SRR 121 Deranged by Doug Wilson, Messianic Judaism & John Piper & the Decline of Sola Fide at Final Judgment (7)

I do a podcast.

I'm not interested in your podcast.

The Battle Over Justification by Faith Alone

The anathema of God was for those who denied justification by faith alone. When that is at stake, we need to be on the battlefield, exposing the air and combating the air.

We are unabashedly, unashamedly Clarkian. And so, the next few statements that I'm going to make, I'm probably going to step on all of the Vantillian toes at the same time. And this is what we do at Simple Riff around the radio, you know.

We are polemical and polarizing Jesus style.

I would first say that to characterize what we do as bashing is itself bashing. It's not hate. It's history. It's not bashing. It's the Bible.

Jesus said, Woe to you when men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way, as opposed to blessed are you when you have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness.

It is on. We're taking the gloves off. It's time to battle.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to the podcast. This is Simple Riff around the radio, where the Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety is applied to all of life. My name is Tim Shaughnessy, and I am one of the co-hosts here.

Today, I'm joined by Carlos Montijo. And unfortunately, Hiram Diaz was not able to join us tonight. So, we want to get an episode out. So, we're going to go ahead and record Carlos and I. And we are going to make a commitment to stick to Piper tonight.

All right, so I say that loosely because we need to address a couple of other things first. But we are definitely going to get to John Piper. We want to continue the series that we were doing with respect to Carlos's article.

And if you want to get ahead and read ahead, we were discussing Carlos's article, John Piper, Final Salvation, and the Decline and Fall of Sola Fide at the Last Day, Part 2. Today, we're going to be covering Fatal Flaw, Number 6.

I also want to recommend Carlos's interview on the Trinity Foundation radio with our good friend, Steve Matthews, where he basically gave an overview of the entire article. And this article does cover, it draws out six fatal flaws from John Piper's Doctrine of Final Salvation.

If you are getting into the controversy surrounding John Piper, this article is a must-read. And it took some time because what Carlos did is he just simply accepted for the sake of argument that, okay, let's say Piper's right.

What does this lead to? Because the Doctrine of Justification is so central to Christianity, well, what do you know? It just leads to one fatal flaw after another. So today, we're going to be discussing Fatal Flaw, Number 6, which is titled Deadening the Resurrection.

And I think this is one of Carlos's favorite sections. But before we get to that, Carlos, you recently just we just put up an episode that you did with Hiram Diaz talking about the Doug Wilson issue.

We sort of got sidetracked on that, the Doug Wilson issue. And when we did an episode where we talked about the interview with Doug Wilson and James White. So that was a very good episode. I want to give a big thanks to Hiram Diaz for that.

But do you first of all, let me just give you an opportunity to say hello, jump in here. And do you have any lingering thoughts on that episode?

Yeah, it's good to well, first of all, it's good to be back on the show with you, Tim. And I know we keep having these hiatuses, but we try to every time we record, we do try to make the most out of it and to produce good, solid content that will actually benefit our listeners.

And we actually haven't been on a break so much because we do have a backlog of episodes that we need to publish that I've just been it's been hard for me to find the time to actually do it. But we've got a few studies to upload and that episode that you just mentioned with Hiram and I talking about Doug Wilson, so and regarding that episode, we've really I'm glad we finally started to address Doug Wilson because he is I don't know why I can't really tell why people like him so much, but he's good enough to the point where he can even deceive James White himself.

And with I think this is just a weakness for Dr. White. It seems to be one of his weaknesses where he just he's just having for whatever reason, he's really not seeing this at all. And I think we're going to show that even more today with his recent podcast talking about this.

But yeah, that was about it.

Yeah, and we're going to play a clip of that podcast. You pointed it out. You listened to the whole episode. But it's really remarkable. I'm glad that you guys took the time to go over and play that clip.

And I remember after the clip, I think it was like five minutes long, of Doug Wilson talking about whether or not G .K. Chesterton I think no, Tolkien and yeah, I think Tolkien and Chesterton.

And Lewis.

Or Lewis. I know one of them was J .R .R. Tolkien. But talking about whether or not they could be saved. I mean, you listen to the clip, and so then afterwards, I mean, you're just completely astonished at what Wilson has said.

And anybody with a basic understanding of Christianity would have to say, this man is totally unqualified to be a teacher in Christ's church. And what's amazing is and you guys didn't point this out but what's amazing is while he's setting up the question and giving his argument towards the beginning of his response, he says, I'm as Protestant as you get.

And then you listen to what he says, and he equates works with right theology with respect to the gospel. And if it were left up to him, with what he just said, he would completely undo the Protestant Reformation.

And yet he boasts that he is as Protestant as you get. That was just the that was I can't think of anything else to say about that, except for that was exceedingly wicked. For him to completely dismantle the doctrine of justification by faith alone, by essentially saying, well, it's not necessary to be saved because ultimately we're saved by grace alone.

And as I was listening to your episode, because I wasn't able to jump on, I kept saying, that's implicit faith. That's implicit faith. And I'm so glad that Hiram pointed that out, that that's really a form of implicit faith, which is what Rome teaches.

And then you pointed out later in the episode that he's essentially agreeing with Roman Catholicism, because ultimately you don't need to believe in justification by faith alone. And he sort of said, oh, well, if you ask a five-year-old, is it imputed or is it

And it's like, those are technical terms. What a sham. What a total sham. And I wanted to read what Paul says in Galatians chapter five, because this is really, I think, the heart of the matter. Paul says, look, I, Paul, say to you that if anyone accepts circumcision, Christ is of no advantage to him.

I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law, you have fallen away from grace. So people who are in the Roman Catholic system and believe that they're somehow going to be justified by their good works, this applies to them.

And he is the most irrational, illogical, just, it's infuriating. It's really infuriating when you have James White, and we're going to play the clip where he just goes off on other people who are trying to call out Doug Wilson.

And what's so bad is that James White postures himself as the rational one, as the intellectual, and yet when it comes to Wilson, he is just so completely superficial. I was reading the book by John Robbins and Sean Garrity, and at the beginning they say, Wilson informs us that he is post-millennial, Calvinistic, Presbyterian, Vantillian, Theonomic, and Reformed.

And, you know, it's like, okay, I get it. You know, Jeff Durbin is post-millennial, he's Calvinistic, he's Vantillian, he embraces theonomy. You know, I think Jeff is Reformed Baptist, he's not Presbyterian, but I know James White is Reformed Baptist, but it's like, okay, and you guys are confronting the culture, and you see Doug Wilson as an ally, and yet when, I mean, when he fumbles the gospel, when he brings utter and total confusion into this concerning the gospel, it's like, it's a non-issue.

Or at least that's how it seems. That's how it seems, it's a non-issue. And it's just infuriating. So, you brought up, I guess in James White's latest episode, you brought up this clip, and I'm just going to go ahead and play the part that you wanted to comment on.

I'll give you an opportunity to comment on that, and then we have to deal with something else before we jump into Piper, but let me go ahead and play this clip, alright?

Real quickly here, the continuing saga of whitewashing everyone with the same brush from certain folks continues on. Now there's a Facebook, so now not only, we all know that the first person to get the Doug Wilson derangement syndrome paint was my daughter Summer, and then of course Jeff and Luke at Apologia, but now I'm looking at a tweet, and now we've got Tom Askle, who I've always suspected was federal vision.

I mean, it's just as absurd to accuse me of it, but again. And now, G3, Josh Weiss. So, anybody, why isn't Phil Johnson on this list? He took the picture of me and Doug at G3, so why? But he's not in the picture.

Maybe that's why he did it that way, I don't know, but he took the picture. So it's the associationalism, this is the stuff we've talked about before, this is the fundamentalist mindset where anybody, you know, hey, you went to the same hotel as that man did, therefore, there you go, you all believe the same things.

It's the same type of thinking that certain people, and when reformed people bite onto this type of stuff, it gets super, super ugly very, very, very quickly. But I wanted to read you, now if you haven't seen it, it's interesting, there's an article, The Truth About Federal Vision on Facebook.

The source is given R. Scott Clark, Brandon Adams, and various, and monergism. Well, most of it came from R. Scott Clark, let's put it that way. And we know that R. Scott Clark, I think I'm being very, very fair to say that R. Scott Clark is grossly imbalanced when it comes to Doug Wills.

He cannot even try to be fair, just can't, can't even try. And so anybody who just goes, yes, whatever you say, Dr. Clark, won't even try to be fair, won't even try to listen. I mean, there is a clear derangement syndrome out there.

Here's an example of it. So, 2019, December, James White of Altamaga begins participating with federal visionist Doug Wilson. You just love how the spin is. I mean, these folks watch MSNBC and go, I see how that works, let's do it ourselves.

Doug Wilson, in a series of videos called The Sweater Vest Dialogues, in the first video in the series, White asks Doug Wilson a series of questions on Sola Fide, i .e., justification by faith alone, through grace alone, and Christ alone.

And ready? And Wilson responds to these questions by using classic federal vision language. I don't even know what to say. I don't even know what to say. You go through the specific statements, point by point by point by point by point, and these people cannot hear it.

They live in a world where it just becomes, and it's like, I have my conclusion, don't confuse me with the facts. That's where we are now. That's where we are now. So there you go. So I wonder who will be next to be added to the great grand and growing conspiracy list.

I don't know. But it is truly sad to observe. But it's out there, folks. It is out there.

All right. So, Carlos, that was the clip that you heard that you wanted to comment on. And man, that is a total mess.

Disappointing.

Yeah, it's extremely disappointing. And, you know, I just want to go back to what James White said about Rosario Butterfield and how he was just pointing out or he was he was trying to when he was reviewing Diane Gadskin's article.

And I think that's how you say her name. He was saying that we live in an age where everybody's superficial and shallow. And he went through that article and he responded to it. But then when it comes to somebody that he, you know, I don't know.

When it comes to somebody like Doug Wilson that I guess he likes, that he knows he he just apparently he cannot seem to be objective. He cannot see. And he is extremely shallow. And so there were a lot of things wrong with that interview that he should have pressed him on, that he should have called him out on.

And it's like we went through point by point by point. It's like, OK, maybe you weren't paying attention because he totally botched the covenant of works, totally botched it. In the interview or in the interview that we played last week, I mean, he just totally botched justification by faith alone because he equated faith with works and then concludes that Roman Catholics can be saved because you're not saved by works.

What a stupid thing to say for for somebody of his stature in the church. What a stupid thing to say. You have thousands of people listening to you. It just it infuriates me. So Carlos, what what are your thoughts on what you just heard?

I'm disappointed. I never imagined that I would be playing a clip of James White to critique it, to criticize it and to oppose it because for the longest time I've been very fond of James White. He's been a great blessing to me personally, but this continues to show how much of a weakness situations like these are for him because we already saw our part.

Hold on, hold on. Let's set that up for our listeners a little bit, because James White got you out of fundamentalism, got you out of the King James only ism groups. So and I appreciate what you're saying, because you're trying to point out that.

We're not we're not biased. We're not we're not James White hating right now. This is this is a valid critique. You know, you do have a lot to be grateful for because you were a King James only us. And James White is the one who got you out of that.

Yeah, I mean, he's also part of the reason he's he's the main reason I became a Calvinist and transitioned to a reformed direction. I'm not yeah, like I'm not I'm not anti James White at all. And I don't really care for Doug Wilson, either.

I have no real attachment to him. I just the things that I've seen the interview that we we already analyzed the interview, and we expose just how bad how false Doug Wilson's teaching really is. You can go back and listen to Episode 117, Seperate from Manda.

And so what he says here, and I'm not as I listen to it again, I'm not sure who he was referring to. It sounds like he was referring to somebody else. I was quoting R. Scott Clark that wrote an article on Facebook or something like that.

I haven't seen the post myself. So I don't know what he's referring to. But I can you can kind of see like, oh, he in his interview with White, Wilson uses classic federal vision language. And what what White is assuming he's like, okay, even after we go point by point asking him, do you affirm or deny this?

And Wilson denies the the accusations that Brandon made against him and R. Scott Clark as well. And so it's like, well, wait a minute, wait a minute. Dr. James White is an expert in church history. And it's like, he should know.

And I'm sure he does know that the Aryans during the Aryan controversy, the people who rejected that Christ was God, they affirmed the Orthodox formulations. But when they would connive with each other and conspire, they would redefine them with their own perverse definitions.

And so a heretic has no problem affirming orthodoxy. He has no problem doing that. You see Wilson doing that. You see Piper doing that as well. He says, oh, my answer is a mainstream reform tradition.

And so that's not the issue. And he should know better. He should know that the issue is not do you affirm or do you deny? The issue is, what do you say that it is? And so Wilson actually explained what he meant in the interview with White.

And that's what we analyzed. We analyzed his response. And his response was a confused, false gospel of federal vision, mono-covenantal mess. And it was obvious. And because I don't know what's going on with James.

It went straight past him. He did not see it at all. He just moved on to the next point and didn't even bother to ask him about the historical facts about what he said about Robbins and about how federal vision controversy began in the first place.

About how it's, what do you mean that God was gracious to Adam and would have been gracious even if he had obeyed perfectly the covenant? What do you mean by that? That's absurd. That's like turning the covenant of works into something that's not the covenant of works anymore.

And mixing it with the covenant of grace and mixing law and gospel and perverting it all together. And so, and Wilson has a number of problems. I mean this is just sort of the tip of the iceberg. There's the stuff that he, you know, in the other episode that you mentioned that we also, that Hiram and I talked about.

We were supposed to talk about Piper, but we just, we couldn't get off of the Wilson stuff because he says so many stupid and false things. Like they're absurd and they're patently false. And it's sad that White doesn't, it's blown right past him.

He's not seeing any of it because in his show he denied those accusations and that's it. That settles it for White.

What this, what this demonstrates is that this is a, this really is an example of very shallow, superficial thinking, which is, which is what.

That's what's so ironic.

Yeah, exactly. Which is what James White complains about so much.

And that's, that's, yeah, that was just going to say that really bothered me about him because he's accusing all these people, R. Scott Clarke, presumably us as well, because we're opposing Wilson and White on this point.

And we, as if we have this Trump, the Wilson derangement syndrome and it's like, sadly, he needs to take a serious look in the mirror because the stuff we're saying, we're critiquing exactly what he said.

We're not, we're not, we're taking what he said. We're holding it up against what Reformed Theology teaches, what the Bible teaches and showing how he's completely at odds with it. So the one that's being shallow and totally deranged, unfortunately, with respect to this issue is White himself.

And it's like, you got to open your eyes. Like, you know, and it's something, it's a, it's a valuable lesson, I think, because somebody as, as qualified as Dr. White, who knows the Greek, who knows the Hebrew, who knows church history backwards and forwards, somebody who is church history literate should be immune to this stuff, should be immune to this stuff because it's so common.

It's one of the most basic lessons of church history. And sadly, it's hitting him right in the face, right between the eyes.

Yeah. It's really, it's really wrong to portray all of this as Wilson derangement. Because obviously we, like you said, we would fall into that category, but you know, we're a bunch of nobody, so he's not going to listen to what we have to say.

So that brings us up to the last thing that we need to talk about before we get to your article. And we are going to get to your article. This might be a little bit longer of an episode, but whatever.

So we do think that one of the reasons that people just seem to fall apart whenever you call somebody out or whenever you disagree with somebody publicly is simply because this is an area of life in the church that is so neglected, that is so neglected.

And I think that it has so much to do with the fact that the church is largely effeminate. It's like we need to put on love and, and we, we categorize people instantly as victims, you know, they're a victim.

And so if you disagree with them, you're an oppressor. And our, our thinking is in these areas is just so unbiblical. And what we see a lot of times is that you'll have guys like John MacArthur who can call out Joel Osteen, but you know, is, is he going to call out John Piper?

No, he's not. And you see these, these relationships and these alliances form. And I think that this really plays directly into why James White is not calling out Doug Wilson, because they're fighting on the same front with respect to the social justice issues.

And so the question comes up, you know, how would we deal with this if somebody in our camp or somebody that, that we were friends with went in a wrong direction? Well, you have to, you have to be responsible in how you do this.

So if somebody is going to disagree on, you know, we partner with Presbyterians, we're Reformed Baptists. And when, you know, we don't have an issue with our differences and we're not going to, we're not going to call somebody out.

We'll disagree, but we're not going to call somebody out over something like that. You know, Timothy Kaufman is doing a series on eschatology and we know that there's people that disagree with, you know, disagree over eschatology or something like that.

So there's room for disagreement. But then there comes a time when you just, it's like, okay, this, this is crossed over into something else and we have to call somebody out and we don't like to do it.

So, you know, it's, it's not fun, but what, what happens is that the person is starting to say stuff that is, is dangerous. And so this is, this is an example. This is an example of what James White should do with respect to Doug Wilson.

And this, this really demonstrates that, yes, we, we, we want to care for people. We want to be respectful. We want to love people. But at the same time, we can't just compromise truth. We can't just compromise truth.

We can't just compromise truth. But it was a secondary issue. And we, we scuffed with him. And after that, Jason had reached out to us, particularly me. We, we, you know, he apologized for his part in that and we reconciled and I would have considered him to be a friend.

I still consider him to be a friend. And what happened after that is I invited him on to the podcast because he was a Clarkian. From what I remember, he was a Presbyterian. He said that the Westminster Confession of Faith was the, the best summation of the Christian faith at the time.

And he had self-published a book that we had recommended. I actually had a copy of the book and we invited him on. I interviewed him. You know, he seemed like a really great guy. Theologically, we had a lot in common.

He was a Clarkian and I was really hoping that we could just mend bridges and move past our prior disagreement. And I thought, okay, this is, you know, he, there's a lot of potential here and this is great.

So we, we recommended his stuff and now we are going to have to retract that and actually warn people away from him. Now, the reason that this has come up is because there've been some developments in Jason Peterson's theology.

He apparently embraces word of faith. He is, claims to be a Messianic Jew, so he's not Reformed anymore. He's not Presbyterian. I'm not sure exactly why this stuff is taking place. But earlier this week, he, he had published an article on Kobe Bryant and whether or not Kobe Bryant was saved.

Kobe Bryant was a Roman Catholic and he apparently had attended mass the morning that he was, that he was killed. Now, first things first, we absolutely want our listeners to pray for Kobe Bryant's family.

I can't even imagine just the amount of grief that they're dealing with. And so as a Christian, you know, we can't compromise the truth of the gospel, which, which basically says that you're saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

When it comes to people that we know are people that we like, and there is just, I mean, the implications of that are extremely difficult to wrestle with. Well, what about Kobe Bryant? So Jason Peterson wrote an article basically saying that he believes that Kobe Bryant is in heaven.

Now, when I, when I saw the article, somebody else had, had pointed it out, tagged us in it. When I saw the article, I thought that the, the route that Jason Peterson was going to take would have was, was basically going to be this.

Yes, it's possible for a Roman Catholic to be saved. We would wholeheartedly agree with that. It is possible for a professing Roman Catholic to be saved. We, we've said that many times. The problem is, is that you have to, you have to make, you have to be careful.

Doug Wilson is not careful. He's sloppy. The stuff he says is stupid. The Roman Catholic, I'm going to explain it. Hold on. I'm going to explain it. The Roman Catholic church condemned the gospel at the council of Trent.

They basically said, if you, if you hold to justification by faith alone, you're anathema. So they, they condemned the gospel. And consequently condemned themselves. Now, this is actually something that you've pointed out in your article, Carlos.

So what we mean by what we're saying is it is possible for somebody to say like, Oh, I'm Roman Catholic, because this is what they've, they've identified as they grew up that way. And yet they truly believe the gospel because they really don't understand what Roman Catholicism teaches.

And they, they think like, Oh yeah, Roman Catholics, like they teach this, they teach that, you know, you're saved by Jesus, Jesus Christ. And, and you'll be saved, you know, if you believe in him. Well, we would tell that person, okay.

So it's possible that you, that you are, you might really be saved, but at that point, you're not a Roman Catholic. So you need to tell that person, Hey, listen. So according to Rome, you are, you are condemned if you believe that.

And, and the, the judgments at the council of Trent were later deemed infallible. So this is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic church. If you believe the gospel, according to them, you are condemned.

You are not, you are not, you are not saved according to them. So at that point, because salvation only comes through the Roman Catholic church, according to them, you are not a Roman Catholic. So that's where I thought Jason was going to go with this was, you know, yeah, I, and I've, I've met people.

We live in a heavily predominant Roman Catholic city. I've met people where they grew up Roman Catholic and it's like, yeah, I I'm, I'm Catholic. They don't understand what Roman Catholicism teaches. And you just have to gently respectfully say, look, man, you're not really Roman Catholic.

It sounds like you're a Bible believing Christian and you should just embrace that and stop saying that you're a Roman Catholic. So that's what, that's what we mean when, when we say yes, it's possible for a professing Roman Catholic to be saved.

We do not mean that it is possible for an actual Roman Catholic to be saved because in order to be a Roman Catholic, you have to deny the gospel. So I hope that people are understanding how that's, that's playing out.

I mean, this is, this is, this is rational, logical thinking here. And unfortunately, Jason Peterson, he wrote an article in which the way that he affirmed whether or not Kobe Bryant was was saved or not.

He writes, it is my position that the Catholics conception of justification is not consistent with Ephesians two verses eight through nine. Amen. You're right. It's not. But then he says, but the essence of the gospel they preach is by faith alone, just as it is with the Protestants.

That is a complete total undermining of the entire Protestant Reformation. And Jason with, with, with this, with this thinking would completely undermine the Protestant Reformation. This is extremely dangerous.

So I wrote to him and I said, my friend, you need to recant this. You need to, you need to like recant this. You know, my hope is that he would, and basically wrote back and he said, it's my position, take it or leave it.

This is my position. And then he informed me that he is now a word of faith and that he is a Messianic Jew. This type of thinking is extremely dangerous because Rome teaches a false gospel. And so for Jason to say that the essence of the gospel that they preach, that the Roman Catholic priests preach, that the Pope preaches, that the system holds to is essentially that the essence is by faith alone.

Either Jason does not understand the Roman Catholic position or he does not understand the biblical position. And, and in both, so either J and it's possible that Jason may not be saved. I, I, I don't know.

I'm going to hold out hope, but there's, there's absolutely no way that he should be on a platform instructing people. He is, he is prominent within the, the Clarkian groups because he was a very, very outspoken Clarkian and he is, he's actually writing a book, a new book on Clarkian apologetics.

The irony here is that this is step one in defending the faith is you, I mean, if you cannot get this right, then there's no reason that anybody should read your book on, on defending the faith. It's, it's, it is totally, I mean, Carlos, do you have any, do you have any thoughts on this?

Yeah. If, if by defending the faith, you mean defending Roman Catholicism, then it's not the true faith. So, and what I was going to say is like, you can't be, you know, when people say you can be saved if you're a Roman Catholic, but the problem is you, a true Roman Catholic cannot be saved.

Like, because of what you just explained that the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church has very clearly anathematized and condemned the biblical gospel of justification by faith alone. And that's only one, that's only one of a myriad, an entire quagmire of heaps and mountains of false doctrines upon false teachings that the, the, the Roman Catholic Church has perpetuated for centuries.

And so, he's, he is seriously confused and there is just, he is, he is completely unreliable when it comes to spiritual things. Now, from, from, from what I read in, in the, his article about Kobe Bryant, that was just, he just took a really, really bad wrong turn and he's just not in a, it seems like he's not even rational anymore.

Like, he's just totally irrational. What he's saying is just irrational nonsense compared to, you know, coming from a position of, of a Clarkian, of a scripturalist, somebody who values logic and consistency and arguments and, and, and consistent biblical systematic doctrine.

Going from that to this is, is a completely like 180, just the worst kind of possible turn that somebody can, can take from what it seems. And I will say I have had some, some experience with Messianic Judaism.

It's interesting because in my college class, I have a religious studies minor. So, I took a, a religious studies class where they encouraged us to attend a, a service that wasn't our, our own faith. So, I went to a mess, a Messianic Jewish church and here in town and it was pretty cool.

I mean, it was interesting there. They have a, they had a rabbi and he kind of was going through the Hebrew. He would explain everything and for, you know, he would read it in Hebrew and then explain it.

And it was, it was an interesting learning experience. But there were, I noticed some things when talking to the people in the church that kind of alarmed me. One was that they all seem to, some of them seem to love John Hagee.

And John Hagee, I remember when I started listening to him when I was first saved and he made a pretty troubling statement that kind of got me thinking like, what? He said something like, if you're not assured of your salvation, then you're not saved.

So, something like that. He was equating like assurance with salvation. But, and he said other really bad stuff before, way worse than that. Like, he's apparently, one of his books, he says that Jesus didn't even come to be the Messiah or something like that.

So, there's, there's some serious problems with, there can be some serious problems with Messianic Judaism because they also say like, well, it's okay to keep the law if you want to. You don't have to, but, you know, you can.

And it's like, well, that's not really the impression that Paul gives. He says, I mean, you're, this is a waste of time if you're not, there, these are old and done away with obsolete covenant things that you don't need to even bother with anymore.

Because Christ is already here. So, why would you bother? And so, and there was also another ministry called Zola Levitt. I used to get their newsletter called the Levitt Letter. And this article just kind of, it was a tipping point for me because they had an article talking about the Pope and the Pope said something critical about Israel.

And their whole concern, and this is tying into what, what's going on with Jason, ironically, because their whole point was that the Pope pray, they, they, I think they even said at the end of the article, let's pray that the Pope will have a better disposition and attitude towards Israel.

So, right there, you can already see their priority was not the gospel. Their priority was not Christ. Their priority was not the Bible. It was Israel. It was all about the political nation of Israel in which the New Testament is still banned, by the way, the last time I checked.

And so, they make these issues, like these dispensational issues, like Israel, the nation of Israel, they're all about that. And they're even willing to go as far as to say, pray that the Pope will have a better attitude towards Israel.

And it's like, you completely missed the mark.

Yeah. Why don't we pray that Israel will have a better attitude towards their Messiah?

Yeah.

I mean, you know.

Like, and how about you pray that the Pope will, like, renounce his false gospel and, I mean, quit or something, like.

Well, stop being anti-Christ. Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, okay. So, let's wrap this up. Jason, I still like you, but I absolutely 100 disagree with you. I think that where your theology is headed is dangerous. If you would lead people back to Rome, that anti-Christ system, then, you know, you should not be platforming yourself.