0:12

Welcome to the Be Disciples podcast with your

0:15

host , kyle Morris , and Dakota Smith . Today

0:17

we have a special podcast , as we're going

0:19

to be interviewing Robbie Lashua , who

0:21

is an apologist at Stand to Reason

0:23

who has been spent

0:25

many of his adult years

0:28

in ministry for apologetics

0:30

. Specifically , he's got a master's from

0:32

Biola in apologetics and an MDiv

0:34

from Phoenix Seminary , and so welcome

0:37

to the show , robbie . Glad you were able to join

0:39

us .

0:40

Thanks guys , I'm glad to be here .

0:42

Yeah , we've actually had you on before on our early

0:44

years of the podcast with the

0:46

Christ Culture and Coffee podcast , and

0:48

so we were happy to have you

0:50

on then . It kind of gave us some more listeners

0:52

. You guys had a pretty good listener base , so that was

0:54

very helpful for us , and to watch

0:56

you guys do that was helpful for me to learn about

0:59

podcasting . So thank you for

1:01

doing that . Thank you for coming on again . We haven't

1:04

had too many repeats , but we're

1:06

glad that you're on and this is today's going to be

1:08

about the inerrancy of scripture

1:10

and so a huge topic , a very important

1:13

one for the church , and so we're

1:15

glad to have you on and for you to share some

1:17

of the insights that you have from studying God's Word

1:20

, and especially from an apologetic standpoint .

1:23

I'm glad to be here to talk about that . It's an important subject

1:25

.

1:26

Yeah , so , as we get started , just

1:28

one thing that we were talking about before

1:30

the show . I think this is critical because this

1:33

is not just for information's sake

1:35

. But , robbie , would you tell us

1:37

you shared with us a

1:39

story about an atheist who was listening

1:41

to your podcast a couple

1:43

of years ago , and you know , really

1:46

our whole goal is to reach people's hearts

1:48

for Jesus . Share with us the story that you

1:51

shared before the show .

1:53

Yeah , so you know , my podcast was we

1:55

stopped recording in December of 2021

1:58

. So it's been a year and a half and we've

2:00

left him up , you know , on Spotify

2:02

and Apple and all that stuff . And

2:04

so I got an Instagram message from a guy

2:06

a couple months ago and he said hey , you

2:08

probably don't remember me , I was an atheist

2:11

. I interacted with you a little bit on your

2:13

you know , social media stuff for

2:15

your podcast . And he said but I want you

2:17

to know that I've recently come

2:20

to trust in Jesus as my savior . Me

2:22

and my wife are attending a church and getting plugged

2:24

in and your show

2:26

was instrumental in bringing

2:28

me to faith in Jesus . Well , and

2:30

I just thought oh man , like I that you

2:33

know I haven't thought about that show for a long time . It's just

2:35

kind of out there on the airway

2:37

, not even airwaves , digital waves , I don't know what

2:39

we call it . It's just out there , you know

2:41

, and God's still using that

2:43

to reach people's minds and hearts

2:45

with the truth , which I think is just really

2:48

cool for us . And and

2:50

and I applaud you guys for taking

2:52

advantage of this medium , because

2:54

a lot , of , a lot of people aren't

2:57

, and I think that this can just pay huge

2:59

dividends into impacting people . You

3:01

know , while while we're asleep , somebody's out , you

3:04

know , jogging at the gym in the middle of the night listening to

3:06

your podcast , you don't know how that's impacting them

3:08

, and so God can use these types of things

3:10

in amazing ways to speak truth

3:12

into people's lives .

3:14

Amen to that brother .

3:15

So tell us a little bit . You've made a transition

3:17

since you were on our podcast last to

3:20

from being on pastoral staff somewhere

3:22

to stand to reason . So

3:24

tell us now what you're doing with stand

3:26

to reason . What does a day to day look

3:29

like for you , the work that you're doing

3:31

? Give us a little bit of background on that .

3:34

Yeah , so a standard reason . I'm an apologist

3:36

and speaker , so I get asked to go and

3:38

speak all around the country , which is really fun

3:41

. I was out and not I

3:43

mean not right next to you guys , but I was in Oklahoma

3:45

, which is closer to you guys than Arizona

3:47

. Yes , I was there this summer . I

3:49

was in Iowa this summer . I just spoke at a

3:51

conference in Temecula a few weeks ago Temecula

3:54

, California , and so I do that

3:56

. So I speak at a lot of places . I

3:59

also help develop content for our

4:01

STRU online courses

4:03

. So I've got a course on the Trinity that's

4:05

coming out on September 30th

4:07

. So that's one of the things that I do and

4:09

contribute with . I write weekly , not

4:12

weekly . Oh , thank the Lord . I write monthly

4:16

articles for our website on

4:19

apologetics issues . And then

4:21

also I'm in charge of what are called STR

4:23

Outposts , which are like

4:25

chapter groups in the local church

4:28

that are teaching apologetics . So

4:30

we started about a year ago with these Outposts

4:33

groups and we have 90 of them around

4:35

the country , all in around the world . We've got some in

4:37

the UK and Africa and these

4:39

directors who we've added are now training

4:42

people in their church , in small groups

4:44

or in Sunday schools or in you know , once

4:46

a month gatherings in

4:48

apologetics using STR curriculum

4:51

. So I'm overseeing that .

4:53

That's awesome . We didn't know about that . That

4:55

chapter group we may have to look into

4:57

that ourselves , so that'd be amazing . Yeah , that'd be awesome

4:59

, and we'd love to have you out here to Kansas as

5:02

well .

5:02

So I've only

5:04

been to Kansas once in my life . We were just driving

5:06

through it , so I'd love to go there and check it out

5:08

for real . That's most people we drove through

5:10

it once to get somewhere else , that's Kansas

5:13

.

5:13

So no , I'm the same way

5:15

. Kansas is not somewhere I ever thought I'd

5:17

be , and now I'm here , so that's right . But we got to

5:19

get you out here . We do something called an OBC

5:21

Academy , where we bring our church

5:23

together to teach them new skills , mostly in biblical

5:25

interpretation . But you know , we're

5:28

having old professor Dr

5:30

C L Mitchell out here in

5:32

October , so things like that similar

5:34

. We're trying to create that for our church as well

5:36

. So , yeah , that'd be awesome .

5:38

I'd love to . That'd be great .

5:40

Well , Robbie , let's get it started . We're going to talk

5:42

about the doctrine of biblical

5:44

inerrancy . Dr Shea

5:46

would say , you know in his pro-legamana

5:49

class that this is of first

5:51

importance for the church . This

5:54

is the attack . This is the

5:56

very nature of what God says

5:58

, and you know Satan seeking to

6:00

get people to doubt what God says . I mean , that's

6:03

been the fight all along

6:05

. So the outline of today's show

6:07

is essentially going to be what is

6:09

biblical inerrancy , what are the conversations

6:11

that surround it , and how does this impact

6:13

the church ? So why don't you just

6:16

lead us as we continue into this subject

6:19

and educate us , educate our church

6:21

, help us to become competent and equipped

6:23

in what we believe ?

6:26

Yeah , so the doctrine of inerrancy

6:28

, like you said , is extremely important and

6:31

how we define it will really

6:34

determine how we live our lives and what we follow

6:36

. And so there's no

6:38

one definition

6:41

of inerrancy , right ? So many different groups have

6:43

different definitions , but the

6:45

big idea through Christian

6:47

history has been that the

6:49

Bible is error

6:52

free , is kind of the idea it's free

6:54

from error and it's true in

6:57

all aspects it speaks to , including

6:59

scientific facts , historic facts

7:01

, prophecy . It's true

7:04

in the poetic things that

7:06

it asserts right , obviously reading them as

7:08

poetry and interpreting it correctly but

7:11

it's true in all the things

7:13

that it asserts in

7:16

the original manuscripts

7:18

, and I think that that's an important

7:20

aspect of this . But it's basically

7:22

the idea that the all the

7:24

New Testament are true

7:26

and error free and what God

7:28

spoke to prophets or inspired

7:31

New Testament authors to write , is

7:34

true and doesn't have error .

7:36

So if you're hearing that definition

7:38

for the first time or that explanation for the

7:41

first time , can you elaborate a little

7:43

further on what you mean by within

7:45

the original manuscripts ? Because maybe

7:47

that sounds restrictive or limiting

7:50

at first , but how would you respond to the person

7:52

who initially asked that question ?

7:54

Yeah . So when I say in the original manuscripts

7:57

, I mean that when Isaiah

7:59

wrote Isaiah , what

8:01

he wrote down in the original

8:03

is without error . Now

8:06

, why we say that ? Is because since the time

8:08

of Isaiah , or since the time of Paul , or

8:10

since the time of Matthew , we have copied

8:12

those books , hand copied them over

8:15

time , and we have multiple

8:17

of these copies , tons of these copies

8:19

, especially of the New Testament . We have thousands

8:21

of Greek manuscripts and

8:23

we can look at these manuscripts and compare them

8:25

with one another and see that they're not perfectly

8:28

identical . There's mistakes

8:30

that were made in copying spelling mistakes

8:33

, word order , different

8:35

stuff , like that . And so to say

8:37

that it's , it's without error in all

8:39

of the copies , that would be

8:41

an error , right , because we can look at them and say , no

8:43

, there's a mistake , there's a mistake , there's a mistake

8:45

that was made in copying . So

8:47

when we say , when they were originally , given

8:50

what God breathed

8:52

, right , what God gave and inspired

8:54

the authors of scriptures to write , those

8:56

original manuscripts that were written are

8:59

inerrant , but there

9:01

have been mistakes made in copying

9:03

. Now that doesn't mean we don't know

9:05

what the original said , right , we

9:08

do know what the original said because of text criticism

9:11

, and we can talk about that , but what

9:13

we're trying to say is listen , we've seen

9:15

mistakes made in copying , so we're not

9:17

saying every copy is without error

9:19

, because that's crazy , but the originals

9:22

are without error .

9:23

Yeah . So let's talk about textual

9:25

criticism a little bit . So now for

9:27

the person hearing , maybe for the first

9:29

time okay , so there's errors

9:32

, or there's , maybe we'd even say variants

9:34

within all of the manuscripts . Is

9:37

this truly , then , the game of telephone

9:39

? I mean , is what I possess today

9:42

what the scriptures originally

9:44

said ? And you noted a moment ago that

9:46

through textual criticism we

9:48

can know what is truly said . But how

9:50

vast or maybe I'm looking

9:52

for this word how severe are

9:55

those copyist errors or variants

9:57

? What do you think ?

9:59

They're not that severe at all actually not

10:02

at all . Let me explain

10:05

a little bit about what

10:07

we mean by variance . So

10:09

now here's where this will sound crazy

10:11

and you'll have an internet . Atheist say

10:14

this , and what they're saying is true

10:16

there are about half a million

10:19

variants in

10:21

the New Testament alone . When

10:23

we gather all the Greek manuscripts

10:25

we have the old Greek original language

10:27

manuscripts we have about half

10:29

a million variants or differences

10:32

among them . Now , that

10:34

sounds pretty

10:36

crazy in my book . Right , half a million

10:38

, right , yeah , oh my gosh , like . You

10:41

go to college and , as a Christian student , a

10:43

professor says that to you and you go , oh right

10:46

, it kind of arrests your heart and

10:48

you lose your breath , and I've

10:50

also heard some atheists say what's

10:53

more alarming is that there's only about

10:55

138,000 words

10:57

in the entire New Testament . So

11:00

you have half a million variants

11:02

for only 138,000

11:04

words . That sounds

11:06

pretty scary , right , like , oh man

11:09

, yeah , what is going on here ? An

11:11

important thing for Christians to remember is

11:14

that the fact that we know what

11:17

the problems are , the variants , the

11:19

fact that we know the differences , means

11:21

that we have to know what's not a difference

11:24

. Does that make sense ? Like

11:26

it's a double-edged sword that it cuts both

11:28

ways . We know what errors

11:30

there have been because we know

11:32

what errors there haven't been , and

11:35

so the fact that we can recognize the variants

11:37

also attests to the fact that we can know what

11:39

the original said . So when

11:41

you deduce and you go through all of the variants

11:43

and you look at them , a lot of them

11:45

are easy to figure out

11:47

. But the latest statistics

11:50

on this by Peter Gurrie , who's

11:52

from Phoenix Seminary . He did a really

11:55

great work in his book

11:57

Myths and Mistakes , in Translation

11:59

.

12:00

I've got that book .

12:01

Oh , dude , it's so good . I love that book . It's

12:03

really really good . He said

12:06

with the New Testament Greek manuscripts

12:08

the number of variants that

12:10

might meaningfully affect

12:13

the text is 0.3

12:16

to 2.8%

12:18

. Well , so somewhere between

12:20

0.3 to 2.8%

12:23

of the half million actually

12:26

might mean something . All

12:28

the rest of them are word order spelling mistakes

12:31

. They're not big deals at

12:33

all . But even with those

12:35

ones that might meaningfully affect

12:37

the text , we have a science

12:39

called text criticism on how

12:41

to deduce what the originals

12:43

said . So there's rules like

12:45

the more complicated

12:48

is probably the more

12:50

true or the more original

12:52

. Because you would think , if a Christian

12:54

is copying scripture , their

12:56

tendency would to make it more clear

12:59

than to make it more difficult

13:01

to understand . So when we see

13:03

a clearer example or a more difficult , we

13:05

say the more difficult is probably original , because

13:07

we can make a sense of why somebody

13:09

would try to make it more clear as

13:12

they copy it . So there's a bunch of rules

13:14

like that for going through and

13:16

deducing what the originals

13:18

said . So half a million

13:20

variants is possible because

13:23

we have over 5,000 Greek

13:25

manuscripts where we can deduce

13:27

and study from . So

13:30

I think an example helps people

13:32

understand what this practice is like

13:34

. So imagine I have my

13:37

great aunt , sally , and she has the best chocolate

13:39

chip cookie recipe in the world , but she's

13:41

never shared it with anybody . She keeps

13:43

it under lock and key , right In her recipe

13:45

book in the cupboard . But

13:48

she's getting old and so she doesn't

13:50

want her recipe to die with her . So what she does is she

13:52

takes it out and she meticulously makes

13:54

six copies of it for

13:57

her six children . Now

13:59

she gives it out to them so they can carry

14:01

on the best cookies ever , right . But

14:03

then they make

14:05

copies for all of their kids . So each of them has three

14:08

kids . Now they've made handwritten copies of their

14:10

copy for their three kids , but

14:12

then tragedy strikes and Aunt Sally

14:14

dies in a house fire , and that

14:16

house fire doesn't just kill Aunt Sally , but it

14:18

also burns the original recipe

14:20

. So when it comes to the

14:22

New Testament , we don't have the original manuscripts

14:25

. We don't have the one that Paul actually wrote , but

14:27

we have copies of copies . So

14:30

the original is gone with the recipe . And

14:32

now you've got the handwritten copies that

14:35

the six kids have , but then you also have

14:37

the copies they made for their kids . So you

14:39

get them all together to try to put the original back

14:41

together . But as you're reading

14:43

one recipe , it says

14:45

that the first step is to take three

14:47

eggs , crack them and

14:49

blank them in

14:51

a bowl . And the blank is a

14:53

smudge because it looks like somebody spilled milk

14:56

on it and so that word's rubbed out . But

14:58

then you look at another one and it says take

15:01

three blanks because there was

15:03

a little burn hole on it , like they got it too close

15:05

to the oven , and

15:07

place them into a bowl and

15:09

whisk them . Oh well , now I can look

15:11

at these two recipes and know

15:13

what this one's supposed to say where the smudge

15:15

mark is , and know what this one's supposed

15:18

to say where the burn mark is . It's easy

15:20

to deduce what the original said , and

15:22

if you had multiple copies

15:24

of a recipe it'd be very simple to put back

15:27

together , even if each one of

15:29

those recipes , in every line

15:31

of the recipe , had a mistake in it , because

15:34

you compare and contrast with all the rest , and

15:36

that's what text criticism is . We have over 5,000

15:39

degree manuscripts of the New Testament to

15:42

compare and contrast with .

15:44

Yeah , that was a great explanation , Kyle . Any

15:46

thoughts as well on the illustration ?

15:49

I thought the illustration was great . I think it helps people

15:51

put it in their own minds , because when they hear

15:53

a word like text criticism they're

15:55

like what is that ? And then what are all the

15:57

rules and then all the different stuff . But I think

15:59

that illustration helps . You're just taking

16:01

multiple , the same kind of putting

16:03

them back to back and which

16:05

ones line up , and kind of filling in the blanks . And I think

16:07

we do that with a lot of things in life and we don't

16:09

criticize it as much as we do the

16:11

Bible , though we should make sure the

16:14

manuscripts are overlapping and

16:16

we get the right words . But I think that's a good illustration

16:18

for our listeners to take and to be able

16:20

to use it for somebody else . I think that's a good one .

16:23

Yeah , getting back to your original question , dakota

16:26

on , is this just the game of telephone ? Well

16:28

, the game of telephone isn't about

16:31

translation , it's about transmission , right

16:33

? Because one kid comes up with a story , tells

16:35

it into another kid's ear , to another kid's ear , and

16:37

then by the time it gets to the ninth kid

16:39

it's all distorted and messed up . And that's

16:41

why the game's fun , because it gets mixed up

16:43

in the transmission of

16:46

the story into each kid's ear . Well

16:48

, that's not how Bible translation works

16:50

and that's not how it's ever worked . So when

16:52

we translate the Bible , we

16:55

deduce what the best Greek manuscripts

16:57

, what the original said , seriously

16:59

, with 99.99%

17:02

accuracy . So this isn't a faith position

17:04

, this is a science position . We know

17:06

what the authors originally wrote . Now , that

17:09

doesn't make it true , but you can't

17:11

say we don't have what they wrote . We definitely

17:14

have what they wrote . So once we

17:16

have that , we have the superior Greek

17:18

text . After deducing everything , we

17:20

then take the Greek New Testament and

17:22

we translate it into English . Or

17:25

we go to the Greek New Testament and we translate

17:27

it into Mandarin or to Spanish or to French

17:29

. So sometimes atheists will argue

17:32

well , you had it in Greek and then

17:34

you translated it into Syriac and then

17:36

you translated it into Coptic , and then

17:38

you translated it into whatever

17:40

Latin , and then finally , you get

17:42

to English . After moving through

17:44

all those translations , something

17:46

must have been lost in the meaning . Well

17:48

, if that's how we did it , for sure you can't translate

17:51

through seven or eight languages and keep

17:53

the same meaning , but that's

17:55

not what Christians have ever done . We always go

17:57

to the original language and

18:00

then we translate once . So

18:02

even Jerome , when he translated the

18:04

Latin Vulgate , he took his superior

18:06

Greek text and translated it to Latin

18:08

. Then he moved to Bethlehem for 10

18:10

years and learned Hebrew and

18:13

took the Hebrew Old Testament and translated

18:15

into Latin . This is how it's always

18:17

been done .

18:18

Yeah , I think it's an encouraging

18:20

thing , number one , that we have so

18:22

many manuscripts , because that

18:25

provides more evidence for our position

18:27

. I also think that you know

18:29

, as we're looking at this issue of

18:31

biblical narrancy and what we

18:33

have , do we still have

18:35

the original words ? I think it's

18:37

just merely discoverable , if I can put

18:40

it that way or maybe I'm summing up

18:42

what you're saying , robby is that we can take

18:44

all of the evidence and we can rediscover

18:46

or recompile what was

18:48

originally written . Would that be fair to say ?

18:51

That's a very fair way to say it . You could also

18:53

say God has preserved the

18:55

original amongst all

18:57

the manuscripts . It's a really

19:00

brilliant way to use human beings

19:02

to spread your word and

19:05

also to preserve it . It's fascinating

19:07

. I think God has done a great idea . The

19:09

problem is , is a lot of Christians think

19:12

that the Bible is supposed to be like

19:14

the Quran , that it's God's

19:16

holy word and every single syntax

19:19

and this and that is supposed to be locked

19:21

down ?

19:23

Within that language .

19:24

Yeah , within that language , and you can't really read the

19:26

Quran unless you can read Arabic , right

19:28

? Well , that's never been what the

19:31

Bible is about , and I

19:33

know that because the New Testament

19:36

right away was a translation

19:38

. Most of the time Jesus was speaking to Jews

19:40

he spoke Aramaic , but the whole

19:43

New Testament , without with

19:45

the exception of a couple of places in Mark , is

19:47

written in Greek . It was already a translation

19:50

. Jesus doesn't want us to worship

19:52

his exact verbiage

19:54

and syntax . He wants us to know

19:56

the message of what he said . And

19:58

the beautiful thing is , since it's a translation

20:00

right out of the gate , we can translate

20:02

it into English or Latin

20:05

or Chinese or whatever , because it's

20:07

a book for all people , not just

20:09

for people who speak Arabic . God

20:11

actually wrote a book for all people .

20:14

Yeah , amen . And maybe

20:16

to wrap a bow on this first question

20:18

that we have , maybe to just give an additional

20:20

definition , albert

20:23

Moller cites the Chicago statement

20:25

on biblical inerrancy in the

20:27

book Five Views of Biblical Inerrancy and

20:29

he writes being wholly and verbally

20:31

God given scriptures without

20:33

error or fault in all its teaching , no

20:36

less in what it states about God's acts and

20:38

creation , about the events of world history

20:40

and about its own literary origins under

20:42

God , then in its witness to God's

20:44

saving grace in individual lives

20:46

. So what we're trying to say is

20:48

that we have in our possession

20:51

the words of

20:53

God himself , showing

20:55

us what is true , not just self-vifically

20:58

but also historically and scientifically

21:00

speaking . If we were

21:02

to move on towards , like , the challenges

21:04

of inerrancy today and we've , kind of

21:06

just by proxy , already entered into

21:08

that a little bit , but , robbie , what would

21:10

you say are some of the

21:12

greatest challenges to the doctrine of biblical

21:16

inerrancy today ? Like what voices

21:18

out there or what concepts are out there which

21:20

say , ah , it's not quite that , it's not

21:22

as binary , but maybe it's really on a continuum

21:24

? You know , how can we inform our listeners

21:26

about that ?

21:28

Yeah , well , the biggest danger currently for

21:30

us is postmodern

21:32

Christianity , which has grown into

21:34

the progressive church movement . Yeah , and

21:37

so the idea of that is that

21:39

scripture is not inerrant , it's not God's

21:41

perfect word , it's a library

21:44

of texts of people

21:46

who were following God , so

21:48

that that definition that Brian McLaren

21:51

kind of came up with in the early 2000s undercuts

21:54

that . This is given by God to

21:56

. This is how humans were experiencing

21:58

God in their culture in

22:00

their time period , and we

22:03

experience God maybe differently

22:05

than they did in their culture in their time

22:07

period . So we can be inspired in

22:10

the sense of like a muse , right

22:12

, like Shakespeare was inspired to write his

22:14

plays , we can be inspired

22:16

by these other people of faith to

22:19

walk with God in our time . But

22:21

it really just evolves into relativism

22:23

and it becomes you can pick

22:25

and choose what scriptures you feel

22:27

like you like and you can get rid of

22:30

the ones you don't . It's a cut and paste style

22:32

of religion , and so that's what the Progressive

22:34

Church is doing today . They're saying well , back then

22:37

, you know , homosexuality was

22:39

this thing , but now we're

22:41

enlightened and we experience it differently

22:43

and so we don't really listen to that part

22:45

of the Bible . And so they pick and choose

22:48

what things they want to follow

22:50

, which I think is a huge

22:52

problem , because either I listen to

22:54

my maker or I listen

22:56

to myself , or I listen

22:59

to other men , right ? So it's man or

23:01

maker , right . Those are my choices here

23:03

, and it seems

23:05

like the maker probably knows how things

23:07

work better than I do , and

23:10

then other people do right . So

23:12

why , if I'm a follower of his

23:14

, I should adopt his

23:16

views on things ? Because

23:19

he's in a better position to have good perspective

23:22

on how reality works . So

23:24

the Progressive Church has opted for man's

23:26

view , to do what they think is

23:28

best , instead of listening to what

23:30

God says is best .

23:32

Yeah , you kind of pointed out . I mean Millard Erickson

23:34

calls Absolute

23:37

inerrancy . Where there's there's no air , there's

23:39

, then everything's perfect in Scripture . Where

23:41

there's the one just under it , that's full

23:43

inerrancy which starts to

23:45

dip into maybe some of the

23:48

scientific , maybe some of the historical

23:50

numbers and things in there . That doesn't really change

23:52

the meaning of the Bible , maybe a little inaccurate

23:54

and that's okay . What's the danger of starting

23:57

to just allow a little bit of

23:59

Scripture Become wrong

24:01

, even if it's just something that doesn't really change the

24:03

meaning , doesn't change anything , do a salvation , doesn't

24:06

change what God said , but it's still a little

24:08

bit poking at the true full

24:10

inerrancy of Scripture .

24:12

Well , the problem with that is , then you become

24:14

the arbitrator of truth . Yeah

24:17

, right . So so now I , I'm the

24:19

one who decides what God actually said

24:21

, when , now and now . I , now

24:24

, again , I think we need to study and we need to know

24:26

where the errors are in transmission , and

24:28

we need to study things in context

24:30

and there might be things culturally that we don't

24:32

understand about Abraham and Sarah . Right

24:35

, so we have to . We have to be humble enough to say

24:37

I'm gonna trust what this says

24:39

, but , man , I don't necessarily understand

24:41

maybe , everything that's going on . We also have to

24:43

take things that are poetic to

24:45

be poetic , right , we ? I mean . So there's

24:48

a lot that goes into it . I think so

24:50

many , I Think so many people

24:52

in Western culture are so arrogant to think

24:54

they can just pick up the Bible and read

24:56

something that's 2,000 years old and

24:59

totally get it . You can't totally

25:01

get it . Like , like , if I , you

25:03

know , if 500 years from now , somebody saw

25:05

a video we're making and I said

25:07

I laced up my vans

25:10

and I bolted out the door

25:12

, I hopped in my armada and I punched

25:14

it to Starbucks , they would not

25:16

know what those words mean . Yeah

25:19

, I mean , like you know , that means I

25:21

was running late . I put my shoes on , I got in my car

25:23

and I went as fast as I could to

25:25

my coffee appointment . But all those things

25:27

like if they don't know what's the Starbucks and if

25:29

they're literally saying , well , so

25:31

he got in an armada , so he had this huge

25:34

Spanish army that

25:36

he was eating , do you see how

25:38

they could miss ? And I think we do that a

25:40

lot with scripture , and

25:42

that's where Studying it , that's where understanding

25:45

the context and the , the history , the

25:47

cultural situations , all of that so vital

25:49

To understand it , because if

25:51

you read the Bible outside of

25:53

context , you're not reading God's

25:55

word .

25:57

And that's important for us . Well

25:59

and I think another part of it is by

26:02

proxy we would no longer be loving God

26:04

with our entire minds . If

26:07

we pick it up and we place or presuppose

26:09

all of our cultural baggage upon

26:11

the text , then we're reading

26:14

some type of mixture of God's

26:16

word along with my experiences , and

26:18

and God's word has to Take

26:20

precedence above all of that . So

26:22

I'm subject to it . It's not subject to

26:24

me . You know Peter

26:27

ends . You know I don't know

26:29

Robby , a fear familiar with Peter ends

26:31

.

26:31

But yeah of course he's .

26:33

He's the guy who would take the incarnational

26:35

position of scripture . What he

26:37

means by that is of the

26:39

following that we should understand the words of God

26:41

, and namely through idioms , attitudes

26:44

, assumptions in general worldviews of the ancient

26:46

authors . Otherwise our cultural

26:48

assumptions become petrified and immune

26:51

to criticism . He's saying that

26:53

the Bible is not accurate in all of

26:55

its details and that we should

26:57

just merely take the experience of

27:00

the authors . And maybe an example

27:02

for him would be the book of Jonah . You

27:04

know , jonah wasn't really swallowed by a

27:06

whale or some large fish , but that

27:08

was an experience that Jonah was having

27:11

with God . And at the

27:13

end of the day , sometimes we have our Jonah

27:15

like moments , blah , blah , blah . So eventually

27:17

, what starts to happen is the scripture becomes

27:19

degradated and I

27:22

, as you were saying , I think it cease , ceases

27:24

to be the word of God in that moment . Because

27:26

how can we then trust it ? I mean , how do

27:28

I know what I'm supposed to trust , how do I know what

27:30

I'm supposed to apply and live out

27:33

if I'm constantly calling it into

27:35

question ?

27:36

Yeah , it becomes a real problem . Um

27:39

, and I don't . I think if you

27:41

start to do that , then you'll just do it with anything

27:43

that you Don't feel

27:45

like is good and that , again , that's where the progressive

27:47

church is right . Section . The Bible is against our

27:50

kind of sexuality . So we're gonna live this out and

27:52

we want to be inclusive and the exclusivity

27:55

of Jesus saying I'm the way , the truth in the life

27:57

. Well , for their culture maybe that

27:59

was true , but for ours , all

28:01

paths lead . So again , you're just making

28:03

scripture your puppet for whatever

28:05

you like . Now , this

28:08

, this is a tactic I use a lot with people

28:10

, because I usually

28:12

don't have like six years to sit at coffee

28:14

with somebody to explain to them all the

28:17

evidence for Christianity , right ? So instead

28:19

of getting into all these arguments for God's existence and

28:21

other stuff , I just try to be

28:23

aligned to the resurrection of Jesus , because he

28:25

says that's the sign for all generations and

28:28

it's it's where we have a ton of evidence , right . So

28:31

, so with with Peter ends . You know this , this

28:33

would be kind of my argument against that . I would say , okay

28:35

. So Jesus said

28:37

Just as Jonah

28:39

was in the belly of the fish

28:42

for three days and three nights , so will

28:44

the Son of man be in the earth for three days

28:46

and three nights , right ? So so Jesus seems

28:49

to think Jonah

28:51

was in the belly of the fish . Jesus

28:54

also said that he

28:56

also sanctioned the , the

28:58

Torah , and the Psalms and the prophets

29:01

as scripture . He quotes from all

29:03

of them , he calls them God's word and

29:05

he says not any of this will pass away . So

29:08

so Jesus is hermeneutic , seems

29:10

to be . He took it literally and

29:12

he even applied it to his situation . Um

29:15

, and then Jesus died and

29:17

rose from the dead . So

29:20

am I gonna trust Peter ends or

29:22

a guy who rose from the dead ? I

29:25

think I'm gonna go with the guy who rose from the dead

29:27

. Seems like a way better path . It

29:30

seems like somebody who's valid . Seems like

29:32

God's stamp of approval is on that

29:34

guy and his message . Where , what

29:36

does Peter ends do ? He wrote a book . Well

29:38

, hitler wrote a book and Joseph Smith

29:40

wrote a book and Mohammed wrote a book .

29:42

Dang well when you put it that way , you know I

29:44

mean

29:46

again , I'm not saying .

29:48

I'm not trying to to to . You

29:50

know malign people's character , but we

29:53

really have to say why

29:55

are you trusting in somebody ? And

29:57

now does my , does my interpretation of

30:00

scripture Come

30:03

at the whim of where Peter ends , feels

30:05

like things should be and shouldn't be like . How do you

30:07

even apply that to your life ? No

30:09

, I'm a follower of Jesus , so I'm gonna

30:11

take Jesus word on this , because he's actually

30:14

proven . He's an authoritative

30:16

source . He predicted he drives

30:18

from the dead . Then he did it . Nobody else

30:20

has done anything like that , so I'm gonna go with

30:22

the guy who has the most validity .

30:24

Yeah , and that helped us Transition

30:26

from okay , proving that

30:28

the manuscripts are good

30:30

, like okay , 99.99

30:33

whatever , like okay , I say , say I'm

30:35

a non-believer and I'm okay with that . Cool , you're your

30:37

Bible's accurate , that's fantastic

30:40

. But that doesn't mean what you're saying

30:42

is true . But you've kind of moved into . Well

30:44

, I can prove that it's true because of Jesus

30:46

and you went straight to the resurrection , which you

30:49

know we've talked about many times , like the resurrections

30:51

where you want to go , especially in evangelism

30:53

. If you can get to the resurrection , that's the

30:55

place you want to talk about the most , because that's

30:57

the one that's going to prove everything to be true

31:00

. Because if that's true , it is all true

31:02

. So you've kind of moved there

31:04

. So is there any other kind

31:06

of advice or apologetic ways

31:08

? As we is ? If we get somebody saying

31:10

, yes , I believe the Bible is accurate , but

31:12

I'm not sure it's fully true

31:14

all of it , how do you

31:17

get somebody to move from there to

31:19

the Bible is actually true ? It is God's

31:21

word .

31:22

Well , I mean , first of all , I think

31:24

that you don't have , you don't have to believe in aneruncy

31:27

to become a Christian . So first of all , I want

31:29

them to trust in the gospel , right , because I think you

31:31

can deduce that Jesus rose from the dead , apart

31:34

from in aneruncy of scripture . So

31:36

I want them to believe in Jesus first . But

31:39

it's kind of a logical conclusion

31:42

. If God can't lie , which

31:44

the Bible says , it all over right numbers

31:46

2319 says it , psalm

31:49

12 , 6 says it . John 17

31:51

, 17 says God's word is truth . Titus

31:53

1 , 2 says God cannot lie . So if

31:55

God cannot lie and this is his message

31:58

to humans then it can't

32:00

have errors in it , because that's that's

32:03

what aneruncy is right , yeah , and so I

32:05

would just encourage them to say okay , listen , I

32:08

can't prove aneruncy to you

32:10

. It's a deduction of . God

32:12

tells the truth always and this

32:14

is his word . Now

32:17

we can say well , what proofs do we

32:19

have that this is accurate ? And

32:21

that's fun because you can look at prophecy

32:23

, right , I mean , the prophecy in the Bible

32:25

is insane . That the prophecy Daniel

32:27

9 About , I mean to the

32:29

day , the number of years from the decree

32:32

to when Jesus rides into Jerusalem

32:34

. Come on . Also , there's

32:36

, there's , you know , in the great Isaiah scroll

32:38

and in the the 12

32:41

minor prophets scroll that they found at Kumbhruin , there's

32:43

the prophecy about Jesus

32:45

being born in Bethlehem , ephathra

32:48

right , not Zebulon

32:50

, because there's another Bethlehem , so it's a specific one

32:52

we have . We can hold in

32:54

our hands the kumran document that

32:56

predates Jesus birth by a hundred years

32:58

, saying where he'd be born . I mean

33:00

, so okay , what is that ? This prophecy is

33:03

clearly before him , the prophecy

33:05

in Isaiah about him being buried in a rich man's

33:07

tomb . We can hold that in our hands today . That's

33:09

100 and some years before Jesus

33:12

actually was born . So the prophecy

33:14

part of it , I think is fascinating

33:17

to delve

33:19

into . To say no , there's something else behind

33:21

this and it's not no stradamus , like

33:23

prophecies that are vague

33:26

. They're very specific about

33:28

times and dates and places . So

33:30

I think that's an encouraging thing for Christians

33:32

. To look into is Bible prophecy , but

33:35

also the accuracy in the New Testament . It's

33:39

unbelievable . The different internal

33:41

evidences we have of it . Telling

33:43

the truth , one that's really fun is

33:45

just embarrassment Ancient

33:51

, what do I want to say ? Historical

33:54

prophets and theologians

33:56

and historians they

33:59

look at manuscripts and they'll look for

34:01

places where there's embarrassing

34:03

details put in , because

34:05

they say that's real honesty

34:07

. If somebody will embarrass themselves

34:10

in a document , it's because that

34:12

probably actually happened and they're trying to tell the truth

34:14

. And all through all scripture we have embarrassing

34:16

things . If I was starting a cult

34:18

, I would never say

34:21

that Jesus called me Satan

34:23

. I'm trying to get people to follow

34:25

me right and then I'm saying follow Jesus

34:27

and listen to what I'm saying . And yeah , he did call me Satan

34:29

. That doesn't make sense . You would never make

34:31

that up right . You

34:34

would never add things about women

34:36

finding Jesus at the tomb , because culturally

34:38

that was the worst witness to

34:41

find something . And so there's

34:43

so many embarrassing details throughout

34:45

scripture that historians look at and go

34:47

no , it seems like they're telling the truth in a lot of these

34:49

areas , not to mention how accurate

34:51

they are for places and for

34:54

who's ruling from the Roman

34:56

side of things and who's ruling from the Jewish side

34:58

of things . So

35:00

there's a lot we can study and

35:02

test against history and archaeology to

35:05

see if they were telling the truth , which

35:07

is kind of fun to do , and it's an encouragement to Christians

35:09

to say now , this book's pretty legit .

35:11

Yeah , I mean , the reason I brought that up is because

35:14

, just to kind of summarize , if you want to

35:16

move from , okay , someone's like I agree

35:18

that it's all that it's accurate , that

35:20

it's worth reading , okay , let's

35:22

read it then . Right , that's how you're going to learn that

35:25

it's true . You're going to read it . You're going to

35:27

study the prophecy , like you said . You're going to study

35:29

the New Testament . You're going to see all of these things . Open

35:31

the Bible with people and read it with them , like

35:34

that's what we do on this podcast , that's why we do this podcast

35:36

, so people would open the Bible and read it together

35:39

. That's how you're going to prove God's Word to

35:41

be true is spending time with people with

35:43

the Bible open and reading it together . And

35:45

so , yeah , we need to know our Bibles in

35:47

order to say , yes , god's Word is true

35:49

, because one God said it in Scripture

35:51

but also proves itself true over

35:54

and over , in the most minute details

35:56

, like you pointed out .

35:57

The other thing that I always think is funny is so many

35:59

people will say , oh , there's all these contradictions , there's all

36:02

these issues , and I've

36:04

never seen one . I always ask them hey , I got a Bible

36:06

right here , can you show me one ? And they never can .

36:08

No , they can't .

36:09

Yeah , they can't right . But

36:11

the other thing is this like for

36:13

2000 years , the

36:15

New Testament has been under extreme

36:17

scrutiny , and it's the book more

36:19

studied in history than any other

36:21

book , and for

36:23

some reason it just keeps standing the test

36:25

of time and nobody's proven why

36:27

it's a miserable failure . Now

36:30

, people might not like it and they might not want to believe in

36:32

it , but you can't tell me . There haven't been super

36:34

brilliant people who have scrutinized

36:36

this thing only to find out that it's accurate

36:38

, and so I also think we have like a historical

36:41

reliability stance on

36:44

our side . We have all these brilliant

36:46

minds in history who've studied this book

36:48

and haven't been able to crack the code

36:50

. The other thing is , too , is I just don't trust

36:52

that a bunch of fishermen could come up with

36:54

the greatest character in all literature

36:56

for all time , but that's crazy

36:59

to me . There's so many things

37:02

that we look at to go . No , this book . It

37:04

screams authentic , it's eyewitness

37:06

testimony and it's

37:09

revolutionized the world

37:11

. And that's the other thing . Not only do

37:13

we have it , but it has changed culture

37:15

, and so I think that

37:17

it's a book worth looking into

37:19

, and I think it can stand on its own and prove itself

37:21

.

37:21

Yeah , and no little brother is going to say , as

37:24

big brother , is the Messiah , unless it's true

37:26

, you know no way , no way

37:28

.

37:28

My brother never say I was God , no way , yeah

37:31

.

37:31

So so yeah , thank you for breaking that

37:34

down , because I just think it's important that we reiterate

37:36

that knowing God's word is so important , because

37:39

it's what's going to be our tool when we go

37:41

out there to talk to people . So

37:44

thank you for that .

37:45

It does come down to a point , though , of am I going

37:47

to trust what God says is accurate

37:49

, or am I going to follow my heart

37:51

? And that's where people are getting tripped up today

37:54

. Is they're saying I'm going to follow my desires

37:56

and I'm going to be my true self ? Don't

37:58

be your true self . Your true self is broken

38:00

. You need Jesus . And so

38:02

it comes down to that man or maker

38:05

who are you going to listen to ? And

38:07

I think it's way smarter

38:09

, I think it's better to listen to our maker than

38:12

to follow our hearts , because my

38:14

heart's deceitfully wicked , above all things , and I

38:16

don't even know how bad it is . Yeah , and

38:18

so that's where it comes down to

38:20

.

38:21

Yeah , there's an illustration actually you gave last

38:23

time we were on , that I still use today , which

38:25

is the stoplight , the feelings

38:27

of the stoplight illustration

38:29

, where you just said , well , the lights

38:31

, the lights red , and I can choose to follow

38:34

what is true or the law , or to make

38:36

sure I stop so I don't hurt myself , I don't hurt anybody

38:38

else . Or I can just say , well , I just don't feel

38:40

like stopping today and I'm just going to follow the things that

38:42

I feel and I'm just going to go through it because

38:44

that's just what I want to do . And the danger

38:47

in going with the feelings , or

38:49

I feel like the Bible doesn't say this , or it does

38:51

say that , well , we can't do feelings

38:53

because all it does is it hurts people and leads

38:55

people to hell , and so we need to make sure that

38:57

we're doing things the way God says it in His

39:00

Word and we don't take away from it , we don't add to

39:02

it and we stay true to His Word .

39:04

That's right , as we start to land

39:06

the plane . I suppose you know we moved

39:08

from defining inerrancy , we

39:11

moved to discussions about inerrancy , the

39:14

reason why we should believe

39:16

in biblical inerrancy . We

39:19

talked about how it affects the

39:21

Christian , how it affects the nonbeliever , both

39:24

positively or negatively , depending on

39:26

what you do with the doctrine Robbie

39:28

. If we were to land the plane and if somebody

39:30

were to say how can I learn more ? Where

39:33

can I learn more ? What other resources

39:35

? Or you know where else

39:37

should I go to further my education on

39:40

this topic of biblical inerrancy ? Just

39:42

off the cuff or off the top of your head

39:44

, what would be some places ? You would

39:46

point them to and

39:49

you know who would you decide to trust most

39:51

with this issue , being an apologist

39:54

yourself .

39:55

Yeah . So I've actually been

39:57

having this conversation a lot with my colleague , tim

39:59

Barnett and some other guys , because

40:01

we feel like there's nobody who's

40:03

really defending inerrancy right

40:05

now like it was , you know

40:07

, 30 , 40 years ago with the Chicago statement

40:10

. Guys , they're all getting older . I mean

40:12

Wayne Gruden was on that and he was young back then

40:14

and he's he's old now . Right , but

40:17

the guy who I think did it the best

40:19

is Norm Geisler . He has

40:22

a book called inerrancy . I mean he

40:24

stood for this . He

40:26

left the evangelical theological society

40:28

over open theist being let in because

40:30

he said that's not holding to inerrancy

40:33

. And so he's the man

40:35

I think still . You know he's , he's , he's

40:38

passed now he's with the Lord , but he's

40:40

still the guy I think that does the best job

40:42

of defining inerrancy and

40:44

defending inerrancy from scripture .

40:47

Yeah , that's . That's awesome . We love Norm Geisler

40:49

. I've never met

40:52

him personally , one on one , but it feels like everybody

40:54

who's had an influence in my life was somehow

40:56

influenced by him , so I know

40:58

that Dr Geisler has done a lot of great

41:00

work .

41:01

He was awesome . I got to meet him one time at

41:03

a conference and I was struggling

41:05

because at seminary we were talking over do we have

41:07

the exact words of Jesus or do we

41:10

just have the message of Jesus ? And I

41:12

went up to him and I asked him what's your ? I

41:14

gave the technical term because I knew what he think . I said what's

41:16

your view on absysem of ox versus absysem

41:19

of verb right ? And

41:21

he said Well , we don't have his exact

41:23

words . And I said Really , why do

41:25

you think that ? And he said Because it's

41:27

in Greek . And I was like , yeah

41:29

, like that was it . I was like you're

41:31

freaking genius , right .

41:32

Like .

41:33

I was probably like 20 or something , you know . But

41:35

I was like yeah that's true and

41:38

he's like but we have , we have his message . We know

41:40

what the message is that we're supposed to take

41:42

to the world and I was like that's brilliant . So

41:44

he was man . I look up to that

41:46

guy a ton and he wrote so

41:48

many books . So if people are looking for

41:50

, he literally has a book called inerrancy in

41:53

Aronty by Norman Geisler , so that's

41:55

one I would get .

41:56

He's got another book . It's just called Christian Apologetics

41:59

, I think it's got like a green cover and

42:01

he does an excellent job . When I was

42:03

20 , I barely knew how to read it , but

42:05

he essentially goes through all the different worldviews

42:08

and then explains why Christianity

42:10

is the most robust and all the evidence is for

42:12

it . So certainly pick up his

42:14

book . As it pertains to STR

42:16

, Stand to Reason . Give us just

42:18

a couple more things . If our listeners

42:21

are saying , hey , if I go to Stand to Reason , what

42:23

am I going to find ? How can your

42:26

ministry equip their faith even further ?

42:28

Yeah . So if they want to go to strorg

42:31

, that's where we're at and we have

42:33

30 years worth of blog

42:35

articles on every apologetics

42:37

issue you could think of . So there's just a search

42:40

bar and I do this all the time . I'll go in

42:42

there and I'll search relativism or

42:44

inerrancy or things like this , and it'll

42:46

pop up all of these podcasts , all

42:48

of these articles and you can just nerd

42:51

out to your heart's content on all of this

42:53

stuff that we have on there . We

42:55

also have a weekly well , it's

42:58

a biweekly podcast that comes out from my boss , greg

43:00

Cokal , where he does an excellent job

43:02

at interviewing apologists and theologians

43:04

, taking calls from people , answering

43:07

tough questions . But

43:09

we also have STRU , which is our free

43:11

online courses that

43:13

people can take . We have courses on hermeneutics

43:17

right on how to study the Bible , on

43:20

the Trinity , on relativism

43:22

, on why it's got to allow evil

43:24

the resurrection a whole ton

43:26

of different apologics issues , and they're free , easy

43:29

courses that people can just take at their

43:31

leisure . So that's on the website . But we also do

43:33

conferences around the country . We do

43:36

six student conferences actually

43:38

. Next weekend in Los Angeles

43:40

we're starting our first one , and then we'll

43:42

be in Seattle and Dallas and Minneapolis

43:44

and Philadelphia and Georgia over

43:46

this next year doing this conference

43:49

and it's actually called man or

43:51

maker . That's what we're doing it on this

43:53

year , talking about who do we trust , who's

43:55

the authority . So

43:57

yeah , we have a whole ton of things like that . Also

43:59

, if anybody's interested in becoming an outpost

44:02

that you know I'm in charge of these chapter groups

44:04

love to have people go on there under training

44:06

. You can just click on outposts , learn more about

44:09

it , apply to become an outpost director and

44:11

then we'll get you started with curriculum to be teaching

44:13

in your church .

44:15

Praise God . Can we pray for you in

44:17

your ministry as we close ? Is that ?

44:19

cool . I would love that . Yeah , that'd be great .

44:21

Father , we thank you for our brother , we thank you

44:23

for our friend Robbie . We

44:25

ask you that you would continually

44:28

remind him of

44:30

his need for you , of

44:33

his dependency upon you . We

44:35

thank you , lord , that you are the one who mightily

44:38

works within him , that God , your

44:40

Holy Spirit , resides within

44:42

him and that , god , he can walk

44:44

in a loving relationship with you and

44:46

, as a result of that relationship , he can continue

44:49

on in the ministry . So , father

44:51

, please , in the words of C

44:53

L Mitchell , give him a continued

44:55

intimacy that he would never recover

44:57

from , as it pertains to you . And

45:00

, father , we also just ask for the people who

45:02

benefit from his ministry that

45:04

at the heart level , at the mind level , that

45:06

they would be changed and transformed . And

45:09

whether Robbie sees the benefit

45:12

of his ministry today or not

45:14

, whether he benefits from the shade

45:16

of the seeds he's planting

45:18

, which he hopes to become trees , or

45:21

he doesn't benefit from that here

45:23

in this lifetime , god , I pray that you would continue to

45:25

encourage him as he moves forward . We

45:27

thank you , we love you , we pray for him

45:29

, for his family , his wife , his children , that

45:32

, god , you would protect them and in the

45:34

world that we are living in , he would persevere

45:36

and he would keep on . We love

45:38

you , lord . We thank you for our listeners . We pray

45:41

this in the matchless name of Jesus Amen

45:43

.

45:46

Thank you , robbie , and thank you to all of our listeners

45:48

. Please share the podcast with your

45:50

friends and family . We do this just to share

45:53

the word of God and to help equip believers

45:55

to do the ministry , and so thank you

45:57

again and have a blessed week .