Music

Well greetings and welcome to a dividing line short program. You may wonder what in the world is a dividing line short program. Well,

we've done a couple times before, but it's where I'm just trying to get to one particular topic. Sometimes I think we did one that was short like five minutes.

This will not be five minutes, but I don't think I can go a whole hour. It's where we just throw it out there and we provide some extra information to folks

and hopefully edify you in the process. We are on the road and yesterday I did a program where I went into the book of Jude and we looked at Jude versus four and five.

And we are doing a lot of responses on the subject of unitarianism. There's a lot of reasons for that. I've explained some of those reasons. This is relevant to all the groups that we deal with.

Rich has told me that there have been some Muslims jumping in defending Dale Tuggy, which tells you all you need to know right there really in many ways.

But the subjects that we're dealing with and the subjects we will be dealing with in the future are relevant, for example, to our deep concerns about the movement to do apologetics within a quote-unquote great tradition.

And how to identify that and issues along those lines. So the role of philosophy, Dale Tuggy is a philosopher and a political philosopher. That results in bad theology, really, really bad theology.

It's a super example of how at its best philosophy has to be a very subservient handmaiden, a tooth theology. And if you do theology, the way you do philosophy in it, you can hear if you listen to Tuggy and Dr. Craig talking in the first half of their exchange less than a year ago, I think, or about a year ago.

The models and the, well, I don't affirm this, so I don't affirm that. And there's no conclusion to be drawn. You're not, when you're dealing with philosophy, you're dealing with the principles of men's thought.

And if that is not ordered and under the subservience to divine revelation and how God has made his world, philosophy can come up with any theory on the planet and do anything at once. And as if you end up as well. I don't necessarily affirm this, but I'd be open to that, and you end up with no authoritative proclamation whatsoever, no divine revelation, no way of having sure knowledge of anything.

So, what I want to do is Dr. Tuggy responded briefly to the program. And I found it interesting, somewhat dismissive. He's made a couple of other comments that I want to quickly get to in this as well.

He hoped I'd feel better soon. Thank you. I am feeling better today. He said, well, let's go ahead and I had, well, I'll just read it to you because I already have his article up to show you on the screen, so it'd be easier to do it this way.

It says, I listened and you said some relevant things, but did not address the arguments for Lord in my post, nor did you explain what the CBGM is a game changer on this if it is.

At that end of the day, the late person mostly sees any 27 versus any 28 regarding June 5.

Okay, so let's address, first of all, nor did you explain what the CBGM is a game changer on this if it is. I did, and I'll be perfectly honest with you.

I don't think Dr. Tuggy has any serious knowledge whatsoever of, I don't get the feeling that he reads any of the biblical languages, and I don't get the feeling he has any serious knowledge with textual critical studies at all.

And so, as a result, maybe didn't understand what I was saying is that the ECM, the addition, the addition critical, critical mayor, which the manual New Testament, the Nessialin text, the UBS text, are the same text, different punctuation, but the same text, being produced by the same people, and they are now derivative from the ECM.

The ECM will determine the text of the Nessialin text and of the UBS text, and so until Jude was done in the ECM, every textual commentary that came before that, doesn't have access to that information, doesn't have access to the coherence.

So, the manuscripts that read Jesus, and the manuscripts that he could ask, are Jude 5. And so, any discussion of that textual variant, or any textual variant in the New Testament once the ECM is published, will have to take into consideration at minimum the weight of the CBGM analysis.

And if you're going to argue against it, for example, the NESV 2020 did not adopt that reading. So, you have to go read that their analysis is that, but they have to analyze that and say, this is why we didn't do that.

...