Open Air Theology "Q&A" show

of Anabaptist, host to child of reformation, society, we don't need an education, give me a bible and a bookshelf of dead men, cigars, bourbons, and beer cans, bow ties, tattoos, and bearded men, making reformation, great again.

You can say what you want, you can say what you want, but you won't around me, you can say what you want, you can say what you want, but you won't around me, no you won't around me.

This is Elders of Covenant Reform Baptist Church here in Tallahoma, Tennessee. If you like the intro song, the single just dropped today,

I commented on it in YouTube and also on my Facebook page.

Please go and check it out, show your brothers some love. Pass it over to Jack Blake Braden.

This way? Yeah. I am Pastor Braden Patterson, the pastor of Valley Baptist Church in Hagerman, Idaho.

Also being called, starting in December, the pastor of Grace Bible Church in Moorpark, California.

So if you live in the Ventura County area, please come join the church prior to me getting there.

Come join it when I'm there. It'd be a real blessing to be able to get to know you. Really looking forward to that opportunity and just to continue to preach

Christ crucified from behind the pulpit and to love the people. I also have a

YouTube channel called Reformed Ex -Mormon. I'm also looking for new friends. These ones are jack legs sometimes and I'll pass the mic down to Tom.

So Braden is a pastor in Grace Bible Church. I actually attend Grace Bible Church, but actually in Texas, in Bernie, Texas.

So same name, different church. So I had to put an evangelism team out of Grace Bible Church in Bernie where I'm a member.

Man, it's doing awesome, you guys. We had such a good turnout. We had two people come from evangelism today.

It was excellent. So I'm like, you know, on cloud nine, you guys know when you see fruit and stuff like that.

So it was a, it was a good day today. Yeah. Amen.

Amen. Yes. Service went well for us today. I, I kind of finished the little section on washing feet for some reason.

I can't get anyone in our reformed church to bring out the bucket of water and get in between the toes.

Right. But now we just pointed out that, you know, like we looked at what a servant is.

That's, that's Christ. What a servant isn't Judas. And what was the other one?

How should a leader lead or something like that? But it was a really good message. And it was one that I was actually kind of worried about, like entering into the pulpit.

I just, I didn't know how it was going to turn out. And while I was preaching,

I felt pretty good about it. And then I had a lot of people afterwards approached me just saying it was a really good message.

So I haven't got to hear it yet. But if you want to supposedly hear a good message by me, go check out the one

I preached today. Good Lord's day though. We had a week, man, I'll tell you what, we had four families missing today and our whole church was packed.

We barely had, if they would have came because we have a fellowship meal after every service.

If those four families would have came and everyone would have stayed and eaten, we wouldn't have had enough room for people to eat.

Wow. That's awesome. So we really need this church building. Oh yeah.

And so more announcements on that. I am meeting with the church that owns the building, receive the deed to the building.

And I am meeting with them this coming Tuesday at 1030 Central Standard Time.

So if y 'all could, if y 'all would, excuse me, if y 'all would please be praying that the

Lord would be so gracious for us to get this building. And we really need it.

We're busting out the seams. Praise God. That's awesome. We'll be praying for sure.

How was your day, Brayden? It was good. I got to preach Galatians chapter three, verse 15 to 23.

And so just got to talk a lot about covenants and how the seed is the singular

Christ, not the plural people of Israel. So that was that was a blessing to be able to go through that.

So very good. Good Lord. Good Lord's Day. Great time with fellowship and with the saints. That's good.

How about you, Tom? It was good earlier today. Michael, Michael preached and then in our evening worship service,

Frank preached on memorizing the word of God, how important it is to meditate on it, to read it, to study it, but not only to read it and study it, but also memorize it.

So we have it in our hearts and our minds so we can meditate on it. So, you know, as we as we take in Christ, we can memorize the scripture.

It helps us helps us to keep our mind on Christ. So it was it was really good. And then seeing the two guys, it was actually one guy that we met at evangelism a couple of weeks ago, a young man, you know, a senior in high school, you know, built dude.

I mean, all the girls are going to love this guy, this kid. I mean, just built football player and all that stuff.

And and he came to listen to us evangelize, showed up at church, brought a friend and heard the word preached like they've never heard heard before.

Actually, verse by verse, actually looking at at the scriptures and then explaining the text where they were just floored.

And so they said they're going to come back. So we're just praising God for that. So it was excellent.

Really good. Very good. Very good. But everyone had a.

Had a good Lord's Day. There's nothing like the Lord's Day, in my opinion, where we get to gather with the saints and and allow this to be an overflow of our our continued worship throughout the week.

Yeah. So. So today's topic is we're just going to have a

Q &A. So we we were going to talk about one thing and we just decided not to.

We really want this show to be energetic and fun. And so,

I mean, I mean, you got guys out there, you know, if you're looking for someone to bash everybody that around like this is not the show for you.

Like if you come in the comment sections running your mouth, let me bash. Yeah, we'll make fun of you.

Hallelujah. But we're not like the heresy hunters and stuff like that or something like that.

So, you know, so we just wanted this show to be fun. And so because like like you came down to yesterday and was like, well, what are we going to talk about?

And so it was like, well, let's just allow people to ask questions. So I have a

I have a request. OK, because because I'm married to her, she has a question and I can tell her that tell you guys that we.

So every every question we're going to have the ones that we answer. We're going to pull up on the screen. OK, it's

Debbie Shepherd there. You guys pull it up. Yes. Go ahead. And I'm going to tell you, my wife and I argue about this verse.

So I'm not going to tell you which one I'm going to leave. I want to prove her wrong, guys.

Prove her wrong. That's all I'm asking. So in Luke, Zechariah was unable to speak until the baby was born.

Preachers today say that Zechariah was also deaf, even though the

Bible doesn't say anything about him being deaf. What do you all think? I think it's in Luke one

Luke one. And I've never heard that he was deaf.

Yeah, it doesn't say that he was deaf, but let's read the text. Sounds like you want to argue for a man deaf.

Hey, hey. All right. Go ahead and insert your words into the

Bible. Let's go. Go ahead and shoehorn your interpretation. The best way to open up is the

Bible doesn't say, but this is where I'm going to go. OK, so let's let's let's start it.

Braden, you're a good reader. Start at verse 18. Yeah, I am a great reader. Not really. I think

I have, I guess, two seconds. You read well. It's just your voice. Yeah, that's your voice.

Your voice sucks. And Zachariah said to the angel, how will

I know this? For I am. I'm OK. Read it, Braden. I'm reading. Where are we at? You started reading it and then you stopped.

What? Where are we at? Oh, verse 18. Verse 18. Chapter 18. And Zachariah chapter two or chapter one?

One. Oh, crap. OK. And Zachariah said to the angel, how shall

I know this? For I am old, an old man, and my wife is advanced in years.

And the angel answered him. I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God. And I was sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news.

And behold, you will be silent and unable to speak until the day these things take place.

Because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time.

And the people were waiting for Zachariah. And they were wondering at his delay in the temple. And when he came out, he was unable to speak to them.

And they realized that he had seen a vision in the temple. And he kept making signs to them and remained mute.

Keep going. OK. And when his time of service was ended, he went to his home.

After these days, his wife Elizabeth conceived. And for five months, she kept herself hidden, saying,

Thus the Lord has done for me in the days when he looked on me to take away my reproach among people.

Keep going. Debbie, where is it? Hold on.

Hold on a second. Somebody fired Tom. Go ahead, Michelle. Tell us. Or Melissa.

Melissa is the one that keeps on telling me I need to get fired. I'm going to get fired if I don't get this.

Hold on. There was a part in there when it says... OK. Golly, she gave me the wrong word.

Verse 63. Hold on. Let's go down.

OK. 63. OK. OK, so let's start at 60.

OK. But his mother answered and said no, but he shall be called

John. And they said to her, There is no one among the relatives who was called by this name.

And they were making signs to his father. They were making signs to his father, who was mute, right?

We just read that he was mute. They were making signs to his father. He was mute.

He couldn't talk. Yeah. During that time of pregnancy. Huh? During the time of pregnancy.

Right. He couldn't talk. So keep reading. Let's read it. 61.

And they said to her, there was no one among... OK. So 62. And they were making signs to his father as to what he wanted to be called.

And he asked for a tablet. And he wrote as follows.

His name shall be called John. And they marveled. OK. So he couldn't talk.

But why are they making signs to him? Why didn't they just say, hey?

But 64. And immediately his mouth was open. And his tongue.

Here's the issue. Why are they making signs to him if he could hear?

He started saying signs first. Right. So he couldn't talk.

He couldn't talk. OK. But he could hear. If he can hear, why are they doing this?

Whoa. You were making... No, go back. You just said he couldn't hear. You were just making signs to us.

It doesn't mean you're deaf. All it is is hand gestures. He couldn't speak. OK. You just did it again.

You just did it again. You're talking with your hands. But I'm speaking also.

You're doing it again. I'm telling me he was deaf as well. He was deaf as well. He couldn't... Hey, what's the name of that plant that deaf people use?

What's that called? Braille. Look, she's arguing. Deaf people don't need braille. It's blind people,

Jack. Oh, gosh. You got me. We're over.

OK. So let's move on. Oh, my goodness. OK. Anybody hear what I'm saying? I hear you. It doesn't make sense that they were making signs to him.

If he was mute. I can see him making signs. Hear me out. Or writing on a tablet and all that.

Or even them writing on a tablet back. But if he could hear, why are they doing his name?

You don't know what they're doing. They just could be like, dude, step up. Speak. They're making signs.

Right. They're not sitting here doing sign language. Right. Why would they? What were they doing?

All right. Come on. Listen, listen. This right here. OK. Let's go to something else.

You got a weird interpretation. Was he? I do. So he was making signs at him for no reason.

Yeah. I mean, it's just hand gestures. You were just talking to us. When I preach, I guess.

When I preach, I'm a hand gesture and fools. How many people are deaf in your church? How many people are deaf in your church,

Jeff? In our church? No one. But today I was like, horizontal versus vertical.

Why are you making those hand signals? Somebody has to be deaf in your church if you're making hand signals. I don't know why they wouldn't just ask him if he could hear instead of making.

We agree with Debbie. OK. Oh, my gosh. Get Debbie on the show.

You're off. She's on it. Anybody on your side at all?

Anybody? No one is on your side. Wait, Jake just said check the lexicons on the original

Greek for that word. Same, same. I don't have any. I don't have anything out here with me. It says some mention it as a somatic.

Cannot talk range, including both mute and deaf. So he's saying that the like causing him to be mute.

Yeah, I'd like to say that, Jake. Jake. Yeah. But the issue is, even if even if being made mute could mean both not talk or hear, the only part that is restored that's talked about is a totally different Greek word, which was he used his tongue and he caused him to speak.

It was no longer. It doesn't mention anything. Yeah, it doesn't say. If there was a time to where I wasn't able to talk,

I would learn how to I would learn how to communicate with people around me. So.

OK. Y 'all was one of these the sign languages. What's the next question?

All right. So at the very beginning, a guy was asking a question. He asked a lot of questions and we're going to answer one question and see if anyone else comes up with anything else.

And if not, they don't. We'll come back to it. All right. So, Clint, he has three.

At the very beginning, either one of those you want to tackle? Yes, like four in the beginning.

Oh, yes. Four. Wow. They calm down, brother. According to 1689 federalism is the faith that caused

Caleb and Joshua to believe in God's promise to take the land, the same faith that we have.

Well, faith just means trust. So they were trusting. That God was going to bring them to that land.

And I'd have to. So to be honest with you, I would have to have I would have to have some time to study that exact passage to answer that with assurity.

We do know that Hebrews 11, the chapter of faith mentions that several it was

Abraham looking for a land that wasn't theirs. But not even just that. It says that they quenched the power of fire, escaped the sword, were made strong through weakness, became mighty in war, for foreign armies to flight.

So there's there's mentions of this stuff. And so I just what I think he's getting at is that the saving faith.

And I would say saving faith has to concern the seed for so. So if this was in 16 and in 1689 federalism, the faith that makes a person righteous has to do with that promise seed, which is

Christ. So it's it's it's speaking of the land. I'm sure that that, you know, in the sense that they were trusting

God for the land. However, were they trusting God for the seed? Now, I do believe that they were children of spiritual descendants of Abraham, not just physical descendants of Abraham.

But I wouldn't I wouldn't base it off of that promise. So I would say on this, and if I'm correct me if I'm wrong, but we will rest of the people.

Yeah, obviously. I didn't put that up there. Let me put that up there real quick so people can see it.

So if the Texas and John, I mean, did not that that they came back and they went out to spy out the land, didn't the other people that were with them or the other people were saying, hey, wait a minute.

They look too big. They look too much. They were doubting everything. But Caleb and Joshua believed God. Yes.

If my memory serves me correctly. Yes. Which I think goes back to showing and demonstrating a certain level of saving faith.

So I would err on that saying that they had faith in the seed, which caused them to be able to act in bold manners.

Just like we trust God when we go out and do evangelism. Which stems from our faith in Christ.

Right. So. What they were seeing with their human eyes.

They were leaving God to do that. So I would say we're resting at least on God on that as well.

Yep. It's so funny.

So at work, sometimes we'll go on calls and it's really funny to see somebody that's new try to do a patient assessment on somebody that's deaf because they'll just get louder and louder.

She'll like, by the end of it, they'll be shouting, what's your medical history? And the person's like,

I don't have my hearing aids. Yeah, there's some pretty funny stories

I got with that. For some reason, it's not letting me go further in my comments.

If you ask the question, ask it again, because it's not letting me see it. What? Do you want me to tell us another

Clint one that we can answer? It's not even letting me see the Clint. Why? Are you on the comments on the top right?

What do you think? I don't know. Oh, here's a good one. Here's a good one.

Okay. This is what it says. Why are so many reformed Baptist critical of Christian nationalism when the 1689 confession explicitly supports general equity theonomy?

Because it's speaking of the church. The church. Okay, so we're not saying that the government shouldn't use

God's law. So in 1689, in the reformed Baptist, we held to the three uses of the law.

First use, then a mirror. Second use is the curve. Third use is the flashlight.

The curve. The government should use God's law as a way to curb evil. However, we should not implant

Moses, right? That law, the Mosaic Covenant was only given to the

Israelites. There's never been by that. I mean, the physical descendants of Abraham. That law, according to Galatians chapter three and four was only until Christ.

Now, until someone can exegetically deal with that issue. It was only until Christ. There really isn't an argument to be made.

All of us Gentiles have never been under a Mosaic law. We are under the

David. I mean that the Abrahamic covenant and Abraham, Moses and David are all administrations of that covenant of works as they all are a covenant of works.

God's law would also still apply. Moral law would still apply. Yeah, the moral law applies to us.

However, so you just threw me off. I'm sorry. Sorry.

I don't remember where I was going. My bad. I was going somewhere.

I can't remember. I'm about to be 45. So my age is catching up with me. Anyways, when do y 'all want to take up the mantle?

I don't forgot. Yeah. So that's 1689 chapter 19 of law. Paragraph 4 says to Israeli also gave various judicial laws which ceased at the same time their nation ended.

These laws no longer obligate anyone as part of that institution. Only their general principles of justice continue to have moral values.

And so what's going on in this chapter is there's the discussion of the moral law that's transcendent.

It exists and flows from the nature of God. Then there's the ceremonial and the judicial laws. The ceremonial laws are those laws that help cover the sin of the people of Israel while the and also had foreshadowing and typology of Christ that it could open up a hole.

We've done shows on this topic before. Judicial law is those governing the people laws such as family kinsmen

Redeemer, right? Those those kind of laws. There's several laws that are mentioned. You can't eat pork.

You can't have mixed linen. You can't have all these examples of things. And a lot of those laws,

I would argue the majority of those laws. They had a specific purpose that was to protect them as a nation to bring about the promised seed.

And so the confession says that they ended with that nation because that nation produced, guess what?

The seed what the intended purpose of those laws were, which was Christ. That's what Galatians chapter 3 verse 19 says.

The law was added because of transgressions previously committed until the seed until the seed that law, the law of Moses ceased.

So the general equity that we would see in there is that we could look at something like a parapet wall that was commanded to the people that had flat roofs in those days and say it's probably wise to keep my windows locked and shut so that my neighbor doesn't fall out of my window.

However, the purpose of these things are different because even in the Old Testament, it was so that you wouldn't have bloodshed in the land so that they could remain in the land.

If somebody falls out of my window and dies, do I get kicked out of the land? No. So so so you have to understand that general equity.

I would argue that a theonomist is typically going far too, too, too distant for what the what general equity implies.

And also Jesus, when he uses general equity, it goes against what they're looking at. So the Bible, Old Testament, eye for an eye, tooth for tooth.

Jesus is general equity for the church. It's turned the other cheek. The Bible says to purge the evil from among you.

General equity for the church is that we purge the evil from among the church. Again, we think that the government should use the law.

However, we should not be trying to establish a mosaic covenant.

Yes, period. And that's it, because a lot of people think that theonomy, they're wanting to go not just back to God's moral law, but they're wanting to go back to the mosaic law.

They're wanting to go back. And that's that's that's that's a mishandle. I would say it's a false gospel.

And you're in your borderline heretics. It's to take it to that limit.

Yeah. And I'm going to be honest with you. I would not. What is going on?

I will not have I will not have any fellowship with people that hold to that strong of a view of it.

I mean, like none. Absolutely zero. Right now, as far as the whole

Christian nationalist part of that question, it just really depends on how you define what a Christian nation is. If and everybody has a different definition of it.

If we just simply mean a Christian nation is a nation that has a law that is influenced by the moral law with using general equity principles from other laws, then,

OK, that's fine. I can get on board with that. But if we're saying a Christian nation is a nation that puts people to death for walking around carrying a heavy load on a

Saturday, the Sabbath. Yeah, no, no, absolutely not. Yeah.

If you just look at the Sabbath, the Sabbath has ended in the sense that that the

Sabbath rest was in Christ. Our Sabbath rest is in Christ. Now, the general equity of it that we should have.

So so we're looking at two tier. Should someone work seven days a week? No, you need a day.

You need a day of rest. And also the the Sabbath in the Old Testament was never instituted as a day of worship ever.

You will not find it in there. That came about during the Maccabean period. Yeah. So what my question is, is what are we doing?

Are we really taking the Bible serious? Galatians tells us it was only into Christ. Corinthians tells us that that covenant was a ministry of death.

And if you look at Romans chapter six and seven, like when Paul's saying the things I want to do, I cannot do.

There's a good chance that he's speaking about that time of being under that. Oh, covenant law.

Right. We just heard that Jeffrey Johnson had a good sermon on that. Yeah. Yeah. So real quick.

She's unposted this twice and she's been you know, I think we should at least give a thought to it.

He's asking about Steve. Can I can I go ahead and say it for all of us?

Here's my thoughts. I think that that we probably should hold off on this.

And the reason why is because there's not not everything has been brought out. Let's let's hold off before we put our foot in our mouths and say too much.

Yeah. And also with that, I think we should be praying for him. And his wife, his family.

Yeah, his wife, his family. But also. I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Like if I do that, I have to not read anything of David, not read anything of Peter. The stories of Samson, like what he did was awful.

If it's true, what he did is awful. However, it's sin. He doesn't need to be in the pulpit, so on and so forth.

However, we don't need to throw the baby out the bathwater. He has a lot of good stuff out there. And he's and he's probably done more for the kingdom than everybody put together.

Watching the show. Yeah. So, but I think if I could,

I think the real problem is, is that men should not be idolized. So think about like, yes, if you have 50 men in a room and then you have a guy like Steve Lawson walk into the room and next thing you know, all these men who are chill, they're calm, they're collected, they see

Steve Lawson. And they start fanboying over, getting into a line to shake his hands.

What are the women in that room thinking? The men want to be him. So therefore, the women want to be with him.

Like, like it's a slippery slope and all it's going to take for any guy, some pretty woman to wink the eye and motion them over.

Men are weak in the same way that we use creeds and confessions to read our Bibles. When we travel, we need to have other men of God with us.

To be our creeds and confessions and our holiness. But I'll get off my high horse.

Do you mind if we have the question by Jesse Killinger on here? Which one is it?

It's just shortly up from the bottom. Is it, can you discuss chapter three? Yep.

Okay. Jesse Killinger is a good friend of mine. Sweet. Good brother in Christ right there.

I work with him. So he says, can you discuss chapter three, paragraph one and talk about God's relationship with sin?

Is God the author of sin? Why does he allow it if he is indeed sovereign? Does he just allow it for his glory, et cetera?

That's a great question. Yes. So to begin with, I would say that this is actually a topic that I don't think people should tread on.

But I will give you my response. But I want to hear what these gentlemen say, just in case they say something crazy. I'm going to have to fire on.

Oh my goodness. Yeah. So it says in there.

So I'll read the paragraph. It says, from all eternity, God decreed everything that occurred without reference to anything outside of himself.

He did this by the perfectly wise and hostly counsel of his own free will or his own will freely and unchangeable.

Yet God did this in such a way that he is neither the author of sin nor has any fellowship with any in their sin.

This decree does not violate the will of the creature or take away the free working of contingencies of second causes.

On the contrary, these are established by God's decree. In this

God's decree, God's or in this decree, God's wisdom is displayed in directing all things and his power and faithfulness are demonstrated in accomplishing his decree.

And so what the second cause in here, I'll just I'll preface this in chapter five.

It talks about that the first cause is is God is God acting

God, predestinating God, causing something to come about. Secondary causes are all those things that happen within that first cause.

And according to the first cause, the confession, when it says that he's not the author of sin, is defining it author of sin as a meaning that he cannot be held guilty.

He cannot be held culpable of sin. Culpability is the attributing wrongdoing to somebody.

Now, I can attribute to Tom wrongdoing because him and I are both human men.

Right. We both have a equal level of authority to be able to offer culpability towards each other with.

Right. However, how many ants have we stepped on today? How how many bugs have we smashed while driving our car?

There is a level of culpability that cannot be extended to something that is greater than the object or the person or the insect.

Right. Because the insect is not on the same level of authority as you and I are.

And the distance between mankind to that of an insect, it God is infinitely greater than mankind and mankind is to an insect.

And so the idea of what's going on in there is that we cannot attribute to God's sin because he is far greater than those things.

He's not the one that does the sin. We're the ones that are doing the sin. It's still according to his predestination.

Absolutely, because he is the first cause. But that's what Roman nine is dealing with. It says, you, old man, cannot answer to God.

Why have thou made me like this or why have you made me as this? It's a it's an issue of culpability since there's nothing like God.

There's nothing greater than God. There's nothing that's on the same equal playing field as God. There's no way that we can attribute to God some some wrongdoing that you and I have done.

So good stuff. I would I would go to James 1 13 and it says, let no one say when he is tempted that I'm being tempted by God.

For God cannot be tempted by evil and he himself does not tempt anyone.

And here's the thing. But each one is tempted when he, the person, is carried away and enticed by his own lust.

Then when lust is conceived, he gives birth to sin. It gives birth to sin. And when sin is fully matured, it brings forth death.

But are y 'all really touching on the question? That's that's my that's that's my question. Because like he's your answer is going to be.

Yeah. And and and and I would agree with the confession that so it depends on the way you handle the word author.

Jeff is going to present it as if if we are looking as an author of a story and God is telling a story in his

God's story. This is God's story. God preordains all things. We cannot say that God preordains all things and he's not the author of the story.

But at the same time, I think I think that the words, the words that we're using are are not capable of actually communicating this.

Absolutely. That's what I'm trying to say. This is a dangerous way to tread, because if we say that he's not the author, then there's something greater than him that is the author.

Right. And that's what that's what I was trying to say. But that's where you get to that Satan is God's devil.

Right. Like like if I if I establish rules in my house, like God has a law.

So so God. So so so sin, according to First John, chapter three, verse four, sin, evil is breaking

God's law. God doesn't necessarily have to create sin. All he has to do is create the moral law.

And when we break the moral law, those who break it are evil. So here's where it breaks down.

Where where does evil the question? And this is another hard one. Where does evil come from?

What is evil? So when you look at God as holy,

God is righteous. God is magnificent and he is good. Everything about him is good and holy and righteous.

Opposite of evil. So you have God, which is good and holy. But the absence of God is darkness.

The absence of God is evil. That's that's where evil is. So take God out of it.

And what's left? Evil. Does that make sense? I don't know whether way to put it.

So this this is what I'm trying to get at with it. Is God the author of all things? Yes. As long as we're defining author is not something that we can attribute sin to.

Paragraph one is talking about that. God is not the author in a sense that we can attribute sin to him, that we can hold him.

No, no, no, no, no, no. I'm not saying that. That's what you're saying. I know. I know. I know.

I'm addressing the question. I'm addressing the question of author of sin. That's the reason that that's said in the confession.

Do we think that God is the author of all things? Do we think that God is the author of all things? Yeah, but here's the thing.

If God's the creator of good. All right. What's absent of good? Bad. So so so if he creates a law, which he did, the moral law.

And to break that, that's what sin is. Sin is lawlessness. So I would even say that I would even go far as to say that that his wrath is an extension of his love because of who he is.

For sure. OK, wrath is an extension of his love.

I just think it's sin. So the question really dive into it and explain it.

It's just as dangerous as trying to explain the Trinity or trying to go beyond the scriptures to explain the

Trinity. Because we're talking about things that are two words. We you know, you know,

Spurgeon talks about us using baby talk that God has to use baby talk to be able to communicate things to us that are too too great for us to understand.

OK, this is where I would go with scripture. Does God predestinate sin? Yes, absolutely.

He does. Acts chapter two and Acts chapter four, it says that he predestined Pilate, Herod and all the people in Israel to do whatever is handed predestined to occur, which is talking about the crucifixion of Christ, the greatest evil that has taken place.

So does Christ predestined sin? Yes. Can any of those men that crucified

Christ hold God culpable of sin? No, no.

And I'm going to go back to the greatest theologian, even though she's wrong on the on the

Zacharias thing. She says that God foreknows and foreordains everything, including evil, but that God is not the efficient cause of evil.

Is this where you get your good theology from is your wife? Let me real quick answer your question from this guy that he said, he said,

Jeff, would you not fellowship with theonomist? I never said I wouldn't fellowship with theonomist. What I said was, if someone is looking to implement right to take, if someone is looking to reestablish

Moses, the Mosaic law, I would not have any fellowship with him.

And by that, I'm not saying he's not a Christian. I'm not saying they're not Christians. I would not do conferences.

They wouldn't be allowed in my pulpit. So on and so forth. I would go so far as to say that they are not

Christians. I don't want to go there. I will be confident. I'm preaching through the book of Galatians right now.

The Judaizers are trying to establish the Mosaic law amongst the church.

Paul tells him that that is a false gospel to not call them brothers and to cast them off, cut them off their anathema.

But I don't think Doug Wilson is actually doing that. Doug Wilson is not into a general equity theonomy.

He's not trying to reestablish Moses. However, they are people out there, his fan boys who are taking it too far.

And these guys would not be allowed in my pulpit, nor would I share a stage with them at a conference period.

Right. Yeah, absolutely. And if they don't like it, you can say what you want around me.

You know what I'm saying? Doug Wilson does not teach that you should go under the

Mosaic law. It's just there's hypers in every side of the camp. And if there's somebody is trying to establish the

Mosaic law, you have a false gospel. I mean, the Bible calls it a covenant of death.

We do not need to establish the covenant of death. We are in the covenant of grace. That's right.

We need Christ. Christ is the answer. Christ is the answer. Let me ask you this. So the

Bible says that God did not send angels into the world to subdue it.

That word there for subdue is the Greek word hypotasso. It means to take control of. He did not send warrior angels into the world to do that.

What did he do? He sent his son. How does his son accomplish conquering the world?

Through his death, burial and resurrection. That message of what he has done is putting all of his enemies under his feet.

And the last enemy will be death. And by the way, that's a long gospel distinction.

For sure. And I would say Doug Wilson does not have a long gospel distinction.

And so I would not share. I would not be in ministry with Doug Wilson for that purpose.

Him and I would not share a pulpit together because he does not have a long gospel distinction. All right, next question.

I don't know what his name does, but he's passed away, so we ain't got to worry about that. What's the other question?

Let's find one. What else you guys got? I want to just go back and just say this real fast because I didn't get to finish my thought on chapter three, paragraph one.

Anybody that says that God doesn't predestine all things, a .k .a. doesn't predestine sin. Does God know all things?

Does God knows all things? So he knows all things. So he knows the sin that's going to happen. Does God stop the sin from happening?

So he knows the sin is going to happen and he doesn't stop the sin from happening. You still don't have a solution to the issue of sin in the world if you say that God didn't predestine all things.

What we are doing is saying that the scripture that makes it very clear that God does predestinate all things.

That's our basis. We need to leave our emotions outside the door and just acknowledge the facts. God predetermined the worst sin to ever take place, and that is the death of his son.

That's right. What are we doing? And it was good, by the way. It pleased the

Lord to crush him. It's coming in good. Somebody asked how my beard was coming in.

I just let them know it's coming in good. It's very spotty. It's kind of like his internet sometimes.

Someone was asking a question about Bible translations and I can't find it. Yeah. Hold on.

Let me see if I can find it. Everybody knows the best

Bible translation is the ESV. ESV, baby. Paul wrote his letters in.

Here it is. It's Fred. He was asking a question. My question. Oh, yeah. Here it is. We think having multiple

English translations causes a lot of confusion, especially because these translations take away the very important doctrines.

Are you okay, J .B.? I can't find what you said. But this question says, my question is, what makes you guys not stick with one translation?

I stick with the ESV. Now, I do have other translations that I refer to, but I preach and read from the

ESV. English languages change. Here's what you were reading, right?

Is this what you were reading? Yeah, Mike. Yes. My question is, don't you think that multiple

English translation... Actually, no. I think it actually helps. Every English translation is 100 % accurate.

There are things that we can find in the LSV that are more accurate than the

ESV. There are things in the ESV that are more accurate than the LSV. And if you're particularly just speaking of the

KJV, like when you put that with the Greek, I think it's a good translation. It's very archaic.

I don't really understand it. However, whenever you put it to the Greek, there's a lot that it misses.

In Isaiah 14, verse 12, it says,

The context is speaking of King Nebuchadnezzar. That is not talking about Satan falling.

It's speaking about King Nebuchadnezzar. And you read about his fall in Daniel chapter 4.

That's right. Just read the context. My wife is killing me today. Golly. She loves the

King James Bible, and I know she loves the King. But I'm telling you, there are more problems with the King James Bible than there are the

ESV, the NASV, and the LSV. So there are several arguments for it.

There are the manuscript arguments that you can make for it. But not only that, English, like every language, changes over time.

And so in 100 years from now, there's going to need to be a new updated ESV. There's going to need to be a new updated

LSV. Why? Because our English words don't mean the same thing in 100 years from now than what they do to you and I today.

Yeah, just take the word gay. Right. So perfect example, the word gay. I've heard

Jeff say, I'm gay. And he's meaning that he's happy. I've heard him say it.

No. I've heard him say it. I've heard him say it. Both of y 'all are my gay friends.

But no, seriously. But this is the issue. So in the King James Version, there's these – Mark Ward is his name.

Mark Ward. He has a great book out there, and he talks about the

King James Version and the need, the need to go to a modern translation. Because there's these – what are they called?

What does he call them in the book? I cannot remember. They are words that have had minor changes in English definitions that when you and I read, we don't think that they've changed.

We don't think that the words have changed. And so then therefore we read it with a modern lens, and then it gives us a different doctrine than what it was first originally written as in the 1600s.

And that's just how English – that's just how language works like this. That's just the way it is.

There's – why do we have a

Greek Septuagint? So a Greek Septuagint can read the

Old Testament. Okay, great point, right? If you ask me, I think my Old Testament should be translated from the

Greek Septuagint. So – That's what I believe. I'm not asking you that. I'm just saying.

I mean that's how far I go with it. If we have an English translation from the 1600s, do you and I talk like Shakespeare?

No, absolutely not. No, we don't. So we need a modern translation to be able to read the text in a modern context.

All right, so let's go to Matt's question about six -month -old. Do y 'all believe the six -month -olds at your church are a part of the local body?

If not, do you say y 'all are their pastor or are you only their – the parents' pastor?

All right, so first of all, Matt, you started going back to a Baptist church. Boy, you need to be consistent with your life, son.

Do y 'all believe – do you guys believe – You ain't a true Presby.

Start being gay. Start being happy. Do y 'all believe six -month -olds are a part of your local church?

So are you saying – Yes, so here's the thing. Here's the thing. Our six -month -old, the infant that was just born, so Jake, a member of our church, they have an infant.

I'm not exactly sure how many – like weeks, like infant, infant, right? And the pastors of our church are that child's pastor because we are – because Jake is a member of the church.

Jake is that child's federal head in the home. Yes. And so by virtue of being

Jake's child, I am – Pastor Cal is that child's pastor.

However, they are not members of the church. That's the question. It just goes back.

This is what it is. It goes back. It goes back to the invisible church versus the visible church.

We have people in our church right now that are a part of our visible church that ultimately might not be a part of the universal church.

Well, the question is this. Should a six -month -old be considered a member of even the universal church?

No. No. No. I mean should we steal our kid's baptism? That's a really good question.

Answer? No. Right. You have to be born again in order to receive the sign of the covenant.

You know what we believe about this. Yeah, so what is – You go to a Baptist church, so it's chill out. I love

Matt. So here's a question though because here – let's say – because here's where he's going.

Let's go with this. A 14 -year -old boy comes to Saving Faith, has a good articulation of the gospel.

Would you allow that 14 -year -old boy to be a member of your local body?

Even though he is – we would believe that he has Saving Faith and in the universal church, would you allow him to be a member of your local body?

No, and here's why. Here's why. Here's why. I would baptize him, and he would be able to partake, and we would minister to him fully just like we would all the other members.

But here's why. If that 14 -year -old boy, when he turns 16 and his hormones start to rage and he goes out and does some dumb stuff, if we try to execute church discipline on him, then it's going to be – the parents are going to be hot about it.

And so what I see is that the discipline – Hold on. The discipline needs to come from the parents in that situation because we don't want to overstep our boundary in that.

But once that child turns 18 and they join the church, we tell the parents to keep their mouth out of it. What's your thoughts on that,

Brayden? I would say both and. Absolutely. Church discipline when it comes to minors should not be happening from the pastor to the minor, but it should be a conversation that happens with the pastor, the parents, and the minor.

That's what I'm saying. That is applying church discipline to the parents. But it would be going through the parents.

It would be going through the parents. It would not be us calling them in there without – separate it from the parents.

I hear what you're saying, but I want Brayden's answer on this. Would you allow a 14 -year -old boy, credible profession of faith, baptized to take communion and all that stuff, would you allow that young man to be a member of your local church?

I know Jeff's answer. What's yours? Yeah, so it's according to whatever bylaws of a church would say.

So I think there's arguments to be made on both sides of the aisle, and I'm not –

I wouldn't die upon any of those heels if that makes sense. Because – let me explain what

I'm saying with this. Eighteen is an arbitrary number that we in the

United States have come up with being able that you can vote for a president, and therefore now it's influenced how the church is supposed to operate and vote.

That's garbage, period. I'm not looking at it from that. I'm just saying that that's how most churches' bylaws have come about.

No, no, no. I'm not looking at it like that. You're interrupting me. You're interrupting me, Jeff. I think it's time to move out of the home.

This is the 80th time tonight. Listen. You got a Cali clicker over there?

Yes, 82nd. You just did it again. So that's a really good point, though.

And I hear what you're saying, too. So what is the deciding factor?

Is there an age limit that a person who's making an incredible profession of faith that you guys truly, honestly believe that has articulated the gospel, witnessed fruit of a changed life?

You don't have to witness fruit of a changed life. I don't know where you get that in Scripture. I'm asking.

I'm saying that everything that you can see about this guy as a covenant member of Christ, should they not be a member of the local body?

They receive all the benefits of a member. They receive every benefit of the member outside of voting.

Whenever they turn an adult, whenever they become an adult, they can apply. What? They receive voting.

I'm just joking. Voting – so this goes back. Voting is an unbiblical thing in the church.

A church should be an elder -led thing. And so if a church is elder -led, then the members shouldn't be voting except for maybe very, very minor things within the church.

Well, that's where we have it at our church. Most churches today operate, hey, we need to change the carpet.

What's your vote? Hey, we need to – No, we don't do that. What's your vote? Hey, the pastor is going to preach in a new book. What's your vote?

That's garbage. What is that communication? Purple carpet. I'm just saying. Oh my goodness. All that's garbage.

Now that being said though, if that is what membership is, is that it gives you a vote, then

OK. I could see the argument to say that then it's probably fitting within our nation to be consistent within our nation and say 18 is what we need for a member, a voting member.

But like Jeff said, if a 12 -year -old comes to faith in Christ, they can be a member in every sense of being able to partake in the table, baptism, all those things that we would see within the church.

Counseling, everything that – Absolutely. Because they're still under the federal head of their parent.

And so we would treat them as members. However, they wouldn't officially be on the membership row until they themselves turned of age and applied for membership.

That's a good argument there as far as so – I think it's a safe way to do it.

If the child is under the authority of the parent, if they are dependent on their parent, if their father is still their federal head because they're not on their own, then they don't – they would not count as a – they would stay under the federal head of their parent.

I agree with that. Amen. Absolutely. Yep. Would you say –

OK, Matt's asking another question. Do you say that you were the pastor of the children or the infant? Yes.

I just answered that question because of the authority of that person's parent.

So if the parent is a member of our church, we would treat that child as a member being on the benefactory of the parent.

So you would pastor that child? Pastor, take care, nurture, counsel.

Whatever that child needs, we would be there for them. However, they wouldn't be on the row as an active member, not until they were of age to apply for membership.

Right. Good answer. All right. Let's go to somebody else. Matt, you're getting on my nerves, bro.

Keep them coming, brother. I'm just messing. All right. Y 'all see anything else?

Brandon Baric. I'm asking for membership. Yes, they could call us pastor.

Brandon Baric, can you guys elaborate on 1

Corinthians 15 that Jeff quoted earlier? He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

The last enemy to be destroyed is death. Elaborate from an all male perspective.

Boom. You just quoted the text. That's the all male perspective. That's all male, man. What are you talking about? You read the

Bible. All male. Come on over. The water's good over here.

So all male and post male would say this. Premal doesn't say this.

But all male and post male say that at the second coming of Christ, there is no more sin. There is no more death.

All of creation is renewed back into a state that was like prior to the fall of Adam.

And so there's no sin. And so therefore there's no death. However, premillennialism, especially that of dispensational premillennialism, says that people are still having kids, having being married.

Sin is still taking place. Creation is still groaning for the revealing of the son of man, right, because there's still sin.

And therefore there's still death that's taking place, which is a huge issue because it says that when Christ comes, death is put away.

There is no more death. And there's a new song that says, oh, death, where's your sting? Oh, death, where's your victory that we are singing? And so premillennialism does not fit within First Corinthians 15.

So you have to ask yourself also, why is sin and death done away with?

Well, first you have to say, well, how does sin and death enter into the world? Romans chapter five, verse 12, through one man's sin, death and sin entered into the world.

Right. And so and so what Christ is doing as our last Adam, he is he is he he kept the law that Adam could not keep.

And so as as we saw the covenant of redemption, the father purpose to save a people, the son comes in time, accomplishes the purpose to his life, death, burial and resurrection.

The Holy Spirit applies that purpose, that the purpose of the father saving that people through the message of what was done for us by Christ.

All right. And so and so and so as this as this message is being spread, people are coming to Christ.

He is putting all of his enemies under his feet. I was an enemy of God. I was footstool. These gentlemen were to if you're a

Christian, you are an enemy. You were footstool. The last enemy to be footstool is death.

And so if there is no more death, that means there is no more sin because the wages of sin is death.

So this means that God, that God, through Christ and the Holy Spirit, through this message that's been spread, has in fact placed all of his enemies under his feet.

And that will take place at the resurrection of the dead. Right. So the backtrack, I'm going to say the exact same thing you guys basically said, but just in a different way.

You contrast this age on this side of heaven before Christ comes back, there is sin and suffering.

Age to come, no sin and no suffering. This age, it's corruptible bodies. Age to come, glorified bodies.

Perishable gives way to imperishable. Corruptible gives way to incorruptible.

Mortality, death, gives way to immortality, eternal things.

Temporal things give away to eternal things. So that's the omniperspective. Simple. It's right there.

So in other words, Melissa Owens, listen up here. In the premill dispensational...

Don't be calling her out like that. I have to because we're converting her. You were just calling out

Matt. Melissa, hey Tom, not me.

We love you, girl. No, seriously, in all seriousness, considering that mortality gives way to immortality, that your corruptible body gives way to glorified bodies.

In the premill dispensational system, you guys are going to be coming back to a millennial kingdom where there's still sin, where there's still people living, having sex next door to you, being tempted by sins where things die.

And you're going to be living in your glorified bodies next to people in their natural bodies.

It's an absolute impossibility. It can't happen. It cannot happen.

She's now a mill in 1689. I told her if she comes to our conference, we're going to all mill her to death.

She'll leave our conference a 1689 Federalist. So I tell you this, brothers.

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. This is the reason I'm not post -mill.

They're trying to make the kingdom of God something that you can walk and see today. This text says that you cannot inherit it currently.

Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed in a moment. And in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet for the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised imperishable and we will be changed.

So this is the resurrection. The perishable body must put on the imperishable. And this mortal body must put on immortality.

When the perishable puts on the imperishable and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the same.

So pause there. This happens when the resurrection happens. Death is swallowed up in victory.

Oh, death, where is your sting? Oh, death, where is your victory? Death, where is your victory? Oh, death, where is your sting?

Death can't happen anymore because the resurrection has happened. Doesn't exist. That does not work.

This text does not work in premillennialism. It does not at all. Yeah, and that's coming straight from the

Scriptures. Not only that, you look at when we have our glorified bodies and we are in the new heaven and the earth are on the other side.

It's not a kingdom. Eternity is on the other side, right? It's not premillennialism and the millennial kingdom has a time stamp on it.

If you believe in the literal thousand years, that's going to end.

Well, where's eternity? You have glorified bodies and then that's going to end? There's no time stamp on eternity.

You would have to insert a, that's why it's called the gap theory. Isn't that what it's called in premillennialism? You have to insert a gap into this text.

You have to put in the parenthesis here in the text saying that the resurrection takes place and then there's a gap with another resurrection at the end of that because people were dying in that period.

And then death is done. So the parenthesis was originally added in Daniel chapter 2 with the statue and then it translates over to Daniel chapter 9.

And I would argue that in Daniel chapter 9, the person that they're calling antichrist is

Christ. So all these premillennial dispensational preachers who preach from Daniel chapter 9, they're calling

Christ antichrist, which is very, very dangerous and very, very concerning.

And so I would personally run from this position. It just doesn't hold water.

The 70 weeks ended in A .D. 34. No, hold on.

Right around A .D. 34, A .D. 35. No, A .D. 34, because I believe Christ was crucified in A .D.

30. And then A .D. 34 would have been the end of the 70 weeks. And that's where we see

Peter going to Cornelius proclaiming the gospel the Gentiles are brought in, so on and so forth.

Paul has saved, commissioned to the Gentiles. But we probably should do a show to where we actually walk through that parenthesis concerning Daniel chapter 2 and Daniel chapter 9.

We don't have time to really do it tonight. Next question. Y 'all help me look for one.

Okay. We got more comments than questions. Any questions, guys? What size gloves does

Brayden wear? No, you guys. Mediums. Mediums. Mediums. Do you know what another word for medium is?

Average. They're average hands. So you guys get to go take a large hand. Besides, bro, that Brayden only has a thumb, and it has, like, the one cover.

Little mittens. Is that what you're trying to think of? Hey, these mittens can throw paws, dog.

I'm coming after you. Small paws. What's that?

Hey, if that's another word for average, I'm okay with it.

Kitten paws. Cutie paws. Melissa? Any solid advice?

So Ashley Renee asks. Any solid advice for a Christian couple about to enter into marriage?

Thanks. I got it. I got it, and I'm not even a biblical counselor. Jeff's going to interrupt you.

So that's okay. You want to go first? I'm going to go first. No, go ahead. I mean, I've been doing a lot of marriage counseling, so.

Right. So mine's going to be based off of a marriage conference that my wife and I just went to, and it was by Dr.

Street. He's a biblical counselor through ACBC out of the Master's Seminary.

Qualified guy. Really was a good conference. And he said, so if you're going to be looking for a wife, if you're looking for a spouse, that the number one thing that we should be looking for is not through human eyes, not through what the world says to look for a spouse as, not for necessarily passion or attraction physically, which you still need those things.

But the most important thing would be to look for a wife that her number one goal is to live holy for the

Lord and that she's going to help you live holy for the Lord. That the number one thing that we should be doing for each other is pointing each other to Christ in our daily life.

And that would be the number one thing that I want to live a pleasing life to my

Savior. And I need my wife to help me live that way.

And I need to point my wife and present her holy unto Christ. That's my role as a husband to her, to love her and to point her to live a holy life towards Christ.

Beat that. I would also just add that in marriage, we have to remember the curse.

We live in a cursed world, a fallen world. And in this cursed world.

So the curse that the woman was that was pronounced on a woman was that she would would feel pain and childbearing.

Right. And so this is not only whenever you're having having the baby, but also in your cycles that your monthly cycles, these cramps, these headaches that you're experiencing.

All of that is from the curse. Right. But also something else that's given to the woman in the curse is that she's she's she desires to be the man.

Right. And so a woman has to whenever she enters into marriage, she has to understand that there's going to be times where she's desiring the position of her husband.

And she needs to put herself in check in times like that. And the husband, when all this is happening, the husband also has to remember that she is the weaker vessel.

And so we we constantly have to give one another grace. And so like when my wife starts tripping and trying to be the man,

I have to tell her, listen, this is my role as the man.

But also, as I'm correcting her, I also have to remember to give her grace.

And vice versa, any time that the you know, like the Bible calls the man to do something that's that's counterintuitive to himself.

And that is to love his wife as Christ love the church. And the woman woman is having to do something counterintuitive to what she stands.

And that is to honor, respect and submit. It's easy for guys to honor, respect and submit.

Right. Whenever we're around other men, it's easy for me to respect other men because like that's just kind of the life that we live, especially like I'm an ex game banger.

And as a game banger, we had total respect for our homies. Right. Love, on the other hand, was harder for us, especially to express.

Like you can love someone, but to actually express this love. And so a man has to remember the curse as well.

And he has to hurt like like purposely show affection to his wife, to love her.

And I would also say whenever he's not doing these things, the woman needs to remember the curse, correct her husband and also be gracious.

Right. Because we're told to do something that's counterintuitive to our nature. Amen. Good stuff,

Jeff. So somebody else asks, are you guys pro -life or abolitionists?

Well, it depends on what you mean by abolitionists. Because I've heard some some some things that I wouldn't.

I would be I would be right now. So I would. So my definition would be abolition that I believe in 100 percent abolition of murder against any any unborn baby that life begins at conception.

And I believe in equal justice, that that women should be held accountable for getting a boyfriend and abortion.

They they should be they should be charged with the crime of murder.

So, yeah, I'm not an incrementalist. I think that murder in the womb is wrong.

Stop. What do you think about this? Oh, go ahead.

Go ahead. I'm sorry, Brayden.

All right. The the the question, are you pro -life or abolitionist?

I think it's really a question of are you an incrementalist or an abolitionist? I've been seeing a lot of things recently.

I just watched a debate today on this. And the abolitionists would say that if a

Christian ever voted for a heartbeat bill, you are sinning against God.

That's the argument that's being made by the abolitionists. If that's the only bill that's being voted on. And if you vote yes for that, you are sinning against God.

It would be better for you to say no to that bill on the premise that you're saying you think it's sin to say no to that.

You're right. So. So by you.

So this goes back to this. So by you. No, no, no, no, no. If you said no to it, that means that babies in the eighth month are getting murdered tomorrow.

For sure. Are you OK with that? I'm not OK with any of it. You have to choose between two different evil.

You do. You do. Yeah, because if you don't, then you're the one. The main evil is going to take over.

Yeah. I'll tell you, Spurgeon said Spurgeon. I can't go and tell

Spurgeon what's up. Well, I could. You could tell me that's fine. Spurgeon said if the choice is between two evils, choose neither.

Yeah, he was wrong. Yeah. But then the stronger evil wins. I disagree with you guys. I mean, here's the thing.

I disagree with you. Christ sees everything. You could disagree. Christ sees everything. And you guys are going to go vote on a on a bill that says says go ahead.

I'm not voting for that bill. Listen, if I if that if that was on the docket and I voted yes for it, it means that tomorrow a six month old baby in the womb can't die.

I'm probably going to say yes to it. That's going to save the six month old baby tomorrow. What about the rest that are going to that your approval?

OK, so then you vote no for it because you don't want to sin against God. But then the six month old baby dies tomorrow. It's all going to happen.

So no, it's not. Not if you say yes to the bill. Let me ask you this. Is lying a sin?

Is lying a sin? If someone tells a lie, is that a sin? It's a sin against God. Yes.

Well, God bless the ladies in in in in Exodus.

What is it? Yeah. In Exodus, the the midwives who lied about Moses.

I'm just saying. I'm just saying it's a lie. All right. It's breaking God's law.

But they but they lied in order to save the life of a child. So so let me ask you this.

Would Jesus do that? Would Christ, the author of life, vote for that?

If you guys can say yes, you guys do what you guys need to do. I'm saying no. Well, it's it's not.

So here's the problem. You're saying that, you know, to to vote. I'm out. No, let's not.

If anybody hurt one of these little ones, I would put a millstone around his neck and drown him.

You're saying that you would vote no to a bill that could save a six month old baby. No, I'm saying that I would vote.

You just said no. Our abortion on a two to on us on any age. Listen, this is this is where I think the abolitionists and the incrementalists are talking past each other.

Both groups want the end of abortion today. Right. OK, so but this is both are saying today,

I'm not saying I'm picking the heartbeat. The land that we're going to be taking. Absolutely.

Yeah. If we're talking about a piece of land, I'm going to take a little bit here and a little bit here, and I'm going to gain that ground.

But that's not what we're talking about. We are talking about life. We are talking.

And if you vote the wrong way, all babies, most babies. Here's the results.

Here's the results. What's been happening with the pro -life bills right now is that people are going outside, outside of those means to still abort their babies, to still abort their babies.

It's just not being recorded because there's no facility to go do it. They're doing it on their own. That's the way it should happen.

Murder should happen in the dark alleys. Absolutely. I'm saying that they shouldn't be doing it, but we shouldn't be promoting it for the six month old next week.

We would disagree. Listen, if I see an abolitionist bill or a heartbeat bill, I'm going to pick the abolitionist bill every time.

OK, but if I just have the option of doing a heartbeat bill, I'm going to do the heartbeat bill because that saves the baby tomorrow.

That's six months old in the womb. Yeah. And not say it's sinful to the Christian for voting yes to it.

That's wrong. I don't think so. That is allowing somebody to harm a baby tomorrow.

It all is. That is sinful. No, it's not. Yes, 100 percent. If you allow

Kamala Kamala, however, Trump says it right in like a vote, she's no worse.

A no vote. Listen, I've never said this. I really try to stay out of political things, I guess. However, OK, I am saying at this time, if you do not vote for Trump, you are voting for Kamala.

OK, let me let me ask you. Let me ask you guys this. And then you guys you guys come back.

Legitimate question. If the standard if the standard for the reason why you guys are not voting for Kamala and not voting for abortion in the third trimester, if if the standard that you're going by is what

Scripture says about murdering a baby, you guys are going to say absolutely not.

We're not going to vote for Kamala Kamala based on that on that standard.

OK, the only difference is that you guys are arguing about is an age in which you should be able to murder a baby.

Yes, I don't think any I don't think it's right to murder at any time. Oh, that same standard by the same biblical standard.

How do you say that it's OK to do it at at at a heartbeat?

As long as we don't detect a heartbeat, we could go. I'm not saying that's OK. Listen, don't put words in my mouth.

I said if an abolitionist bill and a heartbeat bill were right before me, I would say yes to the abolitionist.

Why? I heard what I want. Right now. But if I only have the option, if the way you're presenting it, the way he's presenting, it's like, what do you want to be stabbed to death or to be shot?

Yeah, like shoot me. I don't want to be stabbed to death. But both of them are wrong.

But I would rather. But if I had to make a choice, I will make a choice. And the one that's going to hurt me the less would be to shoot me.

Right. Shoot me in the head. And in Trump's bill is better than Kamala's bill.

It's a better bill. There's no doubt about it. Strategy wise and everything. But but here's the thing.

It's it's still not abolition. And I cannot I cannot. That's why I'm not.

I wasn't saying either one. I want I want it to stop today. I don't think killing anybody.

I know you got this. This goes back to the definitions of a Christian nationalist. If we're saying an abolitionist is somebody that wants to stop all abortion today, then

I am unequivocally an abolitionist. But if I'm going to assign sin to a heart thought issue, that is a very difficult issue to somebody when they're trying to make the best decision to promote life.

I'm not an abolitionist anymore. So you're. Let's go to a different question. All right.

Patty asked, what do y 'all think about the lost books in the Bible? What the lost books of the

Bible series? What do you know? I don't know what that's speaking of. I don't see it.

Hold on. By the way, I got it on this thing that that I'm a stick with Doug Wilson on this.

He's an he doesn't go all the way on the abolitionist stuff. So, yeah, I disagree. Yeah. You're voting for Kamala.

Now for this one. Patty, I don't know.

I haven't looked into that. I think that's the book. It's a book that talks about the Apocrypha and the book like the

Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of this and the Gospel. OK, yeah. So I believe the 66 books in the

Bible is what is authoritative. There are some of the books that I would say are that we can use for history, but they're not authoritative.

But but some of those books that they're talking about are actually garbage. So what

I want is to see the book. Hey, do we have a Jehovah's Witness on here, William Graves? God, I think so.

Are you Jehovah's Witness, William Graves? Repent, bro. Jesus can't beat

God. What is that? Hey, William, who was on the throne in Isaiah chapter six?

And I want to ask yourself, is there anyone greater than the God that is on the throne in Isaiah six?

And the answer is no. The God on the throne, high and lifted up with seraphims around him, hiding themselves, reminding each other how holy, holy, holy he is.

What you would say is Jehovah would say is Yahweh. John chapter 12 says it's Jesus.

That's right. Philippians chapter two says that God, he exalted

Christ so that his name would be above every other name. So what are you going to do with that?

Jesus is God. And we don't allow heretics on this. Yeah, yeah.

William Graves. Repent, bro. Jesus is God. Listen, if Jesus is not God, he doesn't qualify to, matter of fact, he's not qualified to die on the cross to pay for our sins.

Oh, you're gone anyway. So somebody booted him. Demi? Yeah. If Jesus is not the one and only

God, then he couldn't forgive sins. Because forgiveness means that the person who was wronged is the one that's forgiving, is the one that's doing the atoning.

That's the one that's letting you go free. If Jesus is not God, there is no such a man.

That's funny, brother. You barely make it. Okay. Okay, let's see.

Any questions? Are y 'all enjoying yourselves speaking to the audience?

I know I'm not. Eternal support.

Okay, so the question you're asking is, is

Jesus eternally subordinate to the Father? Anyone?

Okay, so let me lay out a biblical concept of the Trinity. One God, three persons, one being.

So R .C. Sproul, I don't know who he got this from, but this is what

I use. R .C. Sproul says that the one what and the three whos. The one what is the being of God.

God, right? There's only one God. The three whos are the three persons, and each person is the one being.

And there is no hierarchy, meaning there is no alpha member of the one being.

Now, they are positionally Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

But concerning deity, there is no hierarchy.

When Jesus was on earth in the flesh, the Father was greater in position because he was in heaven on the throne.

But once Christ resurrected, went back to the Father, he's not greater.

Right. Good question. Yeah, what is it in John?

Glorify me with the glory that I had with you before the foundation of the world. Was that the quotation? It's from John.

I can't remember. Jeff. Yeah, John 17,

John 17. So, yeah, the father didn't become incarnate.

The father did not get made underneath the law. Jesus, the son did. So like I just got done preaching through Jesus washing feet.

All right. So you had the master, their leader.

So during supper, he steps down from his position as leader, wraps himself in a towel and begins to wash the feet of his servants.

And at the moment of him washing the feet of his servants, he is putting himself as a lesser position because this was a position for slaves.

Right. And immediately once he's done, he goes back to his position. He takes off the towel and he unwraps himself in a towel and he puts back on his garments.

That's how it took place. So Jesus enthroned in heaven,

Isaiah chapter six. The angels are surrounding him. They're hiding themselves. They're calling to another how holy he is.

Jesus steps down from the throne. He takes off his his royal garments and he becomes humanity.

Right. And when he does that, he steps down from his position. And so in his position, the father is greater.

But once he puts he takes all humanity right in the resurrection, in the sins, he goes back to his rightful position and the father is not greater.

Well, he still keeps his humanity. Yeah, but it's a resurrected humanity.

Yes. Glorified. Glorified. Permanent to natures. Absolutely.

One hundred percent. However, in deity, as in deity, they are one God. There is no there is no alpha

God. Right. Like you're saying with alpha male where people try to outman one another. I can't stand alpha males.

Right. We are all equal. That's right. And that's how it is in the

Godhead. There is no alpha person in God. So the reason why Christ came, right?

If we're going to hold to Baptist covenant theology is because we needed a mediator.

We needed a new covenant head. The first covenant head failed. We needed a new covenant head.

And so Christ humbled himself, became a man. God became a man to live as a man, to die as a man for men.

And so that's that's it. But but he is God and he is on his throne and he is not eternally subordinate to the father.

Love y 'all's answer. Favorite term of covenant between Christ, the father and the son.

What's your favorite term for the covenant between Christ and the father and Psalm to the covenant of peace?

I use the covenant of redemption. I believe that this. So I believe that the covenant of redemption is a blood covenant.

And I also would say that it is an extension of the covenant of grace. In doing so, he accomplishes the covenant of grace.

The father purpose. I said this earlier. The father purposes to save a people. Speaking of redemption, this is election for my

Calvinist out there. He sends his son to accomplish the purpose.

What was the purpose to save a people? He accomplishes it through his death, burial, life, death, burial and resurrection.

The Holy Spirit applies that purpose, this purpose of saving the people through the message. You and I who are filled with the

Holy Spirit are to preach the gospel. The gospel is God's power for salvation. When we preach the gospel, the

Holy Spirit applies that purpose to those whom the father chose to save.

Absolutely. You can read that in Ephesians chapter 1 if you want to. If you guys need the text,

Ephesians chapter 1, just as he chose us in him before the foundation. Well, let's go back to chapter verse 3.

Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.

Just as he chose us, the father, just as he chose us in him, the son, before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before him.

By predestined us to adoption as sons through Christ, through Jesus Christ, to himself according to the good pleasure of his will.

The praise be the glory of his grace and is graciously bestowed on the beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our transgressions according to the riches of his grace.

You can continue on there and he talks about what the Holy Spirit has done as well as by drawing us and sealing us.

Knowledge is understood in eschatology and the light of Trinity, 1 Corinthians 15, 27, 28.

For God has put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he says all things are put in subjection, it is plain that he is expected who put all things in subjection under him.

When all things are subject to him, then the son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

Speaking of the resurrection. And so the question is, how is this understood in eschatology in light of the

Trinity? I think the when Paul is saying God there, he's talking about the father.

We see from several passages in the New Testament that the second coming is is the equivalent of marriage language.

And traditionally, in that day of the true Jewish tradition, the father is the one that got to decide the wedding date, the wedding day and the things that happen on it.

And so when Christ is going to come again, after all things have been put underneath his feet, then

Christ will be subject to him, the father, and will come again to meet his bride.

That's the way I would answer it eschatologically. Yeah, that sounds right. So I want to ask a question to see what y 'all think about this.

What do y 'all because, Brayden, I know that you have a Mormon background.

What's your thoughts on baptizing for the dead?

What do you think that speaking of? Yeah, so I, I am a holder of the

Aaronic priesthood and the bishop gives me the right to be able to go in and baptize in behalf of somebody that has passed away.

No, no.

So it says verse twenty nine. Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead if the dead are not raised at all?

Why are people baptized on their behalf? Why are we in danger every hour? I protest, brother, my pride in you, which

I have in Christ Jesus, our Lord. I die every day. What do I gain if, humanly speaking, fought with beasts at Ephesus?

If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die. Do not be deceived. Bad company ruins good morals.

Wake up from your drunken stupor as is right and do not go on sitting for some have not have no knowledge of God.

I say this to your shame. Is that the portion of text that you're referring to at the baptism of the dead?

Yes. So I've heard it.

I've heard a lot of different arguments for it. I've heard that near Corinth there was a pagan religion that taught baptizing on behalf of somebody that has died.

I've also heard that people were being baptized in the name of dead gods or dead deity.

There's a lot of different answers that I've heard to this text. And a lot of it has to do with cultural premise of what was going on around the church of Corinth in that day, which seems to make sense because he says, wake up from your drunken stupor as is right and do not go on sitting for some have no knowledge of God.

I say this to your shame. So he's talking about people that are in that community, people around the church, people that are in the church that are influencing the way that they're acting regarding baptism within the church.

Well, I would say that you and I were baptized into the death of someone.

Right. Right. When we're baptized, we're baptized into the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

All right. So let's look at so there's two questions, I think, that we need to answer. Sam has a question.

And I also want to answer Melissa's question real quick. So let's look. So Sam's a little more tougher.

So let's look at Melissa's real quick. She says off topic. Curious as to your thoughts on head covering for women.

My wife covers her head. We come to this agreement at the same time.

And then it wasn't long ago. She kind of fell off and didn't think that she should have to cover.

And I said, no, you're covering. And so so here's the thing, without getting too much into it.

It says that a man should not cover. I'm going bald. I wish

I could wear my hat. The scripture says not to cover. So I take off my hat.

It says that a woman should cover. So I and so my wife being in submission to me,

I make her cover. However, I do not make men that come to my church take off their hat.

Nor do I make a woman cover. That's up to their own conviction. But my wife covers.

And I take off my hat in church. So my wife does not cover.

Although I think that she should. But I've left it up to her conscience that if she if it's her conscience that she is sinning by not covering.

So I leave it totally up to her. I also look at it as a matter of conscience.

So also looking like this, if I can obey this, if I can't obey the small things, how am

I going to obey the bigger things? And so when I see something, when I see something very simple, like men should not cover.

I say that's simple enough. So when I go to church, I don't cover. Right. All right.

And so I'm trying to train myself in the small things so that when the big things come,

I have all these small. So it's like when you lift in weight. So if you're going to start lifting weights, you don't want to start out heavy.

You want to start out light and you work your way up to the heavier weights. Right. And the

Bible has some pretty hard, positive commands for us to do. Such as evangelism.

Evangelism is a is a big command. This is flesh eating. It's really hard to do. I do those things.

However, I think the reason why I'm able to obey these harder commands is because I obey the smaller commands as well.

Such as when I enter into church, I take off my hat. I would agree with you.

I like the answer. I do leave it up to my wife.

She's going to have to answer to her savior. But the way I read it, it should be up to you.

I agree. But if she says she's not going to cover, I can't

I can't force her. So. You know what I'm saying? I can't.

I can't slap a hat on her head. But I do.

I do. I do think that she should cover. Now, real quick, let's get to Sam's question.

So federal vision is basically faith plus works. It's it's it's it's convoluting both justification and sanctification together in a way.

It's it's that you're you're you're federal vision is saying that you're you're justified by faith and your works as well.

And yeah, it's conflating the two. It's totally antithetical to the long gospel distinction.

Yeah. Yeah. Like this is a lot of what

Catholics do. Catholics conflate justification and sanctification.

Let's see. Let me see everything for some reason.

Should reform Baptist smoke cigars? Absolutely. Was that on there? No, I just asked.

So, Melissa, I'm just curious, what do you do? Do you cover? Never really understood that.

Does it take from back to Genesis chapter six? So you might have a different interpretation of Genesis chapter six.

Wait, what? I do not. And I think that's a big topic.

If we get into that, we're going to be arguing about Genesis chapter six. And I think that we should argue about it. But I don't think we have enough time to argue about it tonight.

So let's put that on pause. Genesis six. What's the question on Genesis six?

Because, like, who are the angels? Right. Because it says. God saw the daughters of men and saw they were beautiful and took them to be their wife.

I would say that the sons of God are not the sons of Seth, that they are actual angels who took the form of men and had had sex with with earthly women and their children were the sons of renowned, not the

Nephilim. The Nephilim are not the sons of renowned. The Nephilim could be Bigfoot. I don't know.

But that's another question. I know when you read the first Peter, second

Peter, it touches on it. And also Jew touches on those angels that were that were disobedient.

And that in Genesis chapter six is the only place that I can truly find in scripture where it speaks about disobedient angels.

But if you want to argue about that, we got to do that another time. Some would hold to that position that that head coverings was a cultural distinction.

Yes. Yeah, I don't. I would, I would say it was a creation. Creation mandate.

I hold to it as a cultural thing. Yeah. Most people,

I would say most people today do cultural. Absolutely. Yeah. I don't, I don't make my wife cover.

I think her long hair is the covering. No, but if you follow the text, you follow the text.

It's not the covering. That would be my wife's position. Sweet. I'll be willing to have a debate on this.

Debbie and I can go anytime. Just like the

Genesis six passage. I'll be willing to have a debate on that as well. I am. I am not fully convinced one way or another if it's, if it's angels or if it's talking about Kings.

So Melissa, you, you attend a reformed Baptist church, 1689. We have both on mill and pre -mill.

So I'm, I'm assuming pre -mill. Historical or dispensational. It can't be a dispensationalist and be a reformed

Baptist. It goes against the covenant and it goes against chapter seven. It would have to be historical pre -mill.

It would have to be. Yeah. It can't be MacArthur -ish. John MacArthur is not reformed.

No. He's a Calvinistic Baptist. Are you allowed to name your church,

Melissa? Historical. Yeah. How are you dis be in a 1689?

Nevermind. They must not be really pushing the covenant really hard.

I was a part of a 1689 church that didn't push the covenant and it was a mixed bag of nuts. So.

Yeah. And I'm wondering if they would hold do classic covenantalism or are they really 1689

Federalists? Who's thrown my name around?

I already won the Bigfoot debate. He doesn't exist. He's a demon. He's a demon if he exists.

He might be a demon. What? What? You just said it. I don't know what he is.

I mean, I don't think he is, but it might be. The whole time you were arguing that he was a real thing. I'm saying that.

I do believe. I do believe it's a real thing. I believe it's an ape -like creature that walks upright.

So you think he's a real thing that you can go out and find with sonar, radar, thermal stuff right now?

Listen, if I had the money to invest and go out there and do it, I would. Oh my goodness, dude. No, listen.

He comes out when people are in the woods doing seances. That's a demon.

Whatever. That's a demon. There's no monkey walking around that's a

Bigfoot. There is no monkey. There is. Absolutely. It's a demon. We've already had the show on Bigfoot.

Go back and watch the show. I wasn't here. I was right. You ain't right about that.

No Loch Ness monster either. Ah, hoopla. Nah, I'm pretty sure the Loch Ness monster does exist.

Yeah. You catch one. I had him on a line once. It was this far from the.

There's no. I agree with you there, Melissa. Let's see what else we got here. One of the functions.

Orthodox MacArthur. Someone say my name. He really believes in Bigfoot.

I don't. No, no. Hold on. Hold on. I'm on it because it's the way you say believe. I don't believe in like I trust in Bigfoot.

So I don't like to use the word believe. He has faith in Bigfoot. I believe that there is a creature.

That's a flight that walks upright. That we haven't discovered. It was not. It took to 19.

We denied the existence. Up until the 1960s.

If I was to take it. I could get a video camera. And kill an ant right here.

I can kill an ant and take a video camera. And then you'll see other ants come because the ants gave off a smell.

That attracts the other ants. Grab their homeboy. Take them back and bury them.

Whoa. Did you just say you could get a video of something and let me see it? Show me the video of Bigfoot. I set up an ant.

I could kill an ant. And then other ants will come and pick up their homeboy. And take him back to where his body will not be there.

But you can find an ant. You can't find Bigfoot. That's the issue, Jeff. Yeah, because they're tree climbers.

I can't climb a tree. I do good getting up without hurting my back. I have to watch when

I roll over at night, man. I mean, not only does he believe in a

Bigfoot. But now he's assigned what they do. They're tree climbers.

Maybe. Do you have evidence that they're not? You have a heck of a swimmer too there,

Jeff. Swim. They're demons.

That's all it is. They're Nephilim. What about those? What do they call those ghost -like things?

What do they call them? Dog people and all that? I haven't looked into those.

All I know is this. Chupacabra? Thousands of people. I'm talking thousands of people have had experiences.

And seen something. Thousands of people have seen tongues too, Jeff. I'm just saying.

Yeah, but that's quite. I mean, they are speaking gibberish. I mean, they're forcing themselves to speak gibberish.

Hey, two or three witnesses, Jeff. Two or three witnesses. I'm not saying that they're not doing a habba -dabba -doo type of thing.

Right? But it's not a real language. Tongues are a real language.

It's not gibberish. I will say this. You know, in Dubai. The Dubai people.

They really like cartoons. But they don't like the Flintstones. The Dubai people.

The people that live in Dubai. They really like cartoons. But they don't like the Flintstones. But the people in habba -dabba -doo.

You've had too much to drink. I'm on water.

As you read it. What is this? Oh, yeah, it's water. La Croix.

La Croix. The people in habba -dabba -doo.

I'm happy that you thought that was funny, Tom. Oh, there he is. Spiked water.

It's not. It's just. I don't think. Orange. Orange La Croix.

You know something? I mean, like, I was a part of a church that would teach people how to speak in tongues.

And all it was was just some kind of weird syllables that people were saying. So, I totally deny that.

But I would say. I would say that they were really speaking. It was just not of the

Holy Spirit. It was gibberish. That's not according to the two or three witnesses I talked to.

Listen, if you don't understand what they're saying. That's not according to the two or three

I've talked to. They say they understand everything. My biggest argument against the people speaking in tongues is that you have three.

So, let's name three sets of groups. So, you have Trinitarian Pentecostals, which will say symbols of God.

Churches of God. Bigfoot Baptists. Listen, be quiet, Jack Lay. And then you have one that's

Pentecostals. And then you have another group called Way Internationals, which is a cult.

They're kind of like a mixture between Pentecostals and Jehovah's Witnesses, right? They all three believe in the gift of the

Holy Spirit. I mean, the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. All of them speak in tongues.

And they sound just the same. Except they all believe in a different God. Two or three

Witnesses, though. Yeah. The Witnesses, they're all

Nuzzos. Yep. So, the thousands of people that have seen Bigfoot, all

Nuzzos. Listen, Brayden. They are the same people that have seen

Bigfoot. If I was out in the woods and I saw Bigfoot and I reported it to you, would you believe me?

No. I would ask, why are you summoning demons out in the woods?

Nobody's summoning demons. If you saw Bigfoot, you did. What would you be doing?

I wouldn't be out there knocking on trees. I'd be out there with my 12 gauge. No, what would you be doing?

I wouldn't be knocking on trees. No, do the noise again. My 12 gauge. No, do the other noise, the

Bigfoot noise. No, I'm not doing it. Come on. Gotcha.

I can't do the noise. I can't do the noise. You know, remember last week, my computer died and I ended up leaving?

It's not ready to do this again. Well, you know, you need to charge your stuff.

I know. Already. So, we've been on here an hour and 55 minutes. Oh, he's in trouble.

Serious question. Pastor announced his immediate unfit for office. He proceeds to preach for five minutes.

That is 100 % wrong. Wrong. Absolutely wrong. Yep. If you are, if you have done something to disqualify yourself, you need to step down.

Yeah. Oh, he announced it too.

That's weird. Is this somebody in Tulsa? Tulsa. I believe

Orthodox MacArthur is from Tulsa, right? Don't you go to scalp church? I know you're not talking about scalp, but I'm just asking.

I know there's another person in Tulsa that announced that he was going to be.

Oh, you're close to Joe. Nevermind. Okay. Do you know of any pastor,

Jeff, that announced five months ago and still preaching? No, I don't. I don't.

I just might not be in the same circles. Give me a name.

Be brave. He's going to DM me the name.

Well, we'll out it. We don't care. All right.

Any other questions? Any other questions? Are we going to sign off on TDJ?

No. I thought you put TDJ. Was he at a

DD party? No. Did you guys see all the baby oil that they confiscated from themselves?

Thousand bottles. We got to be careful about this. Your butt's going to start hurting,

Jeff. Shut up. It's not going to pop your seal.

It was right. Popping seal. Oh, man.

No, but did he? That's not. Man, I'll tell you what.

It's made me question hip hop. Are all these gangsta rappers that I grew up listening to?

Like I just I don't know anymore. Right. Did he's gay in a not so happy way.

Yeah. Yeah. He's not gay. Have a gay queer. NSFW.

Do stop speaking in weird languages. Just come out and say it. We're not a popular

YouTube channel. People don't watch this show. Now he said

NSF. Why FG? I. Bigfoot.

I got nothing. Now say for your fellow guy.

That's what it means. There's absolutely no shame with those folks.

You guys know Tim, by the way. Orthodox MacArthur.

The first one means not safe for work. The second one means not safe for your. Effing grandma.

Oh, OK. What? I don't get it.

Yeah, I don't speak in code, man. I think. I don't know what any of that stuff means.

Here is cool. Brother in Christ. OK, cool. I was just I didn't know who Tim was.

Well. How do you? How do you, Tim? Time and we don't get butthurt.

I grew up in the trailer park and I wrote a song and it was and it mentions that there's no safe spaces and places with your when your place is on a hitch.

So we didn't have all that stuff. Now, Brayden, he might have grown up in a place where there was safe spaces.

Yeah. We had no safe spaces. I grew up in Albuquerque, New Mexico in the body of homes.

We don't need. I grew up in the body. I'll be a son. White kid growing up in there.

You better fight. Hey, you just get in trouble. I grew up as a

Mormon. I mean. My grandparents ever said was don't get hit first.

So we were swinging. Joseph Smith, baby.

Aren't you a descendant of Brigham Young? Yeah. Why gang?

I don't even know what GTSY means. Oh, we talked about this one the other time.

What was it? Good to see you. Yes, it was. Yeah, I remember that one.

Good to see you. Is it? Yeah. Are you good to see you or good to see you? I'm pretty sure it could go either way.

I'm almost sick with the with the trailer park. It's yeah. Great to see you all.

Good to see y 'all. Y 'all don't even know what it means. One person says good. The other one says great. Great.

Great to see you. Great to see y 'all. So, yeah,

I'm currently auditioning for new friends. If anybody would like to hit me up. We're taking applications for open air theology.

You're going to be able to have a backbone and be able to take criticism and and and argue.

I ain't scared. That's why Habs had to go. He couldn't argue. Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah. What in the world is going on? He disappeared. No one said anything. Don't say that,

Jake. Don't say that, Jake. What does BTID mean? How do you guys know all that?

BTID. BTID. Well, someone was. Habs was raptured.

I think. Yeah, I think that's the reason why Braden is so intimidated by Bigfoot.

It's because if someone that big with big feet and big hands like Braden just don't want to be a part of it.

He's not jumping on that train. He's afraid of heights, too. And they're trick climbers. Maybe.

It could explain a lot. You can hit me up for friendship on Facebook.

I'm blocking you. I'm blocking you. I'm about ready to get raptured on my computer battery, guys.

Well, let's just sign off. Any last words, Braden? Go get your ticket to the

Open Air Theology Conference. Sanctification. It's going to be called war.

Go get your tickets. We hope to see you in February. I'm just going to say these guys keep on pushing these buttons.

They got to look out for the small paws. So come watch. Come watch the throw down. He's going to ball his fist and poke me in the eye.

Listen, Open Air Theology Conference is turning into the new MMA. Come watch it.

War. 2025. February. Tullahoma, Tennessee. Tullahoma, Tennessee. Not Tallahoma.

It's Tullahoma. Tullahoma. It's called Tullahoma. It's not

Tullahoma. How do you spell it? T -U -L -L -A -H -O -M -A.

T -U -L -L -A -H -O -M -A. Tullahoma. Whatever. That's not how we say it down here.

I don't care. I'm just saying it. Say Philippi. Philippi. Philippi. What the heck is that?

It's like Malachi. Old Testament. Malachi. Hey. Malachi.

Anyways, Tom. Last words. Yeah. Yeah. Go.

No, I don't have any. Yeah, I do.

I do. Go tell someone about Christ. Go tell. Go tell your neighbor this week.

Make it a point to go tell your neighbor, a friend, somebody you don't know. Strike up a gospel conversation and tell them.

And then the next time we're on, this is your homework. Tell us how it went. Let us know what happened, whether they rejected you or not.

But go tell someone about Christ. For sure. For sure. Don't.

Don't do seances in the woods looking for Bigfoot. He's a demon. No. Yeah. Yeah. Well, he's not a demon, but don't do seances.

Like going around the woods going hoo, hoo, hoo, and knocking on trees with wood. Like, that's just that's that's demon stuff.

Oh, we lost him. That's fine. He was raptured. He's going to be calling my phone here in a minute.

Yeah. All right. Well, if y 'all again, like Brandon said, y 'all need to come check out the conference in February.

If you don't, I don't I don't even know what you're doing with your life. Like, it doesn't make any sense. So. So we're not a big conference.

Right. So. So. So no one's too big for the britches. All the speakers you'll be able to hang out with, not just walk up and talk.

So you'd be able to hang out with. We're just men. We're not trying to be put on a pedestal. The only thing great about us is the

God that we serve. Hallelujah. Hollaback! Y 'all should come hang out with us.

It's going to be a blast. It's a small conference, but it's the it's the most fun conference that's out there.

And so I want to encourage you all to come check us out here in Tallahoma. Anytime. Come check us out.

Come be a part of our the church that we have here. It's growing. Covenant Reformed Baptist Church. And as always.