuagint. So we have a number of things like that. But I mean, Jesus affirmed the Old Testament. So it's not like we have to go back to the time of David to affirm it. So when we look at those kinds of subjects, yeah, the text can be trusted.

That's not a problem. But most people, they just don't understand it. And they want to throw out those stories. Oh, some monk in the Dark Ages probably re-edited it or changed it. But the texts we find all over the Middle East, North Africa, they all agree with each other.

So that's not a problem. In fact, I read an apologist once that said, if you take all the variant readings in the New Testament and put it on an eight and a half by 11 sheet of paper, you could fit it on both sides.

And yet none of those have anything to do with any significant theological differences or anything like that.

So it's not much at all. Yeah. When we get to... I'm just gonna... I don't know if that's coming from Jim. You just... I'm just sitting here being quiet, man. Yeah, no, I was hearing something. Okay. Every time you talk, people don't like to listen to it.

It just starts getting your feedback. Yeah, I'm not hearing anything on my end, so... Okay. We'll have to see if it comes through. I'll just have some editing to do. But... Now I think of what the question was.

Yeah, trustworthiness of the Bible and textual criticism. We kind of dove into there just a little bit. So...

I was just gonna ask you a question on something you had said. Hey, when that happens. It's all Jim's fault. I'll blame Jim. Yeah, I'll take it. It's the new guy.

All right, well... You know... Talking about textual variance. Yeah, that's it. And the number of textual variance. Correct. That was it. When people say that Scripture has been changed over time, nobody can ever point to that.

In order to make that claim, they have to be able to show what it was and then what it has become. And they can't just assume that they know what it was when there's no manuscript that would reflect what they say that it was.

Yeah, we deal a lot with that with regards to Islam. You know, they want to call these conflicts when there's a variant. But, you know, in their same Quran, I mean, you see the same sort of variance. I know they destroyed a lot of early ones, you know, back in the early days, you know, because they had some of those variants.

But, you know, there's those types of issues. But just because you read a variant, doesn't mean it's a conflict. And so we have to be very careful of those types of claims that people make too. Yeah, when they make this, when they say the word conflict, are they talking about a contradiction?

Are they saying that that's a contradiction? Yeah, I think that's what they're trying to imply. When they see a variant, you know, like, oh, well, this word is spelt a little bit different. That's, it's not a conflict at all.

It's not a contradiction by any means. It's, you know, there's nothing wrong.

With that sort of thing. And that's actually an interesting subject with Islam, because most of them, it's amazing with Islam, you were talking logic. I tell this when I teach on evangelizing to different groups like Muslims, you will watch them throw logic right out the window.

They will understand that in their history, their own history, you know, the third Khalif, Uthman, had, because they had the Quran supposedly memorized, you know, verbally, they needed to write it down as their soldiers were being destroyed.

And it was like, well, okay, what we need to do is write this down. And so he had the soldiers, and there weren't that many of them that wrote it down. But he put, he gathered them all as they wrote them down.

And his own decree said, we have to burn the abhorrent texts. That right there means they had variances, right? They had different ones. In fact, some of them he calls abhorrent, which means these are not like little contradictions.

And so I'd like to bring that up. And one of the things, there's a guy in the UK, what he actually did was take all the Qurans in Arabic, different regions, and shows that there's variances today in the Quran.

But when you start that way, you can control the text and say, okay, we only have one, but we know from their own history that there's those. And if they're abhorrent, it must've affected, I'm assuming calling it abhorrent affected doctrine.

And that's why he would want to burn them. But you look at the New Testament or you look at the Bible and you realize that when you look at these and say, okay, which ones are meaningful changes? So you make spelling mistakes.

That's not meaningful. We can get back to the original. So we look at whether it's meaningful and viable, whether we can get back to the original. And so spelling mistakes, punctuation, which there was no punctuation in the original, that's 75 of them.

There's only 1 in the category where it's a meaningful change and we can't get back to the original. Those are the ones like you were saying, you can put on two pieces of paper and it doesn't affect a single doctrine.

We wouldn't call any of it abhorrent. I mean, it's things like, was Jesus a carpenter or the son of a carpenter? Well, the meaning does change there. We can't get back to the original, but big deal. Does that affect any doctrine?

Right. And a lot of times, if your dad's a carpenter, you're a carpenter too. So they could both be true. Right. So it doesn't really affect it one way or another. I know when dealing with a lot of these different world religions, Islam is probably one of the biggest ones people want to throw up.

They've got an equal and opposite book. And say, why the Bible next compared to the Quran? Or sometimes people want to say that about Jehovah's Witnesses. Well, they got their scriptures or Mormons, they got their scriptures.

The problem with people trying to bring those up is Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Muslims, they all generally agree that the Bible is true. And that surprises a lot of people. In the Quran, a number of times, it says that the Bible is true.

I've got a whole list of the verses that say it. I repeatedly, it affirms that the Bible is true, but then it goes about to contradict the Bible. All of a sudden, that actually puts their religion into a problem when they say that the Bible is true, but then they deviate from it.

In the Quran, it says that no one can change the word of God, which means the Bible shouldn't have been able to change. And yet here they are arguing that the Bible's verses have changed. Yet at the same time in the Quran, it says that it's verses have changed.

Just to give you an idea, that's 6 Surah, that's chapter 6, 34 and chapter 10, 34 in comparison to Surah 2, 106, Surah 15, 90 through 91 and 16, 101. That's just, I don't want to throw all these numbers out there, I just want to have a reference.

So people realize that we're not, I'm not just throwing some of this out, I pulled it up. But other little things, the Quran claims that the triune Christian God is actually three different gods, the father, mother, and the son.

And that, I mean, no Christian holds to anything like that. It's father, son, and Holy Spirit. But they say that two different times in Surah 5, 73 through 75 and in 116. So, you know, we see that a number of different times.

And these things kind of surprise people because they want to say these are equal and opposite, but they're really not. They're affirming that the Bible's true, but then they're the ones that are making the contradiction and the deviations.

Yeah, I remember I was debating Joshua Evans and I brought up that exact issue that you mentioned. And when I brought up the Trinity and said the father, the mother, and the son, there were a lot of heads going like this until Joshua Evans, who grew up in a Christian home, knew what the Trinity actually is.

And he's like, no, no, no, no, no. We don't believe that. And all these heads went from up and down to no. It was amazing how they just followed the lead. And I always wished that I had the video like on them.

Because most of those in the audience didn't know the Bible. And this is the thing that I end up finding with Muslims is I will ask, I was in New York City and a guy that you may know of, but Anthony Silvestro, who I do ministry with, we were in New York and he saw this family of Muslims and he goes, hey, yeah, my friend over there, he'll, Andrew, raise your hand.

He'll talk to you. And so this family came over. He just didn't want to deal with addressing Islam as he was doing open air evangelism. So this whole family comes over and they're telling me this guy, he is a professor at a university, teaches PhD students.

So he's not an unintelligent man. I watched him throw logic out the window over and over. And he goes, I understand Christianity. Well, you believe in three gods. And I said, no, we don't. No. And so literally we got 25 evangelists out there and I'm grabbing one after another, just asking him to find the Trinity, to find the Trinity.

After like six or seven people, he goes, okay, I get it. Right. And so this was the thing I ended up leaving him with was, here's the thing. Have I misrepresented your religion at all? And he goes, no.

I said, but over and over again, you've misrepresented ours. The definition of the Trinity. These aren't small things. Definition of the Trinity. Who is the Trinity? And then some Christians may have heard you say that and go, what?