May 26, 2005

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 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white.

Patrick Madrid, Envoy, and the White Man’s Burden

Actually hold off calling that number unless you're Xavier or some of those folks who are invited to call in those fine honest Roman Catholic folks from the Planet Envoy web board who We've invited to call in see if they can back up their their slander and libel and ad hominem and all those type stuff they do.

And call it apologetics if they'd like to call in that's fine otherwise hold off on that because we have a lot to do today and I'm sure that as soon as Xavier finds time to get that phone and call in and back up his bravado We'll have a wonderful conversation based upon Facts and things like that, but Instead we've got a couple other things.

We are gonna be talking a little bit more about Patrick Madrid and the envoy folks here we have some I like what's just scrolling down someone sent me a URL and Patrick Madrid to start blogging some stuff and and as normal, you know, I I don't know.

Maybe it's just if I don't have a lot of interaction with somebody over time. It's just my nature to think better of someone and I've just forgotten just how completely disconnected Patrick Madrid is from reality.

I'd forgotten that here's you know, here's a guy who who just keeps using the same arguments. He's been doing this now for many many years and he never interacts with the rebuttal of them. They never grow they never show any, you know signs of improvement or anything like that.

He just ignores the refutations and just keeps going on and on and I don't know I guess I just forgotten about that or or something. I maybe it's just so many of his Fellows have have just gotten you know.

Either completely lost it likes and Janice and gone off into odd stuff. Like matatix and things like that that that he ends up looking better or something in my mind. I don't know but the the Patrick Madrid of 1993 and the white man's burden fame is still around and this is the same guy who puts out a magazine that Has an entire article about me without ever mentioning my name or even giving a single reference.

That the readers can go read the original article that it's allegedly rebutting. I just I don't know how people look at themselves in the mirror when they when they engage that kind of apologetics. I really don't but I've been reminded I was looking at the At the blog and I find that the people being cited Supporting Madrid and how he just all these folks have to run around going.

Oh, I won that debate. Oh, I won that debate. I don't have to do that. Where do I do that? I don't do that. I don't even have to do that. I can just let the debate sit out there and do its thing. It's Madrid that has to do that.

It's Madrid that had to put out the white man's burden and and and now he's putting that back out again. And in fact, even I saw saw it reposted and guess who's supporting him in that such unbiased folks as art Sippo and Ron Tichelli that Tichelli's up at Boston College Tichelli.

He put on he was part of putting on the debate that took place. What was that 96? Was that the date 96? For the Boston College debate Scott Butler and Robert St. Genes versus myself and Rob Zins. I think that was 96 and I'll never forget during the break and This is I don't know what it was during the early 90s.

But Catholic apologists had very small bladders 90s. I I don't know if it was something they drank or just what it was, but They would keep leaving while I was speaking. I'm not really sure how you can how you can debate someone when you don't hear what they're saying.

But these folks would keep leaving during debates. Sippo did that he went and got a coke use the bathroom. He didn't have to care less what I had to say. And you know certainly pronounced it to be all wrong, but you know it's funny he can't even know what in the world I said in some of parts that debate because the tapes were lost and He wasn't there and yet.

He's very confident that he wanted. Just I don't know it's sometimes people think we're making these people up that they that we've just created these folks out of whole cloth, and that's they still exist, but.

Some Janice and Butler would keep leaving during the debate not at the same time thankfully. But they keep leaving during but we get to the break, and that's where you're supposed to you know use the restroom I guess and and I walked out.

To look for the restroom because we're at Boston College. I've never been there before well actually I had in 1993 but it's a different building and I look over the restroom, and I come around a corner and to tell he's out there with.

With some Janice and was there a third person I remember now there's third person, but he's out there suggest. He doesn't see me coming toward them. So I can hear him very loudly saying to Bobson Janice Scott can't Handle this kind of information, and then all of a sudden he looks up, and I'm walking by and if it was awesome.

Becomes very quiet. So he went he was really unhappy. Very very unhappy about the outcome of that debate very very unhappy and so the the people on on the blog saying Oh, yeah, Patrick did great. Into jelly, that's you know that's sort of like asking.

You know Boston fans. How they think the Red Sox did last year over over against somebody else? Do you like the Yankees or the Red Sox well? What do you think they're gonna say? I don't know, but anyway.

We'll look at that look at that a little bit later on instead first. We're starting with. The other side of well, I don't just a defense anymore or not. I think the fence is gone personally. This morning was that this this morning.

Yeah, I was this morning 9 a .m.. Probably Eastern Time. I'd imagine so fairly early this morning Timothy George Who is fairly well known in Christianity today? Dean of Beeson Divinity School of Sanford University executive editor of Christianity Today put out a statement in which he says the promise of Benedict the 16th evangelicals can be glad that the new Pope is not likely to be a mere caretaker and You just where where do you start with this stuff?

John Paul II will long be remembered as the greatest Pope since the Reformation. What does that mean? What what does if you're if you're a Protestant? What is the greatest Pope since the Reformation is that the most Catholic Pope or the least Catholic Pope?

You know what what makes someone a great Pope. I really wonder. He goes on to say The last Last time a man of comparable age was selected to succeed a long-serving pawn. It was 1958 when Angelo Roncalli succeeded Pius the 12th as John the 23rd.

To the surprise of many the good Pope John proved to be far more than a mere caretaker. Listen this he opened Catholicism to the wind of the spirit. By convening the Second Vatican Council, and I'm used to hearing People talking about the wind of the spirit and Vatican to.

The problem is I'm used to all of them who do that being Roman Catholics. What does it mean to be a non Roman Catholic and View Vatican to with its confirmations of Trent and its confirmations of all the sacramental of violations of the gospel of the grace of Jesus Christ.

What is it to view that as the wind of the spirit. I. What I don't know I confess I'm left just speechless going. Wouldn't the wind of the spirit? result in moving away from All those things that violate the gospel.

Maybe you know getting rid of the concept of tradition clearly explained in Vatican to and holding to the absolute supremacy of Scripture and the sufficiency of Scripture and the concept of what wouldn't that be what the spirit does I?

Wow, I I don't know and so then it goes on to say um five point ecumenism. Five Point ecumenism, I'm only used to one particular use the term five-point personally so that one's I don't like that one.

I am NOT predicting that Benedict Benedict 16th will follow suit and preside over a new council Vatican three. I haven't heard anyone who suggests that. But I do believe his pontificate will be one of the one of great moment for the Christian Church not least for evangelicals, so we immediately recognize that we're functioning with a a Given view of the Christian Church here.

That is no longer as we saw with the death of John Paul II it is no longer Defined by the gospel it is defined Culturally it is defined in a broad historical manner. But it cannot be defined theologically.

Outside of maybe the use of the word Jesus Christ. We see this for example right before I went to Italy we were discussing Paul Owen and his betrayal of his alleged alleged apologetic stance and on Mormonism and Saying that his real problem with Mormonism is they don't baptize properly.

You can have the wrong God the wrong Christ wrong gospel all the rest that stuff you can be a polytheist. But if you baptize properly well We can just clasp hands and and have a good ecumenical discussions same kind of background here.

That once again, we're stuck with this issue of what is the Christian Church well Evidently for most people anymore especially in the Academy. There's no way of answering that question. You have to use a very very very very broad Definition you can only look at historical things you can't do it by the gospel.

You can't do it on the basis of Christian truth, that's just too narrow see so it's a it's a Pragmatic way of doing it since that's too narrow and that makes us sound too narrow that we're going to do it a different way and so.

This is an important moment a great moment for the Christian Church, and he says here are five reasons why evangelical Protestants whatever that means anymore. They're not protesting against anything that's for sure and Orthodox believers of all persuasions should be pleased at the election of Pope Benedict the 16th.

The first point is he takes truth seriously. Once again. Well, I guess the the most positive spin I can put on that is he actually believes that there is a truth. The problem of course is every Pope that You know was very involved in the counter-reformation and the Inquisition took truth seriously, too.

So isn't that relevant anymore I? Suppose the idea you know that he takes truth seriously is is meant to mean see we can join with them against the postmodernists or something like that. I I'd like to try to think that that's what it is.

But the problem is when the truth that you take seriously happens to be the negation of the gospel of Christ. Which is more important seems to cross my mind. Doesn't seem to cross Timothy George's mind because his second point is his theology is Bible focused.

Bible focused. Oh Righty. How do you respond to someone who calls themselves an evangelical Protestant. God's Bible focused. Does that mean that he's familiar with? To him what it means is he's familiar with biblical exegetical issues.

Which he certainly is and that does not mean that your theology is actually Determined by scripture or actually you know really impacted in that way. But certainly no one is going to say that Ratzinger does not know His his means of defending his position you know in fact I was I Was looking at one of his books called called to communion understanding the church today.

It's an Ignatius publication prior to his well everything would be prior to his election at the moment but it was interesting because he was. He was talking about in fact. I think I did I mention on is either on the dividing line or one of my blogs I was mentioning.

Some things that he was talking about in regards to the canon of scripture and and things like that. He's talking about the Matthew chapter 16 passage and He makes the comment Let me just read from starting page 58 we cannot enter in all these debates here.

Nor is it necessary for us to do so there are two reasons? Why this is the case. First we have seen that the substance of what Matthew says is mirrored in all the strata of the New Testament tradition however diversely these layers may be organized in other respects.

That was a previous discussion that we would certainly take much In argument against. Anyways such unity of the tradition can be explained only if what is recounted Matthew originates from Jesus himself.

Second He's talking here about the fact that many modern New Testament exegetes, which I would identify as ultra liberals Question the validity of almost anything in Jesus says in any of the Gospels and.

So second we have no need to pursue these discussions further in a theological reflection because for one who in the faith of the church Reads the Bible is the Word of God. The validity of a given statement does not depend upon the historical hypotheses concerning its most ancient form and source.

Everyone who attends the findings the exegetes over a longer period of time knows how short-lived these hypotheses are I? Just stopped for just a moment and saw someone saying Latter-day Saints are in fact monotheistic.

Let me assure st. Pete whoever st. Pete is a lot of things are not monotheistic that is a gross misunderstanding of the concept of Mormonism and the teachings of Joseph Smith, and maybe we have a Mormon in channel.

We can have a profitable discussion with that person that in the in the context channel. Anyways a saying of Jesus report in the Bible is not made binding on faith because it is acknowledged as Jesus word by the majority Of contemporary exegetes and it does not lose its validity when the opposite is the case.

That's for certain. It is valid because Holy Scripture is valid now listen closely it is valid because Holy Scripture is valid agreed and Because Scripture presents it to us as an utterance of Jesus said in other terms.

The guarantee of its validity does not result from hypothetical constructs however well founded. They may it might be but from inclusion in the canon of Scripture which in turn the faith of the church avouches as The Word of God that is as the trustworthy ground of our existence, so what is the ultimate authority in?

Ratzinger's viewpoint here. I mean it's interesting that we would take a Similar we would say similar things we would say majority opinion of exegetes does not determine the validity of these truths. And that it's Scripture that gives these things their theological Reality, but you see I would base that in the nature of Scripture.

I Would base that in the nature of Scripture as being they honest us Whereas Ratzinger has to base that in the church's Alleged creation of the canon and the testimony of the church to the canon of Scripture now you see why there's more than one section on the subject of of the canon in Scripture alone, but it's gonna be really really distracting you'd be trying to talk about Trying to talk about This particular article while watching evidently a a Mormon has has come in the channel and Then of course the cell phone Goes off as well, and unfortunately.

I can't respond to cell phones while I'm while I'm on the air and so anyways. That's gonna be just a little bit on the distracting side so anyhow We will just I will just stop looking at the Mormon discussion ha ha if I can do that.

So his theology is Bible focused well, what is what does that mean in light of what I just read? What what does it mean to be Bible focused? Very very. Okay, I guess we'll have to turn this off because they don't get the point all right.

Somebody in nine five to the nine five two area code doesn't get the clue and doesn't know that we're on the air anyways. Do to do to do number three his message is Christo centric? Well, that's nice.

What is Christa centric mean well? We know what Christa centric means? But what does that mean for Ratzinger? Have you read for example the material? He's written on the mass on the Eucharist is that me is that what it means to be Christa centric now?

I love this. He is Augustinian in perspective. Hey. Does that does that mean the Calvinists are safer. That that's that's nice, and he champions the culture of life. Well, okay, we've we've that's that's wonderful anyway.

I don't know. I was just looking at this thing and as I as I was doing so I just couldn't help but Wonder how many people? Listening to the this material listening reading this material in Christianity they have a sufficient background in anything Ratzinger has written.

Anything in modern Roman Catholic theology or the history of Roman Catholicism to Understand these things in a proper in a proper way. I Just I just cannot begin to think that very many of these folks would honestly have a means of Evaluating this later on he says Roman Catholicism is not a cult and the Pope is not the Antichrist.

Just so evangelicals are not a sect and the gospel call for all people to repent and turn to Jesus is not proselytism. I guess that's meant to Sort of do what the senators did in the Senate this week.

Let's let's deny the two things over here do things over there, and I am the wonderful moderate in the middle. Well, I don't use the term cult simply because I don't like term cult of almost anybody. You know maybe Heaven's Gate fit the term cult.

But the term really doesn't communicate much and and you rarely if ever hear me using the term. Certainly not as much as people would expect that I would I would say Roman Catholicism is false religion.

It does not represent the gospel of Jesus Christ does not possess the gospel of Jesus Christ while claiming to do so. The Pope is not the Antichrist. Well if you use the term the Antichrist as if there is only one I would agree.

However by promoting a false gospel you you take a stance against Christ. There is no neutrality and so when people ask me what I think about the Westminster statement on that the London Baptist Confession statement regarding The Antichrist if you're taking that in an eschatological sense to where you're identifying The papacy as a singular Eschatological fulfillment.

No, I I don't necessarily take that viewpoint. I I don't agree with that that because it basically takes too much eschatology, and you know everybody knows how I think about that, but Beyond that I have said many times that the to take the position take the roles that the Pope takes.

To take the titles the Pope takes Holy Father Vicar of Christ to promote the mass as a Perpetuatory sacrifice the concept of indulgences purgatory priestly confession to deny all those Fundamental issues of the gospel regarding justification is to take the stance of being against the gospel and hence against Christ you cannot Put the two together you cannot I'm sorry you cannot separate Christ from his gospel.

So if you if you trample upon his gospel you're tramping up trampling upon Christ and in that sense not only the Bishop of Rome, but the prophet of the LDS Church and the Governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses etc. Etc. It would all be Antichrist in the actual biblical usage of that phrase.

Because it's used in the plural. It's used in the plural to describe those who had gone out from the church. Yes, Oh show Holy Father is wrong. It is used of exactly one person in the Bible and that is by the Son of the Father.

And so yes, Holy Father is a title of deity and it is only properly used of one person. No, Pope is holy to begin with in that sense and then to use it in the sentence used of Authority and the like is is well downright blasphemous.

I especially give him the fact that papacy is an unbiblical institution as we have demonstrated repeatedly in other debates. We've done on that particular subject and would direct anyone to any of the debates.

We've done the papacy. I think each one of them has a demonstrated that with a fair amount of of clarity. We go on here with with mr. George. Dr. George when he when he says When we come closer to Christ, I wasn't quoting the thing called no man father.

I was quoting John 17, which is the only place where a holy father appears and it's an inter Trinitarian Conversation and if you're gonna take the way that the Eternal Son Addresses the Eternal Father and apply it to a man.

You're missing the point. Hello ding ding ding. That's how much more obvious can this be? Anyways, I'm sorry if you're not watching the channel. You have no idea why I said that when we come closer to Christ we come closer to one another and such Stereotypes are overcome.

That seems to indicate that for Timothy George Catholics and Protestants come closer to Christ and they're just coming closer in different ways and that to come closer to Christ in a Catholic way and to come closer to Christ in a Protestant way are equally valid and That that brings us together in Christian fellowship.

Isn't that interesting? Well, I certainly would disagree with such a such a perspective in any way shape or form and so Benedict new Reformation. That's that's exactly what's uh, where did I forget to read that part?

I think I did. The D. Where was that part? I thought I read it. He makes the statement that he he feels. Somebody's hammering us with fax calls and that lovely don't you just love fax? Fax spam fax spam is just just unbelievable.

There was a statement here for some reason. I can't seem to locate it, but he makes the the statement at some point that Benedict might Might usher in a new Reformation and I just want to go what kind of Using of the term Reformation do we have here?

Oh, there it is. I read it may well turn out to be the harbinger of a new Reformation. Well, what was the old Reformation about? What was the old Reformation about? I don't know. Different lines too, huh?

Hmm. So maybe it's purposeful. Maybe someone's just trying to play around and mess with the program here. Keep people from getting in. I don't know. It's a possibility then again. Maybe Xavier only has a fax.

He's trying to fax his response. It's sort of doubt that eight seven seven seven five three three four one Xavier is for talking to me not sending. Oh, oh I see. What some something for me to review great wonderful lovely?

Bad always bad timing there is nine five two, California. I bet you nine five twos, California. I'll bet you dollars doughnuts that it that's who was calling me. Yep. Yep. Yep, that makes sense that that makes nine four nine.

Is this one? Yeah, nine four nine nine five two. They've got to be fairly closer. So anyhow so much for Timothy George and Christian a .com. Just keep in mind whenever you read anything Christian today It is probably not going to be viewing the Reformation In an overly conservative or historical fashion at that point and that's a sad sad thing.

Responding to Envoy’s White Man’s Burden Repost

So we move on from there to sadder things and That is I like I said, I was sending URL To Yeah, I bet to Envoy encore I Guess this is in essence something similar to a blog and Let me see here. When does this start?

So one was posted today and Yeah, okay, so all this is posted today starting at 526 and We've got letters to this rock magazine about the soul scripture debate with white this this debate was 1993. You know, they're they're living in the past.

The funny thing is they accused me of bringing this up. I'd like to point something out. I responded to Sippo Because Sippo is constantly raging about these things and engaging in outrageously infantile behavior on Patrick Madrid's board.

And their moderators won't do anything about it. Okay, that's first thing I didn't bring it up if you know if that man would actually You know behave like an adult I would never have to raise the issue again or even talk about the issue again, but that's There's nothing I can do about it.

So I didn't bring that up secondly It's Madrid who set out sent out an advertisement about the 1993 Soul scripture debate. I'm just responding to what he himself said in his advertisement. So if I respond to people Insulting my mother and if I correct Misapprehensions and straw men in a published ad I'm the one who's raising problems I'm the one who's constantly arguing etc.

Etc. You can't win with these and Can't they just know how can they not know that? How can they not realize? Well, you know, he's just responding to what I said I I just can't I don't understand it. He even reposts here the white man's burden and I wonder if he'll link anywhere here.

Yeah, probably not. I I didn't look here. We've got William G most Ron Tichelli and art Sippo as our unbiased folks. Well, that's that's Brill. You know, I don't see any links here To Well, there's there's a one link to my blog.

And so at least you go to the blog. You'll eventually be able to find the article. That's refutes this stuff anyways, but James White should probably be on the envoy payroll. This was posted about 1050 this morning.

That's fairly close the same time that The George article was posted isn't that odd and I'll take a look at it here with you all in the next half hour but we're going to be taking a break here and Remember Xavier all you all you folks from the Planet Envoy forums.

Now's your time. Come on guys. Here's here's your opportunity To call in eight seven seven seven five three three, three four one. This is it.

Alpha and Omega Ministries Conference, Debate, and Book Announcements

Today So many stars Strong and true quickly fall away.

This portion of the dividing line has been made possible by the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. The Apostle Paul spoke of the importance of solemnly testifying of the gospel of the grace of God. The proclamation of God's truth is the most important element of his worship in his church.

The elders and people of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church invite you to worship with them this coming Lord's Day. The morning Bible study begins at 930 a .m. And the worship service is at 1045. Evening services are at 630 p .m.

On Sunday and the Wednesday night prayer meeting is at 7. The Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church is located at 3805 North 12th Street in Phoenix. You can call for further information at 602 26 grace. If you're unable to attend you can still participate with your computer and real audio at Prbc .org where the ministry extends around the world through the archives of sermons and Bible study lessons available 24 hours a day.

Christians around the globe are having the very foundation of their faith challenged at an unprecedented level from every imaginable source. Never before in history has the authority and inspiration of the Holy Scriptures been so viciously attacked by those outside the pale of orthodoxy and within the walls of traditional evangelicalism itself.

Questions that plague the steadfast Christian from the onslaught of Bible skeptics such as the Jesus seminar the DaVinci Code and wolves and sheep's clothing meet many without needed answers. Is the Bible a product of man not of God?

Is it true that the New Testament is a false testimony? Is it true that the canon of Scripture was distorted by men with a political agenda? Is it true that Jesus's divinity was the result of a vote of bishops?

Is the Bible true? Join us August 26 and 27th for the 2005 Alpha and Omega Ministries National Conference in Seattle, Washington. As we answer the tough questions and challenge the false presuppositions of the skeptics and deniers of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

With the founders president and director dr. Tom Askew the director of Baptist Studies Center at Westminster Theological Seminary Dr. James Renahan Grammy Award-winning reformed Christian musician Steve Camp and President and founder of Alpha Omega Ministries Dr. James White.

And on Saturday the 27th of August don't miss the most important debate of 2005 Dr. James White versus Jesus seminar chairman and Bible critic. Dr. John Dominic Russell is the orthodox biblical account of Jesus of Nazareth authentic and historically accurate.

Featuring three hours of debate and cross-examination. Join us and be a part of this historic event that will sharpen your apologetic and reassure your convictions. And God's perfect and holy word. Seating is limited.

So sign up today at a o n dot org or call eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. Under the guise of tolerance modern culture grants alternative lifestyle status to homosexuality. Even more disturbing some within the church attempt to revise and distort Christian teaching on this behavior in Their book the same-sex controversy.

James White and Jeff Neal write for all who want to better understand the Bible's teaching on the subject. Explaining and defending the foundational Bible passages that deal with homosexuality including Genesis Leviticus and Romans.

Expanding on these scriptures they refute the revisionist arguments including the claim that Christians today need not adhere to the law in a straightforward and loving manner. They appeal to those caught up in a homosexual lifestyle to repent and to return to God's plan for his people.

The same-sex controversy defending and clarifying the Bible's message about Homosexuality. Get your copy in the bookstore at a omen dot org.

The pilgrims progress. It's not an easy way it's a journey.

And welcome back to the dividing line. Hey, you've only got till Tuesday. You've only got till Tuesday to get the discounts on the conference debate registration time is running out. You who are procrastinators, I don't want to hear it on Wednesday.

Doesn't work. Sorry. We've tried tried tried tried tried tried to. To get you to do it, and you know there's just some folks. I don't care. You know procrastination is the middle name and. So anyway, that's gonna be a time to do it, and you're gonna want to be there For that debate, and you can get to the website and since you're already listening.

You know that because it's right there on the website, so I don't need to need to worry about that anyway go back to Pat Madrid here, and he says the prosecutor Apologist James White has been factory repping envoy a bit recently and who am I to argue with the new readers?

He's sending our way via his recent posts about me as weblog and some of the readers who visit envoy's website. Keep it up Jim. We appreciate it. Well, you know I suppose I could respond by saying and no Thank you for promoting us because you linked back to us at that's silly the fact of matter is that the web board at envoy?

Provides a forum for certain people to say certain completely Absurd things and I've responded to that it has nothing to do with You know if Pat Madrid thinks that it's advertising for me to point out that Catholic apologists have been reduced to attacking a man's family and And throwing mud as their highest form of apologetics, okay?

If if that's if that's what you want to think factory repping is if that's what envoy is all about is That kind of stuff is the art suppo style in-your-face Slash and burn type apologetic all right.

What what can I say? There's your advertising if that's what they want to be known for Great wonderful, whatever apparently why is experiencing a lull in the endless storm of controversy? He finds himself in with various Protestant groups and personalities at whom he rages snipes Scoffs mocks taunts and vilifies on nearly daily basis on his weblog.

Well isn't that interesting I? Guess the only people who are going to be impressed by that kind of of Caricature that kind of straw man is the person who doesn't read it. And that is is that not and I see some folks in channel who have spent some time examining these things.

Is that not in essence what seems to be the core of Roman Catholic apologetics at least the the stuff that actually sells the stuff that you know envoy has been in business for a while and Isn't it? It seems much more to not not to be Convincing those who have a firm belief in what they would view as error, but just simply to keep The the troops happy those who are looking for an excuse to continue to believe in the myths that Rome Promulgates that's their job is to give them that kind of of Material that kind of reason to continue to believe these things and to not take seriously Anything that anyone else says that's why there's such a vast difference here Between the approaches that we have you know I mean You could want.

I would just invite someone go read the white man's burden it. They just reposted it in fact I need to link to that so anybody can do that if they want to do that cuz I Imagine I quoted most of it in my response actually, but just in case I mean 1993 was a while back a dozen years ago and Read the white man's burden and Then read my response to it and ask yourself the question who engages in the issues.

Who engages in the argument who engages in the textual material and Who engages in little quips and little straw man stuff and Saying that someone rages snipes scoffs mocks taunts. You know who rages is art seppo, but Patrick Madrid doesn't mind that why.

Because it's in service of Mother Church. Yeah, I know he didn't post my response to white man's burden. But that's why I said it's at least if someone follows the web blog the little link there. They'll go to that and at least be able to read it to my knowledge Madrid has never responded To my rebuttal of his white man's burden.

He just and that's the thing about Patrick Madrid. He is saying the same things with no development with no no recognition of response that he said 12 13 14 years ago. He's using the same solo scriptura blueprint for anarchy stuff, and it doesn't even seem like he's aware of.

The literature has been written since then the debates have taken place since then the the the holes that have been shot through his own position he's not even Cognizant of those things and doesn't seem to care about those things because who would be the only people that would be aware of that.

Not his audience. If his audience is like I just said just keeping the troops happy. They wouldn't be aware of that stuff. Because one thing we've certainly learned as we sit here waiting for Savior to call in and he hasn't these folks don't read our books.

They're afraid to. I don't need to. I saw someone just recently it was in the same thread. Asked and it may have even been Xavier. Maybe with somebody else ask this person have you ever read any of of James White's books in response?

I'm not gonna waste a dime on that garbage. La la la la la la la. And so all they do is they repeat what they hear people say and then it grows by the way. It's very interesting how it grows. Madrid's Rages snipe scoffs mocks taunts will be in vilifies will will become worse with the second Telling and then worse with the next telling and and then you start hearing people saying oh, you've got such a bad reputation.