John 6 Rescued from Leighton's Scissors, then Jordan Peterson's Amazing Statement

Introduction and Cold Weather RV Setup

Welcome to The Dividing Line. My name is James White and I am coming to you live from somewhere in the Midwest where the low tonight's going to be 16 degrees. That's all I can tell you. I am learning more about RVing on this trip, obviously and now we're learning how to use heaters.

I'm still hearing stuff from you there, Rich. I'm not sure what's coming through there, but how to use heaters. I mean, the day we picked this thing up was the hottest day in the summer in Phoenix and so most of my trip has been trying to get both AC units working and just surviving the heat.

Not this time. I got back here, opened the door after I got parked here at the RV park, and it was 38 degrees inside and so now we're finding out how well the heater works. It works very well, but it's propane and so I have two little space heaters that I'm trying to supplement it with so I don't go through the propane quite as fast.

So yeah, the low tonight's gonna be 16 here, 13 tomorrow night. Yeah, okay for Phoenicians, that's just like planet or something like that. So I sort of rushed to get here. I stopped on the way and had lunch with Pastor Derek Melton of Grace Life Church in Pryor.

They just moved into new facilities, beautiful new facilities there in Pryor, and we had lunch together and all ministers need to have dear brothers in the Lord that they can just talk to that don't necessarily live in their state.

So you have your elders of your local church and they mean everything to you and they should mean everything to you and you should be able to talk about everything, but I've noticed that as you get older it's good to have some people elsewhere and I've got a couple of those guys and Derek's one of them.

He's a salt of the earth and Tom Buck's another one. Just, you know, people that you're just thankful the Lord put them in your life, and I'm looking forward to getting a chance. We tried it this time around.

It just didn't just didn't mesh. But trying to get there to Pryor to do some preaching in that new facility and so that's what we did this on the way here. It wasn't too long of a trip here today and but then what happened, what happened was someone who remained nameless mentioned in something that came across my feed, not my feed, but my phone.

I saw something about Gabe Hughes, Pastor Gabe Hughes, who's associate with Tom Buck in Lindale, Texas, was doing a debate and I think it was live today, at least that was how I understood it. Maybe it was just last night or something.

I don't know, but I think it was live today with Leighton Flowers on on the, on John 644, basically. It's, it's, you're, you're, you're meant to walk through the text. What was the term they used? It's escaping my mind.

It's not exegesis. Another term, it's been I, I, all I've had for dinner were some crackers and some milk. So, anyway, you're supposed to explain John 644 and they did it on that debate thing on YouTube.

It's not a bad format, I suppose. There's, there's a fair amount of interaction. It can be abused. It has been abused. We've commented on a number of the debates on there and how they were abused up to the point in time.

I didn't get to listen to all of it because once they got here, then I had to get set up, had some real challenges because of the cold and, and a few things like that. They're, the heated hose that I bought may be missing a washer somewhere and so I've been, again, the RV life is how do you get around that?

How do you, how do you make it work? And get around that. And so that's what I was doing. And so I didn't get to listen to all of it, but I got to listen to both of the opening statements, cross-ex and the first rebuttals, at least the first, first section rebuttals.

Actually just the first rebuttal, not the, not the follow-up. And I, I'm not even, I've got to be very careful how I, how I say these things. I have seen, I've seen a lot now. We're coming up, we're coming up on my 40th wedding anniversary will be this next summer.

So I'm only, well today I'm, I'm five, I've got five more months to go for my 40th wedding anniversary. And I met with Elders Reed and Reese, which is what started Alvin and Megan Ministries, about a month later.

So we're getting into that four decade period here. And of course 2023, next year will be the 40th anniversary for Alvin and Megan Ministries too. I mean we, I was 20 years old, 20, yeah, I turned, yeah, I was still only 20 years old when we incorporated Alvin and Megan Ministries.

I look at 20-year-olds today and go, really? But yeah, I was already married and was my second year of college and things were different back then, very, very different. Let's put it that way. By the way, today is January 25th.

And so I don't know if Summer has a chance to tune in to the program. I wanted to say happy birthday to Summer. I don't know how my youngest is a third of a century old, but maybe because I'm getting close to two-thirds of a century old, you know, about six more years.

And so a very happy birthday to you. And hey, you just posted a ultrasound on Twitter, so we're praying for that little one in every way that we can. So happy birthday to my daughter, Summer. Summer Jaeger of Sheologians.

Most of you know that. Some of you do not. It's astonishing when I travel and I tell people, you know, and then my daughter, Summer, and I go, Summer? Summer Jaeger? Yeah, the same. Oh, that explains a lot.

Yeah, it does. I can tell lots of stories about that, but we need to get to what we're supposed to be doing. Though it is funny, I got to this campground and I walked into the office to check in, you know, get your slot and stuff like that.

And the guy had to go out with the guy who got in before me, go get some ice or something. I'm not sure why you need ice in these temperatures. Just stick your glass outside for about 10 seconds. It'll be fine.

And there was another young lady sort of just leaning on the counter and I was actually looking at this. I bought this. I didn't have a sweatshirt, believe it or not. And I was looking at this and she came up to me and she said, did you say your name was White?

And I said, yeah. James White? I said, yeah. Alpha and Omega Ministries? Yeah. Oh, wow. And she said, I thought I recognized you because my dad watches Dividing Line all the time and stuff like that. So always be nice to whoever you're talking to, no matter where you are.

Thanks to YouTube. Anyway, I started listening to the debate and I, you know, everybody on this program probably already knows that I have challenged Layton to debate John 6, specifically 35 through 45.

And I said, hey, tell you what, let's just bring our Greek New Testaments and go at it. And he's like, well, you know, I don't know. And it wouldn't matter what context I put it in. I don't think Layton's going to be willing to do this and I now know why.

So I'm very thankful that he's done this with Gabe, with Pastor Gabe, because now we know exactly what the provisionist approach is to try to deal with John 6. Now, once again, if you've watched the Romans 9 debate, you're going to go, not again.

Yeah, it was again. They, it was very much the same stuff. My concern is really for Layton and let me explain why. This is, I finally got around the circle. Over 40 years, I have seen people who were rabidly opposed, well, to the existence of God.

Dennis McKenzie of Biblical Larency, one of the first atheists that I ever dealt with. And I, I saw in the man intelligence, but such an overriding detestation of Christianity in the Bible that he could not see what was obvious right in front of him.

And then I've seen Unitarians whose hatred of the doctrine of the Trinity, in any other area, they could, they'd be able to see something. But in that one area, they were just completely out of balance.

No ability to analyze in any type of fair way. And of course, I have seen so many people in an imbalanced way who detest Reformed theology, quote-unquote Calvinism, whatever they think it is. I mean, I saw somebody on Twitter just last night describing Calvinism and I'm just like, I have no idea what he, why he thinks that's Calvinism, but okay.

And, uh, that, that imbalance and I've seen people who have dedicated themselves to not the promotion positively of a perspective, especially of an entire worldview, but there tends to be a real narrow focus that becomes all-consuming.

Just, just all-consuming. It's frightening, it's dangerous. And as I was listening to Leighton's opening statement, I, all I can say is I really felt a deep sadness at the investment of so much energy and time resulting in nothing more than the twisting of the scriptures.

And that's what it is. It's a twisting of the scriptures. It really, really made me sad. Now, I, I did not have time. I'm stunned that we're even able to be doing what we're doing right now. I'm, we're literally coming to you via a one bar 5G signal off of my iPad.

Um, the Wi-Fi here is worthless and we're not very close to any um towers, uh, so I'm just thankful we've got what we've got. Obviously that did not allow me to download the video of the debate. Um, I will, once I'm in a place with good Wi-Fi, uh, get that done so that we can play sections of it.

And especially because Leighton was using a PowerPoint. Oh, it's sitting a lot today. Um, Leighton was using a PowerPoint that'll make it even more useful because he attempted to deal with John 644 by saying, well, well, here's a parallel, uh, statement and I want to be able to look at even more in depth than we will tonight in this program, but I wanted to, wanted to comment on it immediately because it was again, very useful to be able to, uh, see, uh, um, I, I did, did forget to mention that I just, just refreshed my, uh, uh, over in, uh, in Nevada, uh, saw that I, I found my stowaway and some people are wondering why, why do you have an Ultraman guy sitting in the corner?

And, uh, that's because, uh, that's a gift from brother Chris and so, uh, yeah, thought I'd let him, you know, do his thing and, and there he is. So thanks. Uh, thanks Chris. So uh, anyway, what was I talking about?

John 6 and the Provisionist Reading of Drawing

Okay. Let's talk about John 6. So I'm going to have to just summarize for you, uh, what Leighton's argument was. I mean, aside from the fact that he, he does the whole let's talk about 47 ,000 other things before we get to John, as if I'm establishing the actual context of John chapter six, which I really didn't.

Um, and I'm, I'm not really gonna deal with the flow of the text. It does not even, I've never, ever, ever on any subject heard Leighton Flowers actually follow the flow of the text. Not once, not a single time in Old Testament, New Testament, anywhere.

It's like, it's a thought that has never occurred to them. And so you didn't get any of that. You don't, you don't follow the terminology and the argument from John, say 635 down through 45. And, um, that's just, that is not how provisionism works.

And that's why it'll never be anything more than just simply an excuse making factory. Uh, because that's what people who love the word want to hear. They want to follow the text, all of the texts, not just proof texting things.

So you, you got stuff and it just seems to me that when Leighton Flowers reads the Bible, he reads it fundamentally, not as a positive presentation of what he believes, but as a refutation of what he detests.

And that's frightening. It really is frightening to me that that's not what anyone and, and I, I really feel for him because I mean, he, he has his, um, your internet connection is unstable. Well, great.

Um, it's probably really cold. Hopefully it's not breaking up too, too badly. Um, okay. Yeah. You know, things like that happen. And I think I know what, why it was my, uh, I had a timer running on Twitter to refresh things.

And, uh, I, I think when it tried to do that, it was like, ah, stop. So I have, uh, turned that off. So hopefully that won't cause any more problems. Sorry about that. So he goes all over John and runs over to Axe and does all these things and then finally gets to John six.

And Gabe did ask him during the rebuttal period. It, it, it, it, it was expository. It was a term I was trying to find earlier earlier. Do you find that to be an expository reading of John six? And once, once again, uh, I think, I think, uh, Layton had flashbacks to our Romans nine debate, uh, where I asked him that question is, is this the kind of interpretation you'd use for resurrection of Christ or, or, you know, biblical inspiration or justification of, well, no.

And that's, that's true. It's not, um, finally gets to John six and let me see if I can summarize for what, basically what he's saying. He's first of all, he's saying John six is to Jews. Well, Jesus is in a synagogue.

And so he's talking to Jews. That's true. But the gospel of John is not addressed to Jews. It's telling a story that's amongst the Jews, but it's not addressed. Secondly, um, these Jews have been hardened and they've been hardened by rejecting God's purposes in their lives.

Now, I don't know how he knows all these people, all the people in the synagogue who call themselves disciples are going to walk away, except for the 12 and one of them is devil, but for many different reasons.

And there are numerous places in the gospel where the, the people being addressed are not addressed in that way, but he does go to John 12. Interestingly enough, he forgets to apply the context of John 12 to his errant reading of John 12 32.

Uh, he does make that same error. Well, I'm going to draw all men to myself and, and tries to read that back into John chapter six, uh, ignoring the fact that the cross actually, um, is foolishness for those that are perishing.

Um, but that's part of part of it though. It wasn't the main part of it. That is one of the many errors that has been refuted so many times. It's amazing, but people keep, keep making the error. So six is two Jews who have been hardened.

And so they were not, as he put it, they are not being drawn at this time after the crucifixion, then Jesus would draw all men. Well, did he draw all men, including the Jews who had been hardened? Was this hardening only during the ministry of Jesus?

Cause that seemed to have come up in our Romans nine thing. He has this weird idea. That's only during the ministry of Jesus that they're being hardened. And then there may be afterwards again, another chance.

I I'm not, I'm not really what that's all about. Um, and so he, he says, that's, that's what's going on here. And then in what he does is instead of starting in up in 35, 36, you're not believers. Here are the people who are believers.

God gives a certain people to Christ. Um, and of course in his theology, the people that the father gives the son are the people who've already been following the father. So again, it's, it's man centeredness taken to the nth degree.

There is no freedom that again, the only freedom God has is to choose whether to save people or not save people. Um, but the idea of individuals can't be. And so the idea is, well, God chooses to save those who humble themselves.

So have the ability to do this. And what he does, remember how, how Norm Geisler, he skipped 37, 38, 39, jumped down to verse 40, established a so-called ability of man to believe verse 40, and then reads it backwards into 37, 38, 39, rather than following the text.

That's what he did. What Leighton does is he jumps to verse 45 and it's the last half of the set of the verse and comes up with a meaning for that and then reads it back into 44. So everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me.

And so he creates a class of people who are able to hear and learn from the father. They're the choice meets. Okay. So the choice meets, he didn't say that again. I don't think he will ever say that again, but we know what he meant back then is what he means now.

There are people who humble themselves. They have, they are, they're spiritually better than other people. That's the only way it can be said. He may bristle at that, but, but that's what he's saying.

They are, they are spiritually better than the other people, not because of God's operative grace in their life. I mean, I, I don't know how else it could be, but they hear and they learn from the father.

And so they are the father's sheep because they hear and learn from the father. So in Layton's world, sheep choose the shepherd and follow after the shepherd. And they're the ones that the father gives to the son.

All right. So you have this again, historically semi-Pelagian or Pelagian idea, because if you say it's by grace and if that's grace made everybody has a semi-Pelagian idea. But I don't even see how it's by grace at all.

To be honest with you, if man has the natural ability to do these things, because the only gracious here is the giving of the gospel is the giving of a message. It's, it's, there's no, there's no supernatural enablement or intervention or regeneration or anything else along those lines.

And so it's the people who are good enough to hear and learn from the father. They are given by the father to the son and they will come to the son. So it's again, all up to the man, up to the individual who does these things.

And so this fascinating to me is he then focused in upon Helcuso and he tried to find, it's fascinating, he even found a use of Helcuso in the Greek Septuagint. He never established how that's relevant to its use in John 6, just because a term is used in the Old Testament, that does not mean that it has a direct connection to a New Testament text, unless you can demonstrate contextual compatibility between the two.

He didn't try to do that, but he just assumed it. Well, if there's a place where Helcuso does not mean an effective action of God, then, then there wouldn't have to be an effect, effective action in John 6, 44.

No one can come to me, his father sent me, draws him, but he's going to draw everybody. And the one that the father gives the son is the one who is the father's sheep, which is the person who has heard and learned from the father.

So, in other words, he takes, so if you've got 35 up here, instead of going like this, he literally inverts it, binds the string, he inverts it, and goes from 45 backwards through the rest of the text.

This takes a lot of effort. This takes a lot of effort for someone to do this. It really, really does. But that's what he does. That's what he does. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to, I have set up my mini flipboard here.

I wish I could sort of show you things here, but then you'd see my bike over there and and it's messy. So let's go to the screen and take a look at some things here. Here is what we've got. Let's see, go to blue.

So here's, I've got a laughing out loud here. Yes, unraveling the text. Very good. Okay. All right. So here's the text. Everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me. So here are your, someone trying to give me a call there.

I'll try to get back to you. Here are your key terms in verse 45. So it's the one hearing from the father and learning is coming to me. I'm sorry. Okay. It says I'm sharing. Okay. All right. Okay. All right.

So you can't, you can't mute me, man. Am I back? You muted. You muted you. So you muted me instead of you. All right. Let's try this again. Time. So here are the key terms, the one hearing and the one learning from the father.

Okay. So it's everyone hearing and learning from the father is coming to me. Now we already know, and I'm not going to keep going back and forth. So just enjoy the screen. We already know from back in John 6 37, the ones coming to Jesus is the one who's been given by the father.

So this is how he's trying to do this. And he's turning it upside down and saying, these are abilities of hearing and learning. These are abilities that everyone has. And so if you are choice meets, if you humble yourself, if you are better than the others and you can hear and learn other, then you're going to come to Jesus.

Here's the problem. This is the second half of a sentence and verse 45 follows verse 44 and verse 45 is an explanation of what we have up here in verse 44. And what he's missing of course is the flow of the text.

Notice that hearing and learning, hearing and learning are passive actions. If I hear something, somebody else has to make the sound for me to hear. If I learn something, someone else has to do the teaching for me to be able to learn.

So what came before this? Well, let me remove that, trying to remove that. And I hear your microphone, Rich, that's pretty weird. But okay, well, you're going to have to keep it. Yeah. All right. So here's the issue.

It stands written in the prophets. It is written in the prophets. They shall all be taught. They shall all be taught. So all be taught by God. So Pontus here is then Pause. So they shall all, there's a specific people who shall be taught by God.

God is the one acting here. They shall all be taught by God. Why does it say all? Because the all here are the ones that the father draws to the son. And verse 45 is an explication of what that drawing involves.

The drawing involves the father teaching, revealing who the son is. And Jesus' point is even the prophets prophesied that this would be the case. So what that means then, if we will follow through meaningfully, is that since these are passive things, this all is a description of what Helcusae means.

How is a person drawn by the father to the son? Through teaching, hearing, learning, and all of those who are taught by God. See, there's the problem right there. There's Leighton's problem right there.

Feu means God is the one doing these things. God is the one doing these things. Not man. He's not just throwing this out there for everybody and the choice meets go, oh, I'm humble enough to do that. No.

They shall all be taught by God. This all is not every single human being. You cannot tell me that the Canaanite priests were taught by God. He didn't even send prophets to them. The one hearing from the father and learning is coming to me.

That's what it means to be given by the father to the son and hence coming to the son. So Helcusae is effective and efficient. Here's what up to the point where I heard, maybe it got covered later on.

I don't know. I didn't hear it. But what was not discussed was how to exegete John 644 meaningfully, grammatically. I didn't hear Leighton even start to deal with the fact that the final phrase is, and I will raise him up on the last day.

The one who is drawn by the father is raised up on the last day. We've said it over and over and over again. This Alton and that Alton are the same. These two sections of the verse cannot be broken up from one another.

This little semi-colon does not amount to the Grand Canyon. That is not the Grand Canyon there. No one could come to me unless the father sent me draws him and I will raise him up on the last day. So if the drawing is universal, the resurrection is universal.

The action of the father in drawing here and then the son does the resurrection here. These are all divine acts. There is no human component that can derail this activity by God. What you have then is if you follow the text in the way it's written, then you have the statement of inability.

No one is able to come to me. No one has that capacity. Provisionism does not believe this. And so they have to say, well, yeah, that was then because Jesus wasn't drawing all men yet. That's what they have to say, which makes no sense because it then says, unless the father who sent me draws him.

Well, is this supposed to mean, and he won't be doing that until after the resurrection? Of course not. Because as you can see down 65 in verse 65, it's speaking of the enablement of the father for someone to come to the son.

And obviously this can't be just about an experience during Jesus's life amongst the Jews. Why? Because on the last day is the exact language of the Johannine corpus in regards to the giving of eternal life to all of us to this day, all the way down the history of the church.

The attempt to try to say that this doesn't have anything to do with where we are now is an attempt to fundamentally escape what this text is teaching us. I will raise him up. That is Jesus's promise.

That is Jesus's power. And to try to get around that is to fundamentally twist this scripture and twist what it's saying. And we should reject any attempt to do that kind of a thing. So as I said, oh, that's right.

I need to stop annotating screen. There we go. And then I can stop share. And that means you should be able to mute yourself now. So there's so much more. I mean, I understand. And again, if after the first hour or so that I got to hear while driving today, all of that got covered, great, wonderful.

But as I listened to Layton twisting the scriptures out of this incredible dedication he has to defeating Calvinism, I felt such a sadness for him. And you just have to pray. You just have to give it to the Lord, respond, demonstrate.

No, that's not what the text says. That's not how you would ever defend the deity of Christ or anything else. You are turning the text upside down. You are inserting things. And my hope is in some of the later, because there's audience questions and stuff like that.

My hope is in some of the later interaction that he was held accountable for those things. Because the reality is John 645 is not a statement that opens the door to human accomplishment and control of the work of salvation.

And all of this, again, part of the problem in only 44 is that opens the possibility of not following from 35 through 40. And recognizing that what's in that section is vitally important in defining the terminology in verse 44 and 45.

Because you have such a strong emphasis on the perfection of the accomplishment of God. And the reality that the one coming to Christ is first given by the Father. But the, I would call it dangerous, eisegetical element to this presentation is that you get around the preceding verses by jumping down to verse 45, hoping that people will not see that verse 45 is actually talking about the perfect accomplishment of the Father's work of drawing.

And that man is still the passive object. Then what you do is you sneak in the assertion that what you actually have there in verse 45 are choice meats. Are the sheep of the Father who follow the Father.

And because they follow the Father, then they're given by the Father's son. And therefore they're the son. It's literally the idea that man can determine, man by worshiping the Father determines who's going to come to the Son.

That you have the ability to worship part of the Godhead and then you get to learn about the rest of them once you worship the Godhead correctly. Just think about what that means. Think about the anthropology of all that and you'll see why everybody, I know Lutherans, I know Orthodox people who know enough about the history of theology in the West to go, that's Pelagianism.

They may be much more, but at least they can recognize what it is. So like I said, we will download that. There'll be much more to be said, especially when I can get hold of the graphics of the PowerPoint presentation.

Because, see, I don't have it. Do I have it? Oh, okay. Let me, let me, maybe, maybe, maybe, let me, let me just, no, it didn't. I, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, stop. I thought it might come back up and I could just sort of scroll it back and find it.

But there was this attempt to, well, by the way, he likewise said that this section involves a parable. There's no parable here. And so he tries to come up with a parallel to John 6, 44 that completely obliterates the role of father and son in 44.

It's just, oh, it's just so sad to see the amount of energy that was invested just to try to get around what the text is clearly saying. It really makes you wonder. Okay. Real quick. And I, my concern here, honestly, is that we're going to get dinged by YouTube if I do this.

But I'm going to try it anyways. And I'm just going to hope, hope for fair use. But so we may end up having to relink at some point in the future to the other version on Odyssey. But I was really taken aback.

Jordan Peterson on the Bible as the Precondition for Truth

Look, I don't know what's going on in Jordan Peterson's life. You listen to Jordan Peterson, you know you're listening to a genius, but you also know that you're listening to a tortured genius. His Jungian categories are just not big enough and are twisted enough from a biblical worldview that it causes all this these problems for him.

But he's, many of us have, for him saying things, you just go, oh man, is the Lord doing something in this man's life? And I'm not even thinking along the lines of, oh, wouldn't it just be so awesome if it, well, maybe that's up to the Lord.

Lord doesn't need Jordan Peterson. He doesn't need me. He doesn't need you. He's going to accomplish his purposes one way or the other, but I would love to see the man bow the knee to Christ. I mean, wow.

That would be awesome. So he said some things and he was just on Joe Rogan and was wearing a bow tie and said some amazing, amazing things. I just wanted to play one minute. And again, YouTube censors, I'm going to interact with this.

Okay. This is called fair use. Stop being communist. In this one section, it's four minutes and 46 seconds long. They don't cut to Joe Rogan very, very often because I can't imagine what he was thinking because you're getting this stream of consciousness thing coming from Peterson as he talks about the Bible as the book, the one book, which is a library of books, but it's the one book that in the West is really the origin and source of all the rest of the books.

And I can just hear certain people screaming about that. But anyway, it's fascinating to listen to because if he goes this direction, one thing's for certain, there's only one theological system he could possibly really go with from what he's saying.

So we didn't test this, but this will probably be loud enough one way or another for the microphone to pick up. I'll aim this down a little bit and let's just hope this works. So, I mean, I could try to play the video, but I'm not going to, I'm just going to go with the audio.

So here we go. And Dante would be in that category, at least in translation, fundamental authors, part of the not because of the arbitrary dictates of power, but because those texts influenced more other texts.

And then you think about that as a hierarchy. Okay. I'm sorry. He said he had just taken a tour of the Bible Museum in Washington, and he said he fascinated. That's great. And so now he's talking about the Bible to Joe Rogan, and he's talking about these other vitally important books that are in the English canon.

The works of literature have been particularly important in the development of all of English culture, all culture that's been impacted by the English language, Western culture as a whole, because it goes into French and via Latin and all the rest of this kind of stuff.

The Bible at its base, which is certainly the case. Now imagine that's the entire corpus of linguistic production, all things considered. Now, how do you understand that? Like literally, how do you understand that?

The answer is you sample it by reading and listening to stories and listening to people talk. You sample that whole domain. You build a low-resolution representation of that inside you, and then you listen and see through that.

And so it isn't that the Bible is true. It's that the Bible is the precondition for the manifestation of truth, which makes it way more true than just true. It's a whole different kind of truth. And I think this is not only literally the case, it's the only way we can solve the problem of perception.

Did you hear that? I mean, how did Jordan Peterson just channel Greg Bonson and everybody else all in one fell swoop? It's the precondition. I mean, talk about seeing, because he's, you know, he's seeing this as this lens.

This is not just true. It's truer than true. It's what makes it possible for us to discuss truth. I'm just like, wow. Okay, Lord, please, keep working. Keep doing your thing. Because I would love to see that man break through all the stuff in his background and come to know the incarnate son of God and peace in trusting in his sacrifice.

That would be absolutely phenomenally awesome. So pray for him. But isn't it amazing how someone in his position is looking at these things and going, well, if that, then this. Now, look, I think it's important.

And my point there was, and yet Christians don't generally do that. Don't generally see the beauty of the flow of God's revelation. And maybe it's because, you know, those of us that were raised in the faith, we sort of live within our echo chambers and things like that.

And maybe it's just because he has a different standpoint. He can see some of those things and help some of the rest of us see some of those things too, which is very useful. But the point is, he sees that if Jesus was this, if the Bible is that, then this has to flow from that.

And that's because he recognizes the limitations of modernism and postmodern thought that has influenced so many of us and has caused us to complementalize and not see the connections between the broad sweep of human endeavor and study and consideration.

I've been thinking recently about some of the ramifications of our way of doing education and all there are positive things about doing like in-depth scholarship in certain areas. We've come to define what it is to, for example, become a doctor by doing a dissertation that has to be so narrow and deep.

When many of the great minds of the past that we look upon and go, wow, how did they do that back then without computers? They weren't narrow and deep. They were broad and yet deep in many areas. And we lose something.