9 Burst results for "Dan Wallace"
"dan wallace" Discussed on Coffee House Shots
"So dominant rob respected within the department dominant grabs more immediate problem. We keep talking about gemini. Is he gonna stay in his position. Will he be moved and they're plenty of rimas. I mean like reshuffling and few weeks so watch that space. But i think by far the most immediate issue dominic. Robb is the fact that he seems to have a big program intensive leaks in his own department. And i think as soon as you have the number of leaks of details of what. The secretary of state is up to some which seems to be private office a smaller group and some intensities documents that does seem to be a point officials. Honor longer on your side. And that doesn't mean you from your post but it does make your job a lot harder on. I think that's what he's now going to encounter. And james in non dominic. Robb dan wallace knees. Yesterday has asked for more money. i mean obviously. The h has very bad situation. Worse than usual with the caveat backlog so what does it asking for. Is it to target the backlog. That is awesome for over ten billion pounds. I think this is one of the political problems is that cova comes around. The the treasury instinct is right. We can stop the crisis. Spending you know furlough comes to end at the end of this month. The universal credit uplift comes to an end at the end of the the twenty pound. A week uplift comes at the end of this month. The pope nevena. How is all of these departments in the organization's organizations can start knocking on the door asking for more money we've already had the government's education catch hops. Are kevin collins resigning things. There's not money going into education. Catch up go here is just saying it's ten billion pounds just to get on top of this backlog now the nhs battle. I think if you look at the known political dangerous government this is the biggest one job it as a hobby. Just battle in england could rise to thirteen. Million bodies are waiting. This is going to one in four people on it. Essentially means pretty much edwards blood relative on the waiting list and that is obviously going to become a massive political. I mean one of the things that you're going to see how you were given the eighties worth remembering in oil thursday because that's the one area that was one of the very few areas that was protected. What's the that the easy comes. The was wounded like changing. The measure of inflation used to determine how benefits were rated in. All of these things have gone. So what does the government do now given it. so determined not to return to austerity and engage. He is the government to give them this money. Because we're going to feed phases. James says by the treasury's looking at tightening. Its belt again in this. The spending review coming up later this year. So i think the spending review is going to be some difficult conversations various departments particularly because it's not just the department of health. The has occurred back. And you'll see the ministry of justice and and others. But i think when it comes to spending priorities we had something interesting. Happening the twenty nine hundred election. Which the tories that she spoke about. Nhtsa made it and central. Mary's in the past. There was one habit to neutralize it but not bringing up much because it's constantly helps labor and i think that therefore when it comes to spending priorities germany speaking..
"dan wallace" Discussed on Cross Examined Official Podcast
"The starts at seven pm that's about an hour north of Nashville. So if you're anywhere in that area, love to see on Thursday night November? Fifth and. I'll be a calvary chapel, Chino Hills Lord Willing on Sunday November, fifteenth doing all three services there. So go to our website cross examined or click on events annual see Frank Turret calendar. And don't forget all the online courses we have as well. We've got we're adding courses all the time we've got a couple from Shaun McDowell. Now we've got Gary Habermas. We've got Craig Blomberg. We've got Dan Wallace Myself Jay Warner. Wallace. Bobby Conway Michael Patton, all these courses are up on our website. Just click on cross examined or click online courses you'll see them there and you can take a self paced course where you can learn any of this stuff at your own pace or when we're running a live course, you can take the premium version where we do these live zoom sessions where we can.
"dan wallace" Discussed on KCRW
"On Casey W. On Madeleine brand, blaming China and immigrants debate over mandatory mask wearing and locked out orders playing down the seriousness of the disease. It's all happening now with covered 19. But these reactions they're not new. They happened 100 years ago here in California during other epidemics, like the Spanish flu, the bubonic plague cholera. USC historians William Deverell and Dan Wallace looked into what happened then. And they're here now. Hi. Hi. Huh? Thank you Having us Great to have you. Well, how did you conduct your research? What were you looking into? So I started my research at the beginning of quarantine. So I was doing this all primarily online, and I found a lot of great stuffs A lot of great old photographs. Cem Cem, testimonials from people living through certain pandemics and I think some of the cooler things I found were these informational pamphlets that were passed around a couple of the city of San Francisco one from L. A. There's really the public service announcements of the day with no television. No social media to get the word out. So They were informational pamphlets gave people sort of remedies for certain diseases. The best way to treat him whether there was going out and getting sunlight or using mercury, which I don't think this is probably a good idea. In case off the plague in San Francisco. What to do with rats? How best to catch a rat on then what to do with the rat? Once you catch it, which was go collect your tents that bounty. In some cases, you would see an explanation for why disease made it to America, and in one of the cases it was Critical of all the immigration going on. So it saw the rise of the virus or the disease as ah, part of, um new people coming to America, as opposed to another pamphlet, which understood it as Inorganic infecting matter, And so that's the problem here is solely for scientific and should be dealt with in a certain way. Other times it was explained. As as People are the problem. Certain people. Yeah. Certain people being Asian people immigrants before, right. It sounds very, very familiar. So let's talk about that plague. This was around the turn of the century and fill this originated in San Francisco. Well, there's a couple of plague outbreaks on the Pacific coast, some of the very beginning of the century around 1900 then about 10 years later, up north and then by the mid 19 twenties, the last major plague outbreak in the United States happens here in Southern California in Los Angeles, right near where we now have union station. Well, initiating thing also is that China was blamed in that instance. As it has blamed now. Yeah, There's you know these fissures in let's say, California society. These fissures about race race difference. Fear hatred, discrimination when you get pandemic disease dropped in on already difficult circumstances. People are a lot of people are going to reach for the ugliest reflex, and that's to blame a population for a disease that can be spread by ethnicity or race but by poverty. Right. And so let's move on to the Spanish flu of 1918 1920. We've been learning a lot about this period in history because it compares to the current one. We're in What were the debates over prevention back then, Dan, what were people arguing about when I came to trying to prevent the spread of the people have the same concern that we have today wearing masks and you're taking Precautions to avoid large groups. And I think just taking it seriously in general, I had a report from from someone reflecting back of their time, uh, during the plague when she was a young girl and Maybe not taken as seriously as she should have been. And and she went out dancing one night and came back and got a mother sick, potentially got her mother's sick, and so she had to live the rest of her life, wondering if her sort of Um maybe unwillingness to accept the situation caused her mother's death. So that's also similar to what we're seeing now. Lots of young people going out and partying and going to the beach and people worried that they're going to spread it to their older relatives. So one of the things we see in the 1918 influenza pandemic is it wreaks havoc in a younger population, young and healthy. Andi, one of the epicenters is the U. S military and what's Particularly scary about right now. This pandemic is the virus does seem to be increasingly affecting younger people in very, very bad ways. So No, the virus moves of its own logic. Yeah, and so in terms of the reaction are you seeing a similar reaction from 100 years ago? Yeah, One of the things from the store of record that that stands out is when people take community seriously and do their best not to be reckless. Then we see say images of entire families masked up and keeping their version of social distance. He is to be their neighbours or their community. But we also see In the past, we see a kind of recklessness and so once community starts to break down. The virus is goingto really thrive in the midst of that, and that's uh, that's frightening. Was there a more or less communitarian spirit during the Spanish flu. I think the recognition In the Spanish flu era of the catastrophic numbers, So 50 million dead. Across the world. Once that sinks in I think the community response Has certainly helped, but the apocalyptic catastrophic destruction of that influenza outbreak Is something that I suspected a lot of ways we have yet to get over. It was only 100 years ago. And so is it frustrating, though, when you see similar reactions happening now, when we should have learned these lessons from 100 years ago, Of course, I think You're historians and I think the profession of history's is often so I looked at it as a safeguard against your repeating past mistakes, but I think what historians it up doing is just trying to explain to stat is why Why do people continue to fall in the same traps? Even with all the things we know that have happened in the past? When it came to the official response. So we're talking about kind of a community community response. But when it came to an official response When you look back at these various Epidemics, pandemics from about 100 years ago and how they played out here in California. Do you see the same? Official response as we see today because today we have varying Different responses. You've got President Trump downplaying the pandemic and wearing masks, But then you've got someone like Governor Cuomo, who took it very seriously from me. Very much from the outset. Did you see that back then, as well? Yeah, I think we do see a variable response. There's in the 1918 1919 influenza epidemic. There is a reluctance on the part of national government. To may even mention it. Um and then at local levels, the responses variable some of it deeply correct in terms of public health and distancing and masking. Other reflexes very ugly about who's responsible. So there's a entirely variable response. Much like we see today, I think I would just add. I mean backing up to the plague in San Francisco, you had Governor of California who really downplayed the situation into denied the existence of the plague, even when medical officials were were saying, saying otherwise. So arguably when historians look back at this pandemic Do you think they're going to come to the same conclusions that you did? In some cases. Certainly, yeah. You know, you hope that they're going to come to the conclusion that that people in 2020 handled things well on DH made it through. But There's there's gonna be no denying the parallels between sort of past pandemics and what we're dealing with today. Bill last word. Do you think that You know, we can eventually learn from history and not repeat the same mistakes. I have to. Yeah, I do think we can I think in terms of the response to this 2020 and potentially 2021 pandemic, Um it's in a lot of ways. Of course, it's way too soon to tell But I'm optimistic in the sense that Those parallels both good and bad, have become part of the discourse. Um, the broader discourse and we just got to keep the attention. On finding those comparisons and making them very, very public. Well, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having us Thanks for having us My pleasure. That's professor William Deverell and grad student Dan Wallace from Ulysses History Department..
"dan wallace" Discussed on Xtra Sports Radio 1300 AM
"Assistance contact their team twenty four seven at rocking mortgage dot com for their home to yours the team at a rocket mortgage is with you thanks for being with us everybody to target double Friday yeah so we want to know how old you were listening wearer ease your acts which got Cookin this Easter weekend that send us that information via Twitter DA on CBS we will not sell it to a third party Twitter D. A. on CBS or on Facebook Facebook dot com slash the the H. show let's talk draft Michael read or pro football focus is going to join us NFL draft analysts will drop on by twenty minutes from now in forty minutes your best audio of the day as part of the sound check next hour George Kittle is gonna join us all paroled Niners tight end next hour George Kittle what a best characters also in the sport all ready what is it about this tight heads can we talk to George Kittle coming up next hour here on the show but we dipped our channel with the story briefly yesterday so I thought it deserved more time Carmelo Anthony in the two thousand three NBA draft is selected by the Denver Nuggets in the years he was in Denver Carmelo topped off with the Western Conference finals losing to the Lakers that was the best season he had had a western finals losing to Kobe and the Lakers Carmelo the O. three draft gets drafted number three H. lebron the Cavaliers won Darko Milic share H. to the pistons to Carmelo to the nuggets for read Chris bosh raptors for Dwyane Wade he five think about it NBA draft where all the top five picks for our perennial all stars three or four are in the hall of fame depending on Chris bosh but something that he'll get in at the very least three are some of the best players of their generation to our multi time champions and one is arguably the greatest player ever certainly the greatest player of his era that's the top five picks in the NBA draft that year lebron Carmelo Bosch weighed one thing is not like the owner one things a lot like the above error that would be number two dark road the pistons so it's interesting because that was the June of three draft that season the O. three O. four season the pistons end up winning the NBA finals that was the team with Ben Wallace Chauncey Billups rip Hamilton in that team upset the mighty Lakers in five video for NBA finals they would get back to the NBA finals the following season against the spurs but lose in seven they would go to three consecutive Eastern Conference finals after that that was the area where the pistons were the Eastern Conference finals almost every year for more than half a decade so has the pistons giraffe did Carmelo his rookie season may win the NBA championship his second season they were in the NBA finals and then the next three seasons they were the Eastern Conference finals here was Carmelo Anthony talking about the what if if the pistons had taken him remember the pitch it's gonna take a hammer or Bosch or Wade could you imagine that here is Carmelo with his friend Dwyane Wade via Twain Wade's Instagram no matter how much we look at what the wait at the drive was a when we're like it all played out so what it was supposed to be right you ended up in Miami now look at you you know me that does that's that's your home loan ended up in Cleveland the deal we did like I ended up in Denver I was doing what I was doing like all everything that we've done a we went to has all played out for us in some way shape or form an hour throughout our life especially now I don't know what I would have been about a went to Detroit I'm not no I had the flu maybe two or three rings W. you know I was there but I don't know I don't know how everything else would've played out after how interesting is this what a half really this is one of the great what ifs because we let's peel this back a little bit Carmelo Anthony is known as a great score will and he'll be in the hall of fame one day because of his scoring ability but he's always marked down for two things not a great teammate not N. B. A. winner a winner in college definitely led Syracuse to that three national championships but in the NBA not a winner not a great teammate and how different would that have been had he been drafted by the ultimate team up in the pistons I mean it is again if you're Detroit Pistons fan right now you just don't want to hear this segment but I imagine the pistons with that squad Chauncey rap Dan Wallace recede Wallace I imagine that team with either mellow or Dwyane Wade or Chris bosh I imagine that infusion of a great young player not a good young player a great young player they wanted NBA championship by getting absolutely no contribution for the number two pick overall none militants gave them nothing now maybe Carmelo wouldn't have worked there because Carmella maybe needed shots maybe he needed that volume he needed it the offense to run through him to be effective and maybe being a rookie on that team full of veterans perhaps Larry brown shoved in the corner and he's doesn't develop the scoring touch that we saw the rest of the way it is career but maybe it's the best thing for him maybe being part of a veteran team and fitting it in learning from Chauncey and learning from rip and learning from these guys and being it'd be a finals with it's hard to imagine that the pistons would've won the NBA finals with Carmelo Anthony they got nothing from Darko even they didn't play Carmelo Anthony maybe about five minutes a game you think they would have still won the NBA championship we Darko didn't contribute anything so just imagine if you're one of Melo's career he now has a national championship in college and it'd be a final championship and imagine now the alternate universe where Carmelo is learning what it takes to be part of a winner in the NBA this piece fits here this veteran presence is needed here this is what this looks like instead he goes to Denver and they're good but it's taking a lot of effort from him of course Chauncey ends up being there as well but it's taking a lot of effort and a lot of scoring it's up to him to carry everything offense of late most nights and he kind of knocks his head up against the ceiling can't get through it and it wants to to landed New York gets traded to the Knicks that accepted give away a bunch of pieces for him to get traded there they make the mistake in trading for him instead allowing him to sign in free agency they trade away all of this all this collateral so that then the nucleus of the Knicks is ripped apart it's only amare Stoudemire and Carmella basically he runs into the worst dysfunctional franchise arguably in B. and B. eight year after year he does help them get to the playoffs for the second round of the playoffs but again that's now deeper into its career to very veteran team is gonna like spare parts we can't really keep that together and it now becomes the descent of dysfunction with the Knicks Phil Jackson he's not a winner he can't lead a team there were no good and that it kind of spirals out of control he ends up with Oklahoma City he ends up with the Houston Rockets he ends up at a basketball last year and now with the very very tail end of his career it is one of the most fascinating what ifs and it's hard to argue Carmelo saying I'd have two or three rings if I would get drafted by the pistons because he probably would have he probably would have had one minutes kind of almost a guarantee would have had one and Carmelo in year two against the spurs of the NBA finals I mean it's hard not to imagine he's a little bit enough just enough of a dash of nothing but improvement your number two for that that distance team to win the NBA finals because remember that's one of the worst watched NBA finals ever because it's games played in the seventies that is the height of the defensive slow it down no pays you know defensive late in battles the pistons and the spurs that you're played one of the most ugliest hard to watch finals ever to get gave a plate of the seventies is mellow enough just to the game seven to get that NBA championship he's probably right the pistons probably go back to back with him in years one of yours too and you don't you have Carmelo they're saying well everything happens for a reason basically you go to Miami that your home abroad goes to Cleveland I went to Denver I was doing my thing but you know that kind of falls hollow because he didn't end up staying in Denver for his career is not an icon in Denver you know he's not a Denver Nuggets legend that's not it all worked out well for everybody else he was the one guy didn't work out well for morass I wonder how criminal looks at his life compared to those guys but it's hard to argue he probably has a multiple rings two or three championships had he simply been drafted two instead of three I'm not ready to go with multiple championships it's hard to imagine he got that the pistons don't win like you said that first image of him as a rookie the problem I have is yes he might have learned all these different things but ultimately mellows game was still a ball stopping score and that was not the pistons game that made them great Mel was not a great defender what made the pistons great with all five guys on the floor playing tenacious defense so I just wonder long term of the pistons team they didn't want another part or were they going to be able to win another changing their style having a guy who frankly at times as a defensive liability on the floor I guy that no matter how many times they move the ball around rip Hamilton Chauncey Billups eccentric cetera that now the pool was always got to stop it mellows hands that the style of play for the pistons would have changed so I'm not sure that would have changed enough in year one where they got nothing out of dark anyway there they wouldn't want to ring but I wonder how much of Miller's actual style game forget the mentality would have changed that they would have won multiple championships all fair points but do you think it's possible that they would have taught him to not be a ball stop I don't I don't know that you would have been able to teach Carmelo Anthony not to be Carmelo Anthony yeah I know that's that's a member if his one year at Syracuse you know there are major contributions from both Gerry McNamara and a key Warrick it's not like he took every shot yes and it's not like he took every shot the NBA the NBA is just a different style of game of college to me it's apples and oranges what he did in college and what he did the NBA it's completely different and he's facing a beat defenses as well and having to play NBA defenses well and not worried about you know the other team you might be playing in the final four Syracuse not having the offense of weapons on the other for the you have to guard against I I think all those things need to be taken into account apps I mean you're right about the style of the pistons were certainly not the style of of Carmelo Anthony but I do.
"dan wallace" Discussed on Apologetics Live
"It is. Thank you for having me and so it's going to be your last year was pretty funny. Oh it was great. It was funny listening to that. Live and actually the the best. I was GONNA play the clip after that. Maybe I'll do it next week after that. I have like an eight minute clip of a guy who right right after that conversation. A guy denies that that babies exist. And then there's a guy who wants to argue. He asks he asks a question he says. Can you prove that God exists? And that's like what kind of proof? And he basically just prove it and Mac os the resurrection. And he's like that's not scientific. Amoco's did an S. for scientific proof and then we even explain that science can't be used to prove God because science is the study of the natural world and God is immaterial. You can't use it and he just. It was funny because he just commented that the guy saying babies don't exist was foolish then. He went on to make himself look bad. It was like Oh it was classic. The show play that longer clip for folks to enjoy at the end so Alex. Welcome on tell some folks will will not know much about you. You and I've recently met because there's a a group of of urban evangelists that were part of and we're just trying to see how we can evangelize and reach out and Depaul Jackson. We've been trying to figure out how to do it in this new age. Were in where we're all stuck at home so So I had said Hey. Do you WanNa come on and you jumped on it and said let's do it so long. You tell folks about yourself and your ministry you got. Yeah what's getting glad to be here and and you know now's the best time to to jump on programs like this whether you're a guest or watching because we got time Although this has been extremely busy week from me so I'm actually getting my masters right now in apologetic so I've got a couple of papers couple tests But prior to that I train a lot with cross. Examine Instructors Academy with Frank Terry. Jim Warner Wallace. Great Coco Chanel. Mcdowell's guys Did some training with ours and about a couple years ago I started a conference called the proof for the truth conference here in Chicago This is our third year doing it this year. It was posted this month but obviously with everything that got pushed to the end of August. So if you're GONNA website you can find information for that there But yeah I I've been. I was in youth ministry president also past education at a relatively large church here in the city into another passion. I planted a House Church. A little over a year ago. So a lot of my my heart and my passion now is making sure our young people understand and I say youth and young adults that there is evidence for why we believe what we believe because the trend we see of young people walking away when they get to or through. College is often because they haven't been given the proper tools to stand up to what a professor may say. Yes so and let me The website up and then put that back up. The website for your conference is because you said go to the website but for folks who who are listening on the podcast. They can't see it on the bottom of the screen so it is. Www dot proof for the truth dot org so proof for the truth dot Org. Is the website go to For that conference which is happening into the month await. Now see that you you guys just gotTa go online like everyone else. We're actually in the midst. I reached out to a friend of mine. Justin Peters said hey you because he had he called me last week and said so has your has your speaking schedule going and I said all cleared up. And he's like mine too so we're like sit around like you know we're just working on some some well. I'm doing a lot with my local church now. get very active teaching mid week. Bible study doing the preaching and And then we're we do a Friday night movie night. I'm leading the discussion. So I've been real busy there but Justin's been working on some videos and talks I said why don't we try to do like an online one day seminar like we've done before and we travel around and do and so we're actually working on that so so? I'm I'm glad you said that I forgot about this So Yeah I lost several speaking engagements in the last month. Obviously for the situation that we're in but I am launching a A one not a one day but my first Webinar the beginning of May. And if you go to the word I think I should coined this word. Dibley Balaji DOT EVENT BRIGHT DOT COM. You can you can register their though. I am trying to do some online stuff. And it's going to be dealing with an apologetic kind of like a crash. Course beginning courts. Yes so where do you said? You're doing your masters in apologize. Where at Liberty University okay? So yeah you meant in and you're working with some guys. I know I agree. Cokle Jim Wallace. Good guys the conservative. Jim Wallace by the way the the Christian gym walls he actually. He could go with using his his name for his books. Because it's like wait. Everyone's going to be a confused with the other gym walls. Who's a good theologian? So yeah so let. Let's talk. We're coming up on resurrection Sunday. This is something that I think we see with. We see with a lot of folks The fact that you know every year people come around they could have good Friday. You have resurrection Sunday. They celebrate with family. Some people know the meaning behind it but you know the Israeli right. Yeah that's it. Yeah no I. I never followed that party either because I grew up Jewish so I didn't understand like I didn't get all that stuff I don't. Yeah so but the thing is. Is that one of the things you see at this time of year is history channel will always almost always have some shows some programs on the resurrection completely liberal nothing historical and it's just basically trying to argue. The resurrection didn't happen. It's a fairy tale. So let let's discuss. Is there actual evidence that we can look to for the resurrection? Wh What say you absolutely? Ns what's actually amazing about it And as a quick sidebar for everyone watching most of those shows have already been debunked years before they air so Just a side note but anyway the the evidence for the resurrection. When you really look at it is so great that I almost feel like when we when we get to heaven. This guy's GonNa be like why? Why was there even any doubt As far as something that occurred in ancient history there is more evidence for this event than for most other things that we take for granted Things pertaining to Caesar Socrates Alexander. The great no-one questions those things you never been in a history class in school. I don't believe that about Alexander. The reason is it's not a it's not a hedge you it's hard issue in my opinion and so the question is if it is true. What does that require of me? That requires me to submit to what is in the book. And that's part where people essentially don't WanNA budge so if people are more honest about that than we can have a better conversation but if they wanNA talk strictly about the evidence. Let's let's get into some of that Number one the can't be a resurrection if there's no crucifixion Even if we go back further if Jesus didn't exist now at this point in time given the evidence we have anybody who says Jesus didn't exist like I would cut the conversation off because the even atheist an analysis that let. Let's you know it was very interesting. Listening to Bart Erman. If you know who board urbanism. Sure if you guys have across you know that name buttermilk actually reading books right now. Oh you poor thing. I've I've read several of his books and well I I see. You've read more of his books than me. And that's why you've lost your hair. I understand I've I've lost a lot of it but not all of it there. No but border was was in a discussion with a an atheist who basically just stated that. There's no evidence that Jesus ever existed and even Barbara was like stop. Stop like okay. We could disagree that you know. We don't think he was God. But you can't say he never existed so Berman boundaries. Like no you can't make that claim. Yeah and I'm glad you brought that up because an actually I was interviewing Jim Welcome might a much on a couple of days ago and And I met at a conference slash out talked with him. He's a really nice guy actually and he will say and actually if you read his books even with all the books he's written all the bestsellers he will tell you those the discrepancies that he that he likes to talk about. Those aren't the reason that he's not Chris Anymore. He said the reason is because he can't reconcile the problem of suffering or evil which is totally separate thing and it's actually a much more Much simpler problem to reconcile from philosophical standpoint but to delay person when when you read those books it seems like up openness showcase especially since he says the consensus is it's by no means the consensus accident have This one book here. I'm efficacy. How thick that is. It's called the resurrection of Jesus by Mike Lacona who who was a great historian this. There's more but that that one book is filled with evidence. You know just to get to. Sony said there with with Bartram and it is interesting because you know the issue he has. You said it's easier to reconcile. But then here's here's a little trick that for anyone that wants to read Bart Ehrman. There's a little tricky just have to. You have to pick up on and if you read enough you pick this up anytime. He supports his his arguments. It's usually right but would you see him do is this. When he writes his scholarly work he does do some good stuff but when he writes to the masses. This is what he does well. The consensus says wait a minute. Hold it that's actually a logical fallacy to appeal to authorities or appeal to popularity. And he does that a lot and you'll notice in his reading. It's like hell states on that's true. Like how say that? The the Gospel The Gospel written and the New Testament people were in a rush because of the Gospel Message. They're in a rush to get this out there get it. You know in people's hands so they. They were quick to make copies and they made mistakes. That's actually true. We can agree with that and he supports that but then he makes a claim and because that we know what the original said wait no or actually say we can not original means right and that's a big difference. I'll agree we can't don't have the original documents to save. This is what it actually was but when it comes to the meaning. I remember taking the course with Dan Wallace and I asked him. I said you know everyone uses the one one percent of the textual variances that we have. We cannot get back to the original and it's easy to get back to original most of them spelling mistakes things like that but there's the the concerning areas are ones where the meaning of the text changes and we can't get back to the original and I said everyone says that's the one percent but they're also saying that based off of older numbers of the manuscripts that we have we have you know. Everyone says we have six thousand. Well we actually have like eight to nine thousand now and he said yeah the more manuscripts we got that number gone down. He said we use the one percent as as a conservative number. But it's actually closer to one fifth of one percent and I'm like okay. So ninety nine point nine percent accurate I'll put that number up to CNN. Amy Day of the week. The Bible's way more accurate. And it's amazing when they found the Dead Sea Scrolls nineteen forty seven.
"dan wallace" Discussed on Cross Examined Official Podcast
"Dr Darrell Bock and Gary Habermas and others you know you go the in depth on these things but it's it's hard for those of us in the professional community who don't necessarily have time to go to seminary you know. How do you get access to that kind of material? And so that's why these online courses are great. I mean you know as Dr Wallace will tell you. You're really just touching the tip of the tip of the iceberg of textual criticism. But you still learn so how much you know plenty enough to be dangerous but you go into the different types of of manuscripts techs types and he'll explain why that's important fortin and how they go about determining the authentic reading if you have a passage where there's multiple different variants. It could go one way or it could go the other. He'll teach you the methods foods that scholars employ to figure out. Okay what was the scribe lightly likely to have copied. What would the author have been likely to write in the first place context of the rest of the taxed taxed? It's a great course. I learned so much and honestly a lot of my propulsion to continue. Studies comes from these kinds of situations where you get the tip of the iceberg and then you decided that's not enough. I WANNA go more. I want to know more. Yeah and Bart Airman has said there are more differences among our manuscripts in there. There are words in the New Testament. Now that sounds like are you kidding me. Wow there's no way we could figure out with the original New Testament. Said if you want to know how to answer that. You need to take this course by Dan Wallace again. Go to cross examine dot. Org Click on online courses. You'll see it there. Dan is sort of like an Indiana Jones type. When it comes to manuscripts he's traveling all all over the world climbing ropes into monasteries to try and discover these obscure manuscripts that people haven't seen in centuries and then photographing them? So they'll they'll be catalogued in in in history forever because these manuscripts ultimately as you know degrade written on papyrus an an animal skins and that kind of thing and so if you want to really know about how we can be sure that the text we have in the New Testament is reliable from. I'M A manuscript perspective. You need to take this course and you've already taken it. I've I've seen some of it myself and it's it's just wonderful. Let's go back to our topic now. Orion we're talking about the self identity of Jesus before we get into that though. There's been some more liberal scholars saying you know the divinity of Christ is a late development among the believers. Jesus didn't think he was God. We've already shown why that's it's not true. He did thank God but they're trying to say it was a late development. Why are they wrong? Yeah it's it's a great question. We mentioned earlier in you kind of off hand kind of way that allows scholars say that John was actually written in the early second century and the reason they say that is because of the high chronology in John. There's no way this could have been and part of the early Christian tradition because a crystal is too high. So how do we combat. Well we we certainly can if nothing else the apostle Paul Paul we know when he wrote his letters to some degree to the churches around Galicia and Greece and Asia Minor. Certainly I corinthians even an Zanga skeptics like airmen who. He considered himself an atheist now. He's certain that Paul say wrote I Corinthians and fifty five or fifty six day and and we know this from an archaeological discovery in Adelphi. We can we can. We can pinpoint when Paul wrote exactly exactly and we know that Paul had a high quality you get it in his letters and so you at that point. You're only twenty years removed. Isn't that much but we can do better than that. Because the Paul who wrote those letters is the same Paul who had an experience on the road road to Damascus where he believed he saw a vision of the risen Christ in his life forever change. Paul never change in the sense that he before. The event was an ardent follower of Galway and after the event was an ardent follower of Yahweh. But what change is his understanding of the Messiah was and who Jesus was is in the program of God and so you know. Paul had this experience shortly after. Jesus crucifixion in alleged resurrection. And so now all of a sudden you're right back to the event itself. But even before that Paul was a persecutor of the church and the reason that he was persecuting them as because he believed they were committing blasphemy and standing in the way of Janas reunion with his people Israel right Israel had this covenant relationship with God where when they we're unfaithful to him they didn't receive his favor and they had these series of over awards as we've talked about. Already the Romans the Greeks the Persians Babylonians and so Paul belonging. To of a class of the Pharisees and arguably zealot was very passionate about stamping out infidelity in among the Jewish people and the Christian way seemed to him to be another instance of this because they were going around committing the highest four which just a man as if he were gone himself their messianic deliver and so Paul had to understand what he was persecuting. And so by doing that. We've now taken this hiker. Stodgy all the way back. The event itself I was just with Gary Habermas a few days ago in New Orleans there was a A conference down there put on the put on by the the the Baptist seminary in New Orleans Bob Stewart is the man who organizes it a faculty member. They're great guy and he had Gary Habermas myself of two mcgrew Richard. How several others down there and Gary is in the middle not in the Middle East toward the end. Now of his magnum opus and ended near five thousand pages now carries amazing and he was talking about his minimal facts approach and I said he said I boiled it down to six the minimal facts and one of the minimal facts was now when we say minimal facts. What we mean is ninety percent or more of scholars whether they're Christians atheists anywhere anywhere in between New Testament scholars agree with these facts and one of the fax that Gary Talks about that these even these other scholars agree three with? Is that all of this. All of the idea that Jesus had resurrected from the dead and the idea that Jesus Jesus followers thought what he had risen from the dead and appeared to them. All this occurred early early as one of the facts now one of the minimal facts and when we mean by early even Bart Ehrman is saying. It's within months if not sooner of the alleged resurrection itself. They're thinking he is a divine being very very very early right. And if Paul is writing about communion in First Corinthians and he's quoting voting luke to do so they and there's controversy over some issues obviously in First Corinthians two churches well established by fifty five. And they're doing communion exactly well they're doing communion they're thinking that Jesus is divine. Yeah Yeah I like. There's a church historian by the name of Garowe Slavs Pelican what a name no Pelican. Yeah some of his works. He points out that that the oldest sermon behold account of a Christian martyr the oldest pagan report of the Church and the oldest liturgical prayer which you've just referenced. In First Corinthians they all agree with the Jesus was regarded as the redeemer and gone himself very early very early and you were just reading from reasonable wives. You have heard of that that book. Good one Dr William Lane Craig. You can't go wrong listening to Dr Craig. Reasonable faith dot org so okay. This is all early despite eight the fact that some liberal scholars are trying to say. This is a late development. It's not a late development. Ladies and Gentlemen Okay so we know that Jesus God by his I am statement. That's one of like like six or seven other. I am statements when we talked about Johnny Certainly has reference to him being the son of man which goes back to Daniel Chapter Seven that it claiming to be a divine being everybody standing around him when he said that knew what he was claiming that's why they killed him. They rip their clothes and said blasphemy. They wanted to stone him. What what about the son of God term or son of God a title that? He's he's given. What what does that mean? Yeah absolutely so what. What did Jesus mean by the son of God? Now there are some other figures in the Old Testament that were regarded as sons of God Solomon is referred to in this way in Second Samuel When David wants to build a temple for God and God tells him no you know your son will be the one who will build a house for me and later this passage and second Samuel came to be interpreted in a messianic sense ants but there are others that are called son of gone so by Jesus saying he's the son of God that doesn't automatically mean that he is divine but uh-huh you can tell by the way that he uses it. He's talking about something a little bit different. Let's go to one of Jesus Parables and Luke Twenty. Jesus he's just tells the parable of the vineyard and I'll read it real quickly here. He sent a man planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dig a pit for the wine press and built a tower or and he leased it to tenants and went into another country when the season came he sent servants to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard and they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed handed again he sent another servant and they struck him on the head and treated him shamefully and he sent another and him they killed and so many others some they beat some they killed he had still one other his beloved son finally he sent him to them that being his son saying they will respect my son but those tenants said the one another this is the air come let us kill him in this inheritance will be ours and so they took him and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard And so Jesus saying this. It's the Pharisees and what he's doing here is a reference to Isaiah five and then Isaiah. It's clear who's being talked about here. This vineyard is meant to symbolize the nation Israel and the servants that are sent are God's prophets lies you Isaiah so on and so forth and then you get down to the sun and in the parable herbal right in this symbol. The Sun Is Truly the son of the owner of the vineyard filial sense. It's not just another delegate. There's different unique kind of relationship there and you can tell that too because when the tenants say that they're gonNA kill the son. They say you know when we do this. The inheritance will belong to US implying that the inheritance the nation of Israel the whole world belongs to this unique son figure Jesus clearly. Identifying with.
"dan wallace" Discussed on Cross Examined Official Podcast
"All right. Let me go back to what Christianity today said in the middle of their editorial. You can read the entire editorial and you should say it's well written It's at Christianity today to search for just Google Christianity today trump. You'll find it anyway away. Mark Kelly the editor there says. Can we say with a straight face that abortion is a great evil that cannot be tolerated in with the same straight face. Say that the bent and broken character of our nation's as leader doesn't really matter in the end Unquote K.. Here's my response. No one that I know about. WHO's a Christian is saying? The character doesn't matter and no one in who Christian is saying. Trump is a choirboy. No one saying that the question is what do you mean by character. Do you mean his demeanor or his record. Following through one is policy promises. Trump's demeanor is a problem. We've already been through that. But he is following through on his policy promises and that is more important when it comes to why you put somebody in the Presidency so yes let me say with a straight face to see that saving babies is more important then then demeanor again. I'd like to say babies and be nice but I could but if I could only have one or the other give me the saved babies and this is this was put put beautifully by Dennis. Prager for those. You don't know Dennis Prager. He's a brilliant conservative Jewish radio host. Who has put together other trump trump trump trump on the mind why we're talking about trump prager university five minute really succinct videos? If if you haven't avail yourself of prager university just go to YouTube look prager university. You'll see all these. These great little videos explained so many issues in a very succinct and colorful way and he also has a number of columns. Dennis writes a column very frequently and he wrote a column just a couple of weeks ago. Let me get the exact title of this. Oh it's a response to the editor of Christianity today. And you can google that find that in any event here is just an expert excerpt of it. I can't read the whole thing. I don't have time anyways anyway. He prager says the gist of the Christianity today editorial of most religious and conservative opposition. The president trump is that any good. The president has done is dwarfed by his character defects. This is an amoral view that says more about Galley than it does about the president president he and the people who share his opinion or making the following statement. No matter how much good this president does it is less important than his character flaws. Why is this just wrong? I because it devalued the policies that benefit millions of people and second because it is a simplistic view of character. Now I don't have enough time to go into the entire column. I say here but I'm just going to quote some excerpts from this column and he's dealing with the benefits here dentists to the millions of the people he says to US meaning the people that are with him in supporting a president trump as president. He says to US putting pressure on the Iranian regime and by the way he just did this two days ago with the missile attack putting pressure on the Iranian regime. One of the most dangerous regimes on earth by getting out of the Iran. Dan Nuclear deal made by former president. Barack Obama is a moral issue. Even The New York Times columnist Brett Steven who loathes trump has written how important the president's residents rejection of the Obama. Iran agreement has been number two to US enabling millions of black Americans to find work resulting in the lowest black employment. Unemployment limit rate ever recorded is a moral issue to us more Americans than ever being employed and almost four million Americans freed from reliance on food. Stamps is a moral issue to us. Appointing more conservative justice justices or judges than any president in history over the same period of time as a moral issue that whether the courts including the Supreme Court dominated by the left or by conservatives is dismissed by Galley As political poker makes one question. Not only galleys moral thinking but his moral theology to US moving the American embassy to Israel's capital Jerusalem. Something promised by almost every presidential candidate is a moral issue not to mention mentioned profoundly courageous encourages moral virtue to US increase in the US military budget after severe cuts of the previous eight years a moral issue as conservative seat. The American Military Tori is the world's greatest guarantee of world peace and Dennis prager goes on so he's pointing out the weightier matters of the law. And it's ironic that Dennis being a Jewish man is basically given an argument that Jesus would give over the editor of Christianity today. Now there's more to Austin's email but we don't have have time to get into it. I want to get to another email and before I do. I want to remind you that. If you have doubts about Christianity than Bobby Conway Conway who has written doubting toward faith and is the leader of the one minute. apologist is starting a new course this week called doubting eating toward faith. You can take it anytime you want. If you just take the basic course but if you WANNA be live on zoom video asking questions of Bobby Directly Dr Bobby Conway you need to sign about the sign up for the premium version and you can sign up anytime during this coming week but sign up soon for doubting toward faith. He'll tell you not just the intellectual reasons why you ought not doubt but also help you through the emotional reasons you may be doubting and then a couple of weeks after that we have the textual criticism course with Dr Dan. Dr Dan Wallace from Dallas Theological Geological Seminary One of the top manuscript scholars in the world. And again you can be live on video asking him questions. The the the biblical criticism or textual criticism courses available. Both those courses are available. If you go to cross examine dot org click on online Christian courses. Check them out there. Sign up soon. When we keep those those premium courses small so you can have ample opportunity to interact live with the instructors and these are some of the best instructors of the in the world? All right let me go to. Bruce writes from Utah. Here's his email again. I can only read some of it. It's very long. He said I just read the transcript. Dipped your podcast. Why Evangelical is voted for trump doctor? Dr Turkey I've heard you speak. I listen to a lot of your apologetic greatly while you have a number of good points and make some cogent observations and why even joke was may have voted for trump nonetheless. I'm extraordinarily disappointed in you. After reading the transcript. You're not the person I would have guessed you from your apologetic work. I do not have time thereto point-by-point assessment from me but I'll just make two points. Okay number one. Your and other even joke leaders failure too loudly and consistently condemned trump's behavior his overt racism and miss and Misogony is hateful. Anti immigrant views bullying lines. Clearly selfish and self-centered and boerse behavior is really really beyond the Pale. All right. Let Me Stop Right there bruce. I'm not sure you actually read the transcript closely because I do talk about those issues although I don't agree with you his he's his anti immigrant views. He's not anti immigrant. He's anti illegal immigrant. And if we don't have secure borders we don't have a country he's right about that and Israel had secure borders. Every nation has secure borders. You have a secure border on your house. You don't just let anybody in your house. Everybody agrees as we need borders. The only question is where in fact I wrote a column last year I think the title of it was something why everybody believes borders. You can go look that up if you want to so. I'm not sure you really listen to the program or read the transcript as closely as I think you may have suggested. Because I have condemned trump and continued to condemn his borsch behavior. The second objection that Bruce has is you make some over. Generalized statements that seemingly convict large groups of people a highlight. I liked to in particular a all major media though. I'm sure you wouldn't include Fox News in that. Sorry that was kind of snippy. Come on there are certainly. There is certainly a liberal media. Conservative media in some in between all media always has some kind of bias you need to get out of your echo chambers and listen discern in process rather than generalize checkout all sides dot com. Let me commend you Bruce. That is an outstanding website. Thank you for that. All Sides Dot Com Ladies and gentlemen has news stories that first of all they they rate where the the news organization is whether it's right center or left and I generally agree with how they rate these people and so they put stories from all three sides from Right Center and left so bruce. That's a good website. Thank you for that recommendation. Shen all sides dot com however. I think you're missing the point. If you think that the media isn't biased left sure there are some minor outlets that are maybe biased toward the right Breitbart. Okay that doesn't mean everything they say is false. It doesn't mean that everything's that say slate which is biased. To the left says says is false. I'm simply saying they're coming at it from a particularly political angle. But what I'm saying is the major media who who are the major media. ABC CBS NBC. P. B. S. The New York Times Times The Washington Post and these people are decidedly leftist. And they put their opinion on the front page age as cal. Thomas Famously said every day I read the Bible in the New York Times just to see what both sides are doing and if you think that there is not not a liberal bias in the major media you haven't been paying close attention all you need to go to Media Research Center Dot Org M. R. C.. Dot Dot Org Brent. Bozell has been doing this for over thirty years. He they they track everything. The major media says do you realize is that in recent months. Trump's coverage in the major media has been ninety six percent negative ninety six percent Satan would get better coverage okay ninety six percent now. I'm not whether you agree with trump or disagree with trump. That's absurd okay. No president is ninety six percent negative. Alright no president in our history has been ninety six percent negative and yet that is the kind of coverage. The major media puts out a love Denzel Washington the The actor who is a Christian by the way said he said. If you don't watch the news you're uninformed if you do watch the news you're misinformed performed. He's absolutely right about that. So what do you have to do. You have to search for news. That's giving you objective facts while everybody may have a bias that doesn't mean that people can't report report objective facts first of all say that everybody is biased is self-defeating and why because that would mean you're biased and we shouldn't. We shouldn't take your statement that everybody is biased is true we take that's biased. True sure you may have a bias in your orientation tation toward a particular political viewpoint. But that doesn't mean that you can't report the facts objectively. You can report the facts objectively. I'm saying that the major media doesn't do that it doesn't report the facts objectively. It doesn't do that. When ninety? Six percent of the coverage is negative. You know they're not doing it fairly early. That's all I'm saying. Okay I could. We could spend hours doing this on this program pointing out major media bias. We don't have time. Just go to M. R. C...
"dan wallace" Discussed on The Mighty Oaks Podcast
"Are you kidding me. It's just it's just staggering. So does that prove that Jesus is the son of God and everyone should be a Christian. No of course not what it does prove is that the Bible was wildly influential in years before right now and what it does prove is that you can do a really good job of reestablishing Original manuscripts the autographs as they're called must've looked like in the way they do. That is science now. All of studying the Bible obviously isn't isn't science there is art. There's interpretation this part is science what you do. Is You take all those manuscripts in your line up and you you look at win win. Who wrote what? I'm trying to do this quick but you look at when who wrote what the figure out all right. Well if we got at nine hundred ninety nine copies from you know early in the game that all say it this way and the first thing that we see says of this other way doesn't come around and tell say thirteen eighteen hundred yen okay. We know where the where the mistake was made to allow. People look from the outside of the Bible now like US giant game of telephone to haphazard mass. Who knows what let the originals were? Right answer is at this point in history. I think we are the most clear we've ever been on what the original text of the New Testament must have been so so in terms of external corroboration in the processes behind these many of which are carried out by people who aren't even Christians by the way people who would be critical of Christian theology but still do the Work of manuscript analysis I am. I'm wildly. Confident the what we have in in our hands right now is a Greek text is a magnificent reflection of what was written down in the first place really signs as standpoint not not not just purely scientific we've yeah yeah and then. There is a secondary layer of that manuscript. Alison that doesn't involve art. And I think people people on both sides of the argument. You're Dan Wallace's you're barred airman's would agree with me that there's an art to it as well. This would be handwriting analysis to try to nail down a specific typic- date on another wisn ambiguous manuscript. This would be Debating and theorizing as to where divisions happened happened in manuscript traditions. There's without getting all the way into it. They're kind of a couple of separate prominent manuscript traditions which overwhelmingly agree but functional personal differently or arranged differently so so there's also historical theory involved but in terms of just the raw data. Yeah you've got you've got science and and then on top of that you have some historical interpretation and a touch of art yom so all the disciplines come into play and and then beyond that you just got the question of. There's somebody might say. We'll be handled those manuscripts great. But how do we know. We have the right books in the Bible but and well to be fair to the critic that to a degree doesn't involve the question of faith but if we just look at the historical record of what Christians thought we can get really paying close now the Catholics and the eastern Orthodox both include what's called Protestants called the APOCRYPHA. What they would call the Doodo canonical books? They don't include the same list. So those two groups do not agree on. What do Terrell canonical books belong? There and the church fathers don't agree worried none. The Jewish scriptures don't include them so there is debate about that but effectively the theological influence of those Old Testament meant books that mostly date from between four hundred BC and the time of Christ. It's not huge illogically so even if we go to. The extreme ends of the debate about what books ought to be in the Bible you still got overwhelming theological agreement and and only the slightest disagreement in by volume in terms of. What's there so are the right books in the Bible? Well I mean the atheist Jason Christian might disagree about that but we can. We can say with very very strong certainty what Christians in the past thought about that and come to a conclusion that at least what we're reading is what believers thought was by throughout history. Thank you for watching but four to me with again next week every Friday at ten. Am these go live and also out Sudanese pen this time with you. You're listening instead of watching jump over. Did you to go ahead and take some time to subscribe to notification bell that lets you know in new constant comes online and we're doing our best to put more and more content out there and helpful content like this to help you live the life really that you were created live on hope in a world that's awesome so hopeless and trust follow along and find those things. Thanks for watching uh-huh..
"dan wallace" Discussed on Cross Examined Official Podcast
"Is the great whore? Hey Gayle and he's going to be actually. Teaching stealing from Godoi atheist need God to create into make their case in s Spaniel in Spanish. So if you know anyone who speaks Spaniel the class starts next week if you go to cross examine dot org and Click online courses it will take you over online Christian courses and you can see that course and enroll in it. And you'll see all the videos that I do subtitled in Spanish but Hor- hey will be your moderator if you sign up for the premium version of the class and he does a great job. And so we'll cover all this in more detail that we can do on these podcasts and many other are issues related to stealing from God and you can as I say sign up sign up soon because again. The class I think begins next week. I think it begins on the eleventh. Actually actually November Eleventh Veterans Day. Ladies and Gentlemen Anyway go to the website cross examined Dot Org Click on online courses. And you'll see coming up in the spring Dan. Wallace is gonNA teach textual criticism. He's like one of the best in the world on that we're going to have a course by Shaun McDowell called homosexuality and the Bible as well you don't WanNa miss that one and this is GonNa be posted here in the next couple of weeks so you'll be able to sign up for them and then I'm gonNA teach stealing from Godoi atheist and he got to make their case in English so check all that out on our website cross examined or click on online courses also want to mention attention on the thirteenth of November. Going to be at the University of Maine in Ono right near Bangor Maine. I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. Wednesday night November thirteenth eighteenth. Everybody's invited anyone can come. We'll have Q.. And A. as well it's I don't have enough faith to be an atheist right there and again just before that. I'm going to be a say in in Eden Prairie Minnesota with my friends from standards and Greg Kogel Tim Barnett. They're all going going to be there. Alan Schliemann other speakers as well for rethink great conference. Youth Conference going to be an Eden Prairie next week that's November one eight nine and also the following week. I'M GONNA be in Oklahoma for a conference there on Sunday the end Sunday night and hang on a second. Let me give you the exact Church where that's GonNa be that's GONNA BE MC Lester it's GonNa be a first Baptist Church MC Lester Oklahoma or sutton cluster mcallister mcallister November seventeenth. And and that's Sunday November seventeenth in the morning and then an evening. I don't have enough faith to be an atheist event as well so looking forward all that hope to see out there. Let's get back to our topic here. What are the six things that people make mistakes? They make when they're talking about morality. The and this gentleman talking about the as tex is making a mistake the first mistake is confusing a difference in facts with the difference in objective morality and see us. Lewis made this point. He said that in the late seventeen. Hundreds witches were sentenced as murderers but now they're not now a relativist might might argue see. Our moral values have changed because we no longer kill. Witches morality is relative to time and culture but the relativists claims is not correct trek wide. Because what has changed is not the moral principle that murders wrong but the reception or the perception factual understanding of whether which is this can really murder people by their curses. People no longer believe they can therefore people no longer consider which is murderers in other words. The the perception of immoral situation is relative whether which is a really murderers but the moral values involved in this situation or not relative murder has always been and always will be wrong so people are just confusing. The fact of the situation with the moral. The moral roll precept moral precept hasn't changed it's always wrong to murder people what's changed is whether people think which is a really murderers imagine agean the Aztecs thought it was a fact that their gods wanted human sacrifice if they really thought that then the Ashtec we're actually agreeing with the moral principle that our top obligation is to the Creator who owns all life. They were not disagreeing with the objective moral principle but a green with it and Christians believe the same. Abraham Abraham knew that God had the right to all right to all life including his son Isaac and he also knew that God could resurrect Isaac from the dead in fact if you look at the account in Genesis Twenty two Abraham says to his helpers. Look the boy and I are going to go up there. And then we're going to come back. So he he knew that God was not going to kill Isaac and if he did he could resurrect him so this is not a disagreement but an agreement actually in fact I say in fact a lot in fact do anyway. In fact the whole scenario with with Abraham and Isaac is a foreshadowing of the scenario with God and Jesus Abraham took his son Isaac up on Mount Mariah sacrifice. Him Two thousand years later. God took his own son Jesus to that same mount out Mariah but he didn't stop the execution from taking place because that execution acution that sacrifice is what saves us God remains perfectly just because he punishes Jesus in our place and we can then have our sins forgiven because of what Jesus has done so the first mistake is confusing. Gene the factual situation with the object of more principle. The second mistake is confusing. What people ought to do with how they behave and I already mentioned that? This gentleman is confusing. Morality was sociology objective. Morality is unchanging and prescriptive but human behavior is changing and descriptive. That's sociology so our moral values of change with regard to abortion homosexuality or premarital sex rex well what we do might have changed. But that doesn't mean that those things are now morally right because we do them and more people think they're right they can still be wrong even if people think they're right mistake. Number three is thinking that hard problems in morality show. All Morality is relative and this is what it's called a life raft dilemma. You know you put four people on a liferaft. That can only take three. If you don't kick one of them off everybody's GonNa die and professors give if this scenario to their students in break up into groups and talk about it and they go talk about it and they come back with all different answers in the professor go see moralities relative no it actually shows moralities objective. Why because the very reason you're struggling to try and figure out what to do is because you know how valuable life is the only reason? It's a dilemma is. Because you know life is valuable and you want to save everybody. If life was invaluable. You'd say who cares. Throw everybody off the raft. It doesn't matter at all so this doesn't prove that moralities relative but actually shows moralities objective just because there are a hard problems in in morality doesn't mean there aren't easy problems in morality while people may get morality wrong complicated situations. They don't get it wrong on the basics for example everyone a nose murders wrong. Hitler knew it. That's why you had to dehumanize the Jews in order to rationalize killing them even cannibals appear to know that it's wrong to kill innocent human beings it may be cannibals. I don't think that the people in the other tribes are human. But chances are they do in fact. Jaybird you shefty wrote the book. The Great Book. Why what what? You can't not know. Oh says that why to cannibals perform elaborate expiatory rituals before they take the lives of other people. They wouldn't perform those rituals unless they thought there was something wrong with what they were about to do. So the basics are clear even if some difficult problems are not clear so the fact that there are difficult. Problems in morality doesn't disprove the existence of objective moral laws anymore than difficult problems in science. It's disproved the existence of objective natural laws. Scientists don't deny that an objective world exists when they encounter a difficult problem in the natural world in other words when they when they have have trouble knowing the answer of figuring out what the answer is and we shouldn't deny that morality exists. Just because we have trouble knowing the answer a difficult situation just because you don't know what what to do in the life raft situation doesn't mean you don't know what to do in similar situations in the very fact that you are that you are experiencing angst when you're trying to figure out the life raft. Dilemma is because you know that human beings are objectively morally valuable and you have an obligation to protect human life so we live in a fallen world. There are going to be instances senses where absolutes conflict. There's going to be instances. What do you do sometimes? You know the answer. Sometimes you don't what happens if you're hiding if you're in Nazi Germany. And you're hiding Jews from the Nazis and you get knock on your door now now now you come to the door. Nazi show soldiers say has to what do you say well. You're not supposed to lie right. You're supposed to say yeah. They're up in the attic. Go get him. There's there's four of them in there that you might only see three but there are no what do you say in that situation. It's a bit of a dilemma. But you say look I have more have higher moral duty to protect innocent recent life than I do to tell the truth to a guilty murderer so you lie to save the lives of the save. The life of the Nazi's this save. a life of the Nazi. Save the life of the Jews. This is called graded absolutism in morality. Effect my my mentor. Enter Dr Norman guys who wrote it in his book Christian ethics that you have a higher duty to protect innocent life than you do. Tell a guilty murderer. You're the truth. You're exempted from telling the guilty murderer. The truth in order to protect innocent life. That's a bit of a dilemma. But I think that's an easy one. The life raft one is harder but still it wouldn't be a dilemma unless human beings were supremely valuable and you have an obligation into protect human beans. Now I've only gotten three of these mistakes so this could be a fourth session next.