Calvin/Servetus Affair

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James wife.

Responding to Dan Barker on the Calvin/Servetus Affair

Hi, good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line on a Thursday afternoon, it's starting it towards summer here in Phoenix, Arizona and That is inevitable. I suppose I'm glad that nature is regular and We're slowly tilting that direction and it's warming up here in Phoenix.

We continue with our examination of some of the claims of Dan Barker in the last program. I sort of finished up really quickly at the end with about a four minute run through some of the issues that Dan Barker forgets to mention when Discussing the subject of John Calvin, but I knew there was a second section of his of his exchange with Doug Wilson.

I wanted to play first Because I think I find it quite interesting. So let's let's listen to after the opening statements and The rebuttals then there was some cross-examination and here's what Dan Barker had to say later on after That presentation.

We heard last time about John Calvin Doug. Okay, so we heard about John Calvin.

Burning a man to death. Who committed no crime. Who violated no law in that city or in that area. Who broke no scriptural law. Who simply disagreed with John Calvin's authority? He was burned to death.

Along with his book. So I want to ask you was John Calvin a good man.

John Calvin was a good man. Not a perfect man. Not a sinless man, but he was a good man. Yes.

Okay, well you heard it. A man who whose vanity and ego is so offended because someone disagreed with him publicly burns him at the stake. A Truly good man like Michael Servetus who did exactly What John Calvin himself did by dissenting from the church?

Demos has the right to kill anybody he wants.

Well you I'm not arguing for Demos as a god by the way.

You misconstrued my argument, but the people of Europe had the right to kill Servetus if they wanted.

So John Calvin the murderer No was a good man according the people of Europe Lutherans Roman Catholics and it was John Calvin's decision. His vanity was offended.

Okay, let's stop there because there's just so many errors to address that eventually you start stop, you know. Start losing track of all of them. I don't you know, I would assume That Dan Barker is reading some bad material on the subject of John Calvin.

He's probably reading atheist material I know looking at his book godless looking at the section where he attempts to present contradictions. They really do reflect the worst that Prometheus puts out.

Let's put it that way. And if you aren't going to engage in meaningful biblical exegesis in the assertions of your of your contradictions That's not overly surprising that you would not do much in the way of history.

Many people hear about Michael Servetus as the chief argument against John Calvin. I would simply like to suggest to you that if Servetus is an argument for rejecting John Calvin as a good man Then Servetus is an argument for rejecting that almost anyone alive.

In.

1553 was a good man. And what I mean by that is that the governments that existed in Europe in 1553 were absolutely united in Their condemnation of Miguel Servetus. In fact, I don't believe that you would find Servetus arguing for freedom of religion.

In fact, he was arguing in his restitution the book that came out in January of 1553. Which was a direct shot at the Institutio the Institutes of John Calvin. That it was his view that should be adopted.

Yes Calvin in a sense laid the seed that would grow into the concept of freedom of religion. But it was not something that had yet come into any type of maturity at all. In fact, you could say its growth had only just begun with the Anabaptists and the Radical Reformation which at that time was in great disrepute because of what happened at Munster and so when we think about what happened with Servetus Barker tries to present it as if this was something that Calvin did.

What he does not tell you is twofold. Let's first start with his. His Calvin's history with Servetus he describes him as friends. Calvin never described Servetus as his friend and neither would Servetus have described Calvin as his friend.

That's just simply inaccurate. Instead you have two men who were contemporaries born within about a year of each other and yet Both very brilliant. I think Servetus saw in Calvin An Intellect equal to his own.

Servetus was a brilliant man, but he was not a balanced man at all. He was truly all over the place. As far as the things that he studied he's been credited with describing the circulatory system. Though I've never really tracked down exactly where that comes from as to whether that's really accurate or not, but he studied astrology.

He studied a wide variety of things. At various points in his life and in fact just prior to 1553. After an extensive attempted correspondence on his part is very interesting in the middle 1540s. He sent as many as 30 letters to Calvin.

Calvin simply refused to talk to him. I he reminds me a little bit of somebody who's constantly sending me letters and Either who is a little bit on the imbalanced side, but Calvin would not respond to him.

He The man was was not a nice person. I don't know where Barker gets this wonderful truthful kind man Michael Servetus. What really needs to be understood is that early on in shortly after Calvin's conversion.

He was prevailed upon to meet with Michael Servetus. In an attempt as Calvin put it to win him to the Lord already Servetus's heresies were well known even though he had not his books were not nearly as well known as they would be later on but His heresies were well known especially in the doctrine of the Trinity and at that time in Europe if you were a non Trinitarian you were a glowing heretic and That was considered a crime against the state.

That was the case under Rome that was the case under the Magisterial Reformation and Calvin risked his life to meet with Michael Servetus and Servetus never showed. So Calvin risked his life and Servetus didn't show up so immediately if you risked your life to meet with someone on To try to talk to them on theological issues, and they never showed up.

I.

Don't know about you. But I would probably be somewhat hesitant in the future to really put out a whole lot of effort to communicate with this particular individual then. Starting around as I recall 1545 Servetus at this time living under the name of Michael Villanueva because his own name would have had him arrested by the Inquisition.

Who was personal doctor to the archbishop in a city in France. Began corresponding with Calvin and Calvin immediately knew who it was even though it was Michael Villanueva. He knew that this was Servetus and Again Calvin he approached Calvin as people always do we.

We've gotten used to this in our IRC chat channel people will come in and I just have a few questions. Yeah, okay. You have to be careful because sometimes people do just have a few questions. But in the vast majority of instances where someone's coming in which we call them a lamer.

Someone who's actually coming in to just start a fight or try to draw people off or find some some disciples for themselves. Whatever it might be they love to come in and I just I just have some questions.

And of course, what are those questions? What are those questions? They are objections. Disguised as questions and This is how Servetus approached Calvin. Well, Calvin took the time to respond and Servetus's responses would always be nasty.

Calvin even took the time to send him a copy of the Institute's the Christian religion which Servetus sent back with what we might call nasty grams written in the margins and I wanted to give you an example of some of these nasty grams.

Remember this is Eight years prior to him showing up in in Geneva. Here's here's one of the The things that Servetus writes to Calvin during this period of time. I have often told you that that triad of Impossible monstrosities that you admit in God is not proved by any scriptures properly understood or later on.

This shows that your knowledge is ridiculous say nay a magical enchantment and a lying justification and so on so much that even Bolshevik described Servetus as a man known for arrogance and insolence and.

So.

After the the first he also by the way sent to Calvin a manuscript of his upcoming book. That he was working on which again is denial of the doctrine the Trinity and various the sundry other issues along with it and Calvin refused to return it.

He'd in fact after the about the second letter. He sent to him just refused to have anything do them all. He wrote over 30 letters to Calvin and Calvin just said not doing anything not responding this man in any way shape or form and after that Servetus basically started focusing upon End times he was the herald camping of his day.

He actually came up with a date. Folks there's been. Hal Lindsey was a latecomer. Let me assure you Hal Lindsey was latecomer. In fact, let me let me again see if I can get you the specific dates here.

You do to do to do. What was the dates he had come up with. I saw them here just a few moments ago as somewhere between 15. Why can't I find it. I should have marked it, but I didn't want to mark this book up.

This is called dead air, which is not a good thing to do. This is why Rush you know keeps talking at this point in time. It is somewhere between like 1555 and 1585 as I recall was the the time period he came up with that's when It was all supposed to be wrapped up.

So in other words, he was I mean that was right around the corner. So the Jehovah's Witnesses and everybody else that they're they're latecomers people have been doing this for a long long time. So he really wasn't focused on that kind of thing for a while, but then something happened in in 1553.

Remember I forgot something here. Remember that Calvin knew where Michael Villanueva was he knew where Servetus was. He knew the the pseudonym he was using and He could have turned that information over to the Roman Catholics, but he didn't.

He could have betrayed him, but he didn't. Not that he liked the man not that he approved of his heresy or anything along the lines of that. But he didn't. What happened was a man in Geneva was trying to convert a relative of his who was Roman Catholic and He was aware of the fact Calvin had mentioned to some of his his close friends that Villanueva Servetus was actually living in a Roman Catholic country and in fact was in the employ of the archbishop of a major city and So in a letter this man said to his Roman Catholic relative he said Look in Geneva, we are truly concerned about truth and Christian doctrine and We would not put up with someone like that infamous heretic Michael Servetus which who is living in a Roman Catholic country and is in service of an archbishop.

Well his Correspondent immediately turned that over to the authorities who immediately went to Villanueva. And he denied everything. I'm not Michael Servetus, no, that's not me. No no no and so they wrote back to the reformed man in Geneva and said You you've you've made an accusation here against this man.

You need to back it up and so he went to Calvin and As he himself said had to plead with Calvin had to convince Calvin To give over the documentation that would be needed to demonstrate that Michael Villanueva was actually Michael Servetus and since there was a legal proceeding ongoing he felt that that was what he should do, but you'll notice Here's here's the What the man said, but I will tell you one thing I had the greatest difficulty in getting them out of Monsieur Calvin.

Not that he wants such execrable blasphemies to go unreproved but because it seems to him that his duty as One who does not bear the sort of justice is to convict heresies by doctrine rather than by pursuing them with the sword.

But I was so unfortunate with him Remonstrating that I should be accused of levity unless he helped me then the end he agreed to let me have what you see. Well, he sent along portions of Servetus's manuscript and Enough information to demonstrate that Michael Villanueva was the one who'd written these letters and was in fact Michael Servetus.

So that's how he became known to the Inquisition, that's how he was arrested.

Servetus, Geneva, and Calvin’s Role in the Trial

And.

While on trial in his nightshirt, he snuck over the wall while he asked asked the guard to use the restroom and jumped up on top of the of the outhouse in essence and Jumped over the wall and escaped.

But he for some odd reason made a beeline for Geneva. There's a lot of discussion as to why that was and Why that would be. I think he knew that his jig was up and he wanted to take on Calvin and Many speculate that this was one of the most difficult times for Calvin in Geneva.

Why. Well something that mr Barker doesn't seem to understand is that John Calvin was not even a citizen of Geneva at this time. He became a citizen in 1559. This is 1553. His book had come out in January.

That is serratus's and he knew that in the past few elections everything had gone against Calvin in Geneva and So many believe and there's reason to believe this given how serratus Behaved when he got there that he thought that the enemies of Calvin would be able to be convinced to be to side with him against Calvin and In fact, even once he was arrested in Geneva and put in prison.

He demanded that Calvin be put in prison as long as he was prosecuting him. Remember the chief minister since this was a theological issue would be under obligation to be the prosecutor in this case. But it was not the minister or the ministers.

Who did the arresting or the punishing. When people say that Calvin had surveyed us burned they are misrepresenting the historical situation. They try to present as if Calvin was this this autocrat. He just he ruled Geneva.

That is not the case. Anyone who has read anything about the history of this situation knows that's not the case so you have the personal history and then you have the situation at the time of surveyed us as arrest and That is that Calvin is fighting hard to maintain his position.

Servetus immediately makes contact with those in the city who are Calvin's enemies. And he attempts to have Calvin arrested on charges of heresy. Years before a man had accused Calvin of heresy in regards to Arianism and a denial the deity of Christ.

He brought those things back up. He wanted Calvin put on trial and hoped to see him destroyed. In fact, he even filed a motion accusing Calvin of simony. Accusing Calvin of doing what he did to gain money and everybody knew that Calvin was not a man.

With a love for money, but he still made the accusation and filed it in such a way that he wanted to receive Calvin's home and property if He prevailed in his suit against against Calvin. So this this is not a man who is just sitting there, you know.

Sitting idly by going. Oh, I'm just such an innocent person.

He.

To the end not only maintained his Position but he fought to have Calvin accused along these lines as well. And so when Barker tries to tell us that that oh, well Calvin's ego was hurt. It was just a little disagreement.

This is absurd. It is absurd beyond the level of absurdity because you see the Genevans wrote to the other Swiss cantons and all of the Swiss cantons without Exception insisted that Cervetus had to die by burning all of them they wrote to now remember the Inquisition after he escaped burned him an effigy along with a few bales of paper.

Representing his books so we know what they thought about it. So it was very clear what the Roman Catholics thought about Michael Cervetus. All the Swiss cantons said he must die. They wrote to Philip Melancthon.

Philip Melancthon Luther's successor was not like Luther. He was I think last time I described him as somewhat squishy.

And.

Yet Melancthon wrote back and said it is it is necessary that Cervetus be punished that he died. This was the united voice of all the governments of Europe. They try to present it as if as if Calvin was just doing something and everybody's like oh but We can't stop Calvin and as if this is some unusual thing.

If Calvin is to be convicted of something is to be convicted of living in 1553. He did nothing out of the norm whatsoever in any way shape or form. He was not there the burning lighting the fires. In fact the ministers Specifically asked that Cervetus receive a more a quicker and less painful execution and The little council which is the secular council, which is the council that burned Cervetus the little council refused they did not allow even for what the ministers asked to take place and Even up until the night before his execution Calvin went to Cervetus and sought to try to convince him of the errors of his ways and I want to read you some of the things that he said.

The day oh I took I brought the wrong book. I apologize that's not in this one I can't tell you but in a long to make a long story short. He sought this was not a man Gloating over the destruction of this person.

This is not anything like what Dan Barker and others try to present here is a man who? You've got to give Calvin his props. He was consistent the reason that he opposed Cervetus the reason he prosecuted Cervetus is because he truly believed that his viewpoints were a cancer and Now that he was convicted and was about to be executed he sought to see him before that happened repent of his heresies and his errors and Did not receive any Indication from him that he did that in fact it was it was Guillaume Farrell not John Calvin.

Who accompanied him to the execution and so? It's simply a matter of being balanced. It's. It's simply a matter of allowing the historical facts to speak it's so easy to use this kind of argumentation.

Against people of the past I hate to say it, but this is how Dave Hunt acts. Dave Hunt does the exact same thing in regards to the Cervetus incident as well, and it is meant to. It's an obviously a logical argumentation.

Well if Calvin was a mean terrible horrible nasty man, then Calvinism must be unbiblical. Try to follow the logic on that one for a moment and eventually you'll Explode because there is no logic to it but that is the kind of argumentation that you get and with post-modernists in our day and especially with the next generation that unfortunately is Historically ignorant on a level that is difficult even begin to comprehend.

It works real well. People today are more than willing to anachronistically apply our standards today to people who live before and I don't know about you. But I sure hope that people living 50 or 100 150 years from now will not judge me on the basis of an anachronistic historical methodology.

And if you have concerns about things like that, then you would I think understand that as well. But that's what people do and so it's a cheap argument. It's a cheap debating point, you know that in a debate you're the other guy is never gonna have enough time to actually You know fix these things up and give you a context at all.

And so that's how you get away with that kind of thing. And so I want to expand out on that a little bit. I went through it very quickly before. But especially if you know, I we talked to a lot of folks on this program.

You're attempting to bring reform to your church you're attempting to Encourage people to think biblically and they discover this name Calvin and I've not googled it. But something would tell me that probably on the first page if you google John Calvin you're gonna find references to Michael Cervantes and I've mentioned before the very first time I ever heard about John Calvin and Calvinism was in a Watchtower article about Michael Cervantes and so that kind of stuff is is out there and so you need to know and you need to have some backgrounds as.

So you have some understanding of what this was all about. Calvin was not running around. With a lighted torch in his hand, you know lighting people up right and left around Geneva just for the fun of it.

You you can definitely as a Baptist, you know, I like to go through this story. And then I like to play the movie the radicals. Which gives the other side in a sense of what it was like to be persecuted by the magisterial reformers as a Baptist the magisterial reformation which places that power in the hands of the secular authority is dangerous and Many of my forefathers died through that and I would disagree with the magisterial reformation but the fact of the matter is that's all there was in that day and I want to look at anybody like a Dave Hunt who says well, he should have known better.

I want to look him in the eyes and say you really think that in that day when Europe had known nothing for centuries for centuries prior to this of Quote-unquote religious freedom that you not only would have seen all the errors of Rome.

That your your vision is so clear of the Bible without tradition. That you would have gone as far as they did and even farther to a perfectly consistent position. You want to look at me in the eye and tell me you do that and the sad thing is I think Dave Hunt would I really think he would when the man can look at me and said and say I have no traditions.

Then I think he would say well, of course, I just pick up the Bible and read it and that's how it would go. So anyway, I I want to expand out on that a little bit before we go to our our break. I'm I'm not alone in the studio today.

We have a studio audience today. Sitting on the floor behind me is my daughter. Hi summer. How are you? She's eating one drinking one of my FRS energy drinks, but that's that's how things go when you have kids.

You know, I bought him for me, but you know when the little ones little ones, huh say hey I want one of those. But also in the studio with me here. In fact, uh brother Jamin you have a microphone right there in front of you.

Why don't you why don't you slide that one down towards you there? I think rich can turn that on and it's it's on the side. It's you don't want to talk right into it. You want to turn it sideways a little bit.

Oh, he's right there. Okay. All right. Thanks rich. Appreciate that Have and channel a young man. I met in Time ago long time ago has a picture of me and him at Omaha Bible Church. That's where it was, right?

Yeah, and He's looking all you know, he did it to do and I'm sitting there looking away with my eyes rolled up in the back of my head because Before that how long before that had you come into channel?

Well, I think it was about the end of my.

First year in high school, I think so, that'll be 2004. Wow, that's five years ago. Okay. All right.

You can actually get in a little get a little bit closer there so we knew each other from the chat channel and then you and. And Stark and floggy came down to. I was speaking on what was I speaking on justification?

I.

The law thing.

Antinomian is an antinomian ISM. Oh, okay, man. See, it's when you speak as much as I do you start losing track of what it was you were talking about. But that's what we first we first met and since then you have now graduated from from Dort D or DT.

How did you do that given that you're not Dutch?

Did they actually allow that. That's a good question. They do allow that and they do allow public school German Baptist to go there. So really that's that's bizarre.

That is but you were sort of but but you could never really be on the inside circle. Well, I try to have my way in but it didn't work. No. No, you may like tulips, but You didn't have the right last name.

There's no toys about that and now you're looking at continuing on with your education with Pursuing a master's in Christian thought and I I want to mention that a couple I don't know sometime last about two weeks ago.

We had a fellow come in to the chat channel and He asked a question and that's not unusual in our chat channel people like to come in especially find out that I'm there. All of a sudden it's the online Bible answer man and every question I've ever wanted to ask I'm supposed to just stop everything and doing and this fellow said what's the difference between evidentialism and presuppositional ism and I said I said, you know what?

I really don't have time for this. So Slams gonna do that. And of course your Nick is slammed. I'm not gonna tell everybody why that is because it's sort of it's a sort of embarrassing. But anyway.

So.

You evidently wrote some papers on that subject. At some point, yeah because Everyone sat back and was sitting going now. Wait a minute either. He types at a hundred and eighty seven words per minute or is very good with the cut and paste feature on his computer.

Well, that's it the latter. It's the latter. Yeah, but you you help that gentleman out. I think he was probably by the time was over with is like a. Couple paragraphs would have been enough.

Just taking after you James.

This is true. This is very very true. Yes. So anyway, I did appreciate what you had to say there and so I'd like to think. That that you're you're you're here just because you're just so taken with me.

And and that's and that's why and that's why am I supposed to argue. But I don't get the feeling that that's the whole reason why you came all the way down from South Dakota. I Don't know maybe. No, the scary thing is that I tried to warn my daughter about this guy.

But they met in channel and for some reason they've been spending time together. I'm not sure why that is. So hmm. Yes, indeed, so. Anyhow, but so we have our studio audience here today and I went a little bit past my break time.

But so poor summer's gonna have to go to work, but Jamin's gonna stick around and feel free. I'm gonna be playing some Dan Barker here. So maybe you'll have some commentary you'd like to offer there, too.

But we're gonna take our break and be back with a little more Dan Barker. And hey your phone calls to eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. We'll be right back.

Apologetics, Epistemology, and the New Testament’s Reliability

Bible works 8 is here full of innovative and essential tools. Users will have a hundred and ninety plus Bible translations 35 original language text and morphology databases 29 lexical grammatical references and an abundance of additional resources.

Pastors you will appreciate the phrase matching tool which will allow you to find all of the verses containing phrases Similar to your search verse giving you greater depth and keener insight during sermon preparation.

Seminary professors and students will be enriched by the way Bible works 8 shows the most common words in the pericope book or chapter. Plus provides a wider range of formatting options and faster access to copying preferences.

Scholars your research just got easier with the army external resources manager a Handy tool to collect organize and display resource files from your computer as well as the internet. Dr James White says Bible works is the best Bible software available.

I have used Bible works software for years and each new release has brought many new and useful tools to the program. This is the program that runs 24 7 on my office computer and it is the one that's running on my laptop when I engage In debates it is simply the number one research tool for anyone doing serious exegesis of the text.

For over 15 years Bible works has assisted all users in their study of the original languages and That enables you to do one thing focus on the text and that translates to focusing on the truth. Order your copy of Bible works at a omen org and for a limited time You'll receive free shipping and a free mp3 download of the white airmen debate.

The Trinity is a basic teaching of the Christian faith. It defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us. James White's book The Forgotten Trinity is a concise understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters.

It refutes cultic distortions of God as well as showing how a grasp of the significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a Christian and Amid today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit.

The Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the Trinity. Dr. John MacArthur senior pastor of Grace Community Church says James White's lucid presentation will help lay person and pastor alike.

Highly recommend it. You can order the Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at a omen org.

Hello everyone. This is Rich Pierce. In a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man-centered self-help program The need for a no-nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater.

I am convinced that a great many go to church every Sunday yet. They have never been confronted with their sin. Alpha and Omega Ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner making no excuses.

Man is sinful and God is holy. That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior? We are to come before the Holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well. Support Alpha and Omega Ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

Thank you.

It is a historic day here on the divine. I not only did we have a studio audience, but we have Different bumper music that one didn't start out too. Well, we might have to. Everybody's a critic. Yes. Everyone is a critic.

That is that is how it works. There's no no it's ways. Anyhow since we have a phone caller all the way from the United Kingdom It's a good opportunity for me to get to speak to my fellow anyway. Let's go ahead and talk to.

You know, I'm a big fan of your podcast. I'm a big fan of your podcast. Daniel over in England. Hi Daniel. Hi, I can hear you fine. How come you don't have a really good British accent. Well, I was gonna say I'm not going to try to Max you on that.

I'm I'm going to grad school. Yeah, so you're you're just a plain old yank in other words.

So.

Yeah, I have not acquired the accent. Yes, I don't know if I shall.

That's a shame. You got to realize if you're going to graduate school over there when you come back. If you have an English accent people will think you're smarter than you actually are. So you need to pick it up.

I mean look at Christopher Hitchens for crying out loud. Look at the stuff he gets away with and the whole reason he gets away with it is because he's got an English accent. He says stuff. That's just just dumb.

But when you say it with an English accent, then it sounds much more smarter than When we say it and and we've just sound like well anyway. Anyway go ahead with your questions, sir.

Are you on the basis of probabilities and this came up in your commentary last week on the D'Souza and Barker Q &A session is the thing that I've heard you mentioned a number of times on the dividing line as far as living something so biblical about arguing For God's existence or say for the resurrection.

Say on the mirror for ponderance of probabilities as you put it. I was wondering if you'd clarify what exactly It's so biblical about it, and maybe what it's not. I know you've appealed to the Apostolic example, and so, you know, this isn't how the Apostles argued.

Yeah, clarify on that issue and whether you think say all forms of Evidential argumentation that that would kill the probabilities are unbiblical whether say a certain kind that appeals to a certain You know Arminian, you know view of a man and a natural man.

Well, there's a number of things there.

I think that any Argumentation that encourages the rebel sinner in his rebellion and Encourages the that that individual to think that he is in a position to judge God and to judge Whether there's a greater probability or possibility or whatever of God's existence I think that's going to be unbiblical right from the start I see no evidence whatsoever that the Apostles argued in this way now some people would immediately say well The Apostles didn't live in a postmodern world and we have to adapt.

I think that would probably be the primary argumentation that is presented to us. And so part of this Discussion is where do we derive our methodology and there could be many people who would say apostolic example is not.

Where we derive our methodology we have a core of Christian beliefs and as Societies change that core becomes expressed in different ways as long as the core doesn't change. So there'd be some people who would go there.

They would make that kind of argumentation. I would not secondly, I would say that there is a fundamental difference here in in the approach that one makes both philosophically and apologetically and that is that.

And it does go back to a view of both God and man. If you again are allowing a person to stand in judgment over God's Proclamation of his own existence then your entire epistemology is not going to be a biblical epistemology.