A Few Topics then Back to Orthodoxy

Greetings and welcome to The Dividing Line. Boy, you never know where your cross ends up until you have a camera in front of you. Hey, how you doing today? It is Tuesday, June 30th. I'm not sure how half the year has gone flying by, but it has.

Believe it or not, 2027 is on the way, and it's less than six months till Christmas. And my wife mentioned, what was she doing? She said something about how she was getting some early Christmas shopping done, and I'm like, excellent.

You're the first one that mentioned it, and that means I can start listening to Mannheim Steamrollers. Well, anyway, yes, time passes by. Just so you know, real quick, heading for Colorado, don't have all the specifics and stuff, but we have managed to arrange a number of stops up there.

You know, this is one of those situations where you sent me the stuff from Aurora, and I read it, and I think I responded to it, but I'm not 100 certain. So if you're the church in Aurora, I'm sorry, I thought I had responded to it, and it just now hit me.

Did you? Did you write it and not send it? What did you do? I haven't, I've never had a secretary. Rich has never been a secretary. I've never asked him to be a secretary, so yeah, that's true. So I'm hoping to work out something there at a church in the Denver area, because I looked up where the church was located, and how far, and I did all that stuff, but did I respond to the email, is the question.

Please try to remind me to do that this evening, if you would, please. And anybody else who's listening, go ahead and drop me a line tonight. If you're in our signal group, you know, sometime this evening, hey, did you, and that's about the only way I'll remember to do things like that.

I did forget to, as soon as I got back after the last program, I opened up a file. I'm using LibreOffice now. It's the free thing, because Mac wants me to pay to use the programs I've used for the last 15 years, and I'm not gonna do it.

It's not gonna, I'm not gonna upgrade. So I'm having to learn what? Oh, okay, the pastor says he had heard. Sorry, pastor. I thought I'd written. Let's do it. I'm on, I've already looked up the location, know how to get there from where my RV park is.

I've done everything, except told you about it. Hopefully, he's younger than I am. Okay, good, good. Because if you're my age, you're sitting there going, yeah, I understand. I get it. You know, it's just how it works.

Anyway, isn't this amazing how communication happens these days? We never could have, when we first fired up that real audio server, we couldn't have dreamed about sitting here in front of cameras and having people in Colorado in a chat channel listening.

Oh man, it's, yeah, I still remember when we gave my dad for Christmas, we gave him, well, the first, not LED, because I remember the first LEDs too, but the LCDs, liquid crystal display. I remember when we gave him a, it was simply a little travel alarm that had that thing in it for Christmas.

And he cried. This was a guy who worked his way through Moody Bible Institute, replacing vacuum tubes in TV sets. Okay. That was the level of technology at the time. And so he got to see some pretty, pretty amazing, amazing things.

And we're seeing some pretty amazing things too. Anyways, so yes, Aurora, put it down. If you have to get ahold of Rich, and he can send the email to me, but I think I can track it down. All that to say that I opened up the file and I started creating nice, for the screen, graphics with decree number three from the Confession of the Scythias, that has the Greek and the Hawaiian Yars, for those of you who weren't with us last program.

This is the most widely accepted official, official by whose standard is one of the questions, but official statements from Eastern Orthodoxy as to their view of Protestantism in general, but much more specifically Reformed theology.

This is, in any conversation we're going to be having with responsible Eastern Orthodox representatives, and I guess we probably can't completely avoid interaction with the ortho bros, but I really want to have responsible interaction with like Greg Trulia.

We're arranging, you know, Stephen DeYoung is considered, you know, viewed highly by a wide variety of people, but there are people in Eastern Orthodoxy that consider him a modernist. Okay, you know, that's the way it is, but in looking, in even thinking past Stephen DeYoung, and you know what, I just realized we never talked about that on this program.

We announced it, but apologetic dog, we announced this. I'm sorry. Hey, I was sitting in front of a camera. So, you know, we announced last week of the week before that, that in March, early March of next year, I'm debating Dr. Stephen DeYoung, Father Stephen DeYoung, another Eastern Orthodox representative, published widely known on the atonement in Jonesboro, Arkansas, and what I haven't told you is we're also working on making that a double header like we did the last one, where it'll actually be two debates, one with Stephen DeYoung and one with someone locally there that denies penal substitution atonement, and Jeremiah and I will team up for that one, sort of like we did the team up last time, though there will be at least 67 pounds less of me on the stage this time around than last time.

Anyway, which hopefully will have some positive impact on certain other areas. But anyway, so yeah, we're looking at debates in March, and then we are trying to set up an in-person debate in April in Salt Lake City, Ogden, Logan, Provo area up there in Salt Lake City on the LDS priesthood.

I've had a ministry contact us and say they have someone that they've been dialoguing with that they consider to be a responsible LDS apologist, and he wants to debate the Trinity. Okay, that's fine, but I want to debate the priesthood.

I've debated the Trinity with Mormons many, many times before. He wants to do an online Trinity debate. Well, okay, but that's going to have to be after, right now, everything has to be after the Craig Trulia debate on October 17th.

I'm not doing any debates. I'm taking this trip. It's the only trip I'm taking between now and then. I'm not doing anything between now and October 17th other than this trip up to Colorado. I've been going up to during the summers for a long time.

I used to do big, huge, massive bike rides while I was up there. I'm not doing the big, huge, massive bike rides despite the fact that I now weigh as much as I did when I was doing the big, huge, massive bike rides in the past.

But I'm much more balanced now than I was back then. But still, it's beautiful to get to go up there. I will do some riding around and riding at high altitude and stuff like that. I'm looking forward to that.

Anyway, so we're looking at LDS debate or debates in April as well. And then there are a few other key topics that would need to, I think, be addressed in regards to responsible representatives of Eastern Orthodoxy.

Let me just mention this really quickly. David Wood has gotten into this area. Eli Ayala did a seven and a half hours thing a week ago this past weekend with a number of people. Samuel Farag just got his book.

I wrote the foreword for it. Eastern Orthodoxy through the Lens of the Soul of Scripture. I told you about who's Orthodoxy and Evangelical or Eastern. And now here's another one coming out. And this came from Free Grace Press, which is the publishing company of the seminary that I'm a professor at.

So you want to get hold of that. And so, last stuff coming up that should be pretty exciting. But again, looking for responsible folks. David Wood did a presentation on the ortho bros. And he said in that, he said, Hey, I've never, never really had much interest in this.

But man, they're all over the place. And they're like, you know, you have to debate us. You have to debate us. They have to debate us. He's doing some digging around and finding really interesting stuff.

And of course, who's the main person he runs into, but Jay Dyer. And he reads from an article that I need to track down, just simply for my own interest, about the inside activities of the ortho bros and their relationship to Russia and all this other stuff.

And Jay Dyer puts out a response to it, which is nothing but pretty much a confirmation of what was being said. I don't think he realized that. Anyway, I don't want to dive into a lot of that stuff. I don't want to get in.

I mean, some of those ortho bros are nasty. I mean, their language. I'm not just, you know, once you go with profanity, you know, you're blocked, you're done. I don't care. You just, whatever your religious stuff is, you just go do your thing.

But it is fascinating to see the development. We're gonna be looking at one thing, though. I just realized I didn't cue up the video. Oh, drat. That's gonna be, that's gonna be tough. We'll see. I'll have to do it at the end.

And we'll see if I can pull it up. But yeah, it would have to be in Proton Drive, not in the other thing. Anyway, let me just look here real quick. Yep. Okay, I've got it. Well, yes, I do have it. Whether I can find the exact spot or not, we'll see how much time we have.

So anyways, lots of stuff coming up. David Wood is going to be debating Jay Dyer. I'm not sure what that's going to look like. I'll be perfectly honest with you. I'm having to mute a channel here that's going ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding all over the place on my watch right now.

I'm not sure that's gonna look like. But it's gonna be fiery. There's no way that when you put David Wood with Jay Dyer, that's gonna be wild. No Tways about it. The only thing that worries me at all about it is, David has admitted, I'm just brand new to this.

And I've been looking at this stuff for you know, over a year now, and I feel brand new to it. So that could be a challenge for David. But, you know, as long as he, you know, I think they're focusing on icon veneration, but like I said, there's a ton of stuff that goes into that conversation, if you want to be prepared for the best the other side has to offer anyways.

And it's it's not what most evangelicals would expect. It really isn't. You really need to know Nicaea too, you need to know Basil, you need to know the development of, you know, the entire iconoclastic controversy and everything to really have the standing to address it on the level it needs to be addressed.

But anyways, it'll certainly be interesting when that takes place, and I'm not sure when it's going to take place. That's the other thing, you know, a lot of these almost online stuff, you know, these, I see these ortho bros, and they're doing debate reviews, and they'll do three-hour debate reviews from a two-hour debate, you know, and it's just the amount of stuff they're putting out.

They just live in front of cameras. I mean, I have to go, do they have a normal life someplace? I mean, are they married? Do they have children? Are they gainfully employed? Or is this how they make their money, you know, Patreon or something?

I don't know. I got no idea. But they'll do these things, it's like, well, you need to debate me like next week. And I just sit there, and I go, I'm really, really seeing just how far removed I am from the younger generations these days.

Like one of the LDS guys that I may get around to showing you here in a minute, he did this hour-long webcast, and someone at church pointed it to me, and then I looked up the section, because it had to do with John 1 -1 and stuff like that, and I'm gonna be doing a sermon at Apologia on the 12th, dealing with the various apologetic attacks on John 1 -1, and, you know, what Jehovah's Witnesses say, what Muslims say, whatever.

And so I'm looking at this thing, and this kid, and he looks like he's 22. He really does. Looks like he's about 22 years old, and he's sitting there against a really bad background. I mean, he's got the thing on where it has a background, but every time he'd move, then it was, I mean, it was just super poorly done.

Just zero concern about, you know, this is a real background, by the way. You know, that's an actual wall. Rich made that, you know. So he looks bored out of his mind, like he'd rather be anywhere than where he is.

It's just sort of like, you know, so what's your question? Okay, well, I think, and I'm sitting there going, why does anyone care what you think? You're 22 years old, and you're opining on stuff that you clearly don't know anything about.

You read something, you asked an AI about it or something. You're talking about languages you clearly cannot read. You have spent no time in. You've taught nobody anything, and you look like you're bored out of your mind.

Why do people watch this? I've got absolutely no idea, but that's what's happening online. I guess we have to be, we have to be aware of that kind of stuff. All right, before I jump into this, I showed you Sam's book and the Confessions of Zesithias.

I was just trying to tell you, I didn't save the file I started working on with the Greek and the English. I have all of Decree 3 ready to go. I saved it locally instead of in one of my online things, and so I don't have it here.

So we'll do something else to help with the background of that. But there is just one thing. I got this in the mail, okay, a couple days ago. Prophecy Countdown, a Bible prophecy conference coming live to Phoenix starting Wednesday, July 8th.

And I look at this thing, it goes Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday, it goes to the 15th. And I'm like, continuing topics, USA and Bible prophecy, what heaven is really like, the rapture, fact or fiction, and more.

And so on the front, of course, you got the Dome of the Rock, and you've got big old tanks firing guns, and you've got Ukraine and Gaza, and you know, this is a, I don't know what this cost to print, and then to ship to the resident, that would be me, at my address.

But I got this thing, and you know, I'm not trying to put these folks down. I would imagine this is probably a dispensational premillennial group and, you know, probably gonna have some ideas about the Antichrist and a few things like that.

I don't know. But I have said so many times, you know, we did a conference three weeks ago up in Prescott on the reliability of Scripture. Which, by the way, is foundational to anything they're gonna be saying, if they're gonna be quoting from the Bible.

Bible's not been accurately transmitted to us, then whatever you're doing quoting from, it's really not gonna get you anywhere. And so, we had, I don't know, 30, 40 people, maybe, somewhere around there.

And I even mentioned, just in passing, and I say this at all the conferences, because I'm talking about, like, Islam, or biblical reliability, or something in church history. I said, you know, if we'd announced this as a biblical prophecy conference, and said that we were going to be presenting new evidence as to the identity of the coming Antichrist, we wouldn't have enough seats for the people who'd show up.

But when you're doing something more foundational, basic, and lasting, because those conferences have been going on for a long, long time, I remember the people that proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Henry Kissinger was the Antichrist.

And nobody even remembers Henry Kissinger any longer, even though, like I say, he's 143 years old. Amazing guy. But you can do eternal stuff, but it's the flashy stuff that gets the people to come. It really does.

So anyways, alright, so with that, I mentioned that I ran across this, it was really weird, I'm not even sure how it popped up, but there was this AI-generated summary of about a 16-minute audio presentation that Patrick Madrid posted about the myth of three popes.

Now, I assumed from the beginning that this is talking about the Babylonian captivity of the church, that's what it's normally referred to. The time period in the 14th century, when the papacy left Rome and went to Avignon, France, and that was part of the subject.

And then, after having been in Avignon for decades, there was a split, and someone attempted to bring it back to Rome, but a lot of the cardinals and bishops wanted to stay in Avignon, which is a really nice place, and you ended up with competing claims, and you ended up with two popes.

And Europe was divided for a number of years between the papacy in Rome and the papacy in Avignon. Now, remember, that papacy in Rome came from Avignon, so there's a period of time where there is no Pope in Rome at all.

And then, a Pope tried to return from Avignon to Rome, and that's when the split takes place. So, up on the screen here, this is a, unfortunately, pixelated, it's still readable, I mean it's fine, but it just reminds me of all the old dot-matrix printers we had back in the day.

This is Patrick Madrid, this is what he posted. Rival claims of the papacy during the Great Western Schism, 1378 to 1417, and so you have the different popes listed here. But notice how he puts it. Legitimate Pope, recognized by the Church, rival claimants, anti-Pope.

And so you have this nice table that simplifies everything, makes everything look cool. Now, the problem is, history defies being put into charts. And everybody will have to admit that I have said over and over again, when you see this stuff that says, well, you know, Purgatory was invented in such-and-such a year, that's baloney.

Purgatory is a complex of doctrines that developed at different times in different places, and didn't come to its final formation. In fact, with how Rome works today, what is its final formation? I mean, you've got Catholic answers today defending a doctrine of Purgatory that they did not defend the first time I met Patrick Madrid.

No way. I mean, that has changed. Well, it might be instantaneous, and you know, the Church has never said there's fire involved, and you know, just pick up FX Shoup's book and read it for yourself. It's pretty obvious.

Anyway, you can't put history into a chart and expect it to actually accurately represent what happened. There was a period of time, after the Council of Pisa, where there were three popes. Because the Council of Pisa basically deposed the other two popes, elected a third pope, but the other two decided not to resign.

And so now you've, by the way, this is the mess you get into with sacralism. Okay, you can mock sacralism all you want, but that means you know nothing about history, and you're just whistling as you walk past the graveyard.

This is what happens, because the papacy moved to Avignon, not just because things were bad in Rome. Things have been bad in Rome for a long, long, long, long time. I mean, the pornocracy had taken place long before this.

Rome was a brothel. And it's like, well, you know, personal safety, they need to move to Avignon. No, it was political. And it was the bishops and cardinals that had tremendous power and wealth, wanted a nicer place.

Rome didn't remain, you know, the beautiful, ancient, eternal city, after being getting sacked and decaying for a time, wasn't the nicest place to be. Anyway, this is what happens when you have religion determined by politics, and they're in bed with each other.

And all of this took place because of sacralism. And so, yes, you do, for a brief period of time, have three popes, and then that is healed by the Council of Constance, which burned Jan Hus for believing the Bible.

And for a short period of time, there were some people that were hopeful that conciliarism might be victorious. Conciliarism, the idea that councils are the ultimate authority, because the papacy had not been able to heal itself.

The only way that the papacy became unified again was through a council, and so there were people that were arguing, well, there you go, there's the ultimate authority. That didn't last long. That got crushed by popes, who didn't want to be held accountable to councils.

So, look, you don't have to take my word for it. Go get the Oxford Dictionary of Popes. I think Kelly edited that one, as I recall. I was going to grab it, but I forgot to. Anyway, you don't have to take my word for it.

Go read a secular history of these things. The whole reason I bring this up, and the whole reason I bring this chart up, is this is what you get when you look backwards at history with an organizing principle in mind.

So, once again, legitimate pope. How do you know that? Anybody who was alive in 1385, when you've got Urban VI and Clement VII. How did they know that Urban VI was the proper pope and not Clement VII?

What mechanism did they have? During this time period, what mechanism existed that would have allowed a faithful believer to know which pope was which? Because they're all anathematizing each other. Entire nations line up based on political alliances behind one or the other.

Europe is divided. I mean, this was part of what shook the foundations of the church and would have influence in the Reformation. This is only a hundred years before the Reformation, that this finally gets fixed.

And so, it was in people's memories. Man, it wasn't that long ago. We didn't even know who the Pope was. It wasn't that long ago that the papacy wasn't even in Rome. That damages the claims to the monarchical Episcopate in Rome and the successor Peter and all the rest of that stuff.

People remembered that. And so, here's the point. Nobody, during this time period, nobody could have possibly known that this would be the chart that would eventually be produced. This is completely anachronistic.

It's completely anachronistic. This is what happens when you have a system that tells you, you have to have that continuous line. I mean, I would argue there were all sorts of periods of time where that line was completely shattered by all sorts of things.

Not just doctrinal, but just during the pornography, you're really going to claim these people? This is some kind of authority? Well, yeah. Because Vatican I tells me that. And so, I believe it. And so, I order history, and I see history as I've been told to order history, and see it by my ultimate authority now.

Okay, and that's, we're going to see happens in Eastern Orthodoxy, too. You're going to see what you need to see in history. The whole effort over the past couple of years, for example, to find apostolic, early apostolic, early church icon veneration.

I mean, the equivocation involved in the very terms what is an icon, what is veneration, what is kissing an icon, it's astonishing, but they have to do it. Because it wasn't apostolic. The didn't do it, and the early church didn't do it.

But when you've been told by your ultimate authority that they did, then you start searching for anything that you can somehow connect to it. Even if everybody else stands back and goes, that's not an icon, and that's not veneration, and that's not what you do today.

But, oh, but there's a connection here, and there's a connection. It's because your ultimate authority tells you, and Rome's ultimate authority tells the Roman Catholic, yes, there was a continuous line.

So, therefore, hey, we can make a chart. Despite the fact that nobody alive at that time, or nobody for the next who knows how many generations, could have ever produced anything like this, or given you any meaningful arguments about it at all.

So, this is the problem, again, that Rome's facing today. And that is, when you see Francis and Leo fundamentally changing the understanding of supposed apostolic tradition. When you've got Leo, saying they're saying, the most important thing is not sexual ethics, it's freedom of religion.

And a hundred and seventy years earlier, you have the Bishop of Rome promulgating the papal syllabus of errors, which identifies religious freedom as an error. It's a false teaching. Okay, what do you do with that?

Well, you pope-splain. Well, that wasn't necessarily an infallible statement by either one of them, you know? I mean, you know, he didn't say I infallibly define and proclaim and blah blah blah. You know, you pope-splain.

How are you supposed to know? You can't know. You have no way of knowing. So, all the constants up. Well, solo scriptura creates all this confusion. Well, the papacy creates all this confusion. Isn't that nice?

So, this is the thing you've got to keep in mind. And unfortunately, so much of online interaction and stuff just doesn't even start getting close to dealing with any of this stuff. So, anyway. All right.

So, there's that. And I was going to do this one next time. And since I left Josephus on the wrong computer, we'll throw this one in here and then keep moving forward. I have explained many times the collapse of...

Well, let me give you something while that's up there. While our rainbow stolled... At least it's a guy. I suppose that's the one positive thing that we can bring out of this. Well, I think it's a guy.

Yeah, it looks like a guy. Let me see if I can find this here. Yeah, here we go. Yeah, I just ran across this Daniel Jones guy. Just popped up on my ex feed. Man, talk about a anti-Calvinist zealot. He's a rough one.

Protestia put out something that was really interesting, and I appreciate them digging into this. The Presbyterian Church USA. Now, this guy is United Methodist, but there isn't a symbol full of difference between the Episcopalians, the United Methodists, the PCUSA, the ELCA.

They're all ultra-leftist. Way out there. Abandoned scriptural authority, inspiration, all that stuff. Decades ago. Decades ago. They're the walking dead, okay? They are the walking dead. They still have the buildings, they still have the name, but they're the walking dead.

And the PCUSA and that redeemed Zoomer dude, you know, he's the ones trying to, you know, perform CPR on PCUSA. Same folks. So these are the ultra-liberal, whacked out guys. Remember, we did that debate in 2001 with Barry Lynn on homosexuality at a PCUSA church, but it's one of the last conservative PCUSA churches.

They were trying to fight the trend, fight the direction it was going. God bless them. I would hope they left or something by now. Anyways, the Presbyterian Church USA just revealed that their 227th General Assembly, been around a while.

Sad, isn't it? That they've dropped under a million members for the first time ever. 992 ,158 to be exact. Of course, those are only member numbers on the books. Weekly in-person attendance is closer to 375 ,000.

We previously reported, based on their 2024 numbers, the following. Now listen to this. 34 of congregants are over the age of 70. That used to sound old to me. Doesn't sound nearly as old as it used to when you're only like six years away from them.

Another 25 are between the ages of 56 to 70. Less than 4 are under 17. Another 7 between the ages of 18 to 25. That's probably Redeem Zumer. And 13 between the ages of 26 and 40. The majority of churches are small, with over 45 having 50 or fewer members.

22 .7 of PCUSA churches comprise less than 25 people. 22 .5 have between 26 and 50 members. The number of members who identify as non-binary, genderqueer, increased by 12 from the year before, and more than 31 from the year before that.

So this is a denomination on life support. We will see, within the next 10 years, it's complete collapse. Those buildings will be sold off. Way things are going. Some of them will become mosques. But this is what this stuff produces.

That's the essence of it. It cannot avoid this stuff, because it has no foundation anymore. That's why every single time, every single time, the Mormon, or the Roman Catholic, or the Eastern Orthodox, whatever it is, posts the, oh look!

And they post something like this and go, this is what solo scriptura results in. They are liars. They have no credibility. None. There is no reason to respect someone who does this. That man does not believe in solo scriptura.

The PCUSA does not believe in solo scriptura. They abandoned a belief in the inspiration of Scripture a long time ago. A long, long time ago. So blaming their apostasy on solo scriptura just demonstrates you don't understand solo scriptura, and you don't understand these denominations, and you don't care to.

I would ask you, what do you blame Father James Martin's apostasy on? You know, the one running around? You know, it's funny. These groups will post these, the Roman Catholics are doing it a lot. They'll post these videos of Pentecostals running around, jumping over pews, jumping on the pulpit, and then they'll say, the fruit of solo scriptura!

And then they'll compare that with some stately mass in a cathedral someplace, you know. But there are places you can go online where you can watch all sorts of wild, insane, crazy things happening at mass in all sorts of Catholic churches.

I saw one last week where they were celebrating Pride Month, and this priest is sitting there with a non-binary worship leader, giving everyone greetings and welcome to our services, whatever you may be, and all the rest of this kind of stuff.

So, it just depends on what sources you want to look at, how you want to spin things, but it's all over the place. So, listen to this guy says, I had his name someplace, sorry, lost it, but he's United Methodist, and you know, it's sad, because my dad used to tell me that the Methodist used to preach the gospel, and I knew a United Methodist in seminary.

She was way off to my left then. I have no idea how far out they've gone since then, at least that particular church. But anyhow, let's just listen, it's a minute and.

16 seconds, that's not too long, so here it is. We seek allies everywhere. That's what being an ecumenical church is all about. That's the kind of people we are. And that's also why you won't hear your preachers do a Billy Graham with the Bible.

The Bible says we don't believe, nor did the earliest Christians believe that the Bible in our hands are the literal words of God. It's not that.

Simple. Okay, I'll keep playing it, but I want you to hear that. We don't believe this is the word of God, literal word of God, literal words of God, and the early church didn't either. What is he even babbling about?

I'm sure that's what he was taught in seminary, but he was lied to. He was lied to. That's not the conclusion you're going to come to if you actually read the early church and how they viewed Scripture.

They didn't have the same modernist controversies that we have, obviously, so they may not have used the exact same terms, but the idea that they held to anything that would be like this guy's view of Scripture, I mean, his worldview did not exist anywhere at that time.

So don't even go there. But you heard him say, we do not believe these are the words of God. That's what he said. So you're gonna blame that on Sola Scriptura? If you have an honest bone in your body, stop it.

It's absurd. Anyway,.

The Bible, just like the bread and cup of the Eucharist or the water and the baptismal font, are sacraments. They're not the thing. They point to the thing. The words of the Bible point toward the Word of God, but they are not the Word of.

God. Okay, that is what you are going to be here being taught in a majority of seminaries today. I heard it taught at Fuller. This idea that it's pointing away from itself to something else, that you get to determine what that something else is.

Depending on your tradition or whatever ultimately, there's no objective reality. Now, that's clearly not how Jesus viewed Scripture, okay? That's clearly not how Jesus presented that, you know, have you not read what God spoke to you, saying?

And you know how they get around stuff like that? That's just Matthew's words. That's not what Jesus said. They don't even know. They do not have confidence that we know a single word Jesus ever said.

They don't have any confidence at all. That's why he's got that rainbow stole, that rainbow thing around him. It's because Romans 1? Leviticus? Ah, there was no Moses. Matthew was right. Christianity and liberalism, two completely different.

Religious movements. And that's why we say at the end of every reading of Scripture, for the Word of God in Scripture, for the Word of God among us,.

For the Word of God within us. Okay, so there he is. There is leftist liberalism as it eviscerates Scripture and eviscerates the objective revelation of the Christian faith that we can know anything about.

So, what I'm going to do is... where did it go here? I think this is it. Yeah, since I messed up, and I apologize, and did not transfer... what? Well, what am I supposed to do about it? Nothing I can do about it.

He's complaining over there because of the color of the thing, and there's nothing I can do about that. So, it's not going to look good. If you don't want to put it up, don't put it up. What I did, once I realized I did not have the file... let me give you a little background.

Last year sometime, or maybe the year before, we did a program with Jason Wallace on Cyril Lacaris, and gave the story. There's a great video you can go watch, AncientPaths .TV, the Ancient Paths TV YouTube channel that Jason put together on Cyril Lacaris.

And Cyril Lacaris was the ecumenical patriarch. He was the head of the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Not the head in the sense that Rome has a singular head, but it's an interesting ecclesiastical system.

Certainly developed over time. Not apostolic, but they'll argue that one too. Anyway, Cyril Lacaris was exposed to Reformed writing, and embraced Reformed beliefs, and taught Reformed beliefs. Now, there are some, you know, some of the ways that the East has dealt with this, and some have denied that.

They've said that the Calvinists created what he wrote, and it was all fake, and none of that's true. The video goes through that, refutes that, provides even more evidence that this was most definitely what Cyril Lacaris believed.

It's obvious that it was what he believed, because you would not have had to have had the Synod of Jerusalem in 1672 if Lacaris had not actually taught these things, and if this wasn't part of the whiplash reaction to it.

Okay, so what I'm going to do with the little bit of time we have here, is I want to read through, and actually, I don't know, I don't like that it did this. It actually looks better to leave it like this.

Makes it bigger, and I wish it was, there was a nice easy way to change the background to black, stuff like that, but I am unaware of a way to do that. If someone can tell me there is a way to do that, I've never really... view?

I wonder if there's a view here. What? Use dark appearance for PDF. There you go. Rich is now very happy. You don't know why he's very happy, because he hasn't put it on the screen for you to know, but Rich is very happy now, because I changed the background from white to black, and I'll put it up there for them, so they can see what we're talking about.