Tim Staples and Dave Hunt

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 602 973 460 to or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 877 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James White. Hey, good morning. Welcome to the dividing line on a Tuesday morning.

Just letting you know right up front I have my cell phone in the studio today. Some of you may recall old editions the dividing line were since we were doing it in my office. Rather than having a little studio like we have now.

My cell phone would go off and I'd have little conversations with my wife. I guess Rudy Giuliani's been doing that recently. I saw something on TV about how he was in the middle of giving a speech and this Massively out cell phone goes off and he pulls it out.

Hi, honey. I'm talking to it happened at NRA. Which would be a tough place for him to be in the first place. I think it was almost like it was meant to sort of endear him type thing. It didn't go over very well at all.

Most people like turn it off, you know. But anyway, it used to go off all the time during the program, but it hasn't for a long time because I don't bring it into the studio. But I have it today and the reason I have it today is that Summer's class started exactly one hour ago With dr. Lee Carter, and I have not heard a word back from dr. Carter.

I sent an email to him. I contained a link to my open letter the email was CC'd to The entire board of the Maricopa County Community College District. I have not heard from any of them either. Not even so much as a thank you for your note.

It's been received blah blah nothing, but Absolute positive silence. So I've been sort of wondering, you know, what's what's gonna happen today in class started an hour ago and Gets out in 13 minutes and so far I have received only one cryptic text message from my daughter, which doesn't tell me a whole lot yet.

So and the cell phone will ring in 14 minutes. Ah, it's possible. It's possible. But if it's if it's just text message, okay, then I'll just be somewhat distracted. But if she actually gives me a call, hey We can do the Rush Limbaugh thing and you can just sit here and listen to a half of a conversation I'd have her call in.

But yeah, I'd have her call in but she has a class right after this. So I suppose she could call while walking from one class to another but that probably wouldn't be a good idea. So that may happen. We will find out anyway.

Moving on to a completely different subject since I have nothing new to report I mean other than the fact that a number of people have written to me former students who basically saying this is nothing new.

One person wrote to me and said hey, you know the first day of class he said if you have leanings toward Christianity, you might as well drop this now and You know, can you imagine anybody getting up and saying in a public school?

College paid for by the public class if you have leanings toward Islam, you might as well drop this class now, you know. Ain't ain't gonna happen. But hey, whatever Christians are fair game and then you know Download a bunch of his papers and and things like that and it's just it's it's Dennis McKinsey 101.

It really is nothing new. Bart Ehrman's grade Lane Lane Pagels knows all Jesus is a Gnostic blah blah blah and Nothing, nothing new there for certain. So instead of worrying about that since there's really not much more to say about that until we get some sort of response if we Get any response at all instead Have some clips to play for you today first from Catholic answers actually have two Catholic answers clips and then Prepare yourselves.

We have a clip from the Berean call. Yes, indeed and Amazingly enough. There's only slight differences in some of the assertions made. But anyway first one here is Tim Staples and What's going on is is James?

Swan's been listening to Catholic answers recently and has been kind enough to send me mp3s of these things which saves me a lot of time and As you I've mentioned many times I would love to arrange a debate with Tim Staples on the Marian dogmas.

He talks about them constantly. He puts out CD sets and and books and and so on so forth. But it's it's really tough to get Catholic apologists to try to defend the Marian dogmas. They have no problem doing the monologue thing.

But it's the debate dialogue thing. That's a little bit tougher because then you have to answer some questions that aren't so comfortable and So here is a a clip that that James Swan sent me and It has first of all a portion of a commercial for some of His Marian stuff Tim Staples Marian stuff and then a call.

Now give you a background. I have often said that the Marian dogmas as a body of Beliefs are Thoroughly completely and totally unbiblical they do not come they do not flow from a biblical view of God the world womanhood marriage Sexuality they flow from a completely non-christian worldview specifically they flow from a Gnostic worldview primarily.

But they also flow from from an ascetic type of worldview that that devalues marriage it devalues human beings quite honestly and we see that in a number of the Marian dogmas and specifically in the concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary the first place you find this belief is in Gnostic sources and These Gnostic sources have no problem since Jesus is a Gnostic Jesus when when he is born He just basically beams out of Mary.

That's why Mary can remain perpetually a virgin even remain as a virgin. Physically having given birth to Jesus because Jesus doesn't even go down the birth canal. He is sort of more as was a Star Trek type thing and he beams out and that's all there is that and that's where There's no pain and the first sources in the doc the first documented sources that say this in all of history.

This is not a question. No one can debate it. No one can deny it our Gnostic sources. They are not Christian sources. No, we can call them Christians to call them Christian Gnostics. That's like talking about Christian Muslims and Christian Buddhists and so on and so forth.

Which people do they certainly do in academia. Bart Ehrman loves to talk about Christian Gnostics all the time, but they are not Christians. Unless you just don't allow for the definition of the term Christian to any level.

So With that as the background listen to the commercial and then the call with Tim Staples on the subject of Mary.

For most non-catholics and even some Catholics the church's teachings about Mary can be the most difficult ones to understand and believe. But as Tim Staples will show you it doesn't have to be that way.

Call triple-a two nine one eight thousand or go to Catholic comm to order his brand-new audio set the gospel truth about Mary Part two. In this new collection Tim brilliantly shows the overwhelming Biblical and historical support for Mary's perpetual virginity and her assumption into heaven.

In the gospel truth about Mary part two You'll discover why church teachings on Mary are so important eight reasons the church teaches Mary's perpetual virginity I know how scholarly advances help make the case for her assumption where to go in the Bible to prove these ancient teachings and much more.

Call Catholic answers today or log on to Catholic comm to add the gospel.

Wait, we got to order this where to go in the Bible to prove these teachings, even though Most Roman Catholic scholars admit that Explicit biblical proofs are lacking. Tim Staples has got it. He's got it down.

They did we need to get this because never have found those those scriptural proofs unless it's maybe something like, you know Solomon bringing out a throne and putting Bathsheba on it. And then when she makes requests he kills a guy who got her to make the request and things like that.

The truth about Mary part two by Tim Staples to your audio library.

By the way. Somebody needs to go over there and help these folks with something called background music for commercial. Did you hear that? Oh my goodness. That's sound like some Ronco commercial or something like that.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary and the Problem of Gnostic Sources

We'll go to Eric calling from Shrewsbury.

Massachusetts. Listening on podcast. Hello, Eric. How are you, thank you for taking my call. It's great to have you with us. What's your question?

Well, I'm following up from last week and you had a comment or discussion on Mary's birthgiving how and how it was without pain possibly.

Possibly never been defined by the church.

But yeah, exactly now another teaching that was almost universally held by the father's. Was that Mary's virginal integrity remained intact during the birth giving process, right? I Just stop it for just a moment.

Universally held. That is such a crock of a statement. I mean. You've got to understand what these people are talking about. They're talking about the very few people who actually address this in later years and we want to extend fathers down to you know.

Through Thomas Aquinas and like that. So you go hundreds of years down the road and those who eventually started talking about these things. These are the things they said. But people hear that and they go.

Oh, you're an ass. I don't remember finding in Irenaeus a discussion of this or Ignatius or that's cuz the doctrine didn't exist at that time. So they didn't talk about it, but they can still talk about universally held to it's it's the.

The weasel words are incredible. What this reminded me of was.

An idea or Legend or whatever you want to call it, but I heard from some very pious and traditionalist using traditional monks. That said that when Jesus was born, he didn't go through the birth canal.

He just kind of popped through Mary the wall of Mary's womb sort of like a supernatural c-section. Now to me this sounds rather not right. Oh, I don't really like the idea.

And I wondered if you could comment on it, right. Well Eric again this this was in fact held by Some of the fathers of the church and and the idea of Mary remaining intact as a virgin in part two is very much steeped in the writings of the fathers and you do have and I'm trying to think of particular.

I believe it was st. John Damascene Who who taught and there were others as well, I don't want to misquote them, but there were there were some others I believe at least one of the Cappadocian fathers, but Who taught that yes as as the old the old saying was as light goes through?

Stained-glass windows without affecting the window whatsoever so was the birth of our Lord from the Blessed Virgin Mary and I know the argument is is given that this is a holdover from from Gnosticism and such.

But I argue that it's not I While I have to be clear here that the church does not teach this certainly not definitively it is an acceptable Opinion that you can hold as a Catholic that that Mary would have you know given birth to Jesus without any effect to her virginal integrity it is Held by the fathers as you said almost universally and that gets into a pretty heavy topic there as far as the specifics of you know Christ not even going through the birth canal and that sort of thing you'll find a lesser numbers of Fathers, but there are a few that that teach that now some would argue that you know Why would that be did Christ really sanctify childbirth if he didn't?

Go through the the birth canal and all these sorts of arguments have really not been answered by the church and I think there's there's valid arguments to be made on both sides, but but the key is you're not You know necessarily if you hold that to be true obviously we've had fathers of the church that that hold to it.

And it gets back to you know our understanding that Mary giving birth to Jesus This was a unique event Mary uniquely Was was by a unique privilege and grace Preserved free of all stain of original sin as Pope Blessed Pius the ninth said when he defined the dogma and So there's certainly going to be a number of unique things surrounding The birth of our Lord and this may well be one of them.

Again the church hasn't defined that the only thing I would warn is That you don't go down the road of saying that this is Gnostic because it was in fact held to By fathers of the church, and it is an opinion that you can hold as a Catholic does that make sense.

Yeah Pretty well all right. Well Eric. I appreciate your call great question hope to hear from you again in the future. Oh No. How do I.

Just Just had a professional comedian in channel. And he truly is a professional a professional comedian just broke up everybody in channel all at the same time. And we're just trying to recover from that you know I Don't know you got a laugh or cry I I when when Roman Catholics say that they honor Mary and stuff like that.

You know what the historical Mary is not honored by people in 21st century having discussions like this, okay? I mean, let's just let's just put it out there that just absolutely ridiculous now. It's interesting Jerry matics would be very unhappy with that phone call because any of you remember when Jerry matics Had his debate with Eric Svensson on the perpetual virginia Mary there was no question even allowed About whether that was true or not.

I mean from from matics perspective. That was an essential element of the dogma itself and So he doesn't say it's an allowable opinion. He defended it as a revealed truth and once again We know why the Gnostics Raised this issue.

We know why they came up with this idea Jesus doesn't have a real physical body so if you don't have a real physical body You don't come through a birth canal if you come to a birth count. It means you have a real physical body, and that's not the Gnostic Jesus and so the docetics You know rejected that we understand all that what on earth is there in Scripture?

That would lead us to such a such a conclusion nothing. Absolutely nothing is there any kind of historical evidence You can give at all in the first century or the second century of that matter to anyone Out that there was even semi Orthodox you can come up with the early Gnostic Gospels, but to anyone Presenting this kind of a belief no and yet Roman Catholics sit around discuss this kind of stuff.

Why? Well because they deny soul scriptura and once you deny soul scriptura once you wander outside The realm of God's revelation and allow other things to come in well. Here's the result is Where do you go in the Bible to prove these things and and here's this all of this stuff is Just absolutely unbelievable to listen to so Anyway, let's go from there to yet another concept.

We've presented to me in In written form and I'm sorry in audio form and that is once again. We had another question asked of brother Dave brother Tom. And the question was a semi decent question. The question in essence was that Obviously one of the problems we have is that Calvinists and non-Calvinists disagree over the definition of the term elect and That's true.

And so you would expect if someone asked this question that you'd have a discussion election now. Please remember something go back with me a little ways if you can sort of get rid of Tim Stables for a moment.

We'll actually come back to him in a moment with another Comment but go back with me a few years to when we were talking a lot about Dave Hunt much more than we do these days and I pointed out The Dave Hunt and I played sermons from his from various Calvary chapels and things like that Kept saying over and over and he said in what love is this and I would be willing to bet it still says this.

And what love is this even with new editions coming out and things like that? That Election is never to salvation. It is only to particular blessings. That election is never to salvation. It is only to particular blessings and I've played him saying this we've we've we've talked about it a Number of times and so what happened is in our book.

When we did the debate book I Again he makes that he made that statement and in my response to one of his his portions I Pointed out that I looked all the way through. What love is this? I looked through the the scripture index to what love is this and never had Dave Hunt to my knowledge addressed second Thessalonians 213 and And second Thessalonians 213 says but we should always give thanks to God for you brother and beloved by the Lord because God Has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

So here you have election you have choosing for salvation the very thing that Dave Hunt said over and over. And over the Bible never ever teaches and he wrote an entire book which he considered to be the really the final word on all things what love is this where he repeated that statement over and over again, but but Never addressed second Thessalonians 213 and he didn't Really provide any meaningful response to it in his rebuttal either because exegesis isn't isn't Dave's thing and so I sort of assumed That once someone you know if I had been going around and repeatedly on tape on video Had said the Bible never says X and someone comes up and shows you the Bible and it says X.

Not only would I be rather embarrassed and would have to retract that. But I would never repeat it again. But you see that's not how Dave Hunt works because.

Well, listen to the Berean call. Here's this week's question. Dear Dave and Tom. I have a friend who was a Calvinist and I have had many discussions with him. I believe a major issue that divides us is the definition of the term election.

Could you give us what you believe is the biblical definition of election? I think that may be helpful even for those who know nothing about Calvinism. Tom Peter in.

Chapter 1 of his first epistle says elect according to the foreknowledge of God. Let me just turn there quickly. So we can see exactly what he says. Election is never to salvation But it is to certain blessings.

Well, there you go less than one minute in while he's turning to attempt to do the old foreknowledge thing. And and of course he has been challenged on this. He has had to read supposedly anyway material demonstrating that he is confusing Foreknowledge in the verbal form and in the noun form and things like that.

But as he's going there, what did he just say? Election is never to salvation. It is only to particular. It's particular blessings. There he goes again. Even though he's been shown second Thessalonians 2 13 and he's not gonna even mention the text.

He's going to repeat what he has to say. That's just the way it is. Wow, okay We Have at 1122 a text message dadada dadada. He just went on and on about how intelligent design and the infallibility of scripture should never be allowed in academia and how dangerous it Is and people try to debate.

I think it's him all the time and he'll never allow it because it's such a waste of time. And on and on that's the text message that I just just received so evidently Dr. Dr. Lee Carter does view his I'm sorry.

Well, he does view his his classroom as his private kingdom and Only viewpoints that are his own will be expressed there. Despite the fact he says he wants people to express other viewpoints it not the case, but and Christians need not apply and that's just sort of how things are.

So I Will be interested in hearing this because I will get to hear it. Maybe while writing and who knows maybe we'll get to play some sections of it here on the dividing line. Why not? So Anyhow, yeah as people are saying a channel, you know typical professor.

I will say what I say. Do not challenge me. I will not defend what I say. I can't document what I say. I can't back up what I say. And that's that's that's the left In academia, that's that's the left just the way it is.

And so there you go. Won't waste time, you know, it's waste time debate those folks. Don't listen to what they have to say. Just listen to me, you know, that's The clearest sign of someone who clearly has nothing meaningful to say whatsoever.

So there you go. So we we can we go back from from that To Dave hunt as he continues on to demonstrate that he hasn't learned anything. Honestly, I don't you know from the very first time we met Dialogued on this subject.

I don't see that. There's any willingness on his part to learn anything about the position that he is. He is addressing.

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit. This is verse 2 unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. So we're elected unto a life of obedience.

Now it's elect according to foreknowledge so Election is not like God says any meaning anymore. I'll elect you to salvation and I won't elect you. But it's according to his foreknowledge. What would foreknowledge have to do with the election?

It means God must have known something ahead of time About these people that he's going to elect. What would God have to know if he's just favoring One person over another. He doesn't have to know anything.

So it is always if we went to Romans chapter 8 predestined.

Is the same thing? Now I just note in passing. I realized none of these things are really new along those lines but. He is he is confusing. And Predestination and election similar terms, but they're not the same term.

Remember what question was he asked here? We differ on the meaning of election. What's the first thing you have to do in answering a question like that? You have to define it. Not well, it's according to foreknowledge.

I interpret foreknowledge this way and I'm not gonna deal with everything that's been shown to me that I'm misdefining what foreknowledge is and and. And then I'm gonna go over here and I'm gonna talk about procrastination.

I'm gonna assume that that's the exact same thing and then this is this is. Not how you do meaningful biblical exegesis, but it's it's definitely the Berean call way.

He liked it means he's been predestined to something. And let's see what it says. For whom he did foreknow. He also did predestined. Predestined what to salvation. Predestined to be conformed to the image of his son that he might be the firstborn.

Among many brethren God didn't have to make us his children. He could have put us on a planet out there somewhere delivered us from hell. So we're predestined to certain blessings if we went to.

Now, of course if those blessings happen to be salvation or require salvation then that would have to come first. Right, but no what these people are saying is that God's choice definition of his his his choice in election Is just that those who believe will experience these things.

But who will believe is not a part of that by the way, just so you all know further text messages coming in. Someone is very good at texting. I won't tell you all the different ways that she can text but The same girl who said she'd be good on his money.

Remember in the thing He had said a hundred bucks to anybody who can tell me who wrote Matthew Mark. Look at him. Listen this had a copy of your letter that a teacher at GCC. She knows had read and told her about so that means other teachers at Glendale are aware of the letter and hence have been Passing it around and there's some discussion of it.

And so I found that that quite interesting. So anyway, just thought you you all would know want to know about that so those of you who have been reading the blog those of you who Don't read the blog have no idea what I'm talking about and don't really worry yourself about regions.

Chapter one.

We get the same Teaching once again, that's what it says According as he has chosen us unto him chosen us in him before the foundation of the world. So whether it's elect chosen Predestined foreknown, they're all basically talking about the same thing.

Let's just throw them all in the same box. Certain people that God knew would respond to the gospel.

Not where has he established that there are certain people that God knew would respond the gospel. How do you know that? Well, cuz he can see future events. So they they didn't. There's nothing they could do about it.

He just knew that was gonna happen, right? I mean again. Just like when dealing with George Bryson you want to be able to ask these questions you want to be able to force them to come up with a meaningful consistent doctrine of God and his knowledge of the future and.

And whether God changes and whether God's knowledge of future events is perfect and complete. But you can't do it because they just won't expose themselves those things now I'll give George Bryson credit.

Some of you been wondering have been asking questions. By the way, I'll mention this in passing a George Bryson wrote to me about a month and a half two months ago. Now. I'd have to go look I wanted to do six Debates in 2008.

Six debates. It's one every the month now. I know who's supposed to be paying for this. And and you know where it's supposed to happen and facilities and all the rest of stuff wants to six debates with me in 2008 I said dude up.

That's that's a lot. How about a two-nighter instead of instead of doing six debates? How about we do a two-nighter and You know that way you can get set up and you only take one trip and so on. I haven't heard back from but it took me a long time to get back to him.

So You know, he travels a lot. I travel a lot we'll see I might drop another line and see if he if he got my note or whatever, but. So that's up in there. Then I Get a phone call. Was that yesterday? What did the church call yesterday a church called and We have.

What's the vintage of the of the internal phone system late 70s early 80s. Remember you got it. No, no, no, you got it at the you got it at the at the yellow front place. Remember? You're like two generations of phone systems behind here.

The vintage of the one we're using now is in the mid 90s. Okay, I thought you got these at y 'all at the old ways through that way. We gave that one to a small trip. Yeah, you're right. That's right. That's right.

That's right. So anyways it but it's eBay has come along since then and I was able to work my magic. Alright, so that's good. That's Boy wait for it wasn't dad about to turn in a Wind it up. But anyway, I don't like using voicemail.

Okay, I Don't like using voice me unless it's on my cell phone. My cell phone tells me it's there. I can get to it easy. I don't I don't like this internal so this internal stuff so I come into my office and there's this annoying blinking light okay, and I think I've actually let that light blink as long as like six months in the past before I bothered to get rid of the stupid thing.

But so I went right for it and here it's a voicemail from a church in Northern, California somewhere I Only heard part of it. I started listening to it and they want to they were talking about possibly hosting a Debate with Steve Gregg up there on Calvinism great fine.

Wonderful. Someone had mentioned that to me I think it may be the church. I even looked up online at one point. But You see on my cell phone and every cell phone I've ever owned if you want to fast-forwards.

You can save a message you hit three. Well on our phone system if you hit three it's gone it is deleted its history. It doesn't fast-forward doesn't say are you sure it's just it's gone. So I hit three and I don't know who called.

I don't know what the church was. I have no way of contacting them. Nothing. I have no way of getting hold of so what I did is I wrote to Steve Gregg and I said, um the church called and I don't know who it was and Could you tell me who it was so I can get back in touch with them so that we can follow up on this because they were talking about at least through the part of the message that I heard the possibility of you and I doing a Debate there, but I accidentally erased it and I haven't a clue what church it was.

Don't remember names nothing have no way of following up at all. So I haven't heard back from him yet. But so there might might come something we've wanted to do that and people keep asking. Hey, when was you know?

When was. When you could debate Steve Gregg and blah blah blah, and so maybe that will. That'll be yes. Someone's saying Twin Lakes Baptist Church. I Maybe I don't remember. I I didn't even listen to the whole thing so it was you know, I was just trying to fast-forward it to save it and it's gone and So we're not going to be sending me any more voicemails in the internal system.

Because it's it's not gonna work. We have but multiple people calling in at the same time. Maybe they all know who it is. Now, that's possibility, but anyhow. Yeah, that that sounds like someone who's calling to do an interview with me rich.

That'll be at one o 'clock it's supposed to be at one o 'clock my time not 1130 so I'm doing a Interview for somebody else and they're probably calling right now and thinks it's the radio program or doesn't realize it's radio program.

So anyhow, we will see what happens with with all of that. So maybe something will happen with George Bryce and maybe someone happen to Steve Gregg yet here in in.

2008. We can certainly hope so and he knew that before him and It's dependent upon their Reaction whether they believe in Jesus or they reject him. So let me read it from Ephesians chapter 1. According as he has chosen us in him Before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.

Having pre-destined. And what's the direct object of choosing? It's us not the believers. Those who by their own free will believe and therefore he can do these things for them and so on and so forth.

Related us up to the adoption of children. So it's the same thought. Why would God choose? Certain people don't have to remember when he chooses. It doesn't mean That's not enough because we get that in John chapter 6 Jesus says have not I chosen you Twelve and one of you is a devil he chose Judas.

In other words.

Chose him for what in John 17. It makes a very clear distinction. He is the son of perdition. So how can anyone read that and go see that's the word choose. And so God can only choose for one thing. You can't choose some for salvation.

You can't choose Judas for Apostleship and then to be used the son of perdition and no no no choose has to always have the same meaning. It's just like love, you know. I mean if God loves you then he just loves you and and there can't be redemptive love and there can't be common grace.

And no, no, no, no as long as God loves you. Then he just he just loves everybody in hell just as much as he loves everybody in heaven. He will for eternity. He's gonna be schizophrenic for all of eternity.

He's gonna love everybody who stand on the parapets of hell Screaming out their hatred toward him just as much as he loves those bowing and adoration his feet. Yes, cuz there's only one meaning of love just there's only one meaning of choose to he's giving them the opportunity.

To be what he wants them to be but it is still up to their choice. They have a choice.

Yeah, just let me interject this I was gonna get to that and I'm glad you got to it right away. Could you say that Judas was one of God's elect? He had a purpose for him see at the beginning you said it was just unto blessings.

But if God has a purpose, for example, aren't the Jews God elect not all of them are saved.

But he did have a purpose for the in the Jewish people. Yeah, and the purpose was to bless them. That's why I said it's under a blessing the adoption of children and so forth. Now when Jesus said in John 15, you didn't choose me.

I chose you. Thomas was that. See you didn't choose me. I chose you.

Well, Tom, actually that's about being chosen to point into apostleship. Anyways, I but again, you know, I Feel like going back and playing the. I know more about Calvinism. Most Calvinists do quote, but we won't do that if you're the owner of.

Some business and I respond to an ad in the paper and for a job offer. And I take my test or whatever and and you you hire me. You could say to me You didn't choose me. I chose you but that doesn't mean I as your employee didn't have some say in this.

You didn't force me to work for you. What it means is you have the last word? I can't force myself on you. Jesus is saying you didn't choose me. I chose you. I Initiated this but it still is up to you whether you want to be what I have chosen you to be.

Mm-hmm.