Dave Hunt's book "What Love is This?" Examined Pt. 2

White.

Opening the Program and the Week’s Topics

Good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line. My name is James White and we are live this week. Last week I had made some reference to the fact that possibly we wouldn't be live this week. But my trip out of town was canceled.

And so we are here and will be for the foreseeable future at least until a long time When we're gone during the month of July. So we've got some some ideas as to what we're gonna be doing the next number of weeks and we will be live here on The dividing line now two things today.

I've got well a couple different topics that we could address but Two things we will be addressing and we'll be listening to some comments from Roman Catholic apologist Tim Staples on the program today and responding to those and yes I have continued looking at Dave Hunt's new book called.

What love is this? In fact, it's been difficult not to I had received it the actual copy of it. I'd actually seen it first in st. Louis at the personal freedom outreach conference on discernment. Mr. Hunt had a single copy on his table and had a sign-up sheet for people who would pay for it then and then have.

It shipped to them and I had leafed through that one. Only had a few moments. I looked up some specific passages. I had had it on order for quite some time had ordered it in fact in December of last year and it finally arrived last week didn't have a lot of time before the program to Look up more things other than just many of the comments that he made concerning me.

There are many references to the Potter's freedom in the book. And so I was working at grabbing those and so last week when we were looking at passages That was based on a very brief review of the book.

Dave Hunt’s Misrepresentation of Calvinism and John 6

I've now had more time and Absolutely Amazing the things that I have discovered for example in looking through the materials I Found on page 306 those of you who have the book. These words the gospel of God's grace which seemingly is offered to whosoever will believe must be imposed and that only upon those who God has elected as White explains this is why irresistible grace is an absolute necessity.

Then he quotes from the Potter's freedom Unregenerate man is fully capable of understanding the facts of the gospel. He is simply incapable due to his corruption and enmity to submit himself to that gospel dot dot dot dot.

To which mr. Hunt then responds. It's on page 306. This is a terrible attack upon the gospel Rendering powerless what Paul declares is the power of God and the Salvation Romans 116 and this is what white calls the reformed position.

Now I must admit if I had run into the numerous assertions that I engage not only in scripture twisting But in eisegetical insertion of foreign elements into this into the Bible and then here that I engage in a terrible Attack upon the gospel that I render powerless the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I'm not sure that the conversations that I had with. Mr. Hunt would have been quite as Quiet as they turned out to be. In fact, I have a hard time Thinking about the fact that we sat at a dinner and there was not a word of warning.

I mean if I had written stuff like this about somebody I think I would have raised those issues and talked about them, but those things didn't happen. And so later in the program today, we're gonna continue looking at what love is this Calvinism's misrepresentation of God specifically looking at two things and that is Dave Hunt's misrepresentation of Calvinism and Specifically of Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

I think you'll find that most interesting. I mentioned it last week. But now I have the full quotes to read to you as well as the fact that there is an entire chapter found in.

The.

Toward the back of what love is this an entire chapter chapter 20 Which is Dave Hunt's and I I'm not trying to be unkind here but Desperate attempt to deal with John chapter 6 and I say it's desperate.

Because once you read it, you will see it's filled with special pleading. It's filled with emotionalism and it's filled with rank errors on the meanings of words. The grammar of the Greek text and everything else.

It is it is truly an astounding example of how very very poor Dave Hunt is as far as his ability to engage in exegetical Research and in his study of of history and in argumentation and Toto it was it's truly amazing.

We'll try to spend some time looking at that and if you don't catch all of it. Or if we don't have time to look at everything today. Then I will be posting on the website an open letter to to Dave Hunt.

And I will be discussing in that letter these issues in significantly more detail than I have opportunity to do Here on the program and I provide References and all sorts of things like that. I would like to have that open letter done this weekend if I can but I simply cannot promise that I will do so because generally what's going on is as I Look more and more at the book and provide further Further responses to the book.

I find more and more things that need to have response and I'm I'm trying to resist the temptation. But I'm you know, I'm only human. So anyways, so we'll be we will be looking at that. But before we do that since we talked about it last week the the book last week.

I want to address some other subjects and in in essence We got a I don't remember if it was a phone call. I think it was a phone call. The two we were contacted by someone who noted that in the May 7th program of Catholic answers live an Announcement was made and so I I went to the it was an email.

Okay. Thank you. I went to the Catholic answers live website and began listening and lo and behold who was the guest apologist in the In that particular on that particular date, but Tim Staples now those of you who do not know Tim Staples I have debated to mr. Staples twice once in I believe it was 1998 both these were in Fullerton, California on that was on the subject of soul scripture the second time in 2000 on the subject of.

The.

Papacy and specifically papal infallibility we have those debates available if you would like to Avail yourself of them. One of those is on straight gate .com as well. If you want to go over there and listen to that anyways.

Mr. Staples and I have also done the Bible answer man many many times actually only twice, but we did multiple hours each time and So we know each other pretty well. During the course of listening to the program the first thing that I found very interesting was mr. Staples addressing the subject of Predestination and election and the reason I'm raising this is I know that so one of our our favorite callers Who let me see here is not in channel at the moment.

Anyways, maybe he's Dispensing burgers and fries somewhere. If you know what I mean, yes, I think you're correct Spencer. I think it was 96. I was wondering is there's about four years between the two of them.

So by 1996 anyways.

Roman Catholic Views of Predestination, Grace, and Free Will

We.

This this particular caller has raised the possibility of mr. Staples and I debating again in the Southern, California area. I had said after the last debate. I'm just not going to do it again because mr. Staples cannot.

Be.

Trusted to Behave properly and it is very clear that st. Joseph Catholic radio cannot be not st Joseph Catholic radio. St. Joseph's communications cannot be trusted. If they are in charge of the recording of the event the reasons for this are listed on our website.

But in essence, we were promised if videotapes were made we'd receive copies. Videotapes were made. We were refused the copies. I imagine they've probably been destroyed for all I know of the last debate and Also, mr. Staples has simply refused to follow the rules and The moderator of the debate would Jerry Usher who is the host of Catholic answers live Seemed utterly powerless to stop.

Mr. Staples or do anything about it. In fact, I was thinking this morning every time there has been a debate that went south in the sense of people misbehaving it was due to the fact that a Roman Catholic moderator Refused to do anything.

As I thought back I remember the very first debate I did with Jerry matics he did not mention the subject of the debate for the first 14 of his 20 minutes and Who was the moderator of that debate Patrick Madrid?

Art Sippo. I get up to give my presentation art Sippo leaves and goes and gets a coke. Because art Sippo doesn't need to hear what any Prost and has to say because he knows much more about anything That a Prost and could ever know anyhow and therefore his behavior was never rebuked either and who was moderator of that one Patrick Madrid and Tim Staples gets up during the question-and-answer time in Fullerton in 2000 and takes the first few minutes of his Time to be asking questions to respond to what I had said at the previous part of the debate and there stands.

Mr Usher doing nothing. So what I'm getting to is Is what I would like to have take place is. Here's here's my idea. Mr. That our caller Zorro as we call him affectionately in Channel Johnny Has said he would like to try to arrange another debate with mr Staples possibly a two-on-two debate between myself and Eric Stenson versus mr. Staples and somebody else and that's.

That's fine and In the process though, these are the things I'd like to lay down as as the issues. First of all, we would not have a Roman Catholic moderator. We would have a moderator who actually moderates and would be empowered to enforce rules of debate a.

B.

St. Joseph's communications has nothing to do with this. They will not to be there. They will not have any control over anything that happens because they cannot be trusted. They have lost all credibility as an organization because they will say one thing and do something else.

We've documented that there's no question about that. Therefore they cannot have anything to do with it. If they'd like to have the tapes to distribute them later We would be more than happy to provide them to them because unlike st Joseph's we do provide tapes to those people that we promise to provide them to so With those Caveats that is a moderator who is instructed beforehand that mr. Staples likes to break the rules the debate therefore he needs to be held in check and st. Joseph's communications is.

You know you they can come and sit in the audience they'd like but they have nothing to do with the debate. There's two topics that I would be more than happy to debate. Mr. Staples on in Southern, California.

One is predestination election and I'm gonna play you a clip here in a moment with his comments about this subject and You'll see why one of the reasons why is is back when I was preparing for the last debate with him In a in a tape series entitled Infallibility versus impeccability which is published by st. Joseph's communications tape one second side you can go and you can go and Look at this yourself.

You will hear mr. Staples say the following now. And a lot of folks folks in the channel love to imitate Tim Staples because they'll say folks folks folks listen to me folks Mr. Staples says that a lot.

But anyways You can go and listen to this and he's talking to the quote-unquote hometown crowd. So Tim gets very very animated in regards to having these kinds of conversations when he's talking to the home crowd and so Here's I'm just gonna read you exactly what I said.

I typed this out the time I didn't have time to go find it on the tape and then digitize it and do all the rest of stuff. But you can find it. Here's what he said. On the second side tape one. You do have some Protestants who tend toward that sort of schizophrenic understanding of the human person.

You know, it's not me that sins. It's my body if you have ever heard of hyper of the hyper Calvinist movement or the one saved always save people that will say oh, I'm saved my body over there just messes up.

But I'm fine, then he laughs and says, you know, that's not biblical folks. There's no biblical thing for that. It's a misinterpretation of Romans chapter 7, but that's another story so there's There's there's mr. Staples and as you're gonna hear he just finished writing an article for Envoy magazine on the subject of predestination, which I Remember Tim's a graduate of the Jimmy Swaggart Bible College so that will explain something about why he would come up with the Hyper-Calvinists or once saved always save people are the same ones and I mean, I just that anyways it would be enjoyable to debate the subject of predestination and election and I will be glad to defend the thesis that God from eternity past has elected a specific Group known as the elect unto salvation and So I would be glad to do that.

The other thing would be The immaculate conception and the bodily assumption of Mary. Mr. Staples likes to speak much upon the the Marian the doctrines and so I would be very happy to engage him on that too, so I would be defending in one and I would be he would be defending in the other and so I would be more than happy to do that if however We have a moderator who will actually moderate the debate and.

If we.

Can control mr. Staples and also if st. Joseph communications is not involved without that then it's not going to happen because we can't trust st. Joseph's and If we have a moderator who cannot control mr. Staples, then we're gonna have the same problems we had before.

Those are the those are the suggestions. Now here is the first call that got me thinking about this and of course. We've been thinking about ever since Johnny and suggested. I haven't heard anything back from him.

But anyways, here's here's the call.

And this ties in right into James Aiken's book. So I guess I should get that next. And I don't mean to sound pretentious when I ask this but what is it's kind of like a theology final. Can you compare and contrast the Thomist versus the Molinist?

Plans of predestination. Sure and and that's in two minutes or less, right? I guess I don't know. Well, basically, I think the key is in this this discussion on predestination. In fact, I just wrote an article for envoy magazine about predestination and I looked into this quite a bit.

I think the catechism in paragraphs 600 just does in 600 through 604 right there does a tremendous job at Giving us a system a synopsis of the truth concerning predestination. There are certain there is no doubt a certain mystery to predestination but basically what the church has said no matter which position you hold to be at the Molinist or Thomistic or the Position of Suarez the Franciscan and there there are some basic differences here.

We cannot go too far in one. We would deny the free will of men in this process of salvation that we're in and We cannot go too far the other way and deny the necessity of grace and historically This has been if you read the writings of st Augustine where the church has always been doing this the balancing act between the heresies of for example The Manichaeans who taught and Augustine deals with them who taught a strict sort of fatalism or predestination.

To the other end of the spectrum that Augustine dealt with the Pelagians who taught that grace is not necessary. Both are heresies. What we believe as Catholics is that God gives sufficient grace as Titus 2 11 says in sacred scripture the grace of God that brings salvation at the peer to all men all Men have received and will receive sufficient grace to be saved.

We must and here's where we get into the disagreement among our with our Calvinist friends that we must Cooperate it's of God that God gives to us, and if we choose to cooperate with that grace We will be saved if not we will be damned.

Now the Thomas now if you've ever read I Recommended the fundamentals of Catholic dogma by Luther God. He gives a pretty good little Synopsis here on page 243 of his book fundamentals of Catholic dogma and basically without reading his words Would say that the Thomas position Emphasizes the idea of efficacious grace that God gives Efficacious grace to men before Their cooperation with that grace the Marlinist emphasized the fact that God.

Sees.

Beforehand how men would freely react to various orders of grace, and it's in light of that knowledge That he communicates graces. He knows infallibly we would say in advance What use the individual will make of the grace bestowed on him and therefore?

He gives graces accordingly. Now both positions can be held by Catholics. I believe that there's a there could be obviously it's a danger in both positions if you go too far in the Marlinist position to to exclude grace and the necessity of or if.

Then there are those who use st. Thomas Aquinas and go too far, and I don't believe st Thomas did this but they go too far and have God choosing arbitrarily, okay? I'm going to give you efficacious grace, and I'm not going to give you efficacious grace.

There has to be in order for it to be Orthodox. There has to be a sense in which we say that man at st. Augustine says he will not save us without our cooperation, and I think that's the real key for us.

That help Eric.

Kinda, I guess. Oh, yeah, if you want to take a look at this. But father William most has a book where he goes into great detail on this issue of predestination. If you want a shorter synopsis, I would say fundamentals of Catholic dogma by dr. Ludwig ought does a good job and again get a hold of the catechism.

The catechism of the Catholic Church does a. Just a fantastic job. Now is the book by gregor legrange too thick for somebody without a degree or not I'm sorry. Can you create a nation?

He asked if there's a book by father gregor legrange if if that would be perhaps too thick for someone.

I would you say Eric without a degree in theology? Yeah, actually, I think that father William most book is really thick as well. I I really believe that the hell in the wisdom of the church when the when the battle was heated between the The the Jesuits of course it teach the Marlinist position and the the Dominicans basically, you know.

The Pope told both sides to shut up. You know and and the church has given us the parameters.

Grace, Free Will, and the Limits of Catholic Orthodoxy

Of.

Orthodoxy that we have to acknowledge free will and we have to acknowledge the necessity of God's grace. I I believe that both sides. When you read the the Dominican position you see grace. You see the glory of God's grace and his power and the necessity of and Our complete impotence to get ourselves to heaven apart from God's grace.

When you read the Marlinist position you see the glory of man and the glory of our free will and the dignity We have as human beings. Human persons create an image and likeness of God. We must freely choose to cooperate With the Marlinist position as well.

You see. You know sometimes I've heard it explained this way before that the Marlinist position kind of has us Kind of like a football being kicked around on a field that God.

Moves.

Masterfully all the pieces into place though. We're absolutely free to choose one way or the other. God, you know at some point gives us an offer. We we can't refuse.

Gives us an offer. We can't refuse the glory of the free will of man, etc, etc, etc. I hope you listen to that because you know This this whole emphasis that we just heard in Tim Staples and his Roman Catholic response Which you know, there's a bunch of things that that immediately strike the mind that you want to you want to address.

But the whole emphasis is found. There is the very same emphasis that is found in Dave Hunt's book. And that's what I tried to explain to. Mr. Hunt. Almost two years ago now is that on the issue of the nature of grace and the will of man?

He and Rome stand side by side Against the Reformers and he just absolutely refused to accept that he simply would not Allow that point to stand but he had nothing you can say to refuse to refute what I had said.

When you hear you kept hearing mr. Staples say to be Orthodox that is Roman Catholic Orthodox you must affirm the necessity of grace and How many times have those of you who've listened to the dividing line over the years heard me say?

The issue has never ever been The necessity of grace the issue has always been the sufficiency of grace and when it comes to that.

Issue.

The.

Non-reformed Protestant who Rejects the electing grace of God the deadness of man and sin the doctrines of grace as we call them. That individual stands shoulder-to-shoulder hand-in-hand with the Roman Catholic because the issue is.

The.

Sufficiency of grace and you just heard it. You just heard it very clearly. Well, we have to be Orthodox. We have to say that grace is necessary. But we then to be Orthodox must limit that grace to being able to accomplish Only what the will of man allows it to accomplish we must Limit God's Grace to that which man will allow it to be it cannot be free.

It cannot be sovereign it has to be given to everybody and Then man chooses what he's going to do with it. We just heard mr Staples saying that but is that not exactly what many quote-unquote Protestants say today and Then we wonder why that section of Protestantism cannot produce a meaningful and challenging apologetic against Roman Catholicism.

It's because on the very issue of the gospel. They are standing side by side with them. That becomes the issue. Now it's it's fascinating as well. It's it's hard to Not chuckle just a little bit. Think with me just for a moment Roman Catholic apologists are constantly asserting The the unity that is there is because the clarity of the teachings of the magisterium.

The magisterium can explain God's truth and that's why we don't believe in solo scripture is the Bible alone can't do that and and we have the clarity of the Magisterium and that's why we have such unity is that we're not like you Protestants.

We're not left with just a man and his and the Bible with the the paper Pope out in the woods, etc Etc, etc. I mean we've all heard it over and over again. If we've ever tried to talk with Roman Catholics to any extent of time at all.

Oh Just last night. I was waiting for someone to come in on another network so I could discuss something with them and there was a Fellow with the nick of pious the 12th and channeling. Oh my goodness.

It was just the same Canned statements over and over and over again just just unbelievable. But anyways In talking to this guy he same thing while you did solo scripture was never heard of before Luther and and You people just you have no idea what to you can possibly believe because no one can agree without the teaching magisterium, etc Etc, etc, etc well here you can Certainly find unanimity amongst Roman Catholics on certain issues.

I mean, it's pretty clear what a Roman Catholic has to believe about such tremendously central issues as the bodily assumption of Mary. Or the immaculate conception. I mean you can you can get right down to the exact level of Exactly how the the grace of Christ was applied to Mary in a in a way before.

Her.

So she does not contract the stain of original sin. It's a preemptive application. I mean you can get really specific. I mean the the magisterium can get very very specific when it wants to. But did you notice something in listening to?

That entire section from from mr. Staples for some reason while Rome can can get very specific on things about Mary. All the Rome can of all the Roman Pope can do is Tell the Jesuits and the Dominicans to shut up on what.

On the very nature of grace. I mean Roman Catholics can believe absolutely positively contradictory things. You can be a Mullen ist and Believe that God has middle knowledge and don't ask me how in the world.

Maybe I missed it, but did he managed to go through a whole discussion of Mullen ism without mentioning middle knowledge? But God can have middle knowledge and God can absolutely Micromanage the entirety of time while allegedly doing the whole thing just so he can preserve quote-unquote free will or you can completely reject that you can believe something almost 180 degrees different and Rome can't tell you what the truth is.

The folks think about it how much more of scriptural revelation Is on the subject of the nature of God's grace and the sovereignty over time that on the Immaculate Conception. That should tell you a little something about Roman Catholic epistemology and how it just doesn't work.

Tim Staples, Patti Bonds, and the Use of Testimonies

Well, we've got another clip to play but we're going to take our break first and when we come back we will listen a little bit more about Tim Staples respond to something he said and Then move on with what love is this by Dave Hunt.

Calvinism's misrepresentation of God. Well, then why is Dave Hunt misrepresenting Charles Haddon Spurgeon and myself? We'll find out right after this. And welcome back to the budding line. My name is James White and we are talking about a bunch of different things today We were listening to a little section from the May 7th Catholic answers live program.

The reason I was listening to the program was not however because of a caller talking about Mullen ism and middle knowledge and predestination or things like that instead it was about a caller later on and some comments were made there and.

Here is that call. Next up would be Diane from Michigan. Hi Diane.

My.

And I'm worried about my husband and How he believes in faith. He's very open to let me believe what I want to believe and we're raising the kids Catholic and doing everything. They're four and six. Yes, but I'm really worried about him and his salvation and.

How do I.

How do I I get it across to him what he needs to believe but without evangelizing to him and turning it off. Do I just need to pray the Rosary to Mary for that and to God. Not pray to Mary but pray with Mary.

Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, you know, I tell you I have so many friends that are in your your position and If you remind me of a very good friend Jerry, I think you know, her name's Patti Bonds. Oh, yeah.

She's gonna be on the program in.

July that's right. She told me about that I just talked with her the other day and when you hear her story What a blessing it is and it so much reminded me of mine when my whole family when I converted.

I want to tell you my sister my family thought I was nuts. They thought I was just You know demonized and now my whole family my three older brothers are Catholic. My one brother's a priest my mother my father.

My sister-in-law my my nephews. It's just been incredible and Patti Bonds tells her story of how when she converted in and her brother is a very famous anti-catholic Apologist James White beside himself when Patti converted.

And Patti experienced incredible persecution from her husband from her children and And and everything. Well God has just done a miracle in her family in a matter of a year. Her husband now has come in the church and two of her three children have come in the church.

It's just a miracle and I'll tell you she attributes it to adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. She's invited Invited one of her children to come and sit in the presence of our Lord. We cannot underestimate the power of prayers and God will do the work.

Well there you have the assertion from mr. Staples and I found it absolutely fascinating. This is the first time I had heard that Patti Bonds is going to be on Catholic answers live. And of course it makes me sit back and think why would that be now I understand the Coming home network and things like that.

I understand I guess that. But I thought Catholic answers live was a Catholic apologetics program. What would someone who has never been involved in apologetics someone who was not involved with this ministry?

Of course, or really did not have any knowledge of apologetic issues on this subject prior to her conversion. Why do you think they would like to have Patti Bonds on? Their program. Well, I think all of you know exactly why.

Let's think about it. Who is with Catholic answers. Well, we have Carl Keating. Carl Keating the man who back in the 80s published tracks that encouraged Catholics to challenge quote-unquote. Anti-catholics, that's the term that they use.

It's a term of disrespect. They refuse to respect those on the other side as you heard Mr. Staples refuses to do so. I Refer to him, of course as a Catholic apologist Roman Catholic apologist and he refers to me as an anti Catholic apologist.

I'm not a Protestant apologist or reformed apologist. And of course, we've discussed that before but they continue. They don't aren't concerned about issues of respect. But anyways Mr. Keating would encourage in his published tracks from Catholic answers, which he started Catholics to challenge anyone who would speak out against the Roman Catholic Church in their community to engage in debates.

Except mr. Keating himself will no longer do that at least against me. He's had a standing challenge since August of 1990 and that's About what's almost 12 years ago now. To engage in debates and he will not do so then we have James Aiken who has at least twice said That he would debate and then backed out of those debates and we have Jerry Usher who was the moderator of the debate with Tim Staples now why would Catholic answers which who will not do what they challenged people to do before and Engage in debates on these subjects me.

Why do you think they would have? My older sister with whom I've had very little contact for quite some time I have not seen physically for a number of years actually. Why do you think they'd have her on the program now those of you who've listened to the program?

Oh the past number of months know that back when back in February when mrs. Bonds appeared on.

The.

Coming home network. We did a program. There's an article on our website that talks about that whole situation and It's a sad situation and that is sad that people would in essence be using her in this way.

There's no reason for them to do so and the very fact that they would do so demonstrates the bankruptcy of their apologetic. To begin with but now now going to Catholic answers live. Fascinating fascinating indeed now, mr. Staples said that I was beside myself.

Actually, if you would talk to the first few people that I talked to. When I was informed of this I was informed of this while I was in Florida. My wife called me and Later that evening. I called my parents and I'll tell you the same thing.

They were surprised that I wasn't. That is my wife will tell you and my parents will tell you. I said look I'm not surprised this at all. What do you mean you're not surprised? Look Patty's gone through all sorts of these these new religious insights.

It's been four or five years since the last one. So I'm not surprised by this that I am to describe me as beside myself is simply ridiculous. You could never document that either from the way I responded to it.

I wrote to her in email and that's when I found out that she had anonymously contacted me. But she had never talked to me about these things didn't pick up the phone anything like that. And so a lot of people were surprised those who you know in my family and those are close.

We were surprised that I was like, yeah, well, you know, it's exactly. You know, it doesn't surprise me a whole lot. And in fact, I'll tell you right now I won't be surprised when it happens again. I'm not gonna be surprised in the future when it happens again.

So to describe myself as time is beside myself is simply a lie. It's inaccurate. Of course Tim Staples wouldn't know and So he's going on secondhand information. He doesn't verify his sources and Obviously given that they are gonna have patty bonds on the program.

They don't care. This is just a way without having to face me in public and give me equal time. This is a way that they can take shots at me which Catholic answers does all the time. Anyways, they've done it for a long time.

This is the same organization folks that has quoted text Mars as being accurate as long as he attacks me. Okay, there's no integrity here at all. There never has been. But shouldn't be surprising now, I hate to say I told you so but I did tell you so that is I.

I.

Said to my sister there is a period of time and again, we haven't spoken. We've only exchanged emails and that always gets end up ends up being cut off from her side. When I challenge her when I when I show her things, you know, you're just so angry.

You know.

If in other words if you show her anything you're angry. That happens very very often with people who've converted to a religion and they They don't know how to defend that religion and have to reply depend upon others to do so.

But I had said in one of my emails and I've kept all of them all this stuff is is Far too easy to document if the need exists to do so. But I said to her I said your handlers are not going to allow you to remain in anonymity.

They simply are not gonna allow it. Initially she said look I don't want to I don't want to be out front. I don't want to do stuff I said they're not gonna allow it. They're going to want to utilize your name your connection and They're going to put pressure upon you to tell your story and to Enhance that story and to allegedly know more and more and more when you converted than you actually did and they're simply not going to allow you to be quiet and once they're done with you and once there is there's no longer any Value to be derived whether the story becomes old they'll discard you Just as quickly as they picked you up.