Centurion's Son

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James White director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James White.

Responding to the Centurion’s Son Argument

And welcome to the dividing line on a Tuesday afternoon unusual time, but that's because we have some special stuff to address today. There are some arguments that you wish you never had to actually respond to because they are just so bad so poor so dishonest so far removed from the realm of possibility that to even have to waste one's time is a Disappointment and it's a it's a frustration.

Over the past couple of months as we have needed to respond to the flood of pro homosexual perversion of scripture misrepresentation of history biblical languages, etc, etc one of the arguments that I have not dealt with because it is just so bad and So far removed from anything that's even possible.

I've decided today that we need to deal with it. We need to deal with it not because it's become any better but because when it's posted on the Huffington Post that means there could be people who are repeating it and When the argument appeals to authority improperly then we need to try to provide some information and help once again to Encourage believers to be prepared to give an answer for the hope that is within them.

I refer to an article by J. Michelson Author of God versus gay the religious case for equality and It is titled when Jesus healed a same-sex partner. In essence what you have is I'm not gonna read the whole thing, but here's here's the essence of it.

But some people argue what about the fact that the only sanctioned relationship the Bible is between a man and a woman. Well, in fact, that's not quite the case. The story of the faithful centurion told in Matthew 8 5 through 13 and Luke 7 1 through 10 is About a Roman centurion who comes to Jesus and begs that Jesus heal his pice a word sometimes translated as servant.

Jesus agrees and says he will come to the centurions home. The centurion says he does not deserve to have Jesus under his roof and he has faith that if Jesus even utters a word of Healing the healing would be accomplished.

Jesus praises the faith the centurion and the pice is healed. This tale illustrates the power importance of faith and how anyone can possess it. The centurion is not a Jew. Yet he has faith in Jesus and is rewarded.

But pice does not mean servant. It means lover. This is I'm reading directly from the article in this in Thucydides in Plutarch in countless in countless Greek sources and according to leading Greek scholar Kenneth Dover Pice refers to the junior partner in a same-sex relationship.

Now this is not exactly marriage of equals an arrest as Pice relationship generally consisted of some a somewhat older man usually a soldier between the ages of 18 and 30 and a younger adolescent usually between the ages of 13 and 18.

We call that pedophilia today. Anyway, sometimes that adolescent was a slave as seems to be the case here. It would be inappropriate in my view to use the word gay to describe such relationship. The word and its many connotations comes from our time not out of ancient Greece and Rome.

This is not a relationship that any LGBT activists would want to promote today. Well, isn't that odd that The LGBT folks would find it to be immoral. But somehow Jesus didn't. Well, this is the argumentation that is being put forward.

It is I've seen it on numerous websites, but the fact that it appeared on the Huffington Post I felt that it would be good for a few moments to demonstrate Without any question that this argumentation is without a doubt one of the most bogus dishonest untrue Argumentations that could ever be presented by those who are attempting to pervert the Bible.

It is far easier for me to respect someone like Dan Savage who simply says the Bible is bleep. That is the people who try to twist and pervert the Bible into something that it never could possibly be but it makes more sense if You're already twisting and perverting your own sexuality if you're already twisting and perverting your own gender.

Then it makes sense that you would be twisting and perverting Your Teachings on the Bible your use of scholarship, whatever else it might be now notice that mr. Michelson specifically says Pais does not mean servant.

It means lover. Now most people today have access to Biblical programs on their computers. I Highly recommend for those who like I use a Mac the Accordance Bible software and Of course having taught Greek many times in the past most people know who have had even a few well a few weeks of Greek is that This is a basic word.

It's used 24 times in The New Testament it is used only in Matthew Luke and Acts and It means child slash servant child slash servant. Now Thucydides and Plato and others are hundreds of years prior to the New Testament and the argumentation presented that I just read to you partakes of an Incredibly amateurish basic level error in regards to Semantic domain and vocabulary studies, especially as they apply to the New Testament the primary source of Vocabulary background and lexical information from the New Testament is not Thucydides it would be the Greek septuagint first and foremost the Greatest influence upon New Testament Greek as it is used in the New Testament itself is That of the Greek septuagint.

There's no question about that. There are so many times where you have terms that That literally do not appear anywhere other than the Greek septuagint that come into the text of the New Testament. We can simply look At let's start with something rather rather basic.

And that is let's let's look at the lexicons. Shall we? The low Anita lexicon based upon semantic domains. Now by the way Pice Pice is an interesting word because it can be used as either a masculine or a feminine to refer to either a boy or a Girl a son or a daughter.

So if you use it with a masculine article, then you're referring to a little boy and feminine to a girl so Pice Pidas a Young person normally below the age of puberty and without distinction as to sex.

The term Pice may occur with either masculine or feminine articles of corresponding adjectival attributes. These gender distinctions indicate where the person referred to is male or female. With the masculine article or attributives one may translate Pice as boy and similarly with female attribute Attributes one may translate Pice as girl.

So there there's there's what you have they don't even give here The meaning of servant, but let's let's go to a little bit more full lexical source and that is the the current standard lexical source of Bauer Dunker aren't in Gingrich third edition Pice Pidas either ha or hey a young person normally below the age of puberty with focus on age rather than social status.

A boy or a youth number two. One's own immediate offspring. Child as son or daughter of a son. Ha Pice of a daughter. Hey Pice number three. One who is committed in total obedience to another slave or servant of slaves and personal attendants.

Slave or Servant of special relationships. Humans as God's servants or slaves. Angels as servants of God. And Is there anything else below that that's the last of the major definitions that are provided by the primary Greek lexicon of the period of the Greek New Testament and immediately thereafter now.

Why don't they have why don't they substantiate this assertion, but Pice does not mean servant. It means lover. Why didn't why didn't lovers show up here? Well partly because we're actually dealing with how the word was used At the time of the writing of the New Testament not how it might have been used half a millennium earlier anyone and I mean anyone who has graduate training in the language and has any sense of lexical semantics whatsoever would never ever Ever ever be able to defend.

I'm not saying they wouldn't say it because there's people will say all sorts of stupid things. But I can guarantee you J. Michelson. I can guarantee you that Kenneth Dover Could never defend. Those assertions they'll make them you can find anybody with a degree after their name to say anything vast difference Between getting them to say something and getting them to be able to defend This type of thing, okay.

So the reason that we do not find these sources Substantiating this is because there is no evidence that in the New Testament. This term is used in that way and let's look at some of the New Testament usage to demonstrate that this is the case.

As I said the term is used 24 times it's found only in Matthew in Luke and in Acts, I'm sorry. I will take that back. There is a brief reference in John 4 51 as well as He was now going down his slaves met him saying that his son was living.

Which interestingly enough we'll come back to in just a moment. Because that is one of the texts that actually puts the death knell in this particular one. But we'll get to that one in in just a moment.

But let's let's take this assertion. Because the assertion was not in any way given a context there wasn't. It could mean this and maybe there were some times in the past what it meant this none of them.

They're actually saying Pais does not mean servant. It means lover. So, let's apply this to New Testament usage. So when when Herod saw this is Matthew 2 16 the even tricked by the Magi he became enraged and Sent and slew all the male lovers who were in Bethlehem and all in the vicinity.

Is that what he did. No, he slew the male children. Two years old and under so that must have been the two years old and under lovers, right? Because that's what it's the term Pais Piedas. So if you're gonna if you're gonna make the assertion This is what the term means didn't say is what the term means in this particular text because then you'd have to demonstrate from that particular text That Pais is being used in a way that's used nowhere else in the New Testament.

So we're just demonstrating the abject absurdity. Abject absurdity of This kind of assertion. We know that it's found in in Matthew chapter 8 because that's the section we're gonna be looking at we'll we'll come back to that one in just a moment, but Interestingly enough in Matthew chapter 12 verse 18 we have a citation of the Greek septuagint and It's being used of Jesus's relationship to God behold my servant whom I have chosen My Pais.

So are you actually going to suggest and I hate to have to say this but There are actually people so perverted in their thinking that they actually have suggested that this shows inter-trinitarian Homosexuality that has been suggested by people who are a part of the homosexual studies section of the Society for biblical literature.

I will sit back for a moment while you Express your utter amazement at such blasphemy, but there is no limit to how far people will go. Behold my servant whom I have chosen my beloved in whom my soul is well Pleased I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall proclaim justice as the Gentiles there.

You have it being used in the gospel of Matthew, and it's hop I smooth Verse Matthew 14 to and said to his Servants twice. Pison out to this is John the Baptist. Was this to his lovers. Of course not.

In Luke 154 He has given help to Israel his servant. Piedas out to. This have something to do with lover is God. Though is Israel the lover. Of course not so we've seen there's just so many so many texts.

We see immediately that anyone who simply makes the statement That Pais means lover it does not mean servant is Lying. There's no other way to put it. This is indefensible it is Completely beyond the bounds of anyone who is a serious scholar.

No serious scholar could ever ever defend this assertion. So we see that the assertion made at the Huffington Post is a lie. It's not overly surprising that because it's at the Huffington Post, but it's a lie.

Now let's continue though in the refutation of the argument and Try to improve the argument and still demonstrate that this story this this argument that Jesus knew that this was a same-sex relationship and that he is approving of it is Absolutely positively completely Without Foundation it is a perversion and twisting the text and no honest person no honest person Could ever present it none can't be done.

Let's look at the text. Matthew chapter 8 verse 5. And when Jesus entered Capernaum a centurion came to him imploring him and saying Lord my Pais is Lying paralyzed at home fearfully tormented. Jesus said to him.

I will come and heal him. But the centurion said Lord. I am NOT worthy of you to come under my roof. But just say the word and my servant will be healed. For I also a man under authority with soldiers under me.

And I say to this one go and he goes and another come and he comes and to my slave do this and he does it. Now when Jesus heard this he marveled and said to those who are following Truly I say to you.

I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. I say to you that many will come from east and west and recline the table with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth and Jesus said the centurion go it shall be done for you as you have believed and the servant was healed that very moment.

And Luke adds at the end of his discussion he says When those who had been sent returned to the house they found the slave in good health because what you have in Luke is a little bit different and this is something we've discussed in our synoptic gospel studies and His centurion slave who was highly regarded by him was sick and about to die when he heard about Jesus.

He sent some Jewish elders asking him to come and save the life of his slave when they came to Jesus. They earnestly implored him saying he is worthy for you to grant this to him for he loves our nation it was he who built us our synagogue and so at that point you have an illustration of Basically representation when someone represents someone else that's the same as if they themselves had come to Jesus, etc Etc.

So Luke gives a little bit more of the detail. But what isn't mentioned by most folks is John also tells this story now some some scholars have identified This is a different story, but I don't think there's any reason to think that it is in John chapter 4.

In John chapter 4 not one of the synoptic Gospels, but in John chapter 4 verse 46. Therefore he came again to Canaan of Galilee where he had made the water wine and there was a royal official whose son was sick.

When he heard that Jesus had come out of Judea into Galilee He went to him was imploring him to come down heal his son for he was at the point of death. So Jesus said to him unless you people see signs and wonders You simply will not believe the royal official said to him sir Come down before my child dies.

Jesus said to him go your son lives. The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and started off and as he was now going down His slaves met him saying that his son Was living now if this is the same story Then it's the death knell in.

Well, I guess I won't even say it's the death knell because You have to make an argument before you can put the death knell to it. Okay, and there is nothing absolutely positively nothing in Matthew or Luke's Rendition of this story that even begins to touch upon the issue of homosexuality homosexual rape pederasty or Anything even close to it the term Pius used in a new testament means child or servant.

That's that's what it means in every usage if you're going to say that at one place at one place It means something else then the weight is upon your shoulders to demonstrate from the context that your unique understanding of the of the use of that term is Exactly what is indicated by the grammar syntax and context of the text itself it you can't merely assert it.

You have to prove it. That's what meaningful scholarship does. That's what people who actually translate the Bible have to be able to do and There is no possible way to substantiate that assertion in either Matthew or Luke's versions.

Can't be done. If John is telling the same story then notice something in Verse 46 47 there it is in verse 47. It says out to tan we on. We on is the standard term for son. Male offspring. Okay. Heal his son then in verse 50.

What do you have ha we asked sue Zay? Jesus said go. Your son lives. Right, okay, so you've got your son lives. The man started off as he was going down however verse 51. His slaves met him saying what?

Ha Pais out Tuesday. So the slaves use ha Pais. Which means what for John ha Pais and ha we us are being used interchangeably in this text nothing about lover and Fact in this context I think about servant.

This is his son so if John for is the same story and I checked the synopsis quattro you on gallium earlier today, and it does put John as John for as the parallel to Matthew 8 and Luke 7. At least in the printed Greek version that I had then if it is then.

That's that's the end of that right there, okay? Even if it is not when we go back to Matthew 8 and to Luke chapter 7 We find nothing. So that would substantiate the assertion made in the Huffington Post article.

Nothing to substantiate the assertion commonly made by pro-homosexuals who are attempting to pervert the teaching of Scripture. We find every reason on the planet to not believe that why? Because the context look at Luke chapter 7 who is it that comes to Jesus?

It's the Jewish elders and Folks you need to understand something there is not a scintilla of evidence to be found Anywhere in ancient history of any Jewish person for hundreds of years before or after the time of Jesus.

Promoting the idea that homosexuality was not anything other than one of the gravest sins against God the idea that Jewish elders would come to Jesus asking him to heal a Love slave of a Roman centurion is so absurd that we should not have to be addressing this.

But the reason we have to address this is because of the level of absurdity to which the dialogue has come so you're sitting on a you're sitting on a plane and Let's say you you commit the the terrible sin of having your Bible open.

Maybe you got on early you want to read something. I've had this happen of course normally. It's my iPad or something like that now, but you've got a Bible sitting there and Someone sits down and the conversation very quickly turns.

Well, you're not one of those folks that thinks that homosexuality is wrong, and they'll do that. I mean you know that's They're there have become so incredibly offensive in Pressing this this perversion calling.

What is good evil and evil good? That that can happen and so someone presents this to you well, how can you say that in? Light of Jesus having healed a same-sex partner. What are you gonna say? You don't have you know how much time you have as much time as I've taken we're we're about 23 minutes after the opening here, so I've taken some time.

You know I could probably have time to go into all the background and you probably don't have Bauer Donker aren't and Gingrich on your In your Bible, I've certainly got on my iPad and my phone. But what are you gonna do?

Well, here's what I would suggest to you very briefly, and then we're gonna take a quick break and then Talk about some other things shift gears a little bit. What I would say is well, you know I've I've heard people make that argument.

But the reason that Christians have never ever understood that text that way is because it's simply impossible on any honest level To interpret hop ice in that way. There is no other place in all the scriptures in the 24 places where it's used that you could ever understand it to mean that Jesus is called the Pice of God every lexicon says child or servant the parallel text in John chapter 4 identifies it as son and The idea that the Jewish elders in Luke chapter 7 would be bringing to Jesus a request to heal the homosexual lover of a Roman centurion is Beyond the level of laughable.

So the question I would have for you is upon what basis do you make this assertion and Who are you trusting to give you this kind of information that Would lead to all sorts of possibilities of being able to demonstrate the fact that the Jewish people Understood what the you could go into the Old Testament law at that point Jesus is teaching about the Old Testament law that opens the possibility to go into Matthew chapter 19 and The positive presentation of Jesus teaching about what marriage is and male and female and so on so forth.

But you need to be prepared. We look my parents. You know, I don't know if my my dad's listening to this but I would imagine he was absolutely shocked. When I presented this I would imagine that people back then.

Back then sorry dad, but people back in the olden days. This isn't this isn't the kind of thing that was discussed. This isn't the kind of argument that was presented. The people of the preceding generations did not have to be prepared for this kind of argumentation.

You do. If you're listening to this you want to be a Christian who who is salt and light in this society if you want to be part of the breaks sometimes what God calls us to be is to be the breaks and what I mean by that is.

We are called to be faithful to present the gospel and God uses us as the brakes to slow down. The headlong rush into cultural collapse and If that's all we get to do. Well, if that's what God calls us to do, that's what we need to do.

We do it to his honor and glory. That means we need to be prepared and sometimes it means to be prepared to respond to some really really really bad arguments. Now the person presenting the argument to you is probably as ignorant as the day is long.

That their argument is completely fallacious. And I'll tell you what I struggle with. I struggle with respecting someone who uses argumentation like this. Because I expect if you're gonna make a statement like was made in this article, but Pais does not mean servant.

Yes, it does. It means lover. No, it doesn't I Expect you to have actually maybe you know done some work know what you're talking about. But the vast majority of people to with whom you're gonna speak and with whom I'm gonna speak don't know.

They read it online. The internet can be a great thing, but unfortunately in this situation. What the internet does is it makes us all that much more shallow. Because of the kinds of arguments that are allowed to be presented without any kind of examination so There's the argument it's one of the earth's worst arguments out there, but it's getting very popular.

You need to be prepared to respond to it and I hope that is useful to you so with that we're going to take a break and I just happened believe it or not happened to notice something while doing that I was multitasking and I want to talk about one other thing we get back and then we're gonna completely shift gears and We're gonna talk a little bit about what happened.

I forgot to grab this. Oh, well, I'll just have to describe it. I really wanted to play part of this. I'm really bummed. But we come back I'll tell you the incredible encounter between Robert Spencer and Adnan Rashid on the unbelievable radio broadcast.

We're gonna talk a little about that. We'll write back crimes the criminal mishandling of God's Word. Maybe James White's most provocative book yet.

White sets out to examine numerous crimes being committed in pulpits throughout our land every week as he seeks to leave no stone unturned. Based firmly upon the bedrock of Scripture one crime after another is laid bare for all to see.

The pulpit is to be a place where God speaks from his word. What has happened to this sacred duty in our day? The charges are as follows prostitution using the gospel for financial gain pandering to pluralism cowardice under fire felonious is a Jesus entertainment without a license and Cross-dressing ignoring God's ordinance regarding the roles of men and women is a public crime occurring in your town.

Get pulpit crimes in the bookstore at a omen org.

Breaking news from the White House and the issue gay marriage for a lot of people. You know the word marriage was something that evokes very powerful traditions religious beliefs. I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.

The NAACP has passed a resolution Endorsing gay marriage as a civil right. This comes two weeks after the president announced his support for same-sex marriage.

Under the guise of tolerance our culture today grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality. Anyone opposing or questioning this today is quickly shouted down called a bigot a homophobe a hatemonger Threatened and accused of discrimination.

It's become commonplace to see people who take a biblical stand against homosexuality Ostracized to the point of losing their job. How soon will it be before we will also see people losing their freedom.

Now more than ever Christians need to be equipped to be An approved workman of God correctly dividing the word of truth as we are told in 2nd Timothy 2 15. Dr James White and pastor Jeffrey Neal have partnered to bring you their book the same-sex controversy if you are Christian.

This book is just one of the tools you'll need to be prepared to give a proper defense of the faith in the face of Righteous onslaught we face today. The authors right for all who want to better understand the Bible's teaching on this subject Explaining and defending the foundational biblical passages that deal with homosexuality Including Genesis Leviticus and Romans in a straightforward and loving manner.

They appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and return to God's plan for his people. The same-sex controversy Defending and clarifying the Bible's message about homosexuality. Get your copy today from the bookstore at a omen Org and don't forget to search for other resources like debates and past dividing lines dealing with this very provocative issue and remember theology matters.

Chick-fil-A, Academic Ideology, and the Mark Regnerus Study

And welcome back to the dividing line. While doing that last segment I I couldn't help but notice I Mean this. I this is just so disgusting to me. Davidson College in North Carolina has become one of the first colleges in the country to give Chick-fil-a the boot.

I knew that this would start happening. Because these folks cannot allow for anyone to hold a different view in their own. They are pro Homosexual activists are the least inclusive most exclusive least tolerant most intolerant people I have ever encountered in our society.

Just just watch the wild-eyed insanity of the people. Who go after Doug Wilson. These young zealots were oh, they not a logical thought to be found amongst any of them. But they'll sit there and yell.

You're so intolerant. Shut up. Yes, go oh you needed spankings when you were younger. You really did and and a job and maybe getting an allowance and taking the garbage out. It's something. It's just it's just amazing.

Many colleges seen students protest against check for Chick-fil-a restaurants located on campus. But Davidson doesn't actually have one at their school. Chick-fil-a food was ordered and served regularly and after midnight events along with other fast food options.

Talk about empty, but That is just the kind of thing you expect. From people who talk about this by the way I I didn't mention this in that previous portion and one of the reasons I didn't interact with you holding your lexicon up is I was videotaping that I'm gonna be posting this on on YouTube and I wanted to post that response and Responding to you would have been a little bit odd in that but I I followed some of the links in that article and The again the the dishonesty of the material.

At one point they have dr. Robert Gagnon noted evangelical scholar and leading anti-gay apologist on the meaning of Pice dr. Gagnon says. Where they put the citation. Yes, boy Pice could be used of any junior partner in a homosexual relationship even one who is full-grown.

The problem is he's not talking about in the New Testament it's so easy to isolate things and and Cram them into your into your arguments, isn't it? Oh, it's just oh. This is from the gay Christian 101 .com website, which is I'm going to close all of them here.

Just and then clean out my cash. One other thing to say before we switch over there is at chronicle .com an interesting story and you need to understand this an academic auto defe a Sociologist whose data find fault with same-sex relationships is savaged by the progressive Orthodox.

This is a story of sociologist Mark Regnerus and This has been going on for a while. He dared to do a study that suggested that children are not aided by having same-sex parents. Folks you need to understand something.

Academia is only relevant as far as it's truthful. Academia is only relevant as far as it's truthful. And when academia is taken over by Ideologues as it has been in Western culture It's no longer relevant.

When you can't study other viewpoints when you can't present counter arguments. That's not academia anymore. We all see that when it comes to Intelligent design. I mean the most basic person on the planet recognizes the difference between Scattered parts on a table and a functioning iPad.

But you can't suggest that in much of academia today that you know what? I have a feeling there's some design here between the parts and what's functioning. Yeah think. But you can't oh, no, that's that's the perfect way to make sure your career is over and now in sociology psychiatry.

Psychology if you dare to say, you know, it seems that kids do better with a mommy and a daddy. You're out. You've violated the dogma the de fide dogma of our society that which is Evil is now good and that which Was good now evil.

That's what's going on in the world today. All right put the clutch in and let's shift over. I Some of you saw the Twitter conversation I had with Justin Brierley on Friday. Justin let everybody know that the program he was about to post was going to be somewhat on the Especially from the British side it was gonna be somewhat on the Angry side of the spectrum or something and Now I know Justin I may get to be on unbelievable again when I get to go over there next month.

We're gonna I'll try to find the time to sneak over there and and He's not very far from the mi5 building actually last time I went there I walked right past it and I sort of felt like they were watching me all the way and I snuck a picture of it.

And and and stuff like that, but there's lots of pictures of the building on line. But anyway. So, I you know, I know I've I've been in studio with Adnan Rashid, I think twice at least once. In fact, let me let me see here because he posted these Murder murder murder murder murder murder murder.

Uh, where did that one go? Yeah, he posted the one that I did with Adnan and I I think Yeah, the 6th of March 2010. Which is more trustworthy the Bible or Quran Christian James White debates Muslim Adnan Rashid.

So maybe only once I guess the other time that I was on with the Muslim was with Abdullah all under Lucy. Yeah, that makes sense. Anyway, I've been on unbelievable and I've been on with With Adnan so I know something.

I know what it looks like in this studio. It's sort of fun to be. You know picturing what what this is all about Adnan's in studio with Justin. But Robert Spencer, of course is on the phone. I say, of course because He lives under constant death threat.

When you run the jihad watch website, you're gonna be under a lot of a lot of pressure along those lines so he was on on the line and Justin said this one really got nasty. Well, I even remember saying some long lines of my response was you mean more nasty than the program?

I did on the King James because I did a King James program. But the guy was on with was was very very laid-back. So as I was being sarcastic, which I can be at times too much to the chagrin was Some people who don't feel like you should have a sense of humor should ever be sarcastic about anything.

But anyway so He said yeah, it really was and I said, oh, you know, what time's it gonna be posted? And it was gonna be posted like six o 'clock in the morning. I'm like, man I'd love to listen to that while I'm on my ride on Saturday morning.

So he sent me a private message where he gave me the link so that I could listen to it while I was riding on Saturday morning, which I did and I'm gonna tell you though. This was the wildest Program. I've heard some there's been some other times where some guests have become Shall we say a little bit less than British?

In their in their conversations on on unbelievable, but this was pretty wild. The this is pretty well, I I tried to track down the link. Is that is that well, I Can't find it there. I Thought I would be able to just pull it out of my iTunes here on this.

But what I didn't realize is I deleted all my subscriptions Out of the iTunes on this unit because this isn't the unit I use regularly and I was gonna play some sections for you. But if you haven't if you don't subscribe to unbelievable you should anyways.

So just just go to premiere radio dot org UK or just put in Justin Briarley Unbelievable and it'll come up. I Would highly recommend Just for entertainment value for nothing else. That you take the time to listen to the encounter.

Here's come of my thoughts. I've now listened to Robert Spencer debate two sets of Mormons and Mormons. Yeah, and the Mormons were really confused because they didn't know why they were there two sets of Muslims on the existence of Muhammad and I'm gonna tell you something the first two were were Salafi guys and Just that was on a BN and it was an embarrassing face plant.

I'm gonna tell you something right now and the MDI guys are probably listening or will listen to the podcast. Guys I could do a thousand times better than any Muslim. I've heard so far defending the existence of Muhammad.

I really could I really could. Adnan did not Challenge Robert Spencer on the real weaknesses of Robert Spencer's theory. He didn't. I disagree with Robert Spencer now the books well worth reading because it does show you Where the Muslims should be?

Concentrating their attention in in providing some meaningful Apologetic and seemingly aren't willing to do so but I Was just shocked now. I know Adnan. Okay, I'm hoping that Adnan and I are gonna get to debate in Dublin next month.

I hope that's gonna happen. I was certainly invited to do that and You all remember just a few weeks ago I played his debate with Jay Smith and the stuff that he said about the New Testament and corruption and and textual criticisms.