Trinity and Transgenderism, The Classical Ponderer, and My Thoughts on the G3 Situation

Trinity and the Category Difference Between God and Creatures

Well, greetings, welcome to The Dividing Line. It is Tuesday, the 13th of May. Happy birthday to my son, who is, you ready for this? Rich 39 today. That means next year, the black balloons and then the whole nine yards, you know.

Yeah, the happy birthday dirge. Yeah. Everything starts going downhill. Honestly, things didn't start going downhill for me till about mid 50s. We didn't close the door all the way. Till about 50, after 54.

So, you know, maybe, maybe he's got a little while left to go. I don't know. But yeah, when you're, when you're oldest is 39 and your oldest granddaughter will be 16 in, in December. Yeah, it just, it makes you, makes you one of the old guys.

But that's okay. I'm still, I'm still on track. I'll tell you now, my goal, and I look at this age, goals are more wishful thinking than anything else, but at least they give you something to do. My goal is, this is what I want to do.

I'm, I'm doing, I shouldn't say what ride it is just because there are nasty people in this audience. But I'm doing a ride in Colorado. I had almost given up on doing them, but I thought, you know, I've done this one a couple of times.

It's going to be a super, super hard effort for me because, you know, last times I did it, I was in a lot better shape. I was a lot lighter than I am now. But I'm still going to try to go for it. And I've got friends up there that go to support me in the ride.

That'll help a little bit to have someone meeting you a couple of times along the route so you don't have to carry as much stuff. But my, my goal is to hit lifetime logged miles of 175 ,000 on that ride.

And I've got to do about 20 miles a day between now and then, basically without any days off, to do that. And then I started thinking about it. It's like, you know, let's try to get to 200 ,000 miles before we croak.

It would only take, you know, 5 ,000 miles a year. And I'm still, I'm still on track for about 7 ,000 this year to get there. And so why not? You know, I've seen some old geezers out there that I was always really impressed by.

And so, yeah, we're going to, we're going to keep, keep pressing on. And, but yeah, when you're, when your kids start getting up there, especially since he's the one that called you Rich the Tingle. That wasn't all that long ago, though.

That was about 36 years ago. Sorry. You got to, you got to admit. Yeah, yeah, that's true. That's very true. I've got a couple of things in my bookmarks that if I don't get to them, they get so old, they'll get run over and get lost.

We have a, an Episcopalian priestess named Reverend Elizabeth Riley. It's a short little thing, but I saved it because I've had a similar experience. The thing I appreciate is she's not ugly. Honestly, I think some of these women try to make themselves as repulsive as possible.

She's got a little nose ring, but it's nothing major. It looks like her natural hair color. She's cute. She really is. So she hasn't done all the stuff to make it look like she's in a Dracula movie or something.

Purple hair, blue, purple, pink, whatever. But she's way out there. Don't, don't think about that. Ask, ask yourself the question, how would you respond to this? Because I actually had responded to this in the same context.

Remember, remember the Dr. Drew show? One of Dr. Drew's co-people, whatever you call them, raised this issue. And one of the things that trips Christians up, if you've never been asked a question before, is sometimes you sound very hesitant in your response because you've not actually thought that argument through before.

So here you go. Here's Reverend Elizabeth Riley. This was from 10 days ago, but here's what she had to say.

Christians, if you are okay with God being three people in one, but you're not okay with people being transgender, I really think you need to examine those two things together.

Okay. Let's, let's start with three people in one. Um, you know, I, I don't expect Episcopalians in general, three, three people in one. Um, I, I do wonder what kind of a definition of the Trinity you'd get from, um, Reverend Riley.

Um, but the lack of accuracy in language aside, the idea is, and this was, again, this was thrown at me in 2016. Um, how can you have a problem with transgenderism in light of the Trinity? And now that I think about it, the guy who raised that question on the program obviously didn't understand the Trinity either.

So part of the response is going to require you to understand the difference between being in person, uh, one being of God, not one person of God being three persons, difference between those terms and what's being referred to there.

Um, but evidently the idea is, well, if, if you could have this kind of sharing in the divine being, then why can't you have this kind of sharing of genders in the creature? Which again, if you just had an understanding of the Trinity to begin with, if you understood monotheism, if you understand the uniqueness of the being of God, and then you understand the, the fact that you don't have one person who decides to be another person the next day, you don't have God the father who the next day decides they're God the mother.

Um, the, the divine, the divine persons are not choices. It's not like you have one person that's split into three or something like this. I mean, I mean, all of that is completely out there. And then of course, mankind's a creature.

We're limited and we're defined by one who is outside of ourselves. We do not define ourselves. We're defined by another. Well, that's untrue of God. There's not another to define God by. So God is self-defined by his self-existence, which is revealed to us as involving the existence of the father, the son, the Holy Spirit as co-equal divine persons in communication and communion with one another.

And that has eternally been, this didn't, you know, God wasn't a Unitarian God one day sitting around going, uh, let's do an MPD thing. Okay. Let's, uh, let's split into three something like that. No, the relationship between the divine persons is eternal.

So this is the way God has always existed in the same way that one God created man, male and female from the beginning. That was his purpose. That's Jesus's own teaching in Matthew chapter 19. And so you have a uncontrolled, unconditioned divine reality.

Nothing outside of God determines what God is. And then you have God creating a creature exists for a relatively short period of time, um, to function within the parameters of it, that creature being a created being made male or female.

There's obviously a massive chasm between those two, those two categories. And that's why this entire argument doesn't make any sense. But the first thing you'll discover when someone raises, cause that like I experienced it, there it is.

I've seen it in other contexts. You're probably going to see it. I'll bet you somebody's thrown it at Charlie Kirk at a, on a university campus someplace. Um, you're going to, you're going to find fundamental misunderstanding and you have a choice to make.

Let's say you were at a Charlie Kirk type thing. Jeff Durbin's done it at ASU and stuff like that. Uh, let's say you were at a Charlie Kirk type thing and someone threw that at you. You have a decision to make and it's a tactical decision.

If it's obvious and it probably will be that they don't understand the doctrine of the Trinity in, in that situation, are you going to have the time to be able to explain it to them? Because it seems to me that the only way you can hold a group there, especially of young people to listen for any meaningful length of time is to keep, to keep your responses fairly short and concise, keep the conversation moving.

So it might just not be the place to have that kind of a conversation. You might say, you know, it, I, I detect some serious misunderstandings of the doctrine of the Trinity. And certainly we detect that upon part of Reverend Elizabeth Riley, um, given the kind of education that they're given in the seminaries.

Um, you can, you can almost forgive her for that. Um, but I, I, I detect some errors in the doctrine of Trinity. I'd be happy to talk to you about that. Um, maybe when we're done here, but your, your focus, if the conversation's on transgenderism, you don't have 10 minutes to do Trinitarian theology.

And if you want to keep your focus there and keep the audience, maybe you've got something going. You can see people are hearing that they're understanding, um, sort of making a side. We'll talk about that a little bit later.

You're, you're wrong to think that these are parallel concepts, but that very creator God, according to Jesus in math chapter 19 said this, and you, you go back to your original topic. Um, that's just, that's sort of a very practical decision type thing that I've seen a lot of Christians struggle with in conversations on street corners, whether it's with Mormons or, uh, whatever else it might be.

There are certain people that there's a, there is a Christian personality that when doing witnessing, as soon as you hear an error, you have to correct it. And if that means being there till, till 11 o 'clock at night, I'm going to do it.

And sometimes the greater good is accomplished by letting that error pass for another time and staying focused upon the real issue and the real topic that you might actually be able to do some good at, you know, in this particular context you're in, uh, which if it was something where there's TV cameras and you're taking, you set up a mic and you're, you're taking questions.

Um, yeah, that would be one where you, and this is true of all witnessing situations. And I've been preaching this to everybody going out to the temple or whatever for a long, long time. You, you've got to have your goal.

You know, if you set up a microphone out there and you've got, you've got nothing you want to, I want to focus on this day. I want to communicate this, that you're going to be everywhere. You're going to, you're going to cover everything under the sun.

Some people enjoy that. I think you need to have a, a focused goal or it's just going to be a food fight. Um, and food fights, some people really like food fights. But like I said, there, there is a, and I can almost see certain people down through the years that have gone out to Mesa and that, that was, that was their way of thinking.

It was, uh, I have heard an error. I must correct. And you could go, look, look, leave it for another time. I can't, they're wrong about it. Those are the people who should not own a computer because they will be on Facebook until three o 'clock in the morning, every morning.

And, uh, that'll be, that'll be the end of that. So anyways, uh, might want to think about that on April 28th, a, uh, fellow called the classic ponderer, uh, wrote a wonderfully kind, encouraging, you know, you know, we think about the, the, how blessed it is when brothers dwell in unity and the, the oil of Aaron flowing down the beard, all that stuff where, you know, we're just so thankful for all those brothers out there that encourage us.

Here's the classic wonder is, is James White is nothing short of a coward. He rages against any positive understanding of Christianity in the function of the civil government, but won't debate anyone intelligent enough to do so.

Now that's not a overly good sentence. Um, but won't debate anyone intelligent enough to do so. I think what he means, I think what he was trying to say is I won't debate anyone intelligent enough to engage that topic, maybe.

Um, but the whole sentence shouldn't have had a return hit after it, because I don't rage against any positive understanding of Christianity and the function of civil government. I, I, I really think a lot of these guys, they just, they read secondary sources.

They don't listen to the program. They don't read anything I've written. They, you know, it's just, you get this, this meme going in these groups and it just sort of accelerates. And it's, uh, I'm sure people have written some interesting books about how fiction becomes fact in social media.

I'm sure if they haven't yet, they will eventually. It's probably some AI bot will do it, uh, pretty quickly. But, um, I, I don't rage against any positive understanding of Christianity in the function of civil government.

I believe that a civil government that desires the blessing of God, um, and wants to long endure should look to, should ask the question, has God, has God revealed the basis upon which we could ask for his blessing?

I mean, think about it. I'm old enough to remember the fat lady singing. Okay. Uh, the fat lady was Kate Smith and she could belt out, God bless America. I mean, God bless Kate Smith. She could sing God bless America.

And if you've never heard it, it just means you're probably a millennial or younger, but, um, us boomers remember it very, very well. And nobody, you know, you, you, you look at world war two and you look at how people, how the government provided new testaments to all of our soldiers that had a forward in it from president Roosevelt, recommending to them the reading of, of the new testament.

You know, that can never happen today. I have one of those new testaments and you can actually find them on eBay if you want to look one up yourself. My fellow elder at PRBC had his dad's from the war.

And, um, so there was a time when it was understood that if we want God's blessing, then there needs to be national repentance. Um, in the century before, during the civil war, you know, both sides called for prayer and fasting and believe that this horrible conflagration was the result of God's judgment, obviously for different reasonings, reasons, depending on whether you're in the north or south, but God's judgment upon sin.

There was discussion of this during the civil, the revolutionary war. So it's, it's been a part of the nation from the beginning to believe that we need God's blessing upon this, this land. As the nation has secularized, that has diminished.

And the result is Episcopalian priestesses thinking that the Trinity is relevant to transgenderism. That's, that's, that's where it's coming from. Um, and so, uh, I don't rage against any positive understanding of Christianity and the function of the civil government.

I do believe, and I made this very, very clear at ReformCon, and by the way, I haven't linked to them yet, but my presentation is on YouTube. Uh, well, yeah, it's on YouTube. If you go to reformcon .org, maybe ReformCon 2025.

I don't know, I'd have looked, uh, but it's up. Okay. Um, I made this very clear, uh, specifically that without the move of the spirit of God, changing the hearts and minds of people. I mean, every day I'm reminded when I go online, there are two completely different nations living within one set of borders.

Positive Civil Government, Sacralism, and the Limits of Christian Nationalism

Um, did you notice, did you see, did you see, are you rich is a little bit out of it right now. Okay. Um, rich has been pulling cable. Now I did not realize you could have this much cable. Our offices are not huge.

They're not small. Uh, we rent offices from a church and, uh, started converting this, which had been the offices of a school and a classroom, one classroom. So that my office is a classroom. My daughter went to sixth grade.

Um, and so as we've had various incarnations of computer stuff in here, you run cable, you know, network cables and stuff like that. Well, we've been here almost 20 years and evidently network technology advances in 20 years, which is astonishing.

I didn't know that. And I guess cabling advances in speed and all the rest of that kind of stuff. So being the rich, massive mega ministry that we are, uh, we just had people come in and do it. No rich is doing it.

So we have, uh, what do you just, just, I guess they're sealing tiles, drop seal. We have drop seal and we put that in ourselves and we, you did. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. He wants to make sure they don't let me do any of that stuff.

Okay. Uh, because they want it to actually to be straight and functional and stuff like that. So we have dropped ceilings with the, you know, those things that I don't care what you do, stuff falls off of them.

You know, I mean, even they're brand new, the floor is going to get nuked by moving any one of them. You leave them up there for 20 years and you live in a desert with dust storms, you move it and you're, yeah, you're going to look really good for a long time.

So for days now, rich has been down here spending hours on ladders, going up and down ladders, sticking his head in here and pulling cables and, and doing all the rest of this kind of fun stuff, which he he's always, he's constantly talking to himself while doing it.

And it is a, a continuous monologue with Tim, the tool man, Taylor. It really is. Uh, it's just, it's, uh, it's just, it's, it's fun. It's fun to watch, but not to be involved in. Anyway. Um, what did any of that have to do with what I was about to tell you?

Uh, you have no idea where I was going. Even if you did, you wouldn't tell me now anyways, right? Yeah. Yeah. The, the, the, the, the debate in terms of civil government, uh, had something to do with, uh, reform con and, um, all the rest of that stuff.

Anyways, uh, that, that, that rabbit done jumped the track. We're going to try to get back on the road now and I'll continue reading here. So anyways, uh, I am, what I am saying is my presentation, uh, on this subject should be up if you go looking for it.

And I made it very, very plain that if you, if you do not have a, a people who from the heart desire to do what's right for God, then the only way that you can quote unquote Christianize somebody is to have a quote unquote Christian prince to go back to sacralism, to go back to nominalism, to go back to forced theology, to go back to executions of heretics.

Um, and there are people who go, yeah, cool. Do it. And I'm, I'm just sitting here going, uh, have you, have you looked at the government? I even look, have you looked at the people that Trump thinks are faith leaders?

Okay. Do you want, you want Paula White involved in determining Christian orthodoxy? Who gets to preach and what gets to be preached? Seriously? Um, yeah, I don't think so. I'm, my mind is going back and I was, what I was going to do is I was going to ask you something, but then I realized you probably don't know anything about it because something was going on recently with, uh, with Trump, but now I can't remember what it was.

There was something on, on Twitter. I could probably find it if I moved away from this, but that's what I was going to, I was going to say, you don't know anything about this because your head's been stuck in the ceiling for three days.

Um, it'll probably come back to me right as soon as the program's over. But anyways, um, so I do not rage. What I, what I would rage against would be a Trump determined Bible translation or the Trump administration determining, uh, what we can teach or preach about transgenderism.

Okay. You say, well, but they're, they're against men competing and yeah, but let's, let's be honest. Trump has never been super strong on the homosexual issue. He's a New Yorker. Okay. That's just not a part of his DNA.

Um, so that's what I would rage against. I would rage against sacralism. I would rage against a violation of a recognition of the sphere sovereignty of individual family church and state. I will rage against that.

We do not need a Christian Franco. Okay. I'll, I'll rage against that. If you want to talk raging, whatever the world that means. Um, sure. Uh, we'll, we'll go there. That's, that's cool. But I do have a positive understanding of Christianity and the function of civil government because I, I believe the promise of Isaiah 42 that the, the coastlands will come seeking God's Torah.

But what, what, what does that require? That requires a change of heart that requires regeneration that requires the work of the spirit. A person not seeking God's law will find ways to either look like they're keeping God's law while violating it or just simply violating it openly.

The only way to fundamentally end the transgender nightmare in Colorado is for a change of hearts of the people in Colorado. So they're not electing the nut burgers in the legislature and the governor who have a rebellious anti-Christian worldview, which means they have a worldview which causes them to be constantly fighting against the world in which they live.

We live in God's world. They don't get to change that. And when you choose to live in that fashion, you're not going to have happiness. You're not going to have peace. Um, you're going to have rebellion and destruction.

Social Media, Anonymous Accounts, and the G3 Crisis

I can't see the lights in there, so I evidently, I can see your hand, so I guess that means you want to comment.

Pete. Well, your comment there makes me think of Rush Limbaugh, because Rush Limbaugh's agenda, every show, was about changing the hearts and minds of the American people en masse, and then that is how you change government.

Well, put that into a Christian context, and who does that changing? A Christian prince ain't gonna do that changing. That's just gonna be a bunch of posers walking around afraid of the government for whatever reason, reason A or reason B, both as tyranny, all right?

But when the nation is changed from the heart, when the hearts and minds of the American people have been changed to think in a certain way, as he wrote the book, The Way Things Ought to Be, you suddenly have an entire change in the whole function of the society, but you can't force that.

David. No, you can't force it, and it would come from the grace of God, and I remembered now where I jumped the track. I was going to ask you if you had seen, but then that's when I stopped and said, well, of course you haven't seen it, because there aren't any TVs in the ceiling.

Um, there is a Democrat who has filed charges, filed impeachment charges in the House of Representatives.

Paul. Only one?

David Well, others have been talking about it, but

Paul. It's like they talk about this every day.

David. Well, and the point is, we need to understand that will be the case forever. I don't think we will, without a fundamental change in the population, we will never go back to a situation where that was considered something serious.

David. Um, the left will do this, and if the left takes the House of Representatives in a very short period of time, and it is a very short period of time, um, the only thing that will be happening in the government are impeachment trials.

That's all there is to it. Um, I don't think we have a functional governmental system right now. It's, it is a, whichever side wins, does whatever they want, doesn't matter what the Constitution says, doesn't matter what the law says, the legislative branch is deadlocked and dead.

That's all there.

Is to it. Paul.

I'm, as you know, I have a fairly lengthy commute.

David Yes.

Paul. And when I come in during rush hour, and I'm sitting in a parking lot, um, on the freeway, going nowhere, I'm often reminded of the fact that look at all these people, the thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people that are sitting in this parking lot with me, and all these hearts and minds.

What do these people think? How do these people think? You realize how many of these people that are on the freeway sitting here with me will never darken the door of a church? Their, their entire worldview is subjective, their entire way of thinking is subjective, it's all about me right now, how much money I make, and wanting to make more money, on and on and on.

And yet those same people go to the voting booth?

David. It's true. It's very true. So anyways, um, back to the classic wanderer here, ponderer, I'm sorry. Um, come on White, I thought you were the debater of our age? But no, he won't debate Wolfe as he runs the risk of more people being convinced of Wolfe's propositions, so he reserves himself to chip shots in comment sections.

He's a coward and a vulture. This guy's really kind, loving, so fair, especially because I've never said I won't debate Wolfe. The issue has always been on what? And he says, uh, at the end, he will say, I'll even give you a debate topic.

Is sacralism antithetical to Christianity? Um, how about is sacralism compatible to Christianity? That makes it significantly more usable, but then that will also require the definition of sacralism. So we, that's why I've said, look, if we're going to do something like that, how about we do something along the lines of the execution of Michael Cervantes, um, Fritz Erba, something that has concrete historical stuff.

He may not want to do that because, well, I don't know. Uh, I don't know. I, again, um, there are a number of topics come up. I had mentioned, for example, at one point, um, Theonomy with Jeff Durbin.

Jeff would very much like to do that. I had mentioned presuppositionals and A .D. Robles comes out, I wouldn't even want to listen to that. I don't care what you think, to be honest with you. Um, but he's made comments on it and I would, I would feel horrible if someone wrote to Stephen Wolfe and reversed this on the subject of presuppositionalism and could be just this nasty, just, I would hope this guy would be maybe a little bit more mature adult in person.

I'd like to think that maybe it's just the anonymity. Uh, in fact, let me, let me look here. Uh, yeah, it's an, it's, it's an Anon account. There's no, there's a link to who anybody is, no names, nothing like that.

Uh, it's, it's Anon. So, yeah, you'd think we've learned about Anons by now. Um, but, uh, so anyway, I go back to this, here, if I can find it, there it is. Um, so again, this is this, this is how fiction begins is that in these groups, evidently the whole idea is he won't debate, he won't debate.

And it's, that's not the issue. The issue is what are we going to debate about when, where, how, what's going to be most, most useful. Um, and most of the stuff I've responded to Wolfe about has been on worldview, presuppositionalism, uh, theonomy and stuff like that, but he won't touch those 10 foot poles.

So why aren't you talking to him about what he won't debate about? Um, he doesn't claim to be a debater, so I'm not really sure what y 'all are all excited about. He's only debating Mahler on a subject that walking in 90 of people would agree with white.

He didn't debate him on anything else. He just stacked all the odds in his favor before he proceeded in anything. What? Well, I was saying Can I just take over? No, that's okay.

But you know, you, you, the topic, you know how many different martyrs you could plug into that? Tyndale, you could, you could plug in Jan Hus. So many different ones you could plug into that.

Topic. Yes, sacralism was very successful, yeah. Yeah, I, I don't know that they would want to defend those, but the reason I mentioned Erba and, uh, Serratus is because it was Protestants. This was the Protestant Franco situation, you know.

Ah, but back to what you just said, he's only debating Mahler on a subject that walking in 90 of people would agree with white. Uh, no, I'm agreeing, I'm debating him on a subject that had just been within a few days of my being in contact about this, had just been enunciated by Corey Mahler in his conversation with Samuel Say.

So it, it just come up. It is, I think, one of the clearest, um, illustrations, demonstrations of the non-gospel-centric understanding of the Stone Choir cult that you could possibly have. Um, yeah, it's a given that I think anybody who reads the New Testament goes, huh, everything I've read about the work of the Holy Spirit amongst God's people has nothing to do with ethnicity at all.

It's just, it's just, how can anybody come up with that? Well, he's going to have to come up with it in a very short period of time, and I don't think he's going to be able to do it. Um, so he didn't debate him on anything else.

Well, if you watch the previous two dialogues and discussions, he kept going to the same stuff. Um, he just stacked all the odds in his favor before he proceeded in anything. I'm not the one that forced Corey Mahler to say, no, God cannot sanctify blacks as much as whites in his conversation with Samuel Say.

I had nothing to do with that. You call yourself a ponderer? You ain't pondering very well. Now, although white could be 100 correct in what he says in this debate, maybe, possibly, he will be rhetorically obliterated.

Okay. He's going to fall into the trap he himself built. Oh, I am now shaking in my boots. Well, those are actually ultra running shoes, but I'm shaking in them. Um, he doesn't explain why this is. And have, have you listened to the last two of the things that Mahler did?

Yeah. He's calm, cool, and collected, but he's got the passion of a insurance salesman. It's true. I mean, I mean, come on. Uh, you know, people go, she's very self-controlled. Yeah. He's boring. What are you talking about?

I'm sorry. You said that. And I'm thinking the Kirby vacuum salesman, the guy who comes into your house and you can never get him to leave. He will just sit there.

And keep talking until you buy. No, I'm not really thinking about that. I'm thinking more, you know, yeah, not, not a whole lot of passion. So, uh, anyway, so finally he says, I feel the up, up most pity for white.

I think you mean utmost U T M O, not U P is P no P and T are really far apart on them. I think you just don't know what the word is. Um, I feel the utmost pity for white. Yes. We can tell your, your kindness and compassion is just flowing out of your keyboard.

Um, but if Christian nationalism as is, is as bad as you say it is, well, depends on which Christian nationalism we're talking about. Um, but the, the stuff that's producing the kick out all the blacks, Chinese, and Latinos and make America white again.

Um, yeah, that's pretty bad. Um, if Christian nationalism is, oh, and the Jews too, the Jews, I've got to go. Yeah, you bet. Okay. But if Christian nationalism is as bad as you say it is stop being a dishonest coward and debate wolf already.

Well, how about you do enough reading to find out what in the world you're talking about? Cause right now it was pretty obvious. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Uh, you've got a really small audience.

So you just figured no one's going to notice it. I'll even give you a debate topic is sacralism antithetical to Christianity. We just talked about that. Um, so yes, dishonest coward. It's so easy for people to do that kind of thing when they don't figure you're ever going to see it.

But I did, I did. And so there you go. Uh, so again, if, if, if any of you know, this, uh, this brilliant fellow here, again, it's called the classic ponderer, you know, and you know, he, he's got 1 ,259 followers.

That's, you know, it's better than 500, I suppose. Uh, but, um, another non account out there doing its, uh, doing its damage, doing its thing. So, uh, so there you go. Um, all right. Well, it's 13th of May.

We've got about 20 minutes left in the program. I hope by now everyone is well aware of the fact that there will not be a distinct dividing line program on Thursday. Um, because at five o 'clock, uh, our time, which is currently Pacific daylight time, which for us is always mountain standard time, but who cares?

Anyway, five o 'clock on Thursday, which is eight o 'clock Eastern time. We will have that debate. The debate will last about two hours. Um, and the debate topic is, can the Holy Spirit of God sanctify a black person as much as a white person?

His arguments could be no, simply because the starting place that, uh, blacks are inherently more evil. I would assume he will probably, uh, try to wander off into Genesis 9 and 9, 25, 27, and do that kind of stuff or that it will just stick with population genetics issues or crime statistics or something.

I don't know. We will find out. We will be ready for it. I obviously will be presenting a new Testament presentation of the simple fact that everything in all of scripture that talks about the Holy Spirit sanctifying anyone has nothing to do at all with ethnicity.

God's spirit is not limited by ethnicity. God's spirit sanctifies all the elect. By the way, that's what the Lutheran confessions say too. Just might throw that in there for the fun of it. We'll see if we have enough time to, um, so it's going to be the, the contrast could not possibly be any more strong than it, than it will be in, um, in what happens on, um, on Thursday.

Um, so be watching for that as far as that's the replacement for the dividing line, um, type, type of situation. Um, they, they've asked me to do an after party type thing. I, I don't know if I'm going to have any interest in that.

We'll see. Uh, you can, you can ruin a clear debate by making it go so long that you can throw enough dust and dirt in the air to obscure what had actually taken place. So I'm not sure that's really worth it.

So yesterday morning I get up and, you know, I, I feed the herd. We currently have, have a herd of cats. Um, we found a home by the way, for the little twins. Uh, I mentioned that a feral kitty. Yes. Yes.

That's a nice, that's a nice, nice part. I've, I've told you before we had a little feral kitty sneak into our house. We have a cat door and replacing the cat door. The guy's coming tomorrow. I hope we can get it done tomorrow.

I don't think we will get it done tomorrow, but I sure wish we could get it done tomorrow because I need that cat door, uh, because the feral kitties have figured out the cat door and I can't keep them out.

And so my kitty has got to be able to go outside and they're, they're coming inside. And, uh, anyway, um, this little feral mama came in and had her kittens under the chest of drawers. One of them died early on.

That's not unusual. Um, we helped her as much as we could. You know, we, I'd be down there in my hands and knees and putting moist food in for mama to eat. And, and, uh, um, she's still coming in. She's been a great, she's a funny looking little thing.

She really is. She's not pretty. Uh, but she's been a great mom. She really, she keeps an eye on those things and they're eight and a half weeks or almost nine weeks now. Normally they're just wander off and do their thing by now.

Um, so two of them are twinsies. They literally are the, and we know exactly who their dad is too. There's a big Tom that's like, Hey, that's dad. There's the kids. There's no question about that. That's real obvious.