Revealed Apologetics Meets the Wise Disciple

Welcome back to another episode of Revealed Apologetics. I'm your host, Eli Ayala, and today I am very excited for my guest, Nate Sala of the Wise Disciple. Now, I just want to start off, if you don't know about the Wise Disciple YouTube channel, you need to go right now, you click off this video, open up another window, look up Wise Disciple and subscribe to the Wise Disciple YouTube channel.

There are some excellent resources, teachings on evangelism, there's a lot of apologetics content there, and Nate, which he's gonna explain his background a little bit, but just if I can give you kind of a little teaser, he is a former debate teacher, and so he does these really cool debate analysis on apologetic debates between Christians and atheists, Christians and Christians, and he definitely brings an interesting take to the table and allows us to kind of, rather it teaches us as to what to look for in a good debate so that we can use some of those skills in our interaction.

Of course, sharing our faith on the street is not the same as a formal debate, but there's definitely something to be learned by asking good questions, being able to analyze someone's comments and things like that.

So his content is super, super helpful. So I highly recommend, if you have not yet subscribed to the Wise Disciple YouTube channel, go there now and then come back because we're gonna be covering a lot of stuff.

Super excited. Now, by way of future interviews, I have just confirmed, although the date has not been confirmed, I'll be having Pastor Jeff Durbin on to talk about presuppositional apologetics, abortion, and actually the relation between what we think in terms of the ethical realm and our worldview commitments.

So it's gonna tie all those things in an interesting way altogether for what I think is going to be an excellent conversation with Jeff Durbin. Also, I'm gonna be having Dr. Jeffrey Johnson on. If you don't know who Dr. Jeffrey Johnson is, he is the author of "'The Failure of Natural Theology,' a Critical Appraisal of the Philosophical Theology of Thomas Aquinas.".

And he's the author of the book, "'Saving Natural Theology' from Thomas Aquinas.". There's a theme there. And he's also the author of the book, "'Absurdity of Unbelief.'". And so he definitely takes the apologetic approach along the lines of a presuppositional approach.

So wherever you stand on the natural theology discussion, it's gonna be very interesting to kind of talk to him about those related issues and how to place that within the context of the whole apologetic methodological discussion.

So very much looking forward to having Jeffrey Johnson on. Well, without further ado, let me introduce my guest in the flesh, sort of, kind of. Nate, how are you doing? Welcome to Reveal the Politics.

Happy New Year, Eli.

Happy New Year. I caught you in the middle of drinking from that super fancy penguin cup. That was nice. That's right, that's right. This was a gift from one of my students. There we go. Yeah. Okay, very good.

Don't ask me what the liquid is inside there.

I won't ask you what the liquid is, but I know that the bird is wearing the same pair of glasses you're wearing. Is that intentional? I think maybe it was. That's cool. Well, why don't you tell folks a little bit more about yourself and maybe you can kind of reiterate where they can find your stuff and maybe there's resources you have that I didn't mention.

Maybe you can share that with folks right now.

Wise Disciple, First Aid Evangelism, and the Problem of Christian Communication

Sure, thanks for having me on. So my name is Nate. I'm the president of an organization. We're a 501c3. We've been around for about, well, we've been incorporated for probably four going on five years, but we've been around for almost nine and we're called Wise Disciple and I got a small team that handles like website stuff.

Wisedeciple .org is the website. We have a store with clothing, which is still strange for me to say that.

And there's an audio I see a T-shirt with your face on it. Is that How's this? Yeah, so that one, that one.

Is it? But really at base, we're just about trying to get Christians to be more communicative, more effective in the way that they communicate their Christian convictions, the gospel, all of that stuff, because we're surveying the landscape, Eli, and it just is a dumpster fire.

Like the way that we talk to people, the way that the culture is right now with tribalism and all that stuff, like I'm really am, I'm sensitive to the notion that Christianity has to challenge the status quo.

And right now the status quo in our culture is anger, fighting, clashing and stuff like that. So how can we navigate our Christian convictions but do so in a way that upholds relationship, that leads to discipleship, the fulfillment of the Great Commission and all that stuff.

So that's what we're focused on there. I have a YouTube channel that I started. Well, actually we started the channel, Eli, this is so embarrassing, I think maybe four years ago, five years ago or whatever it was.

And we just started trickling out videos. We had no idea what we're doing. And only just in the last year, I told my team and my board, hey, what if we like really put effort into thinking about videos and all that stuff?

And so here we are now, I had a thought one day like, how can I get more people aware of us? And it was just like this strange what if thing where it was like, what if, because I'm a former debate teacher, what if I sort of squashed formal debate rules and adjudication on top of informal apologetics debates and debate teacher reacts was born.

That's awesome.

And again, I'm sorry, all of your other videos are super interesting, but my favorite is, when I get the notification, like, oh, Nate's doing a video and then it's like, oh, it's a debate teachers react, like I have to park the car, make sure I find it and put it on.

It is my favorite part of your channel, but it's funny, as you just said, it was never your intention for it to be like a thing. I think that's hilarious. Right, right.

And that's how life is, right? It was a gimmick. That's right. And now it's the most popular thing.

Yeah, well, it's excellent. Folks, again, if you haven't listened to his debate reactions, and he's shared with me before, he listens to these things kind of like on the spot, he listens and he reacts and gives his analysis and you get a nice fresh take on really important and insightful observations.

I love how when you were reviewing the Mike Winger and Matt Dillahunty debate and you did the Drax laugh, I thought that was hilarious from the Guardians of the Galaxy. Right. I died, but it's good. I think it's helpful because a lot of people can be intimidated by folks like Matt Dillahunty.

And it's really cool to see someone who knows debate and is able to kind of like spot what would otherwise intimidate someone and keep them quiet. Like, I don't know how to respond to that. You can kind of identify really the emptiness in a lot of the argument or lack of argumentation.

So I think it's super helpful in that regard.

Boy, I mean, you say that and I see that logically, but deep down, I'm like, really? Like people are intimidated by Matt Dillahunty? I mean, I don't want to, what are we in two minutes in? I don't want to bash him, but there's nothing there.

There's no there there, you know, it's

It's rhetoric, right? He's able to talk his way and give you kind of jabs here and there. That for a lot of people, it seems effective at least on a surface level. But yeah, it's great to see someone be able to say, wait a minute, there's really nothing to that.

Let's talk about that. So, and that's, I think it's very helpful. Now I do have a question and I want to get back to the debate stuff because it's super fascinating. But you said that the focus of your ministry was to be more communicative and that when you survey the landscape, it seems like it's a dumpster fire in terms of how Christians communicate.

Are you suggesting it's a dumpster fire from the arena of like popular Christianity, like well-known public figures who are out there talking, or are you saying it's a dumpster fire in terms of how Christians communicate within like the popular realm, like face-to-face or on the internet?

Can you differentiate that? I think that's an interesting observation. And then maybe we can talk about how we can fix that. Yeah, more so the latter.

Because I strongly believe, just my observation, you know, surveying the landscape, like I said, we have adopted way too much of the culture. The culture has crept into the church. I don't know when it happened, you know, March 9, what year that happened, but it happened and here we are.

Like we look so much like the world. It really is, to me, sometimes sickening. And so if, for example, politics is the du jour, right? The thing that we are constantly consumed with, or I should say the world is constantly consumed with, well, then guess what?

So are a lot of us in the church. It just seems like whatever is coming is trickling in from the culture and affecting us. And so if people are very tribal in the way that they communicate, so here's the greatest example.

And so whenever I go around and I give talks on, so my methodology is called first aid evangelism. And whenever I do that, I always like bring up this particular illustration or this particular scenario because it's true across the board.

You're on social media. You say something on social media to your friends. They're supposed to be your friends. And it's from your Christian convictions. And all of a sudden you get attacked by like nine people.

One of them you know, eight of them you don't know. And they just come in and they start attacking what you said and you're like, oh my gosh, what's going on? Like there's no manners. There's no love.

And ultimately I think that's what this betrays, Eli, is that we've just forgotten how to be in relationship with each other. So I would say the latter.

And I think Dr. James White had mentioned this a while back. And we'll talk a little bit about Dr. White as I just learned that you just watched the James White and William Lane Craig interaction, which I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts and I'm sure folks would be interested as well coming from a debate teacher's perspective.

But Dr. White often says this in reference to how technology has made it easy for us to quickly respond which means we're not thinking very deeply about what someone puts out there. We're just kind of reacting.

Is that kind of along the lines of what you're getting at in terms of how the online interaction is going?

Yeah, you know, it's not one thing. It's like, so I'm from Vegas, right? So it's like a perfect cocktail of multiple things but definitely the ability to be able to provide your hot take, you know, that is key.

Another one that goes into this is the fact that we've become over time. And now I'm not even talking about the church. Now I'm just talking about people in general like humanity writ large, we've become illiterate.

We've become people who no longer reflect. Like we no longer sit down and try to read to better ourselves. There are outliers, right? There's you, there's, you know, there's others, right? But it seems like the vast majority of us really are super interested in what this is happening.

Like what's going on in the glowing rectangle and that's it. And that feeds into all of what I'm saying.

So, okay, how do we fix it? And I wanna, we'll segue into some other areas that I wanna talk to you about, but what is your suggestion? How can we engage in that kind of, I mean, cause this is the way we communicate whether we like it or not.

I mean, that's just the way it is. I don't think there's any turning back unless, you know, satellites go down and we're going back to kind of the stone age. How can we be better at communicating at a level that shows we're giving thought, but we're also wanting to be relevant and speaking to issues as they come?

How do we balance that? How do we walk in and navigate that?

Asking Better Questions in Evangelism and Apologetics

So there is a way to do all of this kind of in one foul swoop. And again, you know, sort of going back to our signature methodology of communicating, it really does boil down to, at the end of the day, putting the focus on other people.

The thing about social media especially is that it is a curated museum of you. You know, so it's like every photo that you took 9 ,000 of and you choose the one, it's a collection of all of those things, the best curated self, and you put it out there.

You are your own apologist essentially. And if you flip that paradigm upside down and you, I'm not advocating that we get off social media, you know, but if we flip that around and put the focus on other people and we start asking people genuine questions about their lives, it's harder on social media than in person, but it can be done.

Then what happens is people start talking about themselves. So one of the things that you realize, especially if you look at some of the surveys out there, is that people love to talk about themselves.

It's like the number one American pastime. Football has been replaced. Now it's talking about ourselves. It's the number one American pastime. And so all we have to do is just start asking people about themselves as if we were on a first date with somebody and ask them about themselves.

Then what's gonna happen is over time when they get more comfortable and start trusting us because it appears that we care about them, because we should, this should not be manipulative. Sure. They'll start to open up about what they believe because guess what, everybody's spiritual.

And so when somebody starts saying and speaking freely about what they believe, guess what happens next? All these claims, these metaphysical claims, these religious claims, they start spilling out of people.

And that's where we can, I think I described this as gentle cross-exam. That's where we can start to do a gentle cross-exam still with the notion of maintaining relationship and continuing to build it, where we start to challenge the claims that we're hearing as Christians, knowing that the exclusivity of Christianity is true.

So that's how, and what you do is, so I've seen this happen with some people that we've interacted with is they'll start using their social media platform, especially as ways to just put questions out for people.

And what you find is when you consistently do this, people start answering because they want to answer, especially if they're spiritual questions. What do you think happens after we die? Is probably, you'll get probably the greatest number of answers from a large selection of different kinds of people because everybody has an opinion about that.

Right. So. Yeah, that's funny. I remember a long time ago when I was just starting to do apologetics like online, like in Facebook, I would pose a question. I remember it was, what was the question? It was a basic question.

How does one get saved? And I just left it there. It was just a question. How does one get saved? It was a question. And there were a lot of comments. Some were not even Christian. One person just put yoga.

Yoga. That was it. Along, you had the traditional Christian answers. Then I was like, what do you mean yoga? And then they kind of just unpacked their Eastern perspective. Right. I mean, people have a lot to say, like you said, that people are spiritual.

God created us to have those sorts of inclinations. So that's interesting. So I never, I watched a lot of your videos, but I don't think I've watched the first date evangelism. So now I kind of get it.

When you go on a date, you ask someone about themselves. And I think that's excellent. And a lot of these excellent pieces of advice are common sense too. Which They are. Yeah.

So, all right. Super cool. I think that's super interesting. Were you going to say something? You wanted to I was going to say, these are not new things, you know? And there's a much longer story here, but the way I came to first date evangelism is basically it's a combination of my debate training or teaching debate to students.

And it's also looking at Jesus in the gospels. So this is old stuff. I didn't invent this. This is not new at all. And there's all kinds of different ways to do this. I just, with, so I lead the college ministry at my local church in Las Vegas.

And we just did this with them. It was a year ago or something. Marvel Avengers came out, or no, it was a couple years ago. Endgame came out, right? And so I just, we took our college kids and we said, hey, here's your homework assignment.

You're going to ask your friends one question and then you're just going to listen. Okay, and here was the question. Was Thanos right? You know? Because Thanos is making a lot of decisions based on worldview, right?

Based on presuppositions that he already has. And so we sent them out there like that. And it led actually to gospel conversations, if you can believe that. So it was great.

Very easy. Very good, very good. Now, okay, so evangelism obviously is very much connected to apologetics. I mean, it's very rare that you're just going to lay out the gospel and then baptize someone in the puddle in the parking lot.

There are going to be questions, there are going to be pushback. How do you approach the whole issue of apologetics? People who watch my show, they know that I'm very presuppositional in my perspective, but we have a wide variety of perspectives and a wide variety of ways to employ our apologetic equipment.

What route do you take when you sense that there is a transition being made from evangelization to now I'm in apologetics mode? So you need one foot in the apologetics arena and one foot in the evangelism arena.

How do you navigate that with an individual that maybe you're talking with face-to-face?

From Evangelism to Apologetics: Gentle Cross-Examination and Presuppositional Thinking

Yeah, that's a good question. It reminds me of a question. I'm answering your question, right?

But it reminds me of a question. He sounded very politically like, that's a great question, but let me tell you, answer my question. This leads me to another question, Eli.

I'll answer your question with a question. But I was talking to William Lane Craig and he was talking about how he came up in apologetics. And back then, the big guy, the big kahuna, one of them was Francis Schaeffer.

Now, Francis Schaeffer for me was seminal. He was a gigantic influence when I first got saved. I was working at a hospital and I sat in one weekend and read the Francis Schaeffer trilogy because I was so enthralled with Francis Schaeffer and his ideas.

And so it's very, how do you pronounce this? Schaefferian, what I would say. That's a word. Right, which is essentially, if I'm starting to talk to somebody and I notice the conversation is shifting, the only reason that I'm gonna notice that the conversation is shifting is because people are asking me questions that are designed to engage me to answer their questions.

So in other words, I'm not really a huge proponent and I'm not saying it's wrong, but I'm not a proponent of shoving my script down somebody's throat. Sure. And so the only way, I'm gonna allow somebody, it's a lot like judo, right?

Like judo, you use the force of your opponent to then move them around on the mat. And that's basically first aid evangelism for me is like,.

If Did you do judo with your wife while you guys were dating? It's kind of like first aid evangelism, it's judo. Okay.

That's another episode for another night, Eli. But I'm gonna sense that, so for example, like if I'm trying to communicate the gospel message, but then they go, oh, but wait a second, wait a second. God hates homosexuals.

I'm like, oh, okay, well, the first thing I'm gonna say is, well, what do you mean by that, right? And how did you come to the conclusion that God hates homosexuals? And let's talk about it, right? And so it's really a matter of letting the person lead the way, even though I'm in control of the conversation by asking those leading questions.

So first aid evangelism doesn't shift for me if I'm talking about the gospel or if I'm talking about apologetics, it's principally the same thing. And it really is based on, I mean, it is in a way, it's very friendly to the presuppositional approach.

I was gonna say reformed epistemology actually, because at least reformed epistemologists understand that there's something going on besides simply giving somebody the content of your argument. There's all this stuff that's going on in the heart that must be addressed before you can actually engage the intellect, so to speak.

Now, I notice in your language, you sounded very, okay, so you said Schaeferian, which is, it is an actual word there. You could be Vantillian, you could be Clarkian, you could be Schaeferian, but you also sounded very Koukoulian.

If Greg ever watches this, I just made up a word, so we could totally make it a thing. You did sound very much like you were drawing from Greg Koukoul's tactics. Do you find that that approach works well in the way that you communicate with folks?

Yes, yeah, so Greg's a friend, and I've talked to him about this before, but trying to, somebody asked me early on, this first aid evangelism thing, it sounds a lot like tactics, and I was like, well, to me, where tactics is really much more a script of questions to ask.

I hate to be too reductionistic here, but it appears to me that tactics is a lot of, like, here's what you would ask in this situation, and here's why that's good. I think for us, we're trying to go even further than that.

What is it? The Columbo questions. Let me ask you a question about the, the Columbo questions. That was a good impression. Oh, thank you. The Columbo questions are key, and for me, they're almost like the appetizer, and then I suggest we go a little bit further with our first aid evangelism method.

All right, very good. By the way, just a quick commercial. You can purchase tactics right now on Amazon Kindle for a half price. I don't know how much it costs, but actually, it's pretty affordable, so if you don't have tactics, you definitely need to get that book.

It's excellent. I also had Greg Koukl on the show a while back, and he, I think he did an excellent job unpacking some of the principles in that book, so you guys might want to check that out. All right, so now, oh, here, oh, this is awesome.

Okay, so let's see here. So we have Cochlean or Coca-Colain, okay? We'll see which, we'll try it out in discussion. We'll see what happens. I got one.

It's, what's the new show on Disney? Cochlorian, the Mandalorian? No? Cochlorian. It's fine, no worries. It's okay.

It's a 10-foot joke. It's over their heads. It's fine. At least you got smart humor. Sometimes people, they're not able to get it. No worries. All right, so, okay, so let's shift here. So we shift from evangelism, apologetics, to really, which is my favorite aspect of your channel, which is these debates.

So I'm gonna ask you a couple of questions with respect to what was your favorite debate to review? What was your least favorite? Who is your favorite debater? We're gonna get into some of those things and kind of some things that you can kind of go through to help folks who are interested in debating, what they can do to kind of prepare to engage that realm.

So, okay, so I forgot what I was gonna ask just now. It just slipped my mind, but why don't you tell the folks a little bit about your debate background? So how did you get into that whole field? I know you taught it at the high school level.

Was that something you went to school for so that you can teach, or is it something that kind of was dropped in your lap? Like, hey, there's a debate team and would you like to teach it? How'd that look for you?

Debate Training, Forensics, and Learning to Read Transcripts

Basically, that's what it was. The way I think of it is like, so back in the day, so I think we're about the same age, Eli, but back in the day How old are you? How old are you? I'm 42.

Okay, I'm 39. I'm a young duck. I haven't reached the 40s yet.

Let me tell you about your 40s, right? You wake up with your back hurting for no reason, and that's your 40s.

My back already hurts and I'm not Oh, you're there, you're there. No, back in the day,.

Saturday Night Live was really popular. Now it's not funny at all, but there was a guy, Chevy Chase, and he was really known for like falling backwards down the stairs. Like, everybody laughed at that.

That's how I feel I got into debate. It was like I fell backwards down the stairs. Like, I went to school, so I have my theology degree, and then I realized, very long story, hey, you know what? I think I'm supposed to be a teacher.

So then I went and got another, like a master's in teaching, and then I started teaching, but it was in literature. So I originally entered what's called Clark County here in Las Vegas, teaching literature, but like second year in, the debate teacher retired.

And so they were asking around, and the only thing I knew about debate was, well, there's logical fallacies involved, and I was like a huge fan of philosophy. I took a couple of classes in theology, but then like just reading things on the side.

And so I'm like, I think I could do that. So I got into it, but then I didn't realize that, oh, there's this whole broad category called forensics, which is basically debate, like public forum debates, Lincoln Douglas debates, you know, all that policy.

But then on the other side, in terms of category, there's what's called like humorous interpretation, dramatic interpretation. There's all these, it's almost like these monologues. Like if actors go out to audition for a part, they would read these things, and that's ultimately what the other side of forensics is.

I was not prepared for any of that. So like I basically bit off way more than I could chew. It was at a school that was in North town, so there were no resources. There was no money. Most of my students were not getting out to the tournaments every weekend because they just couldn't afford it.

They didn't even have clothes like to put on to go, you know what I mean? Because like, you got to dress up. And, but the couple that did, like there was a couple of ladies, they reached out to me years later.

I had transferred to another school, and they were like, because of you, Mr. Sala, you know, we're going on to study law. And I was like, oh my gosh, like that's awesome. And so nobody taught me anything.

I basically fell into it backwards. Somebody helped me out with like their own lesson plans. Another debate teacher from another school that I met basically emailed me all of his lesson plans. And I just went through there and just tried to like figure out what the heck to do week by week.

Sure, so you learned on the job basically, which is I learned on the job. Which I'm a school teacher as well, and Oh wow. Yeah, so, and there's a lot you learn on the job. They don't prepare you enough in college for the actual classroom.

I think I learned more being in front of a class than sitting in a classroom, learning how to be in front of a class, if that makes sense. Oh yeah.

No, I hear you. But some of the things that I realized were quote unquote best practices with my students was number one, we practice debates all the time. We would practice debates. We would get into drills.

I would have my students, especially realizing that not a lot of them were ever going to go to tournaments. We would do mock tournaments. So we would get together and pair up with people. They would have to write what are called argument briefs, which are basically arguments from one side of a particular topic.

They would have to write both of them. So like for affirmative and the negative, they would have to write and then we would flip a coin and then they would learn on the spot, hey, I'm actually arguing the affirmative.

So they would do a lot of that stuff. We would do probably one of the number one questions I get from like my audience is like, what should I do to get better at debate? Here's the number one thing that I've realized really helps everybody.

You take a transcript of a debate and you annotate it. So like the debate itself, if you can find like a transcript of the words on a paper of what is being said, if you can print that out and look at, print it out.

What am I? If you can get it on your device and then you look at it because with your eyes, you can visualize, okay, there's the claim. There's the evidence that's supporting the claim. And there's the, so we followed what was called the Tolman model of argumentation.

So claim data warrant, you know, the warrant justifies, the warrant is the explanation for how the data justifies the claim. So we have to annotate all that stuff, identify all that stuff out. And I found that that is probably the number one thing you can do to like improve your skill.

So, I mean, this is helpful because William Lane Craig, you know, has all of his debates transcribed on reasonable faith. There you go. So, and again, as I said before, I'm a presuppositionalist, but I've learned a lot from reading through debates and listening to debates, people who I don't necessarily agree every jot and tittle.

And I think that's a perfect way to kind of analyze even the opponent's perspective because the people he debates are top-notch thinkers in their field. So it's a really good way to kind of get, you know, the structure of the basics of their argument.

So that's an excellent, that's an excellent, I mean, I've done it before, but it's not something I've thought about in terms of doing more intentionally. And I enjoy reading transcripts because it's faster than if I'm reading a book because it's just going, it's like they're talking.

So it's very easy. Excellent. That's really good.

That's really helpful. Yeah. Can I add one more thing, Eli? Sure, sure. The thing that is not attractive, right? There was another word I was going to say that starts with an S, but it's just not very attractive to say this, right?

Because people are looking for that quick fix, but it just, you have to do the hard work, right? One of the other things that I'm asked is like, how do you, you know, like you immediately hear something and you recognize what you're hearing and whether or not that's an answer to a question or not.

It's because I'm looking at these transcripts, man. I've been doing this for like, you know, months and months, add up to years. Once you develop that muscle, it's very quick for you to be able to hear something and go, oh, okay, that is not a substantive answer to the question.

He avoided the question. He's filibustering, et cetera, et cetera. Excellent, excellent.

All right, well, so let's transfer over into some of the debates you've reviewed. What is the least favorite? So when you're kind of just like, I mean, this was a pretty bad argument or this was a pretty lame debate.

People wanted me to review this one. I did, and it's just kind of like, you know, which is your least favorite debate that you've reviewed on your channel and why?

Least Favorite Debates: Matt Dillahunty and the James White–Leighton Flowers Debate

I don't know if this is gonna answer the question. So two come to mind and for different reasons. So first of all, I'm in my forties. So I don't remember two weeks ago, let alone, like I've done, I don't know how many videos I've done now, but I do remember like any Matt Dillahunty debate, just really, it put like the gag reflex.

I really can't stand because there's two reasons why I don't like watching Matt Dillahunty debates. Number one, because there's hardly any substance there. And partially, I think what makes me so angry, if that's the right word, when I watch Matt Dillahunty is I feel like he knows better.

I feel like he's smart enough, it seems to me, to be able to put in the hard work to make substantive arguments, but he doesn't. And so that even makes me more upset, you know? But that's the first thing.

The second thing is the way that he commands authority, like it's just really, it's an interesting phenomena. I think I was talking to Trent Horner about this, but like you can agree to debate Matt Dillahunty.

Have you debated Matt Dillahunty before?

I was invited to, and I turned it down because, well, I have three kids, so I don't have time to prepare. Right, yeah, exactly. Okay, a lot of people don't know this, and I'll let you finish, but a lot of people don't know this.

One of the reasons why I do interviews on my channel is number one, I love talking to people, and I think it's really interesting, but it's usually because I don't have time to prepare stuff to teach myself, like to give.

So I do every now and then, but I have a theological and apologetics background, so when I interview people, I already kind of know what to ask and the direction to go, but it's easier, so it takes less prep.

So I haven't debated him. I turned an invitation to do so down.

Because just a lack of time, so. Yeah, well, and maybe that's something else to talk about, but your prep time for debate, I mean, that's substantial. Yes, yes. So if you want to do this correctly, but anyway, I just, you could debate Matt Dillahunty, say, yeah, I'm gonna debate Matt Dillahunty.

You could have 500 subscribers on your channel, but all of a sudden, your debate with Matt Dillahunty now has 100 ,000 views, and they're all his followers. He's got these followers. It doesn't matter what he does.

There was a moment, well, I don't know if I'm gonna turn your audience off. There was a moment in the election in 2016. Trump was like, I could basically go out on the street and shoot somebody, and it wouldn't matter.

And it's like, that's how I feel, like Matt Dillahunty's followers. He could murder somebody on camera, and they would be like, well, he's correct. You know, it's like, wow. So anything to do with Matt Dillahunty, and people keep asking me, and I'm like, you know what?

The last one was the last one. I can't stand it. I can't sit through this anymore. Okay. That's the first one. The second one was the James White-Leighton Flowers debate.

Hey, be very careful, because Leighton sometimes pops his head in some of the comments, sometimes, not a lot. And if he hears what you're about to say, he will make a four-hour response.