WWUTT 2550 Q&A Questionable Teachers, Christians at the Movies, The Shroud of Turin

Psalm 141 and the Call to Holiness

What teachers should we associate on what biblical grounds and whom should we avoid? Is it okay for Christians to go to the theater? And how do we respond to scientific evidence regarding the Shroud of Turin?

The answer is when we understand the text.

This is When We Understand The Text, a daily Bible commentary in the word of God, that we may be conformed to the image of Christ. Tell all your friends about our ministry at www .wutt .com. Here once again is Pastor Gabe.

Thank you, Becky.

You're welcome. Psalm 141 we begin with here. O Lord, I call upon you, hasten to me. Give ear to my voice when I call to you. Let my prayer be counted as incense before you, and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.

Set a guard, O Lord, over my mouth. Keep watch over the door of my lips. Do not let my heart incline to any evil, to busy myself with wicked deeds, in company with men who work iniquity, and let me not eat of their delicacies.

Let a righteous man strike me. It is a kindness. Let him rebuke me. It is oil for my head. Let my head not refuse it. Yet my prayer is continually against their evil deeds. My eyes are toward you, O God, my Lord.

In you I seek refuge. Leave me not defenseless. Great word from Psalm 141. Amen. Reminders to be holy, to speak words that are pleasing unto the Lord, to keep company with righteous men and not fools, and to receive correction from righteous men when we so need it.

Yeah. Welcome to the Friday edition of When We Understand the Text. We take questions from the listeners and you can send those questions to whenweunderstandthetext at gmail .com or go to www .tt .com and click on the voicemail tab and you can record us in voicemail.

I don't have any voicemails this week. Aw. So these are all emails and they're very random. Okay. I mean, sometimes All over the place. Yeah. Yeah. Sometimes we're able to follow like general subjects, but no, this time it's just a grab bag.

All right. It's a grab bag of questions today. So let's go to this first one. This actually has to do with the end of year countdown that I did going through like all the big stories of the year. And this is from Jackson.

He says, regarding Wes Hough, I agree that it was fun in 2025 seeing the opportunities he had to be on Joe Rogan and on other top ranked podcasts. So if you remember, Wes Hough is that apologist from Toronto, Canada.

Okay. He started 2025 on the Joe Rogan podcast, seen millions and millions of times, gave some great apologetic arguments, a three hour episode, giving great arguments in defense of the truth of scripture, shared the gospel with Rogan, or at least put it on Rogan, like how, what is your response to this going to be?

Okay. You know, and that's, when it comes to sharing the gospel, sometimes we don't include that part. Yeah. Like we might just share information with somebody, but putting on them to have to respond.

Yeah.

Like you have to take action here. Like what is your choice? Right.

In light of the truth of this that I've, that I've presented to you, what do you think? Yeah. What's your response to it going to be? So it was neat that Wes, like remembered to, but after a three hour conversation, he put that on him at the end.

So what's your response to this going to be Joe? Which is great. That is. That's fabulous. Yeah. So, and then Wes appeared on many other podcasts, huge podcast during the year. There was probably not another apologist that was seen more times than Wes Hough in 25.

But anyway, Jackson goes on here to say he was sharing the gospel with unbelievers, defending the veracity of the Bible. Like you, I had heard Hough on the cultish podcast before his ascent to apologetics fame.

But at the start of 2026, I have some questions. Wes has posted pictures, giving praise to Sam Albury, Kirk Cameron, and Gavin Ortland. He was just recently interviewed on Gavin Ortland's podcast. Is this something that we should be concerned about?

Is it a lapse of judgment on Hough's part? Maybe he doesn't know the problems with these teachers. I'm more than willing to hear everything is fine and there's nothing to worry about. And I've just become overly sensitive listening to too many witch hunt discernment bloggers.

Thank you so much for your ministry, Jackson. Well, I appreciate the question, Jackson. Now, in case anybody is unfamiliar with these names, because names don't automatically...

Yeah, I don't retain names very well.

Don't just automatically pop in your head, I know, it's like, okay, yeah, I know who that is. You're welcome to catch me up on those. That's right. So, Sam Albury works for the Gospel Coalition. I mean, he's a minister in other capacities.

I think actually at the same church that Gavin Ortland's at, if I remember right. Okay. I think Sam Albury is there. Anyway, he's from England, from the UK rather, I should say, and he's known, or let me put it this way, he's infamously known for Side B Christianity.

So Side B is the idea that we can affirm somebody in their homosexuality as long as we tell them that you should be abstinent, you need to remain chaste, and you can't have boyfriends or girlfriends of the same sex, you can't get married, because that's contrary to what God's word says.

So essentially, it's giving permission to somebody to have lustful desires for somebody of the same sex, as long as you don't play them out. So that's kind of Side B Christianity. Preston Sprinkle is another one of those guys that advances this.

The Crew Ministry has been on the side of Side B Christianity. Rebecca McLaughlin, I guess is her name. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's Rebecca. It's either Rebecca or Rachel, and I'm pretty sure it's Rebecca McLaughlin.

Anyway, also works for the Gospel Coalition. She's married and has children, and has said that she still struggles, so to speak, with thoughts of being in a relationship with another woman. So she also advocates for and gives permission to Side B Christianity.

So Sam Alberry is another one that is on that side of things. He's somebody that has experienced, as he said, same sex tendencies. He's been involved in the past with the ministry. I think this ministry shut down.

It may be that this doesn't exist anymore. Hang on. Let me double check and bring it up. But there's a ministry called Living Out. Nope, it still exists. Living Out was another one of those Side B Christianity sorts of things.

So trying to help somebody live out their homosexuality in a faithful way, however you can. I know. Becky's giving me a look. I'm trying the best I can to explain this stuff. Yep. That's fine. As much as I disagree with it.

In a non-faithful way. Right. Exactly. Okay. Let me click on their About Us here. Anyway, I don't think Alberry is connected with this anymore. Yeah. As I go through the names of the people that are on this site, oh, there he is.

Yeah. Founders. There at the beginning and still supporting us, Sam Alberry. Sam works as a pastor and apologist and is the author of various books, including Is God Anti-Gay? And then a link to Sam's story.

So Sam is one of the founders of Living Out. And though he's not with the organization anymore, it says on their website, he still supports us. So he still has a connection with this site. And I mean, some of the things I could say about this are, it would be a whole other rabbit trail.

But anyway, hopefully I've given you enough information that you get what the problem is, what the concerns are with Sam Alberry. Yeah. Okay. Encouraging somebody to maintain their same-sex attraction, as they would call it, is wicked.

It's not following what's said in Colossians 3 .5, put to death what is earthly in you. And those things that it said to put to death are sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.

And you'll know all of those things have to do with the heart. They all have to do with what the heart desires and what the heart wants. Sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness.

None of those things are what you do outwardly. Like they start with the heart, and then you play that out outwardly. Those things that are mentioned there. I mean, sexual immorality, of course, is something that is of the heart first, and then becomes something that you do with your body.

But grouped together with the rest of that. It still starts in the heart. Yeah. It's talking about what you're thinking about, what your thoughts are, where your mind goes, what your heart desires, and what it wants.

And so before Paul even gets to other sins, he starts with those confronting the lusts and the greed and the covetousness of the heart before what you're doing outwardly from your heart. So the Side B Christianity basically encourages people.

It's not even really Christianity, but that's the name they give to it. But the Side B perspective or approach. They are encouraging people that you can still be, you can still have sexually immoral thoughts.

You can still be you. Yeah. Right. Yeah. That would probably be the way to put it. You don't have to give up who you are. This is who you are. Right. It'd probably even go as far as say, this is who God made you to be.

It's one thing for me to describe this, but if you actually listen to the way that their teachers taught, you would be even more convinced that's like, oh, this is bad. This is clearly not the way that we should encourage people to deal with their sin.

Like you don't tell an adulterer. It's fine that you still have lustful thoughts for your neighbor's wife. That's okay. Just as long as you don't play them out. Nobody approaches any other sin that way.

It's okay that you want to murder somebody.

Yeah. That's what I was going to. Next was, I mean, Jesus even says, if you call your brother a name, then. Yeah. If you call him a fool.

Yeah. You're guilty of the fires of hell. Right. Which is if you have murdered him in your heart. Right. And it's the same thing. Yeah. And you notice that these folks don't do this with racism. Right.

They don't say that it's okay that you really, really hate somebody because of the color of their skin. Just as long as you don't go lynch them, then that's okay. Oh, my goodness. That's so true. You would never hear this kind of reasoning with any other wickedness.

Yeah. You're just born that way. Yeah. Right. Exactly. Yeah. Absolutely not. You're just born to hate somebody of another skin color. You can't do anything about that. No. Then you don't really believe that God can transform the heart and make you into a new person.

Exactly. Have you been regenerated by the Holy Spirit or not? Are you able to put to death what is earthly in you, which the Spirit gives us the power to do? So anyway, we've kind of gone on a tangent.

Yeah, we have. Okay. So back to the list. Yeah. Back to the The other people I don't know. Exactly. So that was just kind of to elaborate on what the problems are with Sam Albury. But honestly, you know, even my struggle to try to articulate without any notes in front of me here to articulate the problems with Albury, I still have to like dig back into the recesses of my mind of stuff that's happened five, six, seven, eight years ago with Albury, and then bring that out.

Okay. Here's why Albury is a concern. This is why it would be concerning to see another brother in the Lord partnering with Sam Albury, and it would make you go, okay, why is that partnership happening?

Yeah. So then the other couple of names that are on there, Kirk Cameron. So Kirk Cameron, it was, and this was another story that Oh, I know that name. Yeah. Okay. That one you know.

Yeah. That one I know. This is I'm a little more familiar with that name. This is 80s trivia now. Yes. So yeah. That's exactly why. For some reason, 80s trivia just kind of sticks for the most part.

Yeah.

But yeah. I lived through more 80s than you did, but that's your bread and butter. You love 80s. That was her firm cultural soil there, was being born in the 80s. Anyway. So Cameron obviously made news at the end of 25, although this was only a month ago, when he said that he no longer believed that hell was eternal conscious torment.

That hell is instead annihilation. Oh, okay. A person may go to a place where they suffer for a little while, but eventually what's going to happen to them is God is just going to They just no longer exist.

Exactly. He will obliterate the soul and they won't exist anymore. Annihilationism is what that's called.

Okay. So Well, I mean, that makes me feel better, but at the same time, that's not exactly what the Bible says. Right. Yeah.

I know. And that's one of the arguments that's often made against annihilationism. It's comfortable for you. Yeah. Makes you feel better about the fact that somebody doesn't have to burn for all eternity.

Right. But of course, when we reach glory

But I'm not sure I want their soul annihilated either, but at that point, I mean, when you're in hell, it's already been determined.

Judgment has come. Yeah. Judgment has come upon that person. As we read about in Luke chapter 16, Abraham saying to the rich man, there's a chasm that's been fixed between you and us. You can't come over here and we can't go over there.

Right. Yeah. I mean, and clearly with that story that Jesus shares in Luke 16, with that account, there's conscious torment that takes place in a fiery place. Yes. So Cameron, though, is saying that all of that is just kind of metaphorical and figurative, but that's not really going to be the condition for a person for all eternity.

So he's given up that view of hell. Interesting. And he believes instead in annihilationism. And apparently there was a conversation between him and several other theologians about this, a roundtable discussion.

I don't think it's been released online yet. Okay. But I'm interested in it.

It's just kind of... It might make 2026 end of review.

It'll be the 2026 list. End of year review. It's kind of frustrating, though, when this guy just changed his mind. Yeah. And we just found out that this is where Cameron sits on this subject. And suddenly, a matter of weeks later, not even a full month later, but just weeks...

He peddled stalled on it. Yeah, right. Just weeks later, suddenly he's seated in a roundtable discussion about this. Because that's exactly where my mind went. Like, why is he being...

Why do we do this? That question. Yeah. And looked at as like an expert in this, and he's only just made it anyway. Yeah.

Suddenly just came to this understanding, just announced it, and now he's in a...

And it might be like a fluke kind of thing, where you're like, oh, one day, like, I think this. But he's such a prominent figure that anything he says is going to be taken seriously. Of course. And then he's like...

The next day, he wakes up and he's like, well, that didn't make sense, but he can't back out right now.

Now, unfortunately, even among reformed and heavily evangelical circles, and when I say heavily evangelical, I'm talking about those that actually go out with the gospel and share the gospel with others.

Cameron has a lot of clout because of the partnership that he had with Ray Comfort. And they did Way of the Master together. And how many times those videos got seen of Comfort and Cameron going out and sharing the gospel on the boardwalk and out in public and asking people about the law and convicting their hearts and bringing them to an understanding of the Savior, understanding of their sin, and then pointing to the Savior.

So because of that ministry and how many times those videos have been seen, Cameron has been viewed as a solid evangelical brother. And I mean, if we were just leaving him in the category of he's an actor, then stuff like this probably wouldn't shake us all that much to be like, okay, well, I mean, actors just...

Yeah. We don't really see them as paragons of sound doctrine. They change their minds all the time. Yeah, right. Wherever the wind blows sometimes with an actor, even when they're Christian, not to say they're unchristian.

And again, as I said, when reporting on this with Cameron, this isn't something for which I'm going to declare Cameron a heretic, but it is heterodox in the sense that it's outside of general orthodoxy that we understand to be the plain meaning of scripture and also what the church has taught for 2000 years of church history.

So anyway, Cameron has obviously made a lot of news regarding this. It's a fresh thing though. And like I said, not something for which we would declare him a heretic. I'm fairly certain Wes Hough did do a video responding to that news and saying something like that.

He said something similar to that. I can't say for sure that's the case, but it seems like in all the different videos that I watched the people responding to Cameron's news, I want to say Hough was in there too.

And it said, you know, it is concerning, but it's not heresy. And so he's responding to those who are ready to like write off Cameron is no longer a Christian because he's changed his view on hell. So that one of the three names that are mentioned there really Cameron's the least concerning one.

Right. What about Gavin Ortlin? Yeah. I don't know that name. Okay. Gavin Ortlin. Gavin Ortlin is the host. It sounds familiar, but. Well, you probably know his father, Ray Ortlin. Oh, that's it. Yeah.

Okay. Okay. That's why it sounded familiar. So Ray Ortlin is one of the contributors to the English Standard Version Study Bible. Okay. I believe that he was on the translation committee as well. So he's had a lot of work with the English Standard Version.

Okay. And I know for sure that he contributed notes because when you read the ESV Study Bible and you look at the contributors in the front, Ray Ortlin's name is in there. So a couple of those books, the study notes were Ortlin's.

Okay. He also has a son. Well, Gavin Ortlin is one of his boys. And then he also has Dane Ortlin. Okay. Okay. He has Dane Ortlin. Dane Ortlin is another one of his sons. I was following. Okay. And he wrote the book Gentle and Lowly.

Okay. That sounds familiar. And that's been a really popular book in a lot of evangelical circles over the last several years. But the Ortlins socially and politically are generally seen as being liberal.

During the presidential run in 2024, leading up to the election in November, he had put his voice behind Kamala Harris. Said that he was voting for her and that other believers should vote for her and was just absolutely against Trump.

Now, Gavin Ortlin, who also is not for Trump, and I've been very critical of Trump as well, let's be honest. But Ortlin, who also is not a big fan of Trump, I don't think ever made any sort of public statement regarding we should vote for Kamala Harris.

But he has some politics and worldviews that are seen as being leftist. For example, his views on global warming or climate change. So he's very much on what you would consider to be the Democrat perspective of climate change.

He has taken a position that the global flood in Genesis was not actually global, but it was localized. Okay. He's taken the position that you do not have to believe that Adam and Eve were a real couple that lived 6 ,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden.

It could be hundreds of thousands of years ago. He is kind of Darwinian in his view of the creation of the world and that things are actually millions and millions and millions of years old. And God has just used Darwinian processes to get us to where we are.

So some of these things that he's expressed with regards to some of those doctrinal things as well. And he'll try to base it in church history. Like he'll say that Augustine was on his side of these kinds of things, and he wasn't.

I did another podcast episode on this years ago, three or four years ago, like playing Gavin Ortlin's comments and reading Augustine and saying, Augustine's not saying what Gavin's saying that Augustine's saying.

So anyway, but because of these things, the Ortlins are largely seen to be a little bit on the liberal side. Now, having said that, that's just regards to some of those social issues, some of those creation issues that exist in Genesis 1 through 11.

Ortlin doesn't exactly have William Lane Craig's view of Genesis 1 through 11 as mytho-history, but he will defend William Lane Craig's position in believing that about Genesis. As in like, it's a myth?

No, so mytho-history meaning that the way that it's written is almost parabolic in a certain sense. So like in the Garden of Eden, Satan being described as a serpent, it wasn't really a talking serpent.

And there may not have even really been an actual fruit, because William Lane Craig has made fun of this. Like you mean you actually believe that there was a talking snake and that there was a fruit in the garden that they weren't supposed to eat and they ate the fruit and all of mankind fell?

Yes, actually, that is exactly what I believe. You believe that the earth was created in six literal days? Yes, because when you read Genesis 1 exactly as it's written, you can't come to any other conclusion about that.

You have to read another view of that into the text to get something out of that. And Lane Craig will make fun of people who believe that. It's not just a matter of a difference of opinion. Oh, wow. Like he will go out there on like making you feel bad because you believe that.

Goodness. About Genesis 1 through 11. Okay. Ortlin is not quite that extreme, but he will argue against a person who takes a literal view of Genesis 1 through 11, and meanwhile defend a person like William Lane Craig, who though he's bashing somebody who takes the literal view, doesn't seem to want to try to unite the viewpoints or even call down Craig for being so extreme on how he'll call people out on that.

So anyway, so Ortlin has some concerning areas. But let me say this in defense of Ortlin. The videos that he's done going through church history, especially when he responds to claims of Roman Catholicism, Roman Catholic dogma, when he talks about the authenticity of Protestantism and how what we believe actually follows a continuous strain throughout church history all the way down to the apostles in the first century.

Those videos that Ortlin has done are fantastic. Oh, wow. And I don't know that there's anybody else on YouTube making those kinds of videos where they're tying everything into church history as well as Ortlin does.

And when you're watching those videos, you would probably have no idea that he sits where he does on some of the socially liberal takes that he has. Like you find those things out by stuff that he said on X or Twitter, and I don't even think he's on X or Twitter anymore for that reason.

Yeah, probably. Because he would tend to get called out on this stuff. So it's like, if I just stay in the YouTube world, this stuff is not as easy to search and find and I get called out on these kinds of things.

And again, Ortlin does have some solid stuff out there. And there are things that Ortlin has done that I really do appreciate. And sometimes he'll come up with a new video that I'll mark and think, I got to watch that.

I got to see it. Now, saying that about Ortlin, I wouldn't platform him. Right. I can appreciate some of those things that he's done, especially on church history. I mean, there's all kinds of people that I listen to that aren't Christians regarding to different historical things or theological things.

And I'm just able to put them through my reform filter and know that's not exactly the way that we're supposed to understand that or something to that degree. And Ortlin would even claim to be on the reform side.

He's a Calvinist, attends a reform church. He's Baptist. So Credo Baptist, which I think is contrary to his dad, who's Anglican. So is Pato Baptist. Yes. So they aren't quite exactly the same when you when you look at all the Ortlins.

Anyway, so Gavin, Gavin has had some solid things in there, but I'm really careful with how I would present Gavin. I wouldn't I wouldn't platform him and give a full recommendation of him because of some of those cautionary areas that he's taught on regarding what scripture says.

So so that being said, of these three names that are given, Sam Albury is by far the most concerning. Cameron. Yeah, but not not a whole lot. And same with same with Ortlin. So I don't see Wes's partnership with any of these three, really, as being something that we go, oh, OK, well, we should have been a little bit more cautious about Wes Huff.

We should have let him kind of find his feet and see what his associations were before we were ready to platform. And no, I don't have that attitude about this at all. Huff may not be aware of any of this stuff regarding Sam Albury.

Yeah, because even this exposure of of living out, I mean, there was there was months of research that went into that when Nine Marks was partnering with Living Out and stuff like that. So calling this out so that Nine Marks wouldn't partner with them anymore.

And then when it came to when it came to light that Living Out was not as legitimate a Christian organization as they were coming across, the RLC was partnering with them, Nine Marks was partnering with them.

And suddenly now seeing now pulling back the curtain, even those organizations pulled away from Living Out. The RLC, I don't know, they may still be doing stuff with them, but that's the RLC. So that was that was a lot of legwork to do that and to kind of expose that.

And even Sam Albury, you know, as as I noted from the Living Out website, doesn't have full involvement with that organization anymore, although it seems like the website is still including Albury as one of their founding members and somebody who still gives us a good plug every once in a while.

So that's one of those where you just kind of hope that other people will see it and understand the dangers that are there. But that's that's not something that immediately we see somebody with Sam Albury and then go why is why is he associating with that guy?

I understand the caution flag, but I also understand why somebody wouldn't know. Yeah, it's not like the Gospel Coalition ran articles on this. These were these were people in our own kind of private blogs and sectors that were exposing this kind of stuff regarding Albury.

It was never hitting any major publication. So most people just probably don't know. And being somebody, you know, Wes Huff has written for the Gospel Coalition, which is such a grab bag. I understand the problem with TGC and I don't endorse them anymore.

We don't attend TGC conferences or anything like that. Right. But but with, you know, they'll they'll they'll still have some articles on there that'll be good. They'll have some articles that are bad.

But like I said, it's it can be such a grab bag of stuff on their website. Yeah. Different articles about different subjects just kind of depends on what they're talking about. So I hope that kind of gives you a little bit of of closure, I suppose, Jackson, with regards to Huff's association with any of these little more information.

Sure. Yeah. You know, Gavin Ortlin can still be a solid apologist, even though we don't agree with some of the places that he goes with his theology. But at the same time, as I understand it, Huff is very kind of open about the old age creationism.

He doesn't take a hard line view either of young earth creationism. He's he's of a position on the creation of the world that I really don't know if he's old earth or young earth. OK, so, yeah, he might end up being an old earth guy, too.

I don't think that will tell. Exactly. Yeah. I don't think that discredits his ministry outright, but it's not like he's going to get invited to an answers in Genesis conference or anything like that.

Right. So just maybe some yellow flags instead of orange or red.

Well, I don't I don't know that I would.

We'll see where this goes kind of thing. It's going to continue on this path and trajectory. Or is he going to like just sort of here, there and wherever he goes?

I'm not even convinced that it's a trajectory. So it's just one of those things where you see a picture of him with somebody and you're going, eh, wish it wasn't with him. Yeah. Wish he was platforming more solid people.

But it's not like I'm looking at that going, well, this is a mark on his ministry or this is a stain or something like that. Now, I've I've advocated for a long time about how we need to be more brotherly than we are.

And there there's certain. Oh, yeah, for sure. There's certain teachers that I just won't platform. It doesn't mean that I think that they're unbelievers or they're heretics or even heterodox. There's just some problems with their theology that are enough that I wouldn't want to cause anybody to stumble.

So I don't give them a platform. However, I'm not going to jump on the podcast and they go, hey, they're false teachers, ignore them, stay away from them and then do like, you know, hour long episodes on why they're dangerous.

Yeah. And there's several teachers I do that with. There have been others that have emailed me and said, have you seen what this teacher did? This is concerning or something like that. And I may not make I may not even read it.

I may not even make a big deal out of it, but it's enough information for me to go, OK, well, I recognize now that I can't recommend that teacher anymore. I cannot, in good judgment, recommend that teacher.

So I'm just not going to mention them anymore. Right. And and that's that's kind of the way that I approach that. So those that are really dangerous, yeah, I'll warn you about them. Those that are wonderful, I'll give them full promotion.

And then some others that have some concerning areas, I just may not talk about them at all. But but that doesn't mean that I don't think they're brothers, nor does it mean that I think that they're sound teachers.

Right. You know, anyway. Yeah, I don't know. I just I think the whole world online is is a can become very dramatic.

Very. Oh, heaven's sake. That's an understatement of the year. It can become dramatic and very quickly, if it's not dramatic, it doesn't exist. That's that's kind of the the world of. Yes. Of of online relationships and associations.

Yeah. Yeah, a lot of people post just what they post because they're they're trying to get the clicks. Yeah. And that's I had a conversation about their private conversation with a friend just a few days ago about one particular teacher that has gained all kinds of attention because of the radical things that he says.

And I said in a private conversation, I really don't know if he really believes the stuff that he's saying or he just knows it's going to trigger people. Yeah. And so that's why he says it, because it gets clicks and he's getting revenue from it.

Yeah. YouTube and X and all those other kinds of places. So, yeah, we we are not permitted to behave in that way, though, as Christians. Very true. We've been told to speak the truth in love. So if we're doing things to set people off and trigger them, that's that's quarrelsome.

Yeah. And this divisive. Exactly. It's quarrelsome and divisive. And this is First Timothy six tells us that such a person who has strayed from the gospel of Jesus Christ and the sound teaching of our Lord Christ, that accords with godliness is puffed up and he's puffed up with conceit and understands nothing.

He has an unhealthy craving for controversy. Yeah. And that's exactly what such people are doing. That will say this stuff online to trigger people so that they can they can activate the outrage machine and profit from it.

Right. By, you know, whatever reaction is generated from that. This is the person that this is exactly the person Paul warns against in First Timothy six, who thinks of godliness as a means of gain. Oh, yeah.

So he's using godliness in order to gain financially. And this it's in this context that Paul says the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. So it's because this person loves money and the attention that they get from it that they become triggering like this and benefit reap the rewards, so to speak.

All right. Anyway, let's let's move on from there. OK, I said this was going to be a whole grab bag of stuff. We spent a half an hour on that one. Well, there were a lot of people. Yeah, there was some good things to talk about there.

All right. This is from Terrence. Pastor Gabe, I heard you say that some people have accused your voice of being a I artificial intelligence. Right. OK, I just wanted to let you know that I took the transcripts of several of several of your episodes of what and several of your what videos and ran them through an A .I. test.

And the results came back that your podcast is not a I. And it's official. None of your scripts are a I generated and your voice appears to be genuinely authentic. I just thought you would like to know the results.

That's awesome. I'm glad because I would be very awkward that I've been married to you for so long. And you're like, if you were a I, that would be just.