The New Religion of Climate Worship is the Culture of Death, Response to the Textual Traditionalists

Well greetings, welcome to the dividing line starting at a odd time today But that's because we need to fit it in lots of stuff to do tonight meeting with folks going up to Salt Lake City That's only next week that we will be doing that the outreach at the general conference and then

Immediately after that heading to Australia. We've got a lot of stuff going on So got to fit the programs in when we can we'll be shooting for another program on Thursday as well try to get a few things in before all the craziness begins to Begins to happen and a lot more traveling to do

Thank you very very much to everyone who has helped to make it possible to travel

The travel fund you need to understand, you know when I when I talk about that This allows us to go to a lot of places that we couldn't go.

Otherwise You know the people that Not all the people that have us in are able to really do much as far as you know supporting the

The traveling part of things like that. And so when we are able to do that, that means that when

I tell you about Talking with young students in South Africa that the dividing line has been very helpful in their

Continuing in the faith in the midst of all the crazy wacky leftism there and everywhere else today

That you you're a part of that that's that's that very very important so very thankful to those of you who have given to the travel fund and that travel fund will be being used to get me to Australia and then to to London and Then we got got a lot of stuff to do next year.

We'll be back in Australia next year as well and a lot of traveling to do so with that I Everyone is

I want to talk a little bit about some current events and I guess

Just like just like the United Kingdom who currently has a non -functional government

We pretty much do too here in the United States I guess I was just driving in just happened to pop the news on while I was driving in and I guess there's going to be the beginning of impeachment stuff.

I Despair of an entire of at least half of the politicians

United States having any concern whatsoever But ever ever doing anything for the people the the openness of the left in pursuing their agenda of a fundamental destruction of the constitutional form of government liberty and Any vestiges of the

Christian worldview is just as obvious as it possibly can be But that particular issue aside over the weekend was all of the climate madness

Now one of the things I want to try to find time between now and Thursday I don't know if I'm gonna be able to I I want to I want to I want to talk about how church history is relevant to the climate zaniness that we are experiencing in in the

West today well of the world I've mentioned it before but I and I've talked a little bit about How we know beyond a shadow of a doubt with with absolute certainty

That the earth has been warmer by more than 1 .5 degrees Centigrade Than it is today in the in in the

New Testament in the New Testament Church era And how that was a good thing a positive thing and that life flourished

Life does better with warmth than it does with cold. Yeah. Yeah really does

You You wouldn't have been able to figure that out from the crazed children running around various cities in the world over the past weekend

But this is a religion that is being birthed before our eyes well not for our eyes it's been being birthed for a decade or so Maybe a little more

You know they had to switch over from the we're about to freeze to death thing to we're about to boil to death thing I posted a video with Leonard Nimoy Spock Narrating it from what 1974

I think That was talking about the coming ice age how within a decade, you know, just we're all gonna be frozen solid and All that kind of stuff and hey if Spock says it that's it yeah,

I know we grew up with that I know That's what we were told I didn't care I lived in Arizona we'd like it to be a little cooler

Yeah, but if it wasn't duck and cover. Oh Yeah, sure. Well, that was a real threat.

Yeah, but I mean we did duck and cover I'm serious, but wait a minute seriously You're telling me that that the

Russians are gonna drop a nuclear bomb on Prescott, Arizona And us kids being underneath you have no earthly idea how many nukes we have hidden in the forest

But But us hiding underneath they could miss to just if we hid under the desks that was gonna help

It's gonna help with the flying glass. Yes Yes, so like I said if if it wasn't duck and cover which we practiced in grade school

Yeah, I know so and it was the coming ice age. We were all I know But like I said, it was never it was never

You you watch some of these people these these snowflakes Who are vowing never to have children?

I'm sort of like you go ahead with that, baby You you you go ahead with that not having kids part will will will outnumber you so fast as I'm funny, but You you look at these these children there they are absolutely frightened out of their minds and And They they don't know anything about the other side.

They do not know that there could be a debate because of course we know That people will not allow for that debate if you dare question the science.

I Question a lot of science today because when science and politics get together, it ain't science no more and Science has been

Co -opted by politics for a very very long time But boldly and openly today on so many different fronts

When someone with a gender studies PhD talks to me about the science of transgenderism

I just go I'm sorry that has no meaning You you're you're a nut.

I have no respect for that kind of stuff. I don't and I won't anyway

These kids are scared out of their minds and they are being turned into a huge religious cult

That will You know, they don't know history obviously because like I said history demonstrates beyond all question that the earth has been warmer than it is today

And that human life flourished and I'll talk about that and prove it And how important it was?

but Since they don't know history Then what they're afraid of they don't realize we've already survived in the past and it was actually good for us and so they're scared to death and Given that they have lost any transcendent meaning in their worldview.

It's it's sad But this these are the people who will be making policy within 20 years and you must understand the

New Green Deal people Not only is there not enough money on the planet

To pay for what they want to do, but the only way for that system to be established is to cut the human population by about two -thirds and They want you living off the land as a vegetarian in a tent

No electricity. No medical care. No cars Never going more than three miles from where you live where you're born.

They want the the medieval feudal system That's the only way to do what they want what they think is going to save the planet

We talk about the culture of death you need to understand this is a part of the culture of death Not life.

They do not want human life to flourish because human life is bad So you kill it in the womb you kill it when it gets old and you find other ways of killing it

This is part of the culture of death and You see Young people being co -opted into it.

They've been they've been turned into Just walking bags of accidental protoplasm in their in their worldview as it is

They're looking for something to believe in they've been told there's nothing to find in Christianity or in scripture or They're deprived of any historical knowledge and so people that have no knowledge their past are very easily

Controlled very easily manipulated and that's exactly what you're seeing now, of course, don't don't don't be deceived

That may be what they want for all the rest of us they want all the rest of us to have no cars and no planes and no trains and and no health care system and no transportation and Just take us back to the medieval period

They ain't gonna do that for them Okay, there'll be the special places for for the people in leadership who need to continue to have the nice things in life

That's why you can have the socialists they some people still call them Democrats but the socialists

Up there on the stage talking about You know Kamala Harris who

I consider to be one of the most dangerous individuals in United States, but Kamala Harris up there talking about having to modify our diets and then what are the

Democrats do they throw a fundraiser where they cook 10 ,000 steaks They are

Hypocrites beyond the meaning of the term immigrant, but it'll stay that way Trust me, it'll stay that way

You know I've thought one of the best things that could be done for the for the benighted American populace is to point out that if these people get what they want, there'll be no more sports

There won't be you can't you cannot have Major League Baseball NBA NFL You can't have any major league sports without air travel.

It can't it can't be done and And of course, it's very high carbon emissions

To for all the people to get together at the stadiums and all the rest that kind of stuff so so you need to understand this this might be the this might be the lowball way of Dealing with the 2020 election is saying remember one side wants to get rid of all of your sports

Especially NASCAR. Oh my goodness. Oh the carbon the carbon footprint of NASCAR.

Oh But Back to the serious part.

Where's all this coming from? I'm not gonna have children We're gonna abort babies.

We need to cut the population back We've got too many now. We need to Let it die off.

And of course, by the way in history Whenever the earth is cooled.

The result has been something called famine and massive death. And So that's what these people want because they are part of the culture of death

There is a spiritual aspect of this. No one talks about it, but there's a spiritual aspect of it.

We talk about being pro -life but that has been so watered down into a political movement

That what you don't realize is being pro -life means you want to see human life flourish

Because it is made in the image of God and God has a purpose in it and I just think you know

I I did not have This element of a Christian worldview as a young person.

It was not a part of Your standard Southern Baptist College education it comes later on unfortunately but I think a lot of Christians are

Only have the negative side of a beautiful positive

Christian aspect in regards to a culture of life versus a culture of death, but you must realize

If if you are you've got to realize and I know for some of you this is very frustrating but as Votie Balcombe said years ago if you do not be surprised

When you send your children to live with Caesar that they come back as Romans and What has to be done is our children have to be given a

Knowing positive culture of life. That's what the Christian worldview produces a culture of life

That Presents us as responsible human beings create an image of God with transcendent meaning

Living in a world that is governed by God's law and God's will and God's decree

So that we will have patience and endurance Steadfastness But they also need to be fully aware of the fact that this will set them at odds

With their flesh and with the world and with those around them and How to do that in The proper way is a challenge

But it needs to be done. It needs to be done. That's what we're facing Otherwise, you're gonna see, you know this

Greta this poor Greta girl That she is a disaster waiting to happen.

She is a disaster waiting to happen You let that kind of completely unhinged emotional

Despair Go unchecked and you're gonna have people checking out. I mean the suicide rate is the highest it has been in a long long time but this kind of religious fervor the world is ending could result in Horrific death, which is exactly what well the culture of death would like The culture of death doesn't care about that.

They may say they do but very very happy that kind of thing were actually happening So keep that in mind.

You're gonna see more and more and more of it. You're gonna see more and more and more of it It is just absolutely astonishing what we have

What we're seeing all around us it's It's bad anyways, okay.

All right, I Was attacked recently for I Guess There there's a bunch of stuff being posted right now about sexual critical issues and Someone at a church showed me some posts on Facebook from a group of Vantill group

No, no, not Vantill group Bonson group, sorry and You know my fellow reformed believers ripping and shredding as reformed believers very frequently do and One guy especially

Someone was Defending me and basically saying well, you know

Look he just wrote this article over here respond to some of the stuff that was said He's done these programs and the response was yeah

Well, he said he was gonna review the Fesco book and he hasn't done yet. So why should I listen anything else? Yes, sir so There you know

Sometimes you just look at something like that. You just go Yeah, I've just been sitting around Smelling the roses, you know,

I got nothing to do. I Know I've only got three debates next week in Salt Lake City and then two debates in Australia Yeah, I'm not doing anything, you know

I just and other people have written entire reviews and but that's not I need it, you know, it's it's really frustrating

It just it just really makes me wonder You know, what's this person doing? What what are you doing?

Why didn't you do something? Why didn't you write a review of it? Anyway The whole you know,

I was the yesterday on Twitter I don't know last evening There are a couple of people again talking about just how nasty the reform

Twitter verse or Facebook verse or whatever you want to call it the reformed online presence can get and there's no question about that Part of that is is

Is not necessarily bad. We we don't just sit around, you know, we're not like this Folks at Union Theological Seminary, we're not confessing our sins to plants.

That's a good thing. This is a positive. It's a positive thing We at least hopefully have a focus what no, no,

I don't think we have any plants in here They're dried those are dried

Yeah, there's my idol. Yeah, those are those have been there for a long time actually, you know Those are my

Indian paintbrush flowers, and we probably can't call them that anymore either So are they native in Native American paintbrush

Indigenous people's paintbrush flowers. Okay. All right. All right. Sorry got a go with the flow or get banished from social media and That's level we've gotten to anyway

What was I talking about Moses is in the bull rushes. That's right Yeah Yeah Someone was just mentioning yeah maintain it at 500 million, huh?

Wow, that's 500 million That that would be a massive decrease in the number of people alive.

Yes George the Georgia Guidestones first on the list is to cut the population maintain a 500 million.

Well, there you go one good one good shot of black death and Mankind's done.

Anyhow And I was talking to this fellow about how reformed people online can be pretty nasty to one another

And I pointed out look if you can't tell the difference between the beauty and glory of reformed theology and the

Ostensible proponents thereof in social media then you're gonna have a problem and There are a lot of people who won't even won't even consider

Reformed theology because of the people that they have seen promoting it and I've told you

I experienced that the first Calvinist who called himself a Calvinist That I ever met in Bible College Was a hyper

Calvinist who mocked me for going out witnessing to Mormons and yet,

I somehow managed to get over whatever prejudice that might have created in my mind a

And to realize he was not actually representative of the system so the reality of the beauty of the harmony of the

Father the Son the Spirit and the salvation of God's people and the perfection of their work and the fact the Gospel focus is upon what

God does and not what upon man does the absolute Kingship of God his right to do with his creation as he wishes

These are the things that fundamentally define Reformed theology and People who focus upon stuff on down the road rather than those central things that always leads to the degradation of reformed theology

You just just look at Europe Just look at nations that were once Fundamentally reformed in their populace

But lost the focus upon the key things got focused upon other things that weren't definitional and those are some of the most secular godless

Arid spiritually arid places in all of Europe today when Calvinism dies it dies big and You can see that in a number of European nations today

If you if you go over there so It it can be very discouraging to be constantly under attack from people who call themselves

Calvinists when you're seeking to defend reformed theology and so on so forth, but It never crosses my mind that oh, that means you should be looking to something else.

No I see the inconsistencies between myself and how

I should live and So I see that with others as well and so I can make the category distinction between what is true doctrinal truth and the fact we live in a fallen world and since we live in a fallen world, there will be people who profess the truth, but we all live at various levels of consistency in the application of those divine truths

So with that said there are some reformed man, I'm going to be responding to today and I One of the things that is is is difficult for me is

I'm assuming if you're a reformed man that you're not a snowflake If you're a reformed man we can actually debate the issues and hold each other to a consistent standard and so if you respond emotionally like a snowflake and Start looking for reasons to twist every word that I say and and and everything else.

I just go you just lost the debate There's no reason to do that If a reformed man you should always be able to use the same standards take me back to the same truths that we hold in common, but if you have to go on the emotional stuff if you have to start doing on such a

I'm just such a victim and then you lose and and I whether anybody else sees that or not doesn't matter you lose and I can move on from there because Obviously the truth has been established the response demonstrated that so we can we can move on for there

So if you're gonna respond to this stuff, don't don't try to pick and pick it

And I'm the last thing I talk about is a clear example of someone who took what I said in the last program

Ignored The point of it and Then picked out little pieces and said he said this and he's mean because he said that it was total emotionalism total emotionalism

That is to me one of the clearest example of we can't defend our position So we're just gonna have to go and use this kind of argumentation if you're reformed.

I'm gonna hold you that position I'm gonna hold you that standard pray that God will bless you and Pray that you'll recover your your balance, but if you're gonna behave that way, there you go.

There you go. So someone this is this was a An article

I haven't talked about this guy for a long time a guy named Chris Thomas And I don't see his stuff because I blocked him on Facebook I think

I blocked him on face or mute muted on Twitter. I don't know what it was block mute, whatever Because he's just he's just constantly really really nasty just just You know constantly lying deception, you know never if you cannot even show the slightest willingness

To go well, you know, it could be you could have a point there, you know, that's possibility there or not

You know, I don't think he meant that someone who is just 100 % everything

I say or do I'm Indwelt by the Prince of Demons, you know

I'm I'm gonna block you. I don't need that kind of silliness There's there's there's no and there's no reasoning with you anyways, and so someone else

Made reference to this and that's why I that's why I've seen it at all And it's actually a mishmash of things.

It's a little bit confusing But it is an excellent example He's one of these

Texas Texas Receptus style folks and there's there's different versions and different flavors of that And it's you can't just deal with just one aspect of it.

You have to deal with it somewhat in general But he left he had written a article on a blog site

James White inconsistency and lying, you know That's the sort of how it starts off So just give you some some some some things

Just just poor points for now add this mr. White. I'm only mr. White everybody else is a doctor somebody cuz doesn't like my degree

Doesn't matter how many books are teaching this, you know Scholarship is something you buy for these folks. So Again these folks means this guy because that's what he's doing.

Mr. White has stated that we shouldn't build theology upon a disputed text This is a fundamental truth of exegesis

I was taught this as a Literally before my teen years. I remember my dad

Explaining this in a class at the Bible Baptist Church in Charlemontown, Pennsylvania And Of course,

I got it more fully as I grew older but for example you do not build a dogma or a doctrine upon a hapoxygamma

The hapoxygamma is a word or a term that is used only one time in Scripture So you have you have no way of having the consensus of Scripture because it is a unique term in the definition of what that particular word is and Especially if it is a disputed hapox, so disputed hapox legomena could be a word

That is either textually uncertain. So it's textual variance involved or That is lexically uncertain.

We don't know what it means and and There aren't that many of those words in the New Testament. There are more in the old

They're especially when you're talking about flora and fauna one of the reasons you see such a difference between modern

English translations is because Sometimes Ugaritic helps and sometimes it's something over here.

We'll discover something and oh, let's shed some light on that But still there are certain Gemstones for example, it's like might be this might be that but this text is is 3 ,000 years old and we can't go back and ask the authors and So notice what

I what so I said something that you would get in any meaningful scholarly

Introduction to basic exegetical methodology and hermeneutics in a reformed seminary

Notice how he puts it For now add this. Mr. White has stated that we shouldn't build theology upon a disputed text

This is tantamount to claiming the disputed text is not God's Word 2nd

Timothy 3 16 no, it is tantamount to saying that it is a disputed text and it might be disputed in its lexicography and it might be disputed in its textual history and Therefore you do not base a doctrine on it because there's no need to do so And if you insist upon doing so you might be doing it because you can't find anyplace else

Okay So he goes on to say

Mr. White is a hypocrite for mulling M -E -W

L -I -N -G about what he calls lies and slander when he has spent decades being a false witness that speaks lies against men

Like dr. Theodore elitist Dr. Joel Beakey, dr. Jeffrey Riddle et al proverb 619 now

I Have not had any interaction other than positive interaction with dr. Beakey my interaction with The Lutheran Theodore elitist is still online.

It's it's in the it's in the blog somewhere. You can look it up. Oh Yeah, just look.

Yeah, le TIS. It'll it'll it'll show up And Dr. Riddle I have responded to a couple of his things recently

Those three men hold three different positions and so notice in the mindset of this fellow if You disagree if you argue against you're lying.

You're attacking you're slandering. So There is a deep fundamentalist streak in many of these individuals and it comes out again in the inability to Place things in proper categories and respond to them as such

He says mr. White is still wrong for his assertion that the vast majority of manuscripts lack this verse now.

I'm not There this was an addition. This was an update and so I'm not sure which verse is talking about Because the next line is he is also wrong for claiming the evidence against the

CJ which I assume is kama johannium is Truly conclusive. So if he's talking about the kama johannium, there is no question

That the vast majority of Greek manuscripts lack the kama johannium. That's not that's not a question.

That's that's undisputed No one no one disagrees that So this is talking about the kama johannium

So he must be trying to throw the Latin manuscripts in and make them determinative but there is no absolutely no question that the

Kama johannium is not in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts of first John So anyways what

I wanted to get to especially and there's also stuff in here about my rant on this and blah blah blah blah blah but what

I got down to Is this this section here on inconsistency?

I always look for those I want to you know, if you're gonna charge inconsistency, let's let's find out who's who's consistent something we like to do on the program here and The vast majority of instances we discovered that the critic is the inconsistent one

Mr. White has long complained about inconsistency on his dividing line calling it a sign of a failed argument.

I have This to me is quite ironic considering his own inconsistency in the aforementioned dividing line

He repeatedly claimed that the facts prove That Luke 23 34 is not part of the original text.

Here is his argument fact Number one fact p75 does not contain the verse number two fact

Vaticanus does not contain the verse Number three fact other Greek manuscripts do not contain the verse for fact.

The verse is not original now. Let me stop right there Very very frequently you encounter people who are so Well that you know, it's like the guy in Twitter called textus receptus.

I muted him a long time ago It does not matter what words

I enunciate with my tongue and my mouth Their commitment to a position is so strong that they will hear me saying things that I never said and that's frightening that That is that's not a good thing for any

Christian to be so committed to one particular topic that they are not even able to hear

What somebody on the other side is actually? honestly saying Because The discussion that we have given on Luke 23 34 father forgive them for they know not what they do

We have pointed out we did an entire program Alan Kirshner came on This was years ago.

How long ago was that fine fine fine when Alan and I was on about Luke 23 34

We did an entire hour on the subject of the textual evidence regarding Luke 23 34 and What we pointed out in In that program and again

Fundamentalists will be triggered constantly by the dividing line because we

Present things in such a fashion that we expect the listener to think categorically consistently and Basically in a meaningful scholarly fashion.

We attempt to Demonstrate how to do that and then do that regularly and so what we did in that program was we said, you know, this is a very meaningful textual variant and The primary reason that it is well, there's two

Strong reasons and I'm really looking for it. I am very much looking forward to the publication of The ECM volume on Luke That's not one.

The next one's up John and marker next one's up, but really looking forward and unlike critics

I'm seriously looking forward to What the

CBGM analysis of The variant Luke 23 34 tells us

Now if you've not heard about that before let me just remind you again Coherence based genealogical method it is utilizing computers to examine the relationships of manuscripts to one another and looking for both pre genealogical and post genealogical coherence in The manuscripts in the readings that they have this is being utilized in the production of the edition of critical may are

Out of Munster, which will be when it's finished the standard

Greek New Testament in scholarship For those who want to ignore it

They can ignore if they want but it will have the greatest amount of evidence that we have ever presented That has ever been collated in one place in regards to the manuscripts the history of the text things like that We can either close our eyes to this wonderful gift and run back to the 16th century

Which is what many people today are saying exactly what we should do Our opponents are not going to do that So I ain't gonna do that and I would suggest that it's apologetically suicidal to do that but anyway

And what CBGM does is for example in Mark 1 1 an analysis of? the longer ending there

Using CBGM seems indicate that the official final release of this information hasn't hasn't happened yet, but Would seem to indicate that the manuscripts that have the longer ending

Were Jesus Christ the Son of God the Son of God is longer any are more coherent in the pre genealogical analysis

We haven't looked at don't have access yet to the genealogical analysis but in the pre genealogical analysis there's more coherence there and hence that is a mark in favor of the longer ending over the shorter ending

The ECM will have all of that data. It'll be available for you online.

You can examine exactly what it says even the Subjective elements of the decisions made by editors are

Available if you know how to use the the modules And I'm really looking forward to seeing what that says it would be

Very helpful to know what the coherence of the manuscripts are in regards to that particular verse but prior to CBGM prior to knowing what

CBGM was 11 years ago a long time ago, so we did that we did this program 11 years ago prior to Alan didn't mention anything about CBGM.

I didn't mention anything about CBGM It was still being developed at that time at Munster But prior to that the the primary categories that you utilize in the analysis of a variant like that were textual families

CBGM is challenging Everything that we Had concluded about textual families because it can analyze the relationship between manuscripts to a much deeper level than we could before Because it's looking at all of the variants we can't our minds.

This is too many data points Thousands of manuscripts thousands of variants our minds can't can't do it the computer can anyway, and what we observed was that This isn't a situation where you have the

Alexandria manuscripts versus the Byzantine manuscripts the earliest representatives of the

Byzantine family specifically Codex Washingtonianus Which is a Gospels manuscript contains this

Contains this portion of Luke, but it does not have this particular reading and so the point was that from the best understanding at that time you have the earliest representatives of the

Alexandrian Western and Byzantine text types that do do not have this reading and that is considered to be a very strong Argument, so that's one of the reasons the other reason was that when you have p75 and Vaticanus reading the same way on a variant that means you're looking at as early as 125 for that particular reading and The reason for that is p75 and Vaticanus have a common ancestor

So that common ancestor has to be earlier than when p75 was written p75 is written between 175 and 200

So it goes back earlier than that And so that p75

Vaticanus axis is a gift. It's it's a good thing

It's a wonderful thing. That's one of the things that bothers me so much here is we have ministers in primarily

Reformed churches saying who cares Who cares Who cares if God has given us something like this where we can and I use this in the debate with Bart Ehrman He didn't even try to respond to it.

He knows it's true And by the way, all of Ehrman's work was done before CBGM and it's interesting that his dissertation was on the development of the proto

Alexandrian text type All of that is going to be completely thrown up in the air

Especially we get when we start getting the gospel volumes coming out of Munster so that's

Neither here nor there, but it's an interesting observation. Anyhow Things like the p75

Vaticanus axis when the two agree together is a wonderful Gift that God has given us that allows us to root the text back into what even

Ehrman calls the dark period that's a good thing and Many people who've never collated a manuscript in their life

Not once in their life, they couldn't read an unsealed Greek manuscript if their life depended upon it but they are telling all the rest of us that we need to forget about all that stuff and Go back to the days when we were dealing with 50 manuscripts

Had no papyri Hardly had access to anything in the first half of the first millennium

But that's what we need to go back to because we have theological arguments you see that's that's what we're facing

That's what I'm trying to warn about So So you've got

I've got it. I just Put a pause on that some guy who who calls the edge satanic nerd

I Had mentioned I had linked to the Greta Thunberg rant and it was a rant and I had said this is a troubled child.

She is ignorant unlearned and deceived She is being used by every adult in her life horrifically. So do not be deceived this religion aims to destroy human life

Families and everything we have built and I linked to it. So this satanic nerd Satanic nerd

I'll bet you he's a part of the culture of death See this see us religious man calling this child fighting for change

Who looks at the science ignorant unlearned and deceived you see what superstition and twisting science does

That's exactly what he's doing. That's right. That's right The he and her together yes

So, you know, that's why next time I hope find the time to talk a little bit about some of that That's just happen to look over there and see that Yeah, so sorry for taking so long here but Luke 23 34

The reason therefore that we laid out in That program and that I've talked about a number of times since then referring back to it is that you should not base a doctrinal conclusion upon a text

Where all the families in the New Testament their earliest progenitors do not contain it

It's a major textual variant and That needs to be for the person who wants to accurately handle the text in light of its history of transmission.

That's important What? What Chris Thomas and people like him want us to do is to close our eyes these things

You you simply grab a tradition So you grab the Texas Receptus You grab

Scrivener FHA Scrivener at the end of the 19th century Created this based upon the textual decisions of the

King James translators but The King James translators did not meet as a group to make textual decisions remember the

King James translators utilized the works collected works of Erasmus and this

This volume itself this physical volume itself might have been used by them.

We don't know it existed back then This is a 1550 Stephanus. They used the 1550

Stephanus they used all of Erasmus's editions and they used Bezos editions and Especially his 1598 which would have been the newest they seem to like the new text.

Isn't that strange? anyway They use these but they use them in committees so The committee that made the textual decisions that created this for the book of Revelation Would not be the same committee

That made the decisions for the Gospel of John even though they're the same author so One committee might have more of a predilection for the 1598

Beza and somebody else the fifth edition of Erasmus somebody else at 1550 Stephanus So there's no consistency there.

That is not a textual critical methodology So this is a text that was derived without the utilization of textual critical methodology as its primary decision maker so what

What Scrivener does is he? Goes to all these differing printed texts

Then he goes to the King James and he goes ah in the printed text of the

King James now they gave marginal notes Leaving them aside because there are no notes in here.

There's there's no textual notes. There are textual notes in the 1550 This is a step backwards

From Stephanus or Beza or Erasmus. There are no notes here. There's there's nothing the margin nothing on the bottom of the page

This is You know

I should have that in here I Don't know why I don't hear that or I've just placed someplace that I'm not sure where to grab it real quick I'm going to have to fix this

I was going to grab for you And I've got one down there, but it's got an

English in it, but I need to remind me to bring in here and have available The Uthmanic Quran the

Current printed edition of the Quran from 1924 Cairo Cairo edition that the vast majority of Muslims around the world

Certain areas have other ones, but especially in the United States that is the

Text of the Quran now. They don't know where it came from vast majority of Muslims have no earthly idea that that just The school of schools in Cairo wanted to have a consistent edition

So it was produced. It wasn't produced by an examination the best manuscripts nothing all the rest that stuff the attitude of many

Christians Toward this is the exact same attitude that Muslims have toward the Quran and if I had one sitting here

And I apologize that I don't I will fix that There are no notes in it either Just like that.

It's just the original language text the same attitude same perspective

Not knowing that the

King James translators Were dealing with printed texts based upon a limited number of manuscripts.

They were not analyzing other manuscripts They only had a certain amount of time

The king wanted things done and so they only had a certain amount of time

Remember, it's a whole lot easier to do stuff like this today because we can communicate so rapidly with one another and we can travel

They couldn't do that So They utilized what they had

They made the decision They put textual notes in the original that are almost never published of the

King James today and produced this This well produced the

King James. This is the Greek representation of it That's why

And I've explained this many times before That's why last program. I thought I called it a fake

Greek text because it's not based upon collating Greek manuscripts It's based upon an

English translation so it's Secondary at that point or maybe tertiary anyway and of course someone

Texts the Reformation fake and you know Just get your emotions go after him and people he needs to be kicked out of the kingdom and all the rest of stuff all because I Truthfully explained the history of this they don't even try to refute that.

They don't want a touch of the 10 -foot pole and They know in a debate they'd have to just sit there and go but that's that's where social media allows you to just Get away with stuff you would never get away with If you were having to look somebody in the eye never get away with Anyway, so the point is that if you look at this it has

Matthew 23 34, but there's no note You don't know the Codex Washingtonianus doesn't have it you don't know about the p75

Vaticanus Connection about that It's just there and so you might build an entire doctrine off of that You might

Shouldn't but you might okay, so the presentation here. I realize

I'm going way way longer So so the argument here

Number four fact the verse is not original. I didn't say that and If if you don't think as a fundamentalist

Then you recognize that the conclusion that we reached is that this is a highly questionable text and therefore should not be utilized to determine a

Doctrinal statement see in their world. There's no such thing as a highly questionable text You can't you can't have that you can't allow you can't allow for that It's it's either.

It's either there or it's not there. It's black or white there, that's why

You know it I remember who what was his name um not the guy who

Da wait da wait da wait could you look up da wait, and he's got to have passed away by now

And I don't remember when it was or maybe he hasn't I don't know But I was doing a radio program a da wait in Austin, Texas And that's when

Tex Meyers called in yeah and Da wait

Wrote some of the nastiest stuff that he wrote against the New King James Version and One of the things you hate about the

New King James Version is the New King James like the original King James had textual notes in it a lot more textual notes than the

King James did but the New King James is as close to the King James you're gonna get but sometimes it's the stuff that's the closest to you and Fundamentalists and hit one of his arguments was but by putting those textual notes in the

New King James You are fostering unbelief. It's got to be black and white there can be no notes

Doesn't matter if every note is Absolutely true Doesn't matter if it's absolutely true

You can't have it not in the fundamentalist mindset and we've been dealing a lot with fundamentalists recently and The mindset that comes from that so this wasn't my argument

Chris Thomas is wrong number four fact the verse is not original is not what we said we said is there's a real good reason for questioning that and therefore do not make a

Doctrinal do not make this text the foundation of a doctrinal position And so he makes a whole thing about how

I'm being inconsistent by equivocating between facts and the opinions He draws from those facts. I didn't And it's not an opinion.

It's a conclusion. You can draw from facts as far as those facts allow you to to go

And so he just just goes on and on and on and on And this is the whole basis of inconsistency

Fundamentalists really Struggle with this idea of consistency because you can't actually deal with it

When you cannot make category distinctions when you cannot place things. It's the same thing

I mean, what is the mark of the fundamentalist mindset all? Doctrines of the scripture are equally important with all other doctrines scripture now when you first hear that you might go

Well, yeah, if it's a doctrine of scripture, they're all equally important. No That's not true

What do you mean? Well, how can they not how can that be equally important? Okay, see you're thinking that equally important means equally true.

That's the fundamentalist mindset You have to recognize that there are certain doctrines that define the faith that are central

But then as you radiate out from that you get two doctrines That are less central and less definitional than those that are at the core

The the fundamentalist can't do that That's why Remember, how long ago was it?

Did you ever find so is there anything in Wikipedia D?

Donald a weight isn't in Wikipedia. No, that's that surprises me Um, anyway

This is why About two or three weeks ago member

I at the end of the program I played that fundamentalist dude preaching

Hey, hey you remember that. Hey, yeah. Hey, yeah What was it? Hey, yeah, what was it?

I forget what it you hear me. You okay, you know And he was just going on it was just it looked like something straight out of Babylon B, but it was real and Do you remember one of the things he said because he attacked

Calvinists and Calvinists are heretics and going to hell all the rest of time But there is another group that he called heretics as well that we shouldn't have any new it

Mid tribulation rapturous, so they're premillennial us

So anybody who's an on millennial supposed to realize that there's but mid tribulation instead of pre tribulation or post tribulation

So three and a half year difference out of the kingdom you go because all doctrines are

Equally important and so in their mind you disagree with me on the Trinity. You're a heretic.

That's true You disagree me on the tribulation you're a heretic that's not true and once you

Grow up to the point because it is a matter of maturity. It's simply a matter of thinking maturely

Once you realize that then you go, oh wow, okay. Hmm Okay, and Last you know last year g3 rich will tell you over and over and over and over again

We have people coming up to us and saying, you know you guys and an apology radio you got me out of Fundamentalism you got me out of the independent

King James only bop bop bop bop stuff and how we do that It's not that we spend a whole lot of time talking about it.

We just Talk positively about how to actually do interpretation and to recognize what's central and and then what's out from that and and you know walk through texts of scripture and That's not what they do in a lot of those fundamentalist churches

And so just by example you you grow people to the point where they can go. Oh man, what

I've been getting isn't Isn't really there and so that's what we've been doing so just some response there to To that.

Um, so what I wanted to get to I was gonna make some comments And I already have in essence about Robert true loves stuff that he posted up Again all these fellas

Really believe that by quoting texts About God preserving scripture that this somehow has something is somehow somehow relevant and It isn't

Because the fact that I believe God has preserved scripture it's the methodology and the mechanism

That is relevant and of course Trying to freeze us in history at the

Reformation Freezes us at a point Where the amount of information available to even the brightest minds of a

Theodore Beza or a Robert Estienne or Leaving the Reformation here a desiderius

Erasmus is Significantly less than what we have today significantly less

We can functionally Examine a Much broader spectrum of information than they ever could then they ever ever ever could

So Keep that and keep that in mind because to try to drag those writers in to this debate is

A bogus argument they have to do it. They have to make it look like see we're defending the

Reformation See this this writer said this about the the supremacy of Greek versus the

Latin and so he's on our side and and this way they did not have the information to be relevant to our debate

Now I will change one thing one thing we've demonstrated from this One thing we've demonstrated from this

They did utilize our methodologies Erasmus does Beza does it's no question about that.

It's right here. We've documented it. It's right there in print and here in the collective works of Erasmus as well they did utilize our methodologies and would not have

Understood the idea of saying let's not talk about individual variants Let's talk about the bigger issues because they talked about the individual variants because they were actually trying to produce a text

They were not taking a pre -existing text and defending it and saying and and you know by any means necessary they are actually producing a text and so in light of that I Would say that those who were engaged in textual criticism were much more on our side and would not even understand the

Theological conclusion that we just need to accept a

Singular text and shrine it and ignore everything that comes afterwards because Erasmus would never have done that Beza would never done that You can you can pretend in your in your dreams they would have but the reality is it wouldn't so But the fact is they did not have

They weren't sitting here Going hmm hmm hmm hmm

That's not what they were doing. They didn't have the modern what we would call the modern eclectic text and the the

TR and Comparing them or making arguments that's gonna develop in the 19th century with in England that you know with Westcott and Hort Scrivener And all the rest

Bergen Then it becomes an argument, but that's long after the Reformation They're not doing that in the 16th and 17th century

Because they don't have anything else. It's a default text So to quote them and their use of a default text as if they are choosing that text

Over another text is simply dishonest It's just dishonest Why Why are you doing it, but that's fundamental to the to the entire position

And is that by the way is that text and Canon thing this coming weekend or was it last weekend Look up text and Canon Georgia Atlanta something like that trying to remember the dates were

I think it's Is the last weekend or this weekend or maybe it's this week? I don't know That's not why we

I When other people post things and it comes across my feet, that's what

I that's what I deal with didn't really have anything to do with that so What oh?

It's a knock. It's at the end of October Okay, 25th. It says okay.

That's right That's right. It's next month on the way back from that's it would have been on the way back from London.

That's right Well, I have more to talk about he might be

He does that have a birth date for him I 32 Yeah, okay

Yep, my dad was 33. I think so right around the same Same time frame all right.

I need to get this. I'm running out of time. Sorry On the young textless and reformed

Taylor DeSoto article That I said I would I started responding to this

Let me just just read to you because I y 'all need to be Warned about this terrible horrible nasty man named

James White Listen to this on the dividing line record on September 19th 2019 apologist

James White not only declared that the received text the Reformation was a fake text He also mocked

Reverend Dane K Johansson said that adhering the Reformation era text probably adhering to the

Reformation era text is an Abandonment of the Reformation declared that his own response was scholarly gives an excuse for his behavior at 128 10

These are time stamps claim that we reject variants when we don't Doesn't understand the theology of Karl Barth as it pertains to lower criticism

Claimed that the view of the Reformers and post -reformers was incoherent claims Dane's faith in the

Holy Scriptures So hokey and so empty calls the view a tradition But denies anyone anybody ever believed it and accused him of lying based on his testimony in an article posted by pulpit and PEM the beginning of the argument while antagonistic and completely devoid of integrity and historical understanding the

Reformation period doctrine of scripture was Fairly even keeled and offered various critiques, which

I will interact with at some time in the future However, as the program continued the critique devolved into a bona fide temper tantrum that rivaled that of my two -year -old daughter in an instant

White's critiques transformed from absurd to childish including the utilization of a gay voice to mock pastor

Dane Johansson after proclaiming that voices and faces should not be used from responding to people The only word that I have to describe what occurred is unraveled while white's behavior was completely and utterly shocking

There is a severe error in his approach of attacking the Reformation era text that completely undermines undermines the authority of scripture as a whole

Wow, am I a bad person and Wow anybody who watched it has seen they're going

What? Taylor This was the most face planning

Lee bad thing I've ever seen. This is the you want a temper tantrum. This is it here. I Invite anyone

I linked to this. I went on Facebook and I said folks. Here's the time.

Here's time stamp You watch it You listen to in fact go back to where I started and Listen to the whole thing and then read this

This is a we cannot refute you. So we are going to completely straw man you

Taylor DeSoto Congratulations, sir. You win You win this you just straw manned it like like a pro like a pro

Because I can trust that any person with integrity and this has no integrity at all

That will actually listen to what I said from start to finish Will go dude.

What are you hiding from? That this is this is all absurd every single thing

That you talked about here. So for example, I already did this. This is why I spent so much time on the very first one

Apologist James White not only declared that the received text of the Reformation was a fake text.

This is what I was talking about I pulled it off the shelf and In talking about the fact that there are no notes

In passing having explained this over and over again and Taylor knows this he knows it because we talked about it over Mexican food

He knows this so there's there's no excuse. This is just he's holding the

Texas Receptus now That's gonna get memed You Know this

It was dishonest and lacking integrity on your part When I said fake text, you knew exactly what

I was talking about and had nothing to do with the Reformation era text Taylor because that's the result of Scrivener and Scrivener died at the end of the 19th century is the

Reformation still going on Taylor? I mean,

I'm like Why are you teeing this up? Why are you handing here handing me a bat?

There's no defense of this none What I said was truthful the context

I said it and was truthful you ignored the context in which I said it you made an inaccurate connection to the

Reformation text and Reformation era text when it's from the 19th century You ignored the truthfulness of what

I said even about the fact that it's a fake text It is a Greek text based upon English text based upon Greek text.

That's a reality. That's a fact Why misrepresent? Because he can't deal with what

I had already said. That's why so I Thought about taking the time to go back over each one of these with the timestamps because it's it's easy to do and Say let's look at the actual context

Unfortunately, I've got to get out to the East Valley today and I just It would take us another 45 minutes just to play all that stuff and go through it.

But let me just deal with the with with the fundamental issues here,

I Said he said said that adhering Should be to the

Reformation era text is an abandonment of the Reformation. What did I actually say anyone remember? What I actually said is that adhering to Traditionalism as they are promoting is an abandonment of the

Reformation emphasis upon Advantis to the source

Examination of any tradition It is an abandonment because it is saying we're going to establish this text as our authority and We are not going to apply to it the same standards we apply to anything else

I was making an argument and you ignored the argument and when someone

Puts together a paragraph like this. I know that that they know in their heart that they cannot answer this and they could not answer it standing in front of me and Therefore, this is a defense mechanism.

This is a covering mechanism This is a I don't want

Even for myself or the people following me to really think about what he's saying. So I'm gonna throw this emotional

Hand grenade out there and hope that it covers all this over and creates a prejudice

So that people will not listen to what the real facts are Because my analysis of the pulpit and pen article was perfectly fair was it pointed of course it is

I mean you guys are the ones who in essence are saying that all of us are

Misleading people that we have That we're non -confessional

That we are undercutting. I mean he says right here Undercutting confidence in Word of God and I'm saying you're the ones that are misrepresenting

What confessionalism would actually mean you're dragging the framers into account into a debate that they shouldn't be dragged into and Fundamentally you are crippling any meaningful defense of The New Testament in our day by saying we need to go back to a day

We only had about functionally 50 manuscripts instead of five thousand eight hundred eighteen plus all the other language manuscripts

So I can defend that without having to do this I did not have to I could simply sit there and read

The pulpit and pen article I didn't have to do this thing Where you've got where you the very first saying that received text of the

Reformation was a fakes text This isn't the received text of the Reformation. I don't have to I don't have to do this kind of misrepresentation straw manning

So what does that tell you? It says a lot I think to people who are concerned about the truth so my argument was that this form of traditionalism is does involve a mindset that Beza wouldn't have understood the

Calvin would have understood and So yeah, it is inconsistent. No question about it

Gives an excuse for his behavior at 128 10. What was that? I hold Christians to a higher standard than I hold non -christians to that's not an excuse.

That's a statement and You may not like being pointedly challenged because your your position cannot survive it

I get that and If you're absolutely Beyond correction, sir

Then you will just have to go deeper and deeper into self -deception into this kind of behavior Um, but I'm not apologizing for that you claim to be an elder in Christ Church, I am holding you to that standard

It's all there is to it You can you can respond by saying that's like my two -year -old daughter

Well, that's nice, but no one's gonna believe you. I Don't believe you no one who watched this program believes you

So, why'd you say it? Because you had an emotional you're the one having the emotional tantrum.

That's what this whole thing is The run -on sentences and everything else is all meant to create this idea that Someone watching the program wouldn't come up with Declared that his own response was scholarly.

I didn't even look that up I probably mentioned scholarly works on a subject to say X Y or Z. I guess you're not supposed to believe that Claim that we reject variants when we don't

I'm specifically at that point referring to The article that My recollection is and I'd have to dig through Enough screenshots that I do not have time to do so right now.

I thought it was Robert true love Who posted a Facebook article about?

Eight months or so ago Sounds about right time wise who basically said

Look, I suggest to everyone who is helping trying to help people to understand

The Confessional text position That you don't get bogged down in arguing about individual texts and That was what

I experienced that and in the very first time I encountered this type of perspective when

I started debating Doug Wilson and We did that Disputatio in antithesis magazine

This would have been back when Taylor was about nine And Yeah, I meant that specifically.

I'm sorry you you're talking about stuff that you don't know a lot about You've only held this position for like what a year

But you're quite adamant about it aren't you that's that new convert syndrome But Doug Wilson I brought up Luke 222 off top my head and He was like, well, let's let's let's let's not get bogged down in details because it's the details

That actually produce a text Details come together to produce a text because a text is made up of a lot of details

But if I got the text you don't want to think about the details Because you're not creating a text you already have a text and you're just doing whatever you have to do to defend it

Which is why? for this detail you'll come up with this set of arguments and this detail a different set of arguments and this detail a different set of arguments so All your arguments over here are completely different They're contradictory to one another

That's why I'll say it again These folks cannot produce a text. They do not have a textual critical methodology

They have a theology that defends an already existing text, but this isn't textual criticism It doesn't produce a text

So Doug Wilson wouldn't get into it because Luke 222 Demonstrates the incoherence of the arguments he was making same thing here

So when I say Claimed that we reject variants when we don't I don't

I didn't look up what I said But I know what I was talking about at that point And that was this idea that we're not gonna worry about that stuff

We we need to talk about the presuppositional nature of our argumentation

Except when the facts demonstrate that our presuppositions are in error. That's the point Doesn't understand the theology of Karl Barth as it pertains to lower criticism if I had bothered to attempt to explain to people

Karl Barth's theology on that program Then that might be a relevant statement.

You and I both know I didn't I Did a master's degree and graduated magna cum laude from Fuller Theological Seminary when

Karl Barth was almost a minor deity there Even though he was being presented very positively me to to me

I was never foolish enough to believe what Karl Barth said But I did not present what

Karl Barth has to say about anything in that presentation so How about we hold him backwards so you can you got that side now?

There's that one that will do this side and this side for all of the straw men that are being

Presented but at least I can always say when I was presented with Karl Barth I always had the common sense to recognize that doesn't make any sense

Um Claimed that the view of the reformers and post reformers was incoherent

No, I'm sure what I said was that the representation that you traditionalists are making of them is

Incoherent because they didn't act the way that you act So when

I read Erasmus, I Don't hear you But you claim that he produced

What we should see as the final authority even though most of the time

Erasmus was like Here's one reading. There's other reading you decide

You don't do that So it's incoherent To take your modern

Representation and read it back But it's This side of the straw man now

To say that I was saying that the reformers and post reformers the view whatever view that is

Was incoherent Calls Dane's faith in the holy scriptures so hokey and so empty man.

I mean, I am so tempted to pull that up. I Would assume once again that we were talking here about this idea that you can

Have a text that has no history You can have a text that was produced by people that were concerned about history

But then disassociate from history, so it's no longer that's hokey and that's empty

Because once you disconnect the text from those who produced it It's it's no different than when

Adnan Rashid in London In one and when we're going back and forth on the

New Testament the Quran Said hey, as long as we can get back to Uthman good enough for me and all the

Muslims are like Same attitude the exact same attitude It's not a truthful attitude

Al Mohler is posting lots of pictures from Churches in England because he's running around London right now

He loves the churches He's just so bugged by the fact that the people that own them and preach in them are raving heretic liberals

Calls the view a tradition, but denies anybody ever believed it now. That was a really good one It is it it is you are creating a tradition trying to create a tradition

But what I'm saying is that the people who created the text don't believe what you believe again categories obvious categories if you can't differentiate between Saying That the that Erasmus believed

X about sexual criticism and Almost 500 years later

Don't let me 500 years later as least as far as the first edition goes 500 years later You've come up with this other stuff, but you don't accept that anymore those are two different time periods and Logical thought rational thought recognizes you can make a statement about what was thought here.

It is different, but what's not here. Yeah, so yeah, that's Do do do do and But denies anybody really and accused him of lying

I don't remember what that was about based on his testimony an article posted by pulp impact. So and then

Down below the gay voice thing. You know what that was. I was talking about the fact that there there is a

Motivation that people have That if they if they don't want to deal with the realities of history if they don't want to have the the notes that the

King James translators provided or the New King James translators provide or That are in all the modern translations or at the bottom of the page of the

Nessie Alan text or whatever They don't want to deal with the history of the text. They just want a black and white text then they'll go

This makes me feel good. This is my text and that's the gay voice

That was supposed to be a gay voice. It's actually supposed to be a childish voice Because it's it's for people who don't want to do the hard work of dealing with the scriptures as they existed in history

It wasn't a gay voice. I said nothing about it again See what are we left with here?

Okay, we've done this side that so okay now we're going this with this only one one left And you have the complete Entire straw man.

We're gonna need to get some extra straw man for Taylor because he's Yeah, the lighters not the light because after you get to the last part

I've got a I've got to light him up Yeah, there you go, yeah, okay

Uh, so there you go, um That was that was how

I started and that was the article that people so I had someone come up to me after church a good brother come up to me and show me that this article is being shared in the

Reformed area But the Bonson group on Facebook and people saying well if that's true, he's gone off the rail

And it was not true at all Not true at all. I Don't know why anybody would do this and provide links to times other than well, maybe people won't look it up.

I don't know But I would be more than happy. All I ask you is to do one thing actually start from the beginning

Actually start from the beginning and realize that we have done hours on this program on this subject.

I Are out of time. Yes, sir This There is so much among these groups where I think they draw conclusions not reading you not listening to you but Listening and reading each other.

I Made a comment yesterday and I know more heads will explode across the Twitter verse

About people are wondering why the rich cam isn't on. Oh here There there you go, all right there there we are

The the article that Doug Wilson about racism. Yeah put up No, how do you how do you interact with that?

No, no, no, no rich This is too easy red documented it from his own Understand not only there people who believe that it would be a compromise of their faith to actually listen to what

I said Mm -hmm, but there are more people who believe that it would be a sin to read what

Doug Wilson said Yeah, well, there's that too. So Anyone can then characterize it any way they want and if you dare say did you read it?

That's like saying did you sin? Yeah, so and you're not they're not gonna send so they can pull their pious robes around them

I'm not going to it's like you're asking him to read porn But the problem is if you actually let the man speak for himself or let you speak for yourself or me speak for Myself and give my own defense.

That's not going to promote the narrative. It's The the probably

I think the you know it from our perspective There is great merit to the by the mouth of two or three witnesses

Matter here and not the rumor mill or the bickermongers. Well or all of the other people out there that want to sit around Staring at their navels and Making stuff up.

I can tell you one thing Greg Bonson would not have appreciated the the attitude of many

No, there look there are people. I don't know much about the Bonson group. I just got added to it I respond to one thing.

I haven't seen anything else from it. There are other people defending me now I'm sure there's great folks, but The fact the matter is

I think Bonson would have found the attitude of most most of social media

Reprehensible reprehensible because obviously he died before social media and So anyway

Okay with that, like I said, well we are Intending to be here on Thursday as well

And I'm sure there will be other things to be talking about at that particular point in time. Kofi just says

DA Waite preached this past Sunday Wow So if he was born in 32

Okay. Yeah, so he'd be I think it's he'd be the same age as my dad baby 87

So Yeah God bless him. God bless him.

I mean I obviously you go listen to my debate with DA Waite I think DA Waite Completely wrong on that stuff, but God bless him.

God bless the man So anyway, all right, we will thank you for listening to the program today

Lord with you Lord willing We'll be with you in two days on Thursday See you then