A Special ‘Best Of' Broadcast

You are listening to a previously recorded broadcast was ready Christmastime Newsweek came out with a major cover story on the Bible saying it is so misrepresented. It is a sin generated a firestorm of criticism. Newsweek allowed me to write a major rebuttal, and now we have with us and want to fire the journalist who wrote that very article stage for the line of fire with your host activist, author, international speaker and theologian Dr. Michael Brown your voice of moral cultural and spiritual revolution Michael Brown is the director of the coalition of conscience and president of fire school of ministry get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH. That's 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown. We are going to have a terrific and broadcast today on the line of fire.

866-34-TRUTH 866-34-TRUTH 87884 many of you read the Newsweek cover story that came out two days before Christmas the Bible so misrepresented its ascent by veteran journalist Kurt Eichenbaum.

I responded immediately.

I took it as as a hit piece against the Bible immediately wrote about it. Newsweek bashes the Bible there was an outpouring of criticism evangelical scholars evangelical leaders writing against it. I begin to interact with Newsweek and said, would you be willing to post a response rebuttal. They said we'd be delighted to. We wanted to stir dialogue and then I interacted personally with current with the journalist who wrote the article, we've had two extensive conversations were can have an honest conversation on the air today and will find out who current article really is why he wrote what he wrote where we have differences where we have agreement and how reliable is the Bible. After all, but but before I bring Mr. Eichenbaum onto the broadcast with us.

I want you to hear just because of the man on the street or the educated reader. Their responses to the Newsweek article I want to find out if if Kurt surprised by these responses of these are some responses on Twitter. It was the most biased piece of biblical criticism I've ever read another one there many excellent responses to Newsweek's hit piece on Christianity.

Michael Brown's would be the best so far. Semitic language expert Dr. Michael Brown exposes the ignorance of current IQ all throughout the Newsweek hit piece telling that Newsweek stands by article so erroneous it's nearly bad satire. They clearly value opinion over fact, Dr. Michael Brown gave a great response to that misleading Newsweek article by Kurt Eichenbaum. Dr. Brown's response to the Newsweek rant so they call it a rent. Here's here's another one they called an anti-bigoted Christian screed another one calls it a screed.

Another cause of the misleading cover story.

I stepped up with a scholarly response to Newsweek's feeble attempt to discredit the Bible. Some said it seems like Newsweek published my article was damage control Todd Starnes Fox news journalist said it was a failed he thought was a failed attempt at satire before realizing it was a serious piece of Prof. Michael Kruger expert in early Christianity said this, the article goes so far beyond the standard polemics is so egregiously mistaken about the Bible so many places that the magazine should seriously consider a public apology to Christians everywhere that accused of Michael Kruger's article choose to her like a mold of having a jaw-dropping ignorance of the facts about the Bible and Prof. Daniel Wallace recognizes one of the world's leading authorities on New Testament Greek manuscripts criticized her like a ball for his quote numerous factual errors and misleading statements as lack of concern for any semblance of objectivity is apparent disdain for lack of interaction with genuine evangelical scholarship and consumer confidence about more diffuse expect viewpoints.

Dr. James White in his dividing line radio broadcast. When, after the article with very sharp criticism to the article, deserve all this criticism is Newsweek surprised by the criticism that is come their way and is trackable anti-Bible anti-God anti-Christian.

You are about to find out we meet her like a wall. Speak with him face-to-face, so to say right here on the line of fire. If you have a specific question about his article about my response like: 8663 for truth little later in the broadcast will be taking some calls. You are listening to a previously recorded broadcast file line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown get into the minor fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown McCaskill and asked her to escape your Brown.org later today and just click on latest broadcast you be able to listen to two full hours of interaction with Kurt Eichenbaum. He is the senior journalist with Newsweek. He's written before for Vanity Fair and other publications and is the author, most recently in terms of a major article major research article extra lot of criticism and controversy as we said the Bible so misrepresented its ascent, which came out as the Newsweek cover story right around Christmas time. Kurt, without further ado, welcome to the line of fire.

A great to have you on the air. Kurt were you surprised by the level of vitriol that came your way. After writing the article by the ferocity of the response to that surprise you now actually very I would started giving people warning the story was coming because every now and then I would tweet out. I'm about to publish my most controversial article ever and I got a lot of controversial article I will I will fully aware of what the reactor I will why did you write the article what what motivated you is is it a anti-God anti-Bible anti-Jesus stands what motivated you to write that I'm not at all.

I remember people and about a year. People will pay someone quoting the Bible that will affect the Bible something bad had an brewing and me literally 30 years of me my money can gave young people.

In fact my head like a dad like that of planning and what what people do not understand is that I'm writing about a pillar height of I'm writing about people who proclaim that they have read all the Bible that they live by every word of the Bible who then turn around and start condemning other people who I portrayed him in the first couple of paragraphs clearly and I would call them angry and there they are a group of people who I think unfortunately are the why public perspective of the evangelical movement. I think they actually betray that will plant them. I think that there there are are simply wall. Biblically and so you want to say that of a group of people. The people who politicize the entity that is who I might do a criticism of God or credit for the of the Bible or of Christianity are in my view started laughing.

The very problem because there they are saying. Eventually you I am the Bible I believe are the Bible. What I give Christianity and therefore to point out my shortcut is to attack simply on license let's let's unpack this in and I want I want to do my best to help my listeners and in the readers of your article understand who you are and why you wrote it as as we fleshed out in our lengthy phone conversations as I got very like yeah a lot a lot about you and your back. It started I was I was in the car driving, we were talking then ended up doing a grocery's stop looking things up as as I listened to so restore them walked in the house.

My wife began to talk to when I pointed the mystery conversation went on for one special that that first but I out I want. In short, for listeners to know who you are and and why you wrote what you wrote and then then will impact differences that we do have an and very specific questions will ask him and were free to agree were free to disagree. The second change anything in terms of our interaction, but do you understand that there there there was a perception of painting with a certain broad brush white when you say, for example, they are God's frauds cafeteria Christians who pick and choose which Bible verses that he would less care than they exercise in selecting side orders for lunch. They are joined by religious rationalizes fundamentalists who unable to find Scripture supporting their biases and beliefs, twist phrases and modify translations to prove their honoring the Bible's words and then the only individuals you mentioned by name and I was zeroing in a pick on prominent people mentioned by name or well-known evangelical politicians Rick Perry Bobby Jindal Michelle Bachmann Sarah Palin and I understand that the political parts can be divisive and and or any political personality is somewhat divisive, but a lot of people reading it somewhere and he taught me these are met me and I don't. I want to see the 10 Commandments I think the 10 Commandments should be displayed publicly. That's important and we gathering big primitives are each about me. So a lot of us read it and thought what you come after me like that so you at least understand why people have felt this was it an attack directly on their faith and on the authority of Scripture. I think that a lot of people read into it what they wanted.

And I think that Mama be yeah I'm not critical any part I think Erica Beck you know it, an error group of Christian who have been an addict of biology than that they are, literally under attack and in a turnaround in America is a Christian nation, and you can't have it both ways mean that build and forever talking about how someone saying happy holiday is an attack on Christianity and for those people you know they would be anything that the death of Christianity would be an attack on them. But if you if you actually think about what I'm what I'm writing and what I'm and how I'm paying am I writing about God. Yeah, am I writing about. Yeah, and my writing about your lifter and I met me that would be good so I don't know about you, I do not believe I I fell and I know that comes from our discussion, you know the the. But there are clearly Christian. I'm in the number of Christian self-proclaimed Christians who tell me they have led the entire bot Bible and I five question and apparatus my really simple question� But you know biblical Trivial Pursuit and it becomes very clear that they haven't read the Bible and as I keep going through the questioning you, you really have to pay him back and say what kind of live about having read.

Having read the entire Bible. Now there are under a you know I've never been able to read the whole rule. A lot of� Bible study.

I don't understand and a lot of very of very on but there's a lot of that is very difficult. Part that are difficult to reconcile not knotting a Bible would you let me just ask distant week.

Would you be happy if as a result of your article. Christian studied the Bible more seriously and sought to live by the teachings of the Bible more rigorously and more consistently. Would you feel good if that was a result of your article and my response, and that was the end result of it that one of the part I am actually let me let me go, even a little bit. My article was an attack on typical and that back showed up mode and the political application of an you know when you have people who will pay you know. The one that is absolute, because I heard somebody somewhere tell me that, but I don't know what the next grade and if people would read the Bible contemplate their relationship with God recognize that their relationship with God is not other person know the Bible is not other words there. There I think you know one of the things that jump in and hold that thought will come back to it on the inside of the break. July agree with her.

I can well that there is a plague of biblical illiteracy in the church in the evangelical church that is absolutely likely.

This is one of the hottest absolute points of agreement. You are listening to a previously recorded broadcast by the Expo line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown your voice and more cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown my friends to the Lana Farms article the Bible so misrepresented. It's a sin I would response to that article was pleased to hear from Newsweek editors the end of last week and over the weekend that the response article is getting a lot of attention in the normal shared article for couple days and without Sikkim assured of the week and second-most read so response is getting out and from everyone. It's contact to be Newsweek there really happy to have the dialogue and they said this is one reason the article was published in in the first place.

So I've got the man that would know Kurt tells the truth he said I can pull punches. Was there a genuine intent on the part of Newsweek to spark a dialogue with your controversial article back one of the one about. Probably have we ever want to be a way to avoid that.

Okay now we want to hear the new we would get bombarded by and one of them up. Probably have was finding reading all of the things that were being written finding one of the little writing something or something that was simply, you know a a hack on our in hand or are intelligent or or or you know people.

Anybody who engaged in your diatribe. Anybody who had a number of me completely misrepresented the article bad as an attack representation and I'm not a name high level biblical leader when you ran what I that I really scratch my head, doing what are you telling your people that the Bible you can't get, you know, I've been 8000 word article right quite amazing and so then we had even indelible, you know, we didn't want that. But really the first part who was clearly in clearly and and and preventing something that would open up what you owe. Why we invited John yeah and that's of course we connected us to talk off the air and now on the year quite so I've written for years and many of the evangelical leaders I know would bemoan the same fact that there is a lot of scriptural illiteracy in this generation, not just the younger generation that so digitally oriented and in short attention span, but the older generation, a barter survey repeated over the years as indicated that a tiny percentage of Americans have with you would call a biblical worldview and maybe 20% of professing born-again Christians have will be called the biblical worldview suits we agree on that that a lot of followers of Jesus that say the Bible is the word of God are not spending a lot of time studying the Scriptures seriously and secondly of hypocrisy in our midst.

I steadfastly opposed redefining marriage I put marriage" when it's with same-sex relations, but I've said for years that no-fault heterosexual divorce in the church has done far more to destroy a marriage that that all gay activists combined. So certainly a lot of fingerpainting that goes in the wrong direction. So I will get back to you on this issue of hypocrisy will will talk about our areas of agreement first and then will begin to flush out where I feel that you are undermining the authority of Scripture itself or raising questions and will go back and forth on that. But back to you on the issue of hypocrisy.

One of the one of the moment that I found quite amazing in my life. As you know, there are there are yet we got in my journey has been one of us. The experience and that you know I'm not somebody who would simply born told what to believe you have believed. I have really been someone who had had his own journey and one of the elements of that journey that you know what I Gamache a I really have to write with.

When there was a and Amtech who had been divorced twice and got up to condemn the homosexual marriage undermining marriage and you know I knew he had children who were living with two different why cool dog bit the patient day and my potluck out.

Even be representing the 50th marriage down and you know the what might clear that you know that if you divorce and remarry expected and validate that you are committing adultery. You believe Jesus really said that you take that seriously.

What I what I believe that it that it is here quoted, paying with in the Bible. Okay can I take very. Only those things that Jesus and in the Bible. I do not believe where everybody start to get angry at people have told me that with the new There.

Other argument.

People have told that the New Testament is the inerrant word of God.

People nowhere in the new does it make nowhere in the New Testament day. The New Testament is the inerrant word of God and so when I look at the words of the and I compare the faith of the words of Paul and I would Panera contradict between significant how do you recall and how do you empower you pay, you know, when I really don't want to go to one of the units let's let's hold that will focus on that one specific point just with our our radio segments and breaks but I just just wanted affirm a couple of things again for people don't know you. You are a baptized Episcopalian as that is a correct and and you were baptized. When you're in your 20s right yet I might indicate, and you do believe that we should take the words of Jesus as best as we understand what he said we should take those words very seriously. I am just saying this not to question you, because we chatted off the air I'm saying is for the benefit of our listeners to better understand who were dealing with, as then you will back and read the article you still still differ.

We should understand where he's coming from. Okay I'm going now I have more to turn talk with Kurt. I know many of you can't listen straight through to all the go to website Esther to Brown.org ask a or Brown.org.

Click on latest broadcast later today to catch the entire show and make sure while you're there, check out our special resource offer.

The messianic Jewish family Bible tree of life version. Watch the video about it. Find out what is Bible you and your family really should have really you are listening to a previously recorded broadcast. It's the line of fire with your host activist, author, international speaker, and Dr. Michael Brown voice of more cultural and spiritual revolution get into the line of fire now by calling 86643 here again is Dr. Michael Brown back to the modifier 866 why we will get your calls may hear from some of the typical scholars and theologians who differed with current articles article in Newsweek may be hearing from some of them later in the broadcast as well. So Kurt right before the break you want to raise what you felt was a substantial contradiction between Jesus and Paul note you may not be aware of this but it's a very common Jewish objection to Jesus.

What will Jesus was really all right.

We don't know exactly who he was but he wasn't too bad. He was a good Jewish teacher, it's Paul who changed everything.

So I responded to that in my book, the real culture Jesus Roy took up the challenge for my friend. I debating from Rabbi Shirley bottega who said that that Paul's norm started everything and changed it all. And Jesus was. It was a good Jewish teacher then volume 4 of my series on answering Jewish objections to Jesus.

I look at similarities in the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of Paul and lay those out side-by-side for folks to see.

But what you want to raise what you felt was a substantial contradiction so let's start to get into some specifics now. I now I want to be very clear about something something people could not.

I am not advocating any. I am not paying the portions of the Bible to follow or what people should believe. I think that might've what I do think it might here but I do think is important is that people can't that they try and resolve them in their own head without sniffing it because it doesn't fit with one of the league and elected to take take a couple of them and I you have in Matthew 58 saying that no one told title I coding.

I think the new American standard financially, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest jock kettle will compact wall that pretty pretty clear in Leviticus at piano left when I did have bark but I Bible you have God quoted bang if you will not listen to me and carry out the man and if you read back my decree or my law area out by violate my covenant that I will do. I will bring upon the error and then it goes on from there, telling many terrible bank go. I'm not here to change the law God. If you do not follow what I have laid out in Leviticus 1 well that everyone you do not follow the I am God, and I pray I will then call a man never met a man who actually oppressed and tortured Chris before his conversion comes along and all you need to do believe in the resurrection of the and you don't need to follow Mosaic law. Well I am back and this is pretty complicated. Who is Paul saying God made of day.

This not what God is and if God God basically changed his mind eloquently start with the title of Leviticus.

Did God know what was going to happen in the future dog ran in and right and if Jesus comes along and changes with the Torah says that we should follow him. He abolishes it, and then if if he is the real Messiah Jesus is the Messiah. Then Paul can't be real. Follow the Messiah come along and change it all.

I have wrestled with these issues for so many years, Elizabeth sought to give you my response will have some extent you are listening to a previously recorded broadcast the line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown line of fire now by calling 8663 here again is Dr. Michael Brown speaking with journalists. I can wall the controversial Christmas timed cover story article the Bible so misrepresented. It's a sin. Newsweek graciously printed my lengthy rebuttal response which you can read you read both of us are going to Newsweek.com and you'll see my article listed on the right side under most shared most read in my article was a link to Curt's article so Kurt erased a major question about Jesus.

Paul and the law and I'll give you the immediate response. First, Matthew 517 Jesus says he didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill. So, for example, blood sacrifices and offerings. We don't need those anymore because Jesus went to the cross to fulfill the purpose of the sacrifices he took the the moral and sexual standards of the torture a higher level. So instead of just don't commit adultery. It was don't think lustfully in your own heart instead of don't murder it even goes further.

Yes, don't murder but don't have hatred in your heart for this murderous hatred and anger when it comes to specifics of the law, God never called Gentiles to keep the Mosaic law and Paul was combating the idea that Gentiles required to keep the law of Moses. So he writes to the Galatians and says if you was a Gentile, are trying to please God by being circumcised and keep the law of Moses, then your your misunderstanding grace that that you receive salvation is a gift, a by grace through what Jesus did, but when you go to the book of acts Kurt you see that Paul himself actually lived by the law, understanding, though, that Jesus had given us a new and better covenant.

Remember the Sinai covenant failed not because it was imperfectly because the people were in perfect so we ended up with the Temple destroyed. We ended up with our our people. Jewish people as homage US are people in exile. Jesus comes to give a new and better covenant and now we know the terms of the covenant that are laid out to the rest of the New Testament as God writes his laws on their heart, and you have to remember that the first followers of Jesus that that knew him and that knew the other Jewish apostles also commune with Paul and and he was considered a brother as well from all the early literature that we have. We see there is a lot of harmony and then there were groups that differed and pitted one against another, and in the feeling that I had just to be candid with you and again without our cordial conversation. I hope to have Moran sit down face-to-face in the future, but my feeling was this that if there was a possible contradiction. Rather than looking at how to resolve it to say, okay, can these things be honestly and realistically resolved. Instead, you would look at the controverted contradictions.

We can't really trust what were reading. That's why many people treat your article to be a direct attack on the Bible itself. I feel better.

I never know after of what I was talking about, you know, if you really want to go down to where this was coming from one of admonition against judging other. Now I'm being judged totally and I and and you know the don't get the plank out of your own eye before you can look at the splinter in your brother's eye and we went by. We are you know we are all condemning. We know when you have a shirt okay okay can example that I find to be deeply, I don't. I don't think God needs our help in determining who are who we are not going to be admitted to the kingdom of God.

I think God is perfectly capable of making that but I also believe that every individual's relationship with God is individual that it is there that God speak to them however got and that now we have lot in life of church that will pay all your gay therefore you cannot have community. One example, how dare they intervene between every intervene between an individual will between an individual and his or her relationship with God particularly when you're dealing with, you know, the issue of homosexuality and what I'm talking about people being dealt kicking and chanting.

You have people you are immediately apparent. If you're not work if you all have anything are cited in you know in one and that they and enrollment as being on a partner, or the main character as public sexuality. Now I would say that one canopy is not 100% clear about that talk about homosexuality. Wellman is clear, but not just what you believe that in Romans one we discussed other passages but in Romans one, Paul categorically speaks against homosexual practice. Actually, I think it goes a little bit further talk about man left the heart brother Matt.

I think about it does. Another thing okay I'm a little talk later on about the question. Is there hierarchy of sins, but back to your point okay I will will discuss that will discuss that issue a little later, but let's let's focus in on on this question and all right when you say that we don't have the right to judge another person, and you admit it's your own hit hypocrisy of of now turning round and judging others in judging their relationship with God, or whether God spoke so sorry. I appreciate your candor and something I search my heart for a regular basis in terms of double standards and and picking you know one thing over another. But Jesus also says in John 724 don't judge by outward appearance, but make righteous judgment. We know without making judgments. We can even function in the world you you see things that seem hypocritical to you that are that are offensive to you or we look at human trafficking we all judge that to be evil.

We look at what Isis is doing beheading others will judge that to be evil and we don't know what motivates everyone to do what they do, but we certainly say this is an evil act. This is a wrong act and and then in first Corinthians 5. Paul weighs out that if you have the very issue of public hypocrisy must be judged that if someone claims to be a follower of Jesus and say this man is left his wife and is living in adultery and is now showing up at your church service with his wife is she's the wife sitting there with the kids okay and he comes in with the woman he sleeping with and is not married to aces praise the Lord on free and Jesus I want to receive communion pulses.

No no you don't even eat with that person.

So there are times when if someone is guilty of blatant unrepentant sin and we reach out and they refuse to repent that that we are supposed to judge the meaning say okay right now. You are not right with God.

You are not right with the body are not right with the your wife and family. You need to repent jute you have a problem with that kind of righteous judge Absolutely and the reason why is because you once again you letter, all it out.

Paul never met Jesus never had. Anytime tenant going to personally kind of renovation okay and that Barry will judge you then talked about you know the hypocrisy of credit by another person, without looking at you know your own failing and applicable. You know, plank and splinter argue portrayal of Barry Barry dimple and when we turn around and say well, but Jesus was really unclear what product he goes. He goes on a few verses later in in warns against false prophets and tells people to beware of false prophets, you have to make a judgment that this person is often on� A completely different thing. What that mean you know being all and being of God or being a homosexual or being a debater are very very different thing for me now warning again all profit but now you know who the false prophet is you just decide a hierarchy of sins. It seems that he just made it there until it all off our our though if you're looking at one who have their own individual behavior.

I am not no matter how we live our lives and though what what I am saying is that even thinking that it is very clear about the array of art thou, I so so if right if you break if I examine myself rightly judge myself then Paul Jesus. Jesus says I can then help you. You are listening to a previously recorded broadcast the line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown voice of moral cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown joining us on the line of fire if not read.

I can morals article in Newsweek the kind of massive amount of attention and a ton of criticism. I'm sure from other circles. Ton of affirmation is called the Bible so misrepresented. It's a sin and then my lengthy rebuttal probably little bit longer than the initial Oracle sulcus.

I quoted a lot of the initial article is my response to Newsweek's article in the Bible reading, both by going to Newsweek.com you find my article referenced on the right as you scroll down and then my article will link to Curt's article read those side-by-side, because even with extensive radio dialogue is only so far we can go on covering issues.

Disconnect interrupt the flow of conversation we ran to at least get one call in this first hour, Dennis and San Luis Obispo, California.

You're on the line of fire for my guest. Kurt, I can Walt figure Michael and Kurt is a very important subject appreciate your leadership. Michael college Kurt you know I got the video I really hope and trust that your speaking from ignorance and not willful misrepresentation of the biologic article is that the Bible is in certainty.

There are is a hierarchy of stingy the pilot you have delivered you have committed the greater and and using all are clearly in line with one another really dedicate your life to humble submission to the to the will of God and the Holy Spirit, and dedicated your life in search of Scripture you can see that there are many Jesus when he said he said that till heaven and earth have one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law to get the caveat until all be fulfilled. Jesus on the cross bed picked LSI finished, Christ fulfilled the law established a higher law the new covenant which encapsulates the old law into the new covenant into everlasting covenant have a lot law. Kurt will you please not speak on the subject that you really do not have the knowledge base begun with authority. I trust your heart will respond to the Holy Spirit will repent of the information that you're putting out there attacking a great company I got I got your point. Can you type something in the article that your friends long been the idea of translation of translation of translation is the mass representation of the very reliable expand manuscript evidence do we have we can find typically no beer, no you know what the King James version of the Bible was translated from one language. Yes, I do language was translated from Latin, and in fact, where you have portion of it, not honoring all the King James version of the Bible translated black and when they found portion that were in conflict with the original Greek and they didn't have the original Greek.

They had copies of copy copy and that you know that not a cry. They didn't have methods of preserving paper for hundreds and hundreds of years and so when they were working on that.

They found conflict between a Latin and the Greek Greek was incorrect that it was a copying error and so they went with the last row.

Now what do you want to believe that or not, that you know think you have what most people will hear from people will read the King James Bible Bible and about a okay you're pretty much done when you go further and you get some of the newer Bible. One very very important for intern from any rate, it will be a little graphic but it's right out of the Bible. Hebrews 1111 back in the time of back in biblical believe by people like it was believed that women produce pain and just like and in the original in the original Greek. What in Hebrews 1111 talked about how Tara gave him the strength to produce to conceive of and it goes on and that day in the Bible. They, in the early translation than the Geneva Bible and it wasn't until 19 when it became very clear what it would know. However, what was known here that this belief from biblical time scientifically law that in the late that in the 19th 1980 Mars were just and and so you end up with a scenario are people who are reading the Bible. When they get to Hebrews 1111 (reading the King James version. They are not reading the Bible bad Greek, Latin and English they are reading a new variation where people work on healthy and scientifically wrong when they were confronted with the difficulty they drop.

They have no footnote. They have no indication that they drop that unsolicited said he might let let me resolve the difficulty very simply, the first thing the Hebrew word Sarah dislikes the Greek word sperm can simply refer the offspring general, so, so, for example, Genesis 315 it talks about the Sarah of the woman, it doesn't mean that she has a seed because it's never said that a seed sperm. Proceeds from the woman that's always male and only male in the Scripture where identity as is and I were contacted what will will will will pick that up in a man got all Mike my Hebrew and Greek right in front of me but the fact is, a woman does not have a Sarah in terms of a biological seat she has is Sarah, meaning offspring.

That's the generic word for offspring or sperm, but the other thing is, as I'm just holding in my hand textual commentary in the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger. There's just a manuscript different since ancient in terms of the word sperm a in Romans 1111 so the question is, is it talking about Abraham is talking about Sarah and that's the debate and that it's based on a couple different words but it's it's a textual question that we have in front of us that there is absent. No biological error. With that, our friends, we are out of time for the sorry Dennis, thank you for calling and Kurt, thanks for your answer. We we got another hour to go. We are just getting started with restart to get into the real differences here would be missing the show go to my website, asked her to Brown ask ADR Brown.org right want to give Kurt an opportunity to rebut what I was saying will have to do it in the next hour. Click on latest broadcast to catch all of the show later today and be sure to click on the special resource offer. Find out about the messianic Jewish family Bible.

Watch the video on it. I believe will be a tremendous blessing to an Kurt, I agree, Newsweek, and I agree we want people to read the Bible more. My bottom line today is this the word of God tells us over and over. Seek seek and you will find seek earnestly, God rewards those who seek him earnestly study the word earnestly you will be you are listening to a previously recorded broadcast was ready Christmas time Newsweek came out with a major cover story on the Bible saying it is so misrepresented. It is a sin generated a firestorm of criticism. Newsweek allowed me to write a major rebuttal, and now we have with us and want to fire the journalist who wrote that very article stage for the line of fire with your host activist and author, international speaker and theologian Dr. Michael Brown your voice of moral cultural and spiritual revolution Michael Brown is the director of the coalition of conscience and president of fire school of ministry get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH.

That's 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown and I have been talking for an hour now with my guest veteran journalist Kurt Aiken Walt who wrote the article the Bible so misrepresented. It's a sin I took strong exception to the article, Newsweek graciously printed a lengthy rebuttal of mind to the article, Newsweek and Kurt have told me that yes their desire is to get people to study the Bible more. Read the Bible more so agreement dive right and if you have a question for Kurt request. If you differ with him you do so respectfully you don't want to trash your Christian witness in the name of loving God and loving the Bible do you, but you can call him and 866-34-TRUTH. That's 866-34-TRUTH 7884 will get your calls shortly how I want to dive right back in and and press a couple points Kurt and give you the opportunity to respond. One is that the translations leading up to the King James Tyndale, for example, the Geneva Bible. They were they were working. These were scholars working with the Hebrew and the Greek texts.

The Vulgate is always an important translation, but they were working with the originals.

If you read the preface to the original King James VI 11. It talks a lot about the original text but but more importantly, all modern versions are going back to the Hebrew to the Greek to the manuscripts we have and we believe they were remarkably well preserved. So I just want to address that. Do you agree that the modern translations are using the best copies that we have available of ancient nice Chris and then wanted to give you the opportunity to respond to my statement that the Bible never talks about a female having seed biologically. That's that would be sperm which is only for the mail but it does talk about having seed in terms of offspring want to give you an opportunity respond to those points. Greedy, I want you on the first planar world greatest memory so I I will is. Let's focus on the seed? I said that even only back to Genesis 315 when it talks about the woman and her seed it means offspring would Sarah or sperm and reconvene offspring generically but then we'll talk about a man spilling his seed.

It never talks about a woman doing that because she doesn't have a seed in that sense, so you allege that he was 1111% of the problem is if Sarah had physical seal experiment isolate that's actually not what it was saying. So did you want to I want to go after King James version and other work back in time.

The Latin version of Genevieve the quote.

Good thing we have the Greek and please forgive my Latin my Latin is based on reading, not on a I don't be glad in Hebrews 1111 talked about their height. Opening up name fair barrel power back was translated only through the King James version as being as being exactly what people at the time that the Hebrews was written only with that M and women both produced payment. It would fit info when you have been the Latin Hebrews 1111 there, but then when you get back tonight.

The complexity is not as long as you understand that the point is that seed sperm can also mean offspring.

There's no issue is easy is just the author offspring receive.

I think most understand is you are listening to a previously recorded line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown your voice of moral cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown friends to the line of fire having correct, Kurt Aiken, Walt veteran journalist. Here's what we agree on agree that Christians need to study the Bible more carefully. We agree that many Christians are superficial in their study of the word and don't even know any of the issues with the transmission and translation of the biblical text.

We agree that there is much hypocrisy among those who say the Bible is the word of God we agree on that.

Now we're pressing in on areas of disagreement so current.

Let's let's pressing on one of your statements that's that's I singled out and others have singled out. You said no television preachers ever read the Bible you has have it any evangelical politician either has the Pope.

Either of I need to have you at best. We've already bad translation. Translation of translations of translations of translations of hand copies of copies of copies of copies and on and on hundreds of time so I'm I'm holding a gun on my desk stacked up Hebrew Bible Greek New Testament. One thing that I didn't intend, and I think that perhaps I should have been clearer in that I wasn't talking about the old I was okay for friendly only rep so I'm holding my hand, the Greek New Testament and then on the bottom. It has a bottom of the text. It references any textual variants and as you know I mentioned in the article that the vast majority are insignificant.

It would be like spelling Mr. MIS TER or MRR MR with the.not affecting the overall sense. There is no essential Christian doctrine. That's ultimately in dispute over textual air questions.

Even Prof. Berman, whom you quote and would be very skeptical about things that I take with assurance, he is said that there's no essential Christian doctrine that at stake but there okay right right so what were reiterating itself went. When scholars today are translating the New Testament.

They take this Greek New Testament which is not a copy of a translation of a translation of the translation of a copy of a copy of a copy represents manuscripts that are copies of copies of copies, some going back way back.

We may even have part of of marker fragment from Mark going back to the end of the first century which is remarkable that we have but a 5700 classified New Testament Greek manuscripts that we have thousands, tens of thousands of quotes of the Greek New Testament by the church fathers, some Greek Similac translation about we have tons in Greek from from the Greek speaking fathers. We have all these manuscripts that we have the translations of these so we can really know with with accuracy and in the vast majority of cases, what the, the, the Greek manuscripts read so were going straight from say a copy of a copy may be of a copy straight from there to English. So where do you get that all we have it best is a bad translation or translation of translations of translations of hand copies of copies anyone. After about 3012, down to is what arrivals are we dealing think that I find to be probably the most misinformed, people who can very knowledgeable Christian is that the Bible was a book by the one a book Greek that was translated and that it was a book handed down in polling from God not happen and the Bible that are you there are very few people were using a Bible that is a direct translation from the Greek load just just just to clarify, let's take all the best-selling modern English versions. The NIV the ESV the NASB, the new King James the CSB let's just list those okay because those are semi-millions and millions and millions once every single one of them is a careful translation of the groom, the New Testament now the Greek straight into English. That's that there's nothing in between. It's not a translation of a translation of a copy of a copy of a translation it's straight from winter. Every single one of them. That's I invented it by their no regardless of how cold it is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy and what the point of that is not okay for the Bible should be relied appointment that day.

The Bible is not what people think think that I'm an overly simplistic approach as if the English Bible your reading. Just drop down from heaven on your desk and that there's not a process of transmission and translation capable of that line here and I'm looking at a word and go out out out I'll be out of one of the word I would dealing with someone who through their kid out of the house because man they produce their Bible and) in the Bible, factual and well you do realize that the word homosexual of the late-night entry you know this word was not in the Bible. Now get people only bear I am. I am not challenging anyone fully, but if people believe the Bible is inerrant word of God and the last thing we should do be doing is changing changing it to make it more understandable. Modern people change again. It should be as close to what the original one as possible.

I know a little bit further. If people truly believe that the Bible is God work and the back half of all representation of that is in the original Greek. I don't understand why people are off learning how to translate right now you realize this is what we do in our Bible schools and seminaries that people hello and was on almost everyone right to send us your average person. It's it's tough to to pick up another language. It it's I mean this is serious to him though. If you can read Greek of you have learned Greek, though I have right silicates is not so easy. Don't judge others.

Even hypocritical I. There's yours and you're saying you're serious about the Bible but not serious enough to learn Greek and now you're judging others without being serious enough to learn Greek, but the look. Here's the fact you're not unless you really devote years and years and years of years of study you are not gonna learn it on the level that a scholar learned and eloquent. When someone uses the word homosexual. Today I prefer to say men who have sex with men because that's that's explicitly with the Greek term. The prominent one that used in first Corinthians 69 together with another term that would suggest it's talk about the passive and the active partners in the accident and that's why the reading gay and lesbian scholars say no doubt Paul spoke against homosexual acts. Jesus died for everyone the same.

He died for for heterosexual homosexual the same for the same blood offers the same salvation and new life, but he forbids certain practices so went when someone says homosexual homosexual practice all their trying to do is say in biblical days. This is how the author expressed it, how can we communicate that today because sometimes words change and in meaning. Over the centuries and and what meant something at one time in our culture. The English-language may mean something very different. So you have to stay on top of that, but let's let's just clarified and I agree with that. I disagree because I think that everyone I kept begging for urgent you know if the gold standard of English.

The English Bible every you know, up to one of the people can gain access to fairly but it's not.

It's not the most widely read.

Now it's it's an extraordinarily beautiful powerful English rendition and the translators did the original text, the Hebrew and Greek and and much of it is magnificent within another Poinsett it does it. It's not perfect.

We have much better not ourselves the languages we have that we have more more manuscripts, but you understand though that there is a science to textual criticism that centrist arbitrary or a scholar says I like this are that the and that that going through this careful science.

You can ultimately say okay with with with real confidence.

We can say that these are the words that that Matthew recorded or that Paul wrote now you could say do we agree with them or not, but you understand that there's a there's a science behind this fact. But let me let me I'll remind you because you said your memories that they can we get a break here and I want to take some calls as well but do understand that through the science of textual criticism that scholars can compare manuscript masturbation, and if so, might we have so many thousands and thousands and thousands that have all the ancient books in the ancient world, the one that's best preserved is the New Testament. Other words I can go to the text with confidence rather than with fear that I don't really know what they said so I get your response or we come back. You are listening to a previously recorded broadcast plan and it's the line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown, the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown turning her just want to find out if you agree with me that through the abundance of manuscripts we have through textual criticism, which is a scientific process that we can be confident that the manuscripts that we have now are very close to what the originals were when your mind or we far away. We really can't tell what the originals were not. I'm not well? Okay the originals were more likely do we know what the originals were not we go. But you know that that again. Both are closer to a different point and be when I'm in a gambit for something people have misunderstood. I am not claiming that well there. There are translation issues there copy so therefore don't rely on the Bible. What I'm saying is start off with the belief that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. You know that this is God's will.

I and so most things now is one that and what that means is you can't complete pick up any old Bible and they well I rent that okay you know you need to pick up a Bible because the translation to the original you and people don't even know that there's a different they don't even unlink one of the things I've been load pack for everything that there are parts of the Bible that you did right that people have long argued, may not have been written by the people that they put they pretend to have been written to Peter, John, how long we were talking about the act of Paul and me a go back in time. Early again, I apologize. I mowed my knowledge comes from reading about them because I constantly mispronounced people's names on the air.

Then the news because I just read it I don't I don't yet receive it.

So don't worry about your your following my footsteps by mispronouncing names going and the Bishop of Qatar. Sorry wrote the church. In 325 wrote about the writing directly and me for the event and you know the fact that in has been a debate within the church and have been pumping load for entry thing that would be important but more importantly, you know, earlier Greek manuscript we know more and more about what you know what was originally there and have the ability to check certain items against certain item and for me to simply say 888 that have gone on, you know, 325 20 thing Anna Harrick fundamental ignorance. I don't even know church.

I understand that for one of the basic want to go to one topic and I get the that's what will deftly major on that and and I want us to do it. I again I just want to give context is as we talked that I better understood what you were saying. For example, homosexual issues, I too could be say one thing your point was will be difference. We dialogued about that before I wrote my my lengthy rebuttal actually in the midst of it. You are a gentleman to say hey if you want reach non-evangelicals and all my listeners that thanked me for the article and submit a great job. I did, I want you to know that Kurt personally went through the article here am rebutting him. He was gentleman enough to to go through the article say hey if you want to reach nonevangelicals and in your greater Newsweek readership. I'd suggest this this this this, so I appreciate that. I thought that's a noble thing to do so. Thank you for doing it. But here's the context I fully agree that your average lever doesn't know that there was ever a debate about the authorship of first and second Timothy was that really Paul that's liberal scholars question at conservative scholars.

It was Paul folks can be DA Carson to to get a good perspective on that a second Peter second Peter of forgery and Peter's name was really written by Peter if these things are debated in seminaries by different scholars and theologians and there were questions about some of the documents in the early church we have the manuscript that's not the issue.

We have the manuscripts but there are questions about whether this was actually canonical Scripture that ultimately was agreed that that it was but yet these are questions and to simply state that their questions, you do not deserve the attack for stating that it's in the context of an article that says quote the Bible is loaded with contradictions and translation errors that it wasn't written by witnesses includes words added by unknown scribes to inject orthodoxy." The Bible can't stop deep honking itself so will now when you put the other comments in that context I think that's why people were calling you a heretic. Can you can at least understand that when you look at it in the larger context of these other quotes I can understand whatever you when you talk about one very strong believe in a people been called heretic. Galileo recalled a heretic for document heliocentric and now he was also called cooling is also called a lot of things by the church and an you know it. One of the reality here and I think it getting were getting very close to one of my balloon is that the beginning there's nothing in the New Testament that that all of the all of the divinely there's nothing in the new Catholic close, we have to admit there you know all all is not all never met� You sure you're sure that John have you read Richard Malcolm's Jesus and the eyewitnesses were.

He was the okay from the top scholarly books of the year when he came out a few years ago, but he really documents it in massive scholarly detail how we can see that the Gospels came clearly from eyewitnesses is it.

He's a brilliant brilliant scholar very very learned man, fully aware of every dispute.

The question that you you've raised and injured you be impressed with the scholarship but but he's really demonstrated that that we can reliably say these are eyewitness accounts.

Then of course Jesus says that his spirit will remind the disciples the apostles of what he said said, and then they write it down and then others come along that either were eyewitnesses or encounter Jesus, that the rest of the body receive. That's how were confident that these documents but to come back more ground to cover and encourage not going to get into a big area of difference about public prayer. I get to that stage and you are listening to a previously recorded broadcast.

It's the light a fire with your host activist, author, international speaker, and Dr. Michael Brown voice of more cultural and spiritual revolution get into the line of fire now by calling 8664 through here again is Dr. Michael Brown are not how one gets some callers and then dive back in with some of the agreements disagreements that Kurt and I are having speak with her likable veteran journalist with Newsweek magazine and it was his article came out at Christmas time cover story that supports much controversy and criticism, and Newsweek printed my rebuttal to that. Let's let's describe a couple calls and then I want Kurt to make sure he gets to a major point he wanted Teresa Tony in Melbourne, Florida.

Thanks for calling the line of fire stuck around for the glycol and I want to thank Dr. Mr. I can offer agreement, so just then being completely candid about appreciate him coming on but I did hear a lot of backpedaling.

I think you should just admit that is not a theologian, and he spoke consciously in a lot of areas and someone of your caliber. Dr. Brown PhD's Semitic languages and in theology obviously those of us who know history and church history and Bible history or surprised by any of the claims you made it there a lot like the claims you are coffee shops on back porch. As we talked, you know people who philosophize but I think I have a lot more respect from like one of the backpedaling and denying that he meant what he meant to say hey you know I certain problems with things and lastly on the contract.

I think it will down to gay gay marriage issue. I think you made it clear that at the heart of this.

He does have a problem with the Bible says about homosexuality and I did a lot of people who mask their problems will Scripture do so because they do have a problem with the morality of the Bible is not of faith and trust the Bible to not scholars.

They haven't studied operators don't like what the Bible says so try to get rid of it by denying that it is valid so I strike all banks are coming on the show but I think you did make Dr. Browning to the world that you made a mistake of dipping I Kurt back to you. I completely agree. I did not make a day. I would not know my point while I made that about homosexuality that I'm that I'm denying I will. I don't think I ever even come close.

But I have dad that.

For example, one Timothy pretty. I barely have doubt significantly doubt that all and it's pretty unclear regarding that. But in terms of in terms of Robin Robin. Mary Claire and there is no doubt that it was written by Paul and it is very clear about how he might only is not whether or not moral are in the Bible. My point is if you are going to band God point the finger and they you may not take communion because you are violating this medical phrase of the Bible and I'm not denying that you are violating the parenthetical phrase of the Bible. I will now take place between you and God stopping you reaching out to God, I have decided that that one parenthetical phrase in a live of 20 different is absolute, but all the other one that I ignore you know, am I an alcoholic will that we hold to both. So this is so, so when I and if your loader noted in the bay perfectly welcome lemonade again on the back because they they are clearly abiding by you know you're not going often doubting children about their perfectly abiding by word of the Bible might say so-and-so is not like I issue is God. It allows people and back and condemn other bulk folding. There are fries out there going all clear my C issue drive home all day because we agree. My point is my church fellowship says he will not communion to someone practicing heterosexual homosexual sin were being equal, you are listening to a previously recorded broadcast file line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown get into the minor fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH here again is Dr. Michael Brown and been on the air now for over an hour and 1/2. Most all of that time with her likable and eager to come on the year. First want to make sure understood who he was. Where was coming from sought I did that we spoke off the year was very helpful. Really looking forward to getting to know Kurt better just just one-on-one as it is a friend.

As we dialogue about these different issues and perspectives and where I take strong issue with many of his perspectives and will will keep talking will keep interacting I want to get to a specific statement that was made and then then let's expand on the hypocrisy as soon public prayer because I know that's an important one to you Kurt, I noticed after my article was posted. Even though I gone through it carefully and Prof. Darrell Bock of Dallas theological simile went through carefully, I noticed after that that there were a couple typos.

Some of pointed out that Michelle Bachmann's name I misspelled her first name at her last safe there tonight is not enough letters I read something and it was so wrong is gonna be a typo but given the opportunity to fix it. Here you write an article about 50 years after Nicaea figures later in 83 when the Romans held another meeting, this time in Constantinople. There new agreement is reached. Jesus wasn't to. He was now three father-son and Holy Ghost. Constantinople never said that spoke of God is triune God the father, God the son God the Holy Spirit never ever said that Jesus was now 3G scoping two would be human and divine nature to say was now three father-son Holy Ghost that I mean it's it's a long typo but it looks like it's just a typo. I am kinda baffled by that statement. What what I am currently Trinity American well I don't know if we can agree on the great that Trinity is geared not expressly within the Bible very going to find it and fell on the kind of thing that you would think that something about important that uses or for his disciples to talk about but it is not baptizing them, baptizing them in the name of the father-son Holy Spirit, the words of Jesus being pretty strong parent because I haven't had many different he do but I don't mean I don't need any other Trinitarian.

What I mean is that there are Trinitarian and Yanni are talking about Matthew and there are Aryan who take back very gray and I wish I could remember the name on #something I just read last night at Lewis Bank could not cannot cannot possibly be interpreted as meaning the Holy Spirit is the third being somebody who believe in the Trinity� Let's just say this, let's say that the doctrine of the Trinity is deduced from Scripture as opposed to an explicit statement that says God eternally exist in three divine persons father-son Holy Spirit if we say it like that. We agree. My point is that no one who believes in the Trinity in London in the church history in these councils said that Jesus was the father the son and the Holy Ghost, they would say that Jesus is the son in human flesh, so when you say the Constantinople said Jesus wasn't to.

He was now three father-son Holy Ghost. It's this does not this is wrong on every score has nothing to do with what the Bible even says about the Trinity. It's just no one believes that Constantinople and teach that just look like a mental typo mental lapse or something look on radio yesterday. I said that H2O that's that's the ingredients of oxygen this summer called it like it's actually water at the oh I said oxygen, but it is kind of some of that egregious that you just put in there and I was struck I want you be the opportunity say that's that's not correct all who hope very very point.

I think that we can agree current account book might be a 3.5 did not adopt the concept of the Trinity and it was certainly not there yet without did not.

That did not adopt it. The data that they felt more in the concept of buying no okay I see what you getting wrong here.

No no no no, there okay that the question was, the person believes he is out of very little and the Trinitarian formula is laid out with with absolute clarity it Nicaea you sure you want to go down that road and deny that and say that the date the debate the specific debate was whether Jesus was fully defined, the son of God was fully divine. Whether he eternal whether he was a created being.

As Arius said, and if is arming his eternal being. There was a clear affirmation of the father son and Spirit in God's triune nature. That's why the Nicene Creed became used in a standard way through the centuries and then other issues would be taken up and then there there were the related debates and in other centuries that if Jesus is right now. Essentially, fully man and fully God and that that puts another being. And got so though those were the nuances but but again I don't want to make this into a point where it will really going in and out of very well really like that are very, very pale theological area repaired but simply stay at that is definitely a front or the doctrine of did not ring current or until around the time of 385, under the leadership of Babel area and what you what you have here is what is it we're talking about what we talk about Trinity and you know you can feel with conference of the Trinity and how they were and how they were used in what is being human on the cohort going all the way back to five doesn't mean that it is what we are talking about as you add the Trinity is understood in the current and not in our current day and that is not occur until the end of okay okay what you could say is that there is further articulation given to the person of the Holy Spirit, Constantinople and and that we agree with in terms of the articulation and the creed I can say I got Nicaea in confession as I see it, just in front of the we believe in one God father Almighty and one Lord, Jesus Christ, and that's what's now expanded on because that's what the debate was and then close and in the Holy Ghost. So we confesses one God the father Almighty, the son of God the Holy Ghost that's that's what was discussed. That is clearly Trinitarian and when you say though that Constantinople said that Jesus was father son and Holy Spirit note.

Constantinople never said that never believed it. It just more the more clearly defined God as father son and Holy Spirit, but it never said Jesus was father-son and Holy Spirit success. Somehow something got in your thinking. I am very very awkwardly written that I think I think back, prepare your pecan in there and I don't even know what I originally wrote: I don't have to go back and is essentially simply type a typo or just a bad error. No, just anyone I know. But what were doing to me what were clearly talking about. Oh what what I am talking about the adoption of the con of the Trinity car for which did not happen until 350 years after the and you know actually hear about the concept of the Trinity until almost 100 years that I might sound like talk about talk about in the in the in the article that there are so many places where let me stop [I am not arguing that the Trinity is not praying that the Trinity in not a simple well back began there and the Bible. A lot of people you one John 57 rate which is lacking James, but is not in the reach of excitement. We just finish that sentence for you, yet we should be using that to prove Trinity because it's not in any ancient Greek manuscript and in point of fact, but let me just say this, the church fathers after the New Testament teach substantially the same things in terms of the father terms of the sun. Since the Holy Spirit is church councils just put this together codify things in the midst of debate about wave when I teach. This is a Jewish believer uses the Scriptures use the church councils right. Amazingly, we've got one more segment only and will talk about this republic, prayer, hypocrisy is their hierarchy of sin and it's the line of fire with your host Dr. Michael Brown your voice and more cultural and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. I take an entire broadcast talk with Newsweek journalist Kurt Aiken mauled about the Bible agree a bunch of points. We disagree on a bunch of others.

That's the purpose of the show. That's the purpose of our written dialogue. Kurt you get your pet peeve and in the show with that massive pet peeve.

I don't mean that in a demeaning way. I know it's just a major issue to you and a lot of what fueled your article but just to clarify about hierarchy of sins.

So, in your view. Let's say you have Isys terrorists taking children and chopping them into an and beheading innocent people in cold blood that in God's sight is that any different than maybe if you over eight a little bit today or maybe when you prayed you. One is focused and sincere issue should be you saying that the beheading innocent people in chopping children into is in the same par in God's sight. As I was noticing Sarah's railing. Going with one what you get one sure within the 10 Commandments that you know you are you are clearly a higher and but once you get below that once you get into personal behavior that do not do not inhale being the 10 Commandments and I would stay thing that they are a a Bible believing Christian. And they went and got a ward man violated and remarried and violated one an commandment that I had told me earlier though and listen misunderstood you that let's say someone is living in adultery. They left their wife name divorced now living in adultery. They show up at a church service. Living in adultery with the person they're sleeping with, and they, they, and people. The pastor and leaders of sat down with that person and urge them you need to repent. You need to turn away from from the sin and they refuse and they say God's fine with this because Jesus set me free and they want to take communion. I say that the word is very clear that they ought not to, and cannot, and that we would be sending and serving it to them. I thought you said earlier that that we should still serve it because that's between them and God.

I write what you're talking about murder say don't worry I don't Commandments, you know what you have thought of it right now. I do believe I do believe that man has no place getting between getting between an individual and God, and God� Meter and lysis of the person goes outside and told everybody watching they behead an innocent person and then come in and Sarah and I like communion. You tell me we don't refuse them communion. Well, I don't know why but hey it's all the same time, you may blankets that write that they would. Let's just think about that little bit more but but it's it let let's talk about the issue of public prayer the big prowling stomach going one thing very quick please topic a good thing you talk about the very important event in my life and I really want to think about very many of them who expand will you not believe in the resurrection that you are to for help go to hell. Well, right now there is a 94-year-old woman living in rural China to the literate have never been out of her village has never heard of the entity had what was born there right there by God would never be any owe for the purpose of knowing that you will be tormented and tortured for all eternity because she would work to find out about Christianity. I don't expect and I don't believe that I don't believe there is a God would create and but that's one thing I want people to think about because the work on one that is that it derived from an and there's not a lot of empathy for the public prayer just adjusted 33 E. 32nd note. One wonders off and there's often a lot of superficiality. You're right. We assume that person goes to hell and shed a tear when we think about it that's repulsive to me and in my world. The folks I work with. We go to those places we go to those villages. People sacrifice their lives to tell people about Jesus. But ultimately God is that woman's judge, and God will judge you based on the life that she had or didn't have.

But let's take a couple minutes is robust at a time back to you about public for at least will will will start here.

Mabel will discuss this another day because I had to go very quickly in Matthew talk about and it is very clear statement, but people thought with you.

In Matthew five worry about, shall not be know that thou shall not be in our love to pray and God and of the three that they may be in by maybe people I love people don't do it, but to completely drop neck ever.

And Jesus says very clearly, but now when I enter into thy closet and went out the door way and by father and my father would shall reward thee openly.

But when you pray in vain repetition, even for they think they shall be heard for their much. I don't think the area. The work plan with the Lord's prayer. I don't think Eric hearing the word in the Bible that are more year and may come out of the mouth of Jesus and yet we have people going football for 80 being led by other like politicians on Trinitron people who are who are attending Mac fan with their waving their arm or even what very simple people who are wearing their Sunday that jerk which by the way, a barrel woman. If a violation of one euro sure about once a visit to Tim and that I am joking with that limit limit. Let me just jump in and say this only only two strata times, you know, as I mentioned in my response. Newsweek that you have to look at the entire New Testament, Jesus praise in public on several occasions and then, and in addition to that, the apostles and the believers gathered together in public prayer in acts 114 and then in and ask for the end of the chapter. They all pray together and then Paul exhorts us to even gives teaching about when we come together and pray. So, believe that the great point. This is against hypocrisy and I might let's let's agree heart is just just because just as right eye we can talk.

But, though we know about how to snap one question: there prayer. He what he was.

But tell you it at the essence of the question. Of course he was in the bulk of what we do we get a loan. We pray in recent God, but he wasn't saying it's wrong to ever pray publicly we should do to be seen by men. A conversation to continue current. Thank you for joining us. My bottom line today study the Scriptures diligently earnestly ask God lives