Open Q&A with Matt Slick & Andrew Rappaport | Apologetics Live 0016

Open Q&A, Apologetics Live, and the Old Testament

You mentioned Al Muller earlier. Al, I think he must have a man crush on me. I don't know. He can't quit talking about me. I'm not sure.

This is Apologetics Live with Matt Slick and Andrew Rappaport, part of the Christian Podcast Community.

Friday, we are live. Apologetics Live. That was Andy Stanley thinking that Al Muller has a man crush on him. Yikes. I think the reason Andy Stanley, he keeps hearing Al Muller talk about him is because Andy Stanley's got some problems.

Yeah. You know, Matt, I don't know if you know that Andy Stanley wants to unhitch the Old Testament. He doesn't like the Old Testament. He thinks we need to unhitch the Old Testament from the Bible. What does that mean, unhitch?

Basically means that we should only focus on the New Testament.

Well, Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Old Testament, so if we're going to focus on the New Testament, and then they quote the Old, then what do you do? Ignore what they did?

Actually, every book of the Bible, of the New Testament, does quote the Old Testament except for one. Or at least quotes or makes an allusion, I should say. You know which one is the only one that doesn't?

Is it Philemon? Yep. It's Philemon. And he wouldn't like Philemon because that talks about slavery. That's one of the other things he doesn't want to talk about. Yeah. All right. I'm Andrew Rapport from Striving for Eternity.

We got Matt Slick from CARM .org. And Matt, you're working on a new novella, a short novel.

Oh, yeah, a novella, a short novel. I like doing short novels. It'll be about 80 to 100 pages. And I was watching a science fiction series, and a comment was made that it's really hard to write a science fiction horror.

And I went, it shouldn't be. And so I've had this idea in my head, and I started putting it to pen to paper. I'm on Chapter 9 now, and I'm about a third of the way through, I guess. And it'll be sci-fi horror, just for fun.

Something to do besides theology all the time. So, yeah, I read some of it to Anik today, my wife, and she was disturbed by it. I'm good. That's what I want. Get your wife disturbed. Well, you know, all I do is read it to her while I'm looking at her.

She's looking at me, and then the combo is pretty bad.

Okay, looking at you is the horror part, right? That's the horror part. Yeah, that's right. Exactly. So, for folks who want to get in, ask questions, obviously we're referring to the non-keyboard warriors out there that keep challenging Matt or I to discuss things, but they don't seem to want to hear.

You know what I get a kick out of is, our guy can beat you badly. So this is what you need to do, Matt. You need to contact him. You need to arrange everything at his convenience. And I want you to do this because if you don't do it, Matt, then you're a coward.

What? Who are you? You know, that happens a lot. Have him call me, come on the show. He can come on the show, we can talk, whatever. Oh, you're a coward. What?

Yeah, stuff like that. Well, I think that it's always interesting that people challenge you and I all week long. And we keep giving the same invitation, but they don't show up. So, this is Apologetics Live.

It's an opportunity for anyone to ask questions, challenges. Folks, there's a lot of Christians have questions about apologetics, get stuck on things. And this is a platform where, unlike Matt's radio show, Matt Slick Live, here you can have longer conversations and longer discussions.

The Didache, Baptism, and the Eucharist

So, you had last week the debate with the Roman Catholic on baptism. Yeah. I didn't hear him refer to the Didache unless I missed that. He was going to prove that the Didache talks about Roman Catholicism or proves Roman Catholicism.

Did he ever get to that? That's right. No, I don't know. He may have contacted me or emailed me, but I get so many emails, I miss things. But we could go over the Didache a little bit. I wonder what areas the Didache proves Catholicism.

It reminds me on Facebook. Someone said that the reason I'm Catholic is because I read the Bible. And I'm going, yeah, but you got to believe it too. But I said, show me where all this about Mary is in the Bible.

It's not. So, anyway, I got the Didache. I'm looking at it on CARM.

I'm scanning through it. I don't know. I read it before. I'm trying to take a look myself to see where does it mention baptism.

Chapter 7. But concerning baptism, thus baptize ye, having first recited all these precepts, baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in running water. Is that what Catholics do? No. But if thou hast not running water, baptize in some other water.

And if thou canst not baptize in cold, in warm water. So it should be cold, running water. But if thou hast neither, pour water three times on the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

But before the baptism, let him who baptizeth and him who is baptized fast previously and any others who may be able. And thou shalt command him who is baptized to fast one or two days before. Is that what Catholics do?

No. Yeah. I actually thought he was going to try to argue that. We talked about this efforts that we thought he might try to argue that dedicate except sprinkling, which really would have been funny if he tried to make that argument because you're a Presbyterian, you wouldn't have a problem with the sprinkling.

No, I believe it's biblical. But, you know, it's that's only my position. That's my position because I see scripture teach, but not for salvation, of course. It's a covenant sign. But check this out on the Eucharist, chapter nine.

But concerning the Eucharist after this fashion, give ye thanks first concerning the cup. We thank thee our father for the Holy Vine, David, thy son, which thou has made known to us through Jesus Christ, thy son, to thee be the glory forever.

That's not what they do in Catholicism. Anyway, and concerning the broken bread, we thank thee our father for the life and knowledge, which thou hast made known unto us through Jesus, thy son, to thee be the glory forever.

As this broken bread was once scattered on the mountains and after it had been brought together, became one. I don't know what that means. So may thy church be gathered together from the ends of the earth unto thy kingdom for thine is the glory and the power to Jesus forever.

Let none eat or drink of your Eucharist, but such as have been baptized into the name of the Lord. For of a truth the Lord hath said concerning this, give not that which is holy unto dogs. And after it's completed, pray ye.

We thank thee, holy father, for thy holy name, which thou hast caused to dwell in our hearts and for the knowledge of faith and immortality, which thou hast made known unto us through Jesus, thy son, to thee be the glory forever.

Thou, almighty master, didst create all things in the name of the Lord. Am I supposed to do all this stuff?

The Roman Catholic Debate on Baptism and Acts 10

So how do you feel that the debate went? Because I know we saw the responses that the Catholics thought that you got demolished. Yeah, that's right. I got a kick out of that.

Yeah, what's his name? He always says everything negative about me. So much so that you can't even trust anything he says.

There was an accident that did happen on that. What was that? Right. You accidentally had closed it out when you were looking at your sidewalk. God, I blew that. As predicted, people said you were trying to end it because you got so demolished.

Yeah. That's what happened.

Well, whatever. I went right back in. And the guy, he heard me most of the time. I'm going, oh, crap, what I did. And we get back on as soon as we could. I still remember doing it, going, I'm going to click.

It was like that. So of course you're going to say stuff like that. But whatever. But he didn't do well. He could not prove from the Bible. And that water baptism is necessary for salvation. And what he did repeatedly was to take verses out of the context and only partially quote verses, you know, like first Peter 321.

See, baptism now saves you. See, I read the whole thing. And he wouldn't do it. I had to go through and do the whole homework for him and put it in context. And he fought me all the way. And then the issue of Acts 238.

And I asked him, repent, believe, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. And I said, is that a formula? He goes, yeah.

Well, where's faith? Oh, it's implied. I said, but it's not going to be a formula if his faith isn't in there. Well, it's implied. So the formula has an implication of something. You know, it doesn't make any sense.

And then I went to Acts 10, 44 through 48 and showed him that, you know, people receive the gift of the Holy Spirit before they're baptized. Then he went to Gamaliel. Well, Gamaliel was, by the Holy Spirit, prophesied.

See, you don't have to be a believer to have the Holy Spirit. And I said, notice what it says, the gift of the Holy Spirit in both Acts 238 and Acts 10, 44 through 48 and stuff like that. So, you know, he didn't do well.

And, of course, the Catholics are going to claim victory, and that's what they're going to always do. You know, they're so loyal to their church and their false doctrines that it doesn't make any difference.

But, no, he did not prove his point. He did not make his case. And, you know, it's what it is.

Apologetics Live, Discord, and the Challenge of Online Debates

No big deal. So if any folks want to join in, you can go to apologeticslive .com. Apologeticslive .com or .org. I forget which one now, actually. Let me go check that out. Let's see. Last one there is a Mormon.

Okay, how about this? Apologetics. You have it up there? Dang. Okay. You guys heard it here first. Matt Slick is a Mormon. It's apologetics. Oh, it went forward. Yeah. Dang it. So, yeah, so apologeticslive .com.

There's a link to join there. And I know it works because Kat's in here. So I don't know if Kat has any questions. She likes to come in and stalk us in here. That's what I think.

You know what? Someone sent me something that's worth looking at. All right. The fourth degree oath of the Knights of Columbus. I mean, he said, you've got to hear this. And usually he's pretty good about IDing stuff that's pretty whacked.

But I don't know if you can go over that if you want. Or do people just come in and ask questions? Actually, I'm going to go into Discord and tell people, hey, you want a piece of me? Come on in here.

Oh, get this. Two nights ago. Was it two nights ago or was it last night? I was talking to a bunch of atheists. I went into Discord. And it's another chat thing. And I just go in there. I'm into a room by myself.

I'm whatevering on one screen. I look over and people are there. How'd they get there? How'd they know I was here? Next thing you know, there's 30 people in there. And they're asking me questions. Now, get this.

This one guy, this atheist, he's agnostic. And he offered this scenario. Two worldviews. Everything's identical except for one thing. Worldview A says that worldview B is wrong or can't be true. But worldview B says that both worldview A and B are true.

And I said, sorry, it doesn't work. You can't have both things. We went over this for a half hour. Well, he said, yes, it's possible. I go, show me how it's possible. He couldn't. But this is the kind of stuff I've been having to deal with.

I'll tell you.

A Fire, Frozen Embryos, and the Abortion Dilemma

Well, so let me throw this out. This is an argument that's been made. And I've heard a lot of people respond. But I haven't heard you actually respond to this. An argument that atheists have been, or not actually just atheists, but people that support abortion try to argue.

So here's the scenario. You are in a clinic. There's a thousand frozen embryos and your own daughter. There's a fire. And my own what? And your own daughter. So you're with your daughter. There's a fire.

You can save either your daughter or the thousand embryos. So the argument that those embryos, Christians would say, are living, are life. So do you save the thousand embryos or the one daughter? I save them both.

Well, if you can only save one. Then I would, what I would choose to do then is save them both. You got to choose one now. Yeah, I choose. The one I choose is to try and save them both. Both sides, you know.

Okay. So you try to save them both. See, I would argue that I have a responsibility as a father to take care of my daughter. And so I don't, you know, I don't have a responsibility to save other people's daughters there.

I could try. But the, I think the argument would be that the doctors there would have to save them.

They're going to make up a ridiculous scenario. And there are no doctors and you're on the planet Venus. And actually what happened is there's a gravitational flux. And so you only have 8 .3 minutes to figure the lock.

And then now what are you going to do? They do that kind of thing.

I just say, look, I'll try and save them both. If we can only pick one, why not have, like for me, have my daughter save the embryos and I'll save my daughter. Win-win. Hey, why not think of that?

Okay, there you go. That is a good answer. Have my daughter save the embryos and I'll save her. Done.

Hey, that was brilliant. Oh, thanks. It happens once every five, ten years.

Well, I guess you're going to restart the clock now, huh? Yeah, I'll be quiet.

That was a good answer. It's a good answer. I like it. So let's see what we got in new articles on Karm. Ooh, Matt Slick, you wrote something on toxic masculinity and Christianity. Let's go over that one.

Because that's kind of an interesting topic these days with what the American Psychological Association has come out.

Toxic Masculinity, the APA, and the Left

Yeah, let's see. Yes, I did. I got tired of hearing about toxic masculinity. Masculinity is not toxic.

So let me just give the link for folks. If you go to karm .org slash toxic dash masculinity dash Christianity. Yeah, I can't edit it. Dang it. I can't get in there to edit.

I locked myself out of my own website. It's going to take a while to get back in. What's that? You want me to edit? No, I can edit things. No, once I've let it sit for a day or two, I go back in. I usually edit it.

That's okay. I already see an error. I think I can do it on this one on a lower level entry. I can get in there.

Yeah, let's see. I should go in and edit this and say bye, Andrew Ratzlaff. Yeah.

Now I can edit. I have several logins and this one doesn't have as much.

All right, let's go over this. Why don't you start? Maybe not everyone knows what happened with the APA. Give some background. What ended up happening with APA on this whole issue of masculinity? Then why don't we go over this paper that you have?

Well, the APA basically attacked masculinity and said that it can be violent and bad and all this stuff. The AMA, it's a bunch of leftist servants of wackiness. I don't know what's up with them. You'd think that they could think better than what it is that they do think.

Let me backtrack and I'll show you something. Trump wants to build a wall on the southern border. People say the wall itself is immoral. Some people say that. Well, no, a wall is not immoral. A wall consists of stones and bricks and masonry and wood or plastic, whatever.

That's what a wall is. How is a stone immoral? It's not that. It's the intentionality that goes along with it. You have to separate the wall from the intention of the ones who would use or whatever for whatever purpose because that's where morality comes in.

Toxic masculinity is similar in that what they want to do is designate masculinity with toxicity and say that it's bad. Well, it's not toxic masculinity. It's bad behavior. That's all the issue is. So what I did was I went and looked up definitions of masculinity.

I found four. I've got the links for everything. Having qualities appropriate to or usually associated with a man. Pertaining to or characteristic of a man or men. Having qualities traditionally ascribed to men as strength and boldness.

Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men. Having qualities traditionally considered to be suitable for a man. It doesn't make sense to say it's toxic masculinity because masculinity is not toxic.

It's not good. It's not bad. It's just masculinity. When the leftist moron wackos do this kind of a thing, they're not thinking clearly. The AMA has already been going downhill over the years. It's politically correct propaganda in a lot of its sexual mores, redefinitions and things like that.

The issue is masculinity is not good or bad. It's just masculinity. That's what I said in the article. What they're doing with the couplet toxic masculinity is associating masculinity with toxicity. That's a problem.

They shouldn't do that. But if there is toxic masculinity, then there must also be toxic femininity. And toxic adolescence. And toxic childhood. What do these things mean? You just assign toxic to something and say, see.

So what they do is they redefine masculinity associated with toxicity. And what they'll do is they'll say it has to do with being aggressive. Again, here's what the AMA said in its article. How masculinity can hurt mental health.

Really? How masculinity can hurt? Why not say how femininity can hurt mental health? Why not say how adolescence can hurt mental health? How about this title? How the AMA, the APA, excuse me, American Psychological Association, can hurt mental health.

Why not that? How about toxic psychology? How about toxic whatever? How about toxic Democrats? You know, I'm not Democrat or Republican either. But this kind of thing is stupid. It's a propaganda approach to a thing.

Now, morality deals with the issue of the heart. And so if something's going to be toxic, who gets the right to say what is toxic, what is good, what is bad? It's the leftist agenda that wants to attack masculinity.

And, well, I'll tell you, I am sure tired of my masculinity being attacked by the media. When I watched commercials, this gets me going. I watch these GEICO commercials. Is it GEICO? No, it's Progressive.

And they always have these guys who are wimpy. Almost effeminate, but not quite. And that bothers me. I don't want to be associated with that. And, you know, I'd rather be associated with that lizard thing, you know, at least, you know.

And I remember, I've seen over the years, I've seen so many instances where men are portrayed as buffoons, as idiots, as incapable of understanding things, where women have to be the ones controlling them.

Women have to be the ones correcting them. Women have to be the ones teaching them. And it happens over and over in television and movies and things like this. And what I see in the movies, for example, is men are either buffoons or they're serial killers or they're, you know, hulking massive supermen who can do incredibly great things.

These extremes of masculinity are portrayed. And an average guy like me, you know, it's a problem. I'm going to say something. I know I'm jumping around a little bit. Let me read something out of all things psychology today.

I love this. This is what they said. In no culture ever studied have women repeatedly preferred to mate with pear-shaped, low-status, tepid men possessing high-pitched nasal voices. In no documented culture do women's sexual fantasies revolve around granting sexual access to unemployed, unambitious men who occupy the lowest stratum of the social hierarchy.

Instead, women are attracted to toxic masculine male phenotypes that correlate with testosterone. And they are desirous of men who are socially dominant, who are strategically risk-taking in their behaviors, and who exhibit patterns of behaviors that will allow them to ascend the social hierarchy and defend their positions from encroachers.

Of course, this does not imply that women are not attracted to intelligent, sensitive, kind, warm, and compassionate men. The ideal man is rugged and sensitive, masculine and caring, aggressive in some pursuits and gentle in others.

Think of the male archetype in romance novels, which is a literary form almost exclusively read by women. He is a tall prince and a neurosurgeon. He is a risk-taker who wrestles alligators and subdues them on his six-pack abs and yet is sensitive enough to be tamed by the love of a good woman.

That's what they said in Psychology Today. I can read my next paragraph. I said, oh no, if I'm not a six-pack, ab-packing neurosurgeon who's in touch with his emotions, is caring, and can wrestle alligators, then I'm in trouble.

Wait, I'm autistic, Asperger's, have one ab, and I'm afraid of alligators. I'm obviously somehow wrong as a man. But wait a minute. I did get misty. I just had to put my cat down, which I had to do this week.

It was not fun. So anyway, you know the thing. Which cat? The orange one. Finny. He wasn't doing well. It was not good. At any rate, so the thing is, you know, this toxic masculinity, in my opinion, is nothing more than an attack on masculinity, period.

It should be just bad behavior. That's all. Can men act badly? Yeah. Can women act badly? Yeah. Just call it bad behavior. That's what you got to do. It's bad behavior. It's another example of manly or male bad behavior.

What happens to people when they constantly hear toxic masculinity? They associate toxicity and masculinity. This is what happens. First time I became aware of this kind of a thing where manhood was being attacked was a Volvo commercial.

If I remember, it was a brand of Volvo. If that's correct, I remember. It was a beautiful girl, woman in the driver's seat, and the man was in the passenger seat. So she's in control, and he was ignorant, and she was explaining.

She was in control of everything. I remember looking going, well, of course a woman could drive a car and know more than a guy, of course. But it just, it just, it was like something just, a light went on.

It's like, wait a minute. This is, here we are again. And I noticed, and this is what started to be, wait, I've seen this before. Too many times, this pattern where men are incompetent. Men are dumb. Men are the ones who need to be corrected and tamed and corrected by women.

And I'm not saying that some men don't need that. But it's just too pervasive. I'd recommend, if anybody's listening, go to Netflix and watch, I think it's called The Red Pill. And done by a feminist.

I'm going to watch it again. It is eye-opening. It's extremely eye-opening, what's happening in America. And the attack on manhood and masculinity is being attacked. Now, in that same article, I know I'm going, Christ is the perfect example of masculinity.

Jesus Christ, God in flesh, a man. How did he exemplify his manhood? He loved. He taught. He wept. He healed. He welcomed children. He taught that we ought to honor and serve God. He overturned temple tables.

He defended righteousness. He called people harsh things. He promoted self-defense. He condemned unrighteous behavior and beliefs. And he sacrificed himself. Those are just some of the things that the best example of masculinity had.

So what gets me is, what if you had a man like Jesus, who never sinned, never does anything wrong. And he went through, and he overturned temple tables. Or he went to a place, a big church, a famous church, and threw people out and got mad and called them names.

That's toxic masculinity right there. And the problem is that the left will accuse people of things, even when they're right. Any form of aggression, any form of anything they can call negative, is then labeled by the leftist propaganda machine as toxic masculinity.

It's a problem in America. One of my greatest compliments my wife ever gave me was, she said, Matt, there's no femininity in you. That's a great compliment to me. It's not because femininity is bad. Femininity is great.

Femininity, that's my wife's job. I don't want her being masculine. I don't want that. That will destroy our marriage. I don't need that. But I'm a man, and I'm going to behave like a man. I think like a man.

I'm ashamed of being a man. No problem. But I'll tell you, I get sick and tired of these morons on TV and all over the place, just one other way of attacking men. I wish they'd stop. I wish they would provide shows on TV that are positive, that have good men doing good things and sacrificing, where they have wisdom.

I mean, Bill Cosby's show was great. Yeah, I know. He turned out to be wacko in some other areas and some stuff. But that show was great, a good example of good masculinity. Why don't we have more shows like that on TV?

Why don't we have more stuff like that showing us how things ought to be? But no. So the left and the wickedness of the world promotes all kinds of bad behavior and publicizing bad behavior and then complains when people act badly.

Okay, I'm done. Perfect.

Okay, it helps if I actually unmute myself. So, see, I mean, you brought up the thing that I always found interesting is that they never want to focus on, it's always attacking the masculinity, never femininity, never attacking.

And really what it is, is it's a political agenda of the left to try to silence men, silence Christianity, anything that disagrees with their leftist worldview. Well, we're seeing this whole bunch of areas.

So Edison is here. I'm going to add him in. He said he has got some questions for you. And Matt, so you remember this is the fellow who is from the Philippines, from Cebu, Philippines. And I should mention Snatching from the Flames.

I got to look for the date on this. This is when Justin Peters and I will be in the Philippines. I got to find out when that is. Let's see if I can find that. Of course, I can't find it right now. But we'll be, both Justin Peters and myself will be in the Philippines on, in, I think, May.

And it would be good if I had that like right in front of me for me to talk about it. But we're going to be, we'll be in Cebu. We'll be in Manila for a week. And then we're going to Cebu for three days to do a discernment conference.

And so anyone that's in the Philippines, you could check that out. I'll put the link somewhere on my homepage. So Edison, how are you doing? Well, let's see. You're not muted. Your volume's up. Edison, you there?

All right. He may have a problem with his mic. What we'll do is until when he comes in, he could let us know. We'll go to Andrew. Andrew also came in. So, Andrew, what questions do you have tonight? You can unmute yourself.

Yeah, just unmuted.

Sorry, Andrew. No problem, Andrew. Just got to think there might be a delay too. Christianity is getting a bit stale. The way I maybe the way I look at it. I guess I'm trying to deal with that myself.

My church has gone through a whole lot of problems of its own. Pastorship issues, new pastor. We've got to meet and figure that one out where we go, et cetera. With that got me considering my own position within Christianity and wondering whether I'm whether it's still viable.

And, you know, a lot. Well, I wouldn't say viable, but whether I can believe it anymore.

Why? Because people in your church are behaving badly?

No, just because I just see the whole not just in my church, but in just about every other church. To me, the Bible, you read a song, you can read about it. Pretty much quite the Bible. Just wondering where can I go?

What sources can I go to for that? Let me ask you. Let me ask you.

Let's say you want to give up on Jesus. What are you going to put in place of Jesus? That's the thing. I don't know. How about atheism? What do you think? I've seen my brothers. No way. OK, how about how about Islam?

Yeah. Nabil Qureshi, David Woods. The way the recent debates don't want Islam. I'd replace it with I don't know. So Islam is out.

Definitely. How about I don't know that we evolved from lower life forms of slime through incredible mutational progression. And here we are. How about that?

No. Fortunately, I don't buy evolution either. I can't see how. You're kind of stuck.

You're kind of stuck. We're going to pick something else for you. Besides Jesus, who's God in flesh, fulfilling the prophecies, bearing your sin in his body, rising from the dead and promising to return.

I mean, you got to find something better than that. I don't know what you're going to do if you leave Christianity. It doesn't exist, does it? No. So you're looking at other churches and they're not behaving.

So this is why you are considering giving up Christianity because people are morons because they don't believe what Jesus said.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's just that I just I just think I'm going through a questioning stage or a burnout stage. I think I've been I've been doing it for a long time. Despite every church I've been involved in.

I've been in a music team. I've secretly I've totally believed it. I don't know if I want to cut it off. I think cutting it off is not going to be good.

Well, let me ask you, let's say you go to church and you've been going there faithfully and whatever, and they're not perfect people. They mess up. They whatever. Some good people, some bad people, you know, and one day to your utter incredible surprise, the pastor gets up and he says, instead of a sermon, I could ask questions.

He says, he goes, I don't believe in Christianity more. I don't believe in Christ. I don't believe in this. I don't believe how many are with me. And everybody's hands go up. Everybody's hands go up except yours.

Would that mean that Christianity is not true? No. So what does Christianity deal with then?

From my understanding, it deals with sin. There you go. Are you a sinner?

Absolutely. Yeah. So it's irrelevant whether anybody accepts or not this issue of Christianity, how well they're doing. Churches are not anywhere, everywhere. That's not the issue. The issue is you're a sinner.

You know that. You've got to deal with that through Jesus Christ. And that's the only way. What else are you going to go to?

Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Anyway. So, I mean, I just think I just needed to thresh it out to someone.

Yeah. I had to do the same thing, to be honest. A few years ago, I got to the point where it was just a lot of stuff going on and a lot of issues and difficulties and some things. And, you know, I'm constantly debating unbelievers and their reasoning and their thinking.

And it can be pretty tough. And there's always spiritual attack. And I remember thinking, okay, you know, if I give up Christianity, where would I go? And I went through the same thing. Okay. Evolution?

Not happening. Atheism? That's a joke. Islam? Forget it. Mormonism? That's stupid. Catholicism? That's just traditional legalism. And I just know it's whacked. I kept going. I go, what would I give up Jesus for?

You know, I went through that iteration, too. Okay. Yeah. Thanks.

That's me again. That's you. Yeah. Welcome to the club. The other thing I was going to say is just in relation to the toxic masculinity issue, that video, before I got in and put my dislike on there, there had been, I think it was 400 ,000 dislikes and 1 .5 million, oh, sorry, 400 ,000 likes, 1 .5 million dislikes.

I checked it this morning and it's 712 ,000 versus 1 .5 million in the video. On what? What video? There's a Gillette ad on toxic masculinity.

And so most people are against it or for it?

Against. So the dislikes are outnumbering the likes, but the likes are catching it up slowly.

Well, I'm not going to buy Gillette, period. I've made a decision right away. It's not their job to do that kind of a thing. It's not their job to engineer social structures and address these things. Their job is to produce a good razor.

And if they can't do it, bye. And if they're going to start preaching to me about what I ought to be doing, screw you. I'm going to wall.

What's that? I'm going to wall instead because shit aren't doing a much, aren't doing a good job either.

Yeah. I'm tired of social engineering from the left and the wackos and the morons who want to tell me what to believe and don't have a right to make any judgments. It's ridiculous.

Just to put it into perspective, the same person who worked on the Gillette ad also did a, I think it was a female ad. That was utterly hilarious too.

I am so tired of being preached at by the left. So tired of being told what is moral, what is good, what is right by the, the intelligentsia who don't even know what is right or wrong, who just lift their finger, put it up in the air and then try and decide or discover what is true or false.