Ligon Duncan Wasn't Even Talking About Doug! - Part 3

All right, everybody, let's get started today. We are going to be doing part three of the room for nuance conversation.

This is starting to get into the Ligon Duncan controversy a little bit more completely. In fact, that's how they timestamp it

Ligon Duncan controversy. So that's what I'm going to call it. But before we begin, I just wanted to say a quick announcement for the channel.

You know, we're going to be doing things a little bit differently than we have been going forward this year. Over the years,

I've been approached by a number of companies that have wanted to sponsor the show, and I've never really done that yet at this point, or not never really,

I've never done it. And you know, nothing that I was approached with really felt like me, you know, didn't really feel on message.

Most of it was like, you know, a product you can hold in your hand or something you eat, or like a piece of software or something like that.

But there's nothing wrong with selling that stuff. It's just it just didn't seem like, you know, my on brand for me.

So I never really did it. But that being said, someone did approach me a few weeks back about a proposition and a business that that that they run.

Brother Steve, good solid brother. He's got a business that I felt as soon as I heard it was on message, and I decided to go forward with that.

And so we're going to be reading some ads on the channel for these videos going forward. And we're going to start that right now.

All right, here in New Hampshire, the real estate market has just exploded lately, you're probably seeing the same thing happening where you live to owning a rental property can be a great way to earn passive income and create a buffer from inflation.

Many Christians are subject to the whims of their secular employer, but passive income can help you make you make you financially resilient when times get hard.

My friend Steve did did just that he built a substantial real estate portfolio right here in New Hampshire from the ground up and he has launched curious consulting.

He can coach you through getting started in rental properties and also offers done for you real estate partnering.

If you want to get started without the hassle of dealing with tenants. The world doesn't need more passive Christians, it needs more

Christians making passive wealth. So if you want to support the show and get started making money with real estate, go to consulting by curious .com.

That is consulting by curious .com. Yeah, this is a this is something that I could easily get behind.

You know, I heard the idea I there's a multiple parts of the business. And it definitely helped that it was right here in New Hampshire as well.

Wonderful all the way around. You don't have to live in New Hampshire to reach out to consulting by curious .com. But New Hampshire is a great place and the real estate market here is really good.

And so I was happy to partner with consulting by curious .com. Check it out.

You know what I mean? Check it out and let them let them know that you heard about it on the 80 real buzz YouTube channel.

It'll definitely help the channel. God bless you all. We're going to be doing different ads and stuff like that.

But there you go. There you go. Let's get into it. Let's get into it, guys. We're gonna start talking about the

Ligon Duncan controversy, which is, you know, one of the better parts of this whole conversation, although the entire conversation was good.

One thing I will say is that there was a missed opportunity here by Sean DeMars to really brand himself a little bit, you know, brand.

You always got to think about branding. You know what I mean? And what I noticed is that here at the at the table, you know, they've got the coffee table here and they've got their coffee mugs here.

He's got tea in there and some coffee in there. I would assume there's some coffee in there. Or does he have a mug full of Mountain Dew because he's got a

Mountain Dew kind of sneakily hidden next to him? It's not really hidden because it's right in front of the camera, but it's kind of on the ground there.

I think it would have been better for Sean if he just put that bottle, that 20 ounce bottle of Mountain Dew right there on the table.

You guys are drinking your hoity toity coffee and tea and I've got my Mountain Dew bottle.

I think that would be the way to go. Let me let me know what you think of the comments. You think this this mug is filled with coffee or is it filled with Mountain Dew?

I don't know. I can't remember the last time I had a Mountain Dew, but it does taste good.

I mean, it's definitely tasty, tasty beverage. In any case, let's begin. Well, let's jump even more into the

Ligon Duncan interview. All right, let's do. I just want you brothers to know my aim in bringing up that question with Leg about the

Moscow mood was not, I'm not a pot stirrer. I don't think so. I mean, I guess the Lord will tell me on the last day if my heart was confused in any of that.

You are a pot stirrer, but that's okay. There's nothing wrong with being a pot stirrer. Now, I don't think you're a pot stirrer.

This is the thing. People get called pot stirrers. It's a pejorative usually. And it usually means you just want to cause problems just for the sake of it.

Just for the sake of it. You think it's fun to cause problems. You know, you like the drama, but that's not really all pot stirrers out there.

I mean, there sure are. See, we all know people that just like drama. They like to stir the pot. They like the controversy. I don't think

Sean's like that, but he was stirring the pot. And sometimes that pot needs to get stirred. In fact, that's how you make a good soup.

A lot of the time you stir the pot, you get everything incorporated together and stuff like that. And it's not, you know, it could be dangerous.

You could splash yourself and burn your face, but yeah, but it needs to get stirred though, because otherwise it can't make the food.

Right. And so nothing wrong with pot stirring, man. You are a pot stirrer, but in a good way, at least in my opinion.

There's nothing wrong with stirring pots. It was a totally fair question. Well, you should tell all the angry people on the internet that what

I did was a totally fair question. They don't listen to me. That's true. We definitely don't. Doug, he's just what a jolly guy.

You know what I mean? Simple as that. They don't listen to me. It's a joke, obviously, but we do actually listen.

And I do think that Doug is the kind of guy that he has earned the right to be listened to.

That being said, it doesn't mean you have to agree with him all the time. And, you know, there have been a couple of times on the channel where I say,

Doug was not so right about that one, or he's not right about this one. And that's okay, but you still got to take him seriously.

I think he's earned that right over time to be taken seriously. That being said, a little advice,

Sean, to you. Okay, a little advice. This is something that a lot of people noticed, and I noticed it too.

And I'm not going to be too critical with you. Like I said, this is not about criticizing you and your style, but I do have some advice for you,

Sean. There were a number of times where you kind of addressed the people on the internet, you know, that are calling you mean names, or saying things about you, or whatever it is, being nasty and stuff like that.

And you certainly seemed,

I'm not going to say yet you said this directly, because I can't remember right off the top of my head. But it certainly seemed to me that you were attempting to put some of the blame of that behavior of people on the internet at the doorstep of Doug Wilson and Moscow Mood.

There's a couple things here that I can give you advice for, Sean. Number one, you came across a little whiny about how badly you've been mistreated, and stuff like that.

Look, it's the internet. Nobody cares. Nobody cares. And when you bring it up again, and again, and again, you come across super whiny.

Okay, so that's my first piece of advice. Stop complaining about people on the internet. Who cares?

They're people on the internet. This is what the internet is and always has been. It's a place where people can say nonsense without any repercussions.

At least that's what they think. Things that people would never say to your face, they say on the internet.

And it's like, that's always how it's been. So there's no sense in complaining about it.

But number two, every side has people like this. Every side.

So it doesn't make any sense to put this at the doorstep of someone in particular that is your target here, which is

Doug Wilskin and the Moscow Mood. You're saying, the Moscow Mood creates this kind of people. Well, look, there are people that love

Ligon Duncan that called me all kinds of names, right? But it doesn't make sense to say, oh, it's the big evil mood that made them do it.

No, this is just what people do. This is just what people do. And you just got to be okay with it.

You know what I mean? It doesn't mean you have to do it yourself. And it doesn't mean that people in your charge, you're a pastor, you let them do whatever they want without any direction, any guiding, any discipline.

It doesn't mean any of those things. But to complain about it, it just seems like a useless task.

And you don't come across great. And for my money,

I'm not going to criticize you too much on that. I know a lot of people in some various comment sections were saying that you didn't do a good job in this interview because you kept whining about that kind of stuff.

And I don't think that's the case. I think you did a great job in this interview. But it is true that you did come across a little whiny.

My advice is to never complain about people on the internet. Just don't do it.

It doesn't benefit you. It doesn't score you any points. It doesn't do anything for you.

But it does take away from sometimes what you're trying to do. I think if you didn't do that in this interview, the interview would have been so much better and you wouldn't have lost anything in return.

So it's one of those things where it's like one of those investment opportunities where the downside is basically nothing or little, but the upside is humongous.

You take those bets every single time because that's the way you make money. You know what

I mean? The downside risk is low. The upside benefit is very high.

That's where you invest. And that's just my advice for you, Sean. Take it or leave it. Do with it what you will.

It doesn't get you anything to complain about people on the internet. They react to me.

I think I'm... How do I want to ask this question? A lot of discernment bloggers and a lot of their friends and family, co -workers and neighbors.

After that interview, they've basically said that Lig Duncan is a coward. He's woke.

He needs to resign in shame. Do you agree? Lig Duncan is absolutely woke.

It has absolutely nothing to do with this interview. In fact, I don't even think there was any wokeness in the interview.

I can't really remember. But yeah, he's woke. But Sean, it doesn't have anything to do with that interview.

It has to do with other things. For example, he wrote the forward to woke church.

And so if the guy who wrote the forward to woke church approvingly isn't woke, then nobody's woke.

Sean, come on, man. Oh, man.

Oh, man. Yeah. So anyway, there's that. And as far as the cowardly thing, okay, maybe he's not a coward, but that interview was very cowardly.

And it was very much in lockstep with Kevin DeYoung's cowardly article, where he starts off the article.

I'm not going to talk about this. I'm not going to go back and forth about this. I'm not going to do anything. I'm just going to say it.

I'm going to say my piece and run away. If that's not cowardly, what is cowardly?

So, okay, maybe people went too far on the internet. Again, makes no sense to complain about people on the internet.

But yeah, he was cowardly in that interview. And he is very, very woke. He wrote the forward to the woke church book.

I look what there's so much more, but what more needs to be said? Come on, guys, we can call a spade a spade.

Can't we agree with that? No, I think he I think he needs to correct some things.

Sure. I think he needs to fix some things. And the angry hostiles who are after him, like all 50 ,000 of them.

Yeah. Yeah. Are are after him because I thought it was a very poor performance and it was provocative.

OK, so I don't think Christians ought to be provoked. My dad taught me always act, never react.

And people are reacting to Lig Duncan. But he did some things that were he he can't be surprised that he's in a duel because he slapped some people with the gloves.

Yeah. And it was things like slander and slander has no place in a

Christian's. Yeah. Let me stop there for a second. So I do want to say something here because I thought

I mean, I think Doug's answer is really good. Number one. But I actually

I don't agree with the always act, don't react. I don't think that that's just a hard and fast, always appropriate rule.

I think that it would be true if you said, you know, look to act and never overreact, which

I think is what they're talking about here, because I think it is an overreaction to say that Ligon should be, you know, should resign in shame and you should never read any of his books or totally worthless, never listen to him kind of thing.

I think that's an overreaction. But, you know, there are times when it's appropriate to react. You know what

I mean? You can't always, you know, be one step ahead of everybody. And so when somebody does something, you need to react.

Sure. It's better if you're the one acting. I think about like in chess, right, like in chess. Ideally, you're the one setting the tone, right?

You're the one that you're making the moves that are going to force your opponent into things. That's what you want to do.

Right. But there are times when your opponent does something surprising or something you weren't expecting and you need to react to it because the board state is such that you can't just let it lie.

You think about sports. If you're not a nerd, you think about sports. And yeah, ideally, you want to set the tone, right?

You want to be imposing your will upon the opposing team. But you do actually have an enemy in sports, right?

You have an opposing team. And so sometimes they're going to do something that you need to change what your plan was, because it's a little bit different of a game than you were expecting.

And so you're going to react to that. Even pitching. Pitching is a perfect example. Pitching is such a mental game, right?

You go in there with a plan of what you're going to do. And you're a great pitcher, like Yamamoto, for example.

His plan is he throws a quick strike fastball. And then he starts going to his breaking pitches, which fool the hitters.

And he's already ahead 0 -1. And so he can throw these breaking pitches, and usually he gets people out. His breaking pitches are unbelievable.

I mean, they're fantastic. But the Mets came into the game against Yamamoto, and their plan was, we're going to swing at the first pitch, because we know it's going to be a fastball.

And so he threw these fastballs, and they started knocking him around. This is a great pitcher. What does a great pitcher do?

He changes what he's going to do. He reacts to the Mets game plan. He says, OK, maybe

I got to throw some of these breaking pitches for first pitches. I got to get him over, so there can still be a strike.

And he changed what he did in the middle of the game. And he reacted to the Mets game plan, because he wasn't expecting it. And he started pitching a little better.

And so this is the thing. It's not no reactions whatsoever. I think the overreactions absolutely need to be.

You can't overreact. That's going to lead to disaster every single time. So I don't quite agree with Doug, but I do like where he's coming from here.

Armory or no place in a Christian's tactics. I don't have any reason to believe these people are

Christians. Well, what is that? And who was he talking to? You were talking about us. So he's saying,

I don't have any reason to believe that they're even Christians. And I disapprove of slander.

And then when I heard that he concluded everything, there's a lack of self -awareness.

And everybody was saying, don't you see what you're doing? Don't you see what you're doing? And then when he said things like, these guys talk real big online.

But if you get them in a room, they'd curl up into a fetal position in three seconds. And so in my blog response to this,

I pointed back in the middle of the FV thing. I was traveling down south for other reasons.

And I was in Jackson. And a friend of Liggs offered to set up a meeting.

So we contacted just to, no cameras, no mics, just to personal contact. And he didn't know, no thank you.

So we are the ones eager to meet, talk, work things through.

Public, private. Public, private, microphones, cameras, no microphones, no cameras. We've offered to fly other places.

And the embargo is pretty solid when it comes to this.

But then for someone who's sort of ensconced behind the embargo wall to say, if you got these people alone, they would just wilt.

Well, can I push back on that? So let me just say this is a good answer, right? And like I said, I disagreed. Not completely, but with kind of the way he said it.

But I'm very glad that he said, look, there's a reason that they were reacting this way.

I'm not for reactions, but there's a reason. Because that interview was horrendous.

You know what I mean? You can't go around slapping people on the face with your gloves and then get all surprised when people start reacting.

Now he's against the reaction. Okay, fine. But he's like, but there's a reason for it. It's not like it came out of nowhere.

It's not like people are completely unreasonable or crazy. Like this guy, he spat on you.

And then when you say something, he's like, oh, well, there's people on the internet. Could you believe it?

So really good answer. Really good answer. After the maelstrom that was the response to that interview,

I went back and I watched that clip more than once to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding things. It appeared to me that the fetal position comment, and what was the other one that you said?

The slander. The slander thing. It seemed like he was speaking more broadly. Now you might say, well, that includes us.

But I'm sure you know, the Moscow mood describes an event that is beyond what is happening right here in Moscow.

And I don't think you guys would disagree with me that there are a lot of people on the internet who have adopted the

Moscow mood or whatever, or some derivation thereof. Adopted the name. Yeah. Or you could call it a bastardization of the

Moscow mood, right? But who are big and tough on the internet.

But if you got them in the same room, they would wilt. They would. And when I went back and I watched that, it didn't seem like Lig had

Moscow proper in mind. And I'm not, Lig's a grown man. He can defend himself. I'm not trying to defend him. I'm just telling you, honestly, my impression was he was speaking about kind of troublemakers on the internet in general.

I believe Sean DeMar's here. Okay. So maybe that surprises you, but I believe he's being truthful here.

That's what Sean DeMar's thinks Lig and Duncan was saying.

Here's the thing, though. You don't know,

Sean. You don't know that that's what he was thinking. And the reason you don't know is because Lig and Duncan is a skilled deceiver.

He's a skilled liar. This is one of the problems, you know, people get mad at me for naming names and Big Eva never names names.

Well, this is actually one of the key problems to not doing that. Because when you don't name

Doug, when you're talking about Doug, then you could always have this out where it's like, well, I didn't say that.

But you are saying it. It's a skilled deception. It's a strategy for lying that you've practiced over the years.

This is Big Eva standard operating procedure manual, you know, rule number one, that you don't name the people so you can't really be questioned on it.

And if you ever are questioned on it, you always have a fallback retreat option. This is a huge part of Big Eva standard operating model.

And so I believe you, Sean, that you don't think he was talking about Doug Wilson, but I think you're wrong.

He is talking about Doug Wilson. Because here's the thing. No random person on the internet has ever tested the are you going to be in the fetal position in five minutes.

It makes no sense to be like no random people on the internet. I have no reason to believe they're

Christian. Yeah, that's true of everybody, except for their confession. That's true of everybody.

So you're just saying a nonsense worthless statement. Yeah, when I see a random person on the internet say something to me,

I don't know anything about them. What is that supposed to prove? But the thing is, he does know

Doug, and he does know Doug's behavior. And that's what he was talking about in this interview. And so it's very clear to me,

Sean, that he was talking about Doug and people in Doug's orbit, people like me. That's very clear.

And so I challenge, I challenge you guys. If this is true that you people on the internet and Doug's orbit, you know, would be in the fetal position five minutes if you got them in the room.

Prove it. Prove it. By the way, if he was just talking about random people on the internet, then how is this not internet bravado?

This is the definition of what being a keyboard warrior is. Yeah, well, you know, I could get you in the fetal position in five minutes, theologically speaking, knowing that you'll never ever be in a room with someone like that.

Never. Because why would you be on the room with an Anon on the internet? It would never happen.

So if you give him the best possible interpretation of those words, which is, in my opinion,

Sean, super naive, but I believe you. I believe you. You want to believe the best in Ligon.

And there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with that. But even taking his best possible interpretation of those kinds of words, how is he not the internet

LARPer, the internet tough guy who's like, yeah, yeah, I could beat you up. And he knows he'll never meet you.

So he doesn't have to even worry about ever being proven wrong. Just a thought.

Just a thought. One of the ways that you realize just how angry

Ligon was and how far he went and how awful this interview is, is that literally any way you slice it, it's a disaster of an interview.

But you can give him the best possible interpretation or the worst possible interpretation. And either way, it is awful.

And Ligon did a terrible thing. And he's displaying just an absolute lack of self -awareness every step of the way, regardless of how you interpret it.

That's the point. That's the point. So I believe, Sean, I believe that when Sean heard those words, that he heard, oh, he's talking about the randos on the internet that say they're part of the

Moscow mood. And so he didn't really put two and two together, which I think you're wrong, Sean, but maybe you're right.

But it doesn't matter, because even if you're right, it's still a horrendous look on Ligon Duncan's part.

And he needs to address it and he needs to fix it. I mean, that's me. Yeah, yeah.

Well, and the thing was, your question was specifically talked about the Moscow mood. And then he brought up Kevin's article, which wasn't about internet bro culture.

It was targeted specifically at two videos and why Moscow's influence was bad.

The response from me and Jared and everybody else was, we're defending the Moscow mood.

So the question's about Moscow mood. And then the answer has to do with, so he took it where he did.

And it wasn't, I would want to give him the charity and say, because I've met, he and I've you know, when

I was at Bethlehem, he would come through. And I don't think if I said, like, were you questioning my salvation? I think he would say, absolutely not.

Right. Okay. So I would give him that charity. But when he made the comment, some of these people aren't even saved. Yeah.

Or the other one was, though, when you asked some other question, and I think it was when the slander and mockery thing came up.

And his first thing was, which brings us back to the Moscow mood. So he... So Joe Rigney, like I said last time, this is a very impressive performance.

Um, he sees what Sean has said here and in a very nice but very savage way, puts the kibosh on it right away.

He puts the kibosh on it right away. He doesn't call Sean naive. He just says, here are the facts.

He was talking about Kevin DeYoung's article. That's what he chose to talk about, which was not about random people on the internet.

It was about Doug and two videos that Doug had did. And it was about Doug. Bottom line.

So if you take Ligon's words seriously, and you take and let him define his own terms, he was addressing

Doug Wilson. That is very obvious. At least it was to me. Now the re...

I don't think Sean's stupid or anything. I think Sean is trying to hear

Ligon's words in the best possible light. But the problem is, if you take Ligon's words in the best possible lights, he becomes the internet tough guy that he's warning you about.

Not Sean, Ligon. It's bad any way you slice it. But I think Sean, I believe him.

I don't think he's trying to do a cover job here on Ligon Duncan. I don't. I believe that that's how

Sean interpreted his words. Because it... But it also... Because Sean knows Doug, right?

He knows Doug. He admitted that earlier. He used to recommend his stuff and stuff like that. So in Sean's mind, it doesn't even compute that we don't have any reason to believe he's a

Christian. Like, yeah, Sean doesn't like Doug so much anymore. He said the C word after all. But he knows that there's many reasons to assume he's a

Christian, right? So in Sean's mind, he hears those words, and he has to interpret that in a way that makes sense in his universe, in his own mind.

And he interprets it to mean, oh, it must be those random people on the internet. And that's not Sean's fault.

Everybody does this. Everybody interprets things in their own mind in ways that make sense to them. That's nothing wrong.

I mean, he's wrong, but that's what people do. And Joe Rigney, in like the most savage but nice way possible, he just puts the kibosh on that right away.

Is it the kibosh or the kibosh? Kibosh, kibosh? I don't know. I don't know. It's not correct,

Sean, that he was not talking about Doug Wilson. He was definitively talking about Doug Wilson.

It's as simple as that. So I appreciate your willingness to try to be charitable to Ligon, even though it doesn't really do anything for him.

But yeah, it's just no possible way he was not talking about Doug.

He circled back. But see, that shows me that when he was talking about that, he wasn't really talking about you guys.

I think he was talking about internet discourse with mockery and slander. I think you're right. He was starting there. But what it triggered in his head is, that's

Moscow mood. Where did they learn to do that? And they learned it from him. So here, if Ligon were to contact me, if I were to talk to him, and he would say, oh man,

I wasn't talking about you at all, I'd accept that completely. But it sure looked like he was talking about it.

And so if what he said got the chimps jumping, and there was this big reaction,

I think that whatever things the... I think Doug just called me a chimp.

I think Doug Wilson might have just called me a chimp. What do you guys think?

I didn't sound like a chimp. People who are out of control need to correct with God and cool their jets and whatever they're doing.

I think Ligon needs to take responsibility for having been provocative in a way that it may not have been slander and mockery on his part of us, particularly, but it sure looked that way.

He should have been more careful. And the irony of criticizing indiscriminate bomb throwing or grenade throwing while throwing grenades that you're not sure who he's aiming at.

That's what indiscriminate means. We don't know who we're talking about. And it was striking because he did say at one point,

I don't think that voice. He didn't name Doug, but he sort of referred to that voice and should be having an influence or something to that effect.

This is something that we pinpointed right away, the irony of talking about indiscriminate bomb throwing and then being indiscriminate and talking about the

Moscow mood. And if you notice, Sean, this is another piece of advice for you, buddy, but you said he should be more careful.

Ligon should be more careful. That's what you said. And I think that that's true, but it's not it's incomplete.

What he needs to do is be clear. And he never, ever will be clear in this kind of a context, because that is not part of this

Big Eva standard operating model. It just isn't. And this is across the board.

Being clear in these situations is something that you do not do. And so careful.

Yeah. But what we need is to be clear. You know what I mean? That's why people say he was cowardly, because he's saying all these tough guy things, but being indiscriminate about it and a little bit vague.

And it's just very ironic. You know, it's just a very ironic thing. But anyway, let's complete this.

Let's let Joe finish his thought, and then we will stop for the day. What who he's trying to differentiate from.

And again, your question was a setup for him to do something like this, you know, because you set it up with a, hey, you're you're gracious and disagreement.

You'll stick to your guns, but you're but you're charitable, like we just like you just were with Keller. What do you think about Moscow mood?

It would have been a fantastic opportunity for him to say something like, you know, those guys do a lot of different things out there.

And and, you know, they, you know, great stuff on marriage and family or something and pay a compliment and say, but I don't really like the way that they conduct themselves.

It's not my thing. And he could have done that and then moved on. But he kept circling back to it because differentiating from us was an important thing for him to do.

It was important for him to say. And and you can think about it this way. That was that was that was so that was so key right there.

And and I don't know how much you know about people who criticize Doug, but very often conservatives who criticize

Doug will at least tip the hat. Oh, yeah. You know, his family. They always say the family. So the family stuff's wonderful.

It's great. And then they go and rip him. And that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with that.

But he didn't do that, which was which was interesting when I first heard it, I was like I was kind of surprised that he didn't do that because that's the standard move.

That's the standard move that pretty much everybody does. Oh, yeah. His family stuff is wonderful. He's a heretic, though. But he didn't do that.

Why didn't he do that in this particular context? Well, because he wanted to say that he has no reason to believe they're

Christians. He wanted to say that there they should be avoided at all costs. They're the antithesis of everything a

Christian should be. That's what he wanted to say. So you can't tip the hat to somebody when you're about to launch into a thing that's basically

I don't think this guy's a Christian. That's why he did it. That's why he did it.

The people that he's willing to share a stage with, so Kellerites, he's willing to share a stage with the

Kellerites, so he's going to praise Keller. The Frame guys and those sort of theistic mutualists, he would share a stage with those guys and have a debate and discussion about the issues.

He's not going to share a stage and he needs to have a reason why. So we've got to be pushed far enough out. I would share a stage with any of them.

With any of them. And the same thing is true of the abolitionists, right? We're going to stop there because we're going to go into something else because the abolition stuff is pretty interesting too.

One thing I will say is, look, here's the thing. I consider myself a peacemaker and I'm totally serious about that.

I think I owe a lot of this to Doug Wilson. He just said,

I'd be willing to share a stage with any of them, despite many differences and many problems and many bad things that they've said and done over the years.

I'd be willing to share a stage with them. I try to do the same thing. I try to have a really big tent.

I think it's good for unity. I think it's good strategically. I think it's the

Christian thing to do. So I would gladly work with Sean DeMars.

I would gladly do a video with Sean on a contentious or non -contentious debate.

I would work with Sean. He's someone that I could work with and I would want to. But here's the thing, and it's the same with Doug, right?

Doug will do the same thing. Rigney would do the same thing. The cross -politic guys would do the same thing. So they're willing to do it.

It'd be the best case scenario, right? But here's the thing. We don't need them.

We don't need them to have an impact on all of evangelicalism because we actually have our own thing going on.

We've got so much momentum right now and people see it, man. People recognize what

Christian ethics are and Christian virtues and things like that.

And they can see, okay, maybe I don't like that they said the C word, but man, these guys are super gracious, super winsome, hardcore when they need to be.

They look at a guy like Rigney and they're like, man, he's intense. But he conducts himself like a

Christian, not just online, but also in person. I mean, I've heard a lot about Joe at this point in the last couple of days.

So in order for us to have the influence that we want to have, the best case scenario would be to work with you guys, but we do not need that.

We don't. And I don't mean we don't need you in the cosmic sense, but I mean to have the impacts we want to have.

It would be better if you worked with us, but if you keep doing what you're doing, if you keep doing the

Ligon Duncan thing and the, you know, in the Sean DeMars Ligon Duncan interview, it actually doesn't hurt us that much.

We're going to still have the impact we want to have. So keep doing what you're doing.

That's totally fine by me. It doesn't really hurt us that much. And I would argue probably helps us more than it hurts us, but it's not the best case scenario.

It's not the best case scenario. So that's, that's what I'll say. Like, like Doug doesn't need their stages, but he would like to, he would like to, you know, to, to, to work with them.

He would like to be on the same team. He would like to have more allies. So would I, but we don't need it, but we don't need it.

And we're proving that every single day that passes more and more and more.

And so a kind of a shrewd thing to do if you wanted to help us out, Sean is to keep inviting some of these big

Eva guys to do the same thing that Ligon did, because the more that happens, the more people take a good hard look at, at, at, at the

Moscow mood and Doug, what Doug is doing and what Sean, uh, what John, uh, Joe is doing and cross politic and guys like me.

And they're, they're seeing the contrast, you know, people are starting to see through the, uh, well,

I'm a Christian guy, so I'm not going to say that they're starting to see through it though. In any case,