More Regarding King James, Bart Ehrman, etc

The Dividing Line Opens and the Last Program of 2008

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 9 7 3 4 6 0 2 or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1. And now with today's topic here is James white.

And good morning, welcome to the dividing line the last dividing line of 2008 and If you are a young person just coming to realize that each year goes faster than the one before I Have some insight for you.

It only gets worse. Oh Yes, it's it's a member remember the roller coaster right as it tips over it starts going faster and faster. Yeah, that's yeah, that's what life is all about there. But anyway looking forward to 2009 programming note first of all.

Not gonna be here Thursday, but we will we will do it if I line on Friday instead probably a morning one. So we'll just repeat this time on on Friday and Work it out that way so that you can get your your fill and we can continue Making progress to what we're making progress to an item number two.

Just mentioned in the blog last night and a lot of people are excited and a little bit amazed That you can still make it on the cruise basically at half the price it was before and Why well? I'm not a thousand percent certain, but I'd assume it's the economy the economy stupid.

I would imagine that The I was told anyway that just a few weeks ago. You could get high-end hotel rooms near Times Square in Manhattan before Christmas for 99 bucks. And if you know anything about what hotel rooms in New York normally cost that gives you an idea of what's going on.

They need warm bodies In inside the ship. Basically is how it works, and that's great for you because we're talking $150 per person. Please note the little asterisk just at $2 .99 had a little asterisk.

There's always this tax thing you know. They always get you coming and going. You know but since it's only four day cruise It's not nearly as much as it would be for like a seven or something like that but it's half the price basically is what it was before and You know We'd love to have you come along and yeah, I know it's short notice, and yeah, you should have a passport.

We are going to Mexico. And they do require that now. So I realize that everybody can do it. But for some of you who were just going you know a little bit out of reach well now It's half the price it was before so Love to have you come along with us.

I certainly have a feeling I'm gonna be fired up just a little bit after the Bart Ehrman debate, and oh yeah. So I'll be Gary's got to behold me back. You know and so well We're gonna have opportunities for the theology talks on the ship and stuff like that.

It's a great time, so just wanted to let you know about that and Then it is fascinating to me That over the past couple weeks. I have had two Christians. Both of which would probably be Well I imagine they're both Baptists of some stripe or another who have contacted me to Insist upon the fact that I am NOT a Christian.

I am a false teacher. I'm an unbeliever and the first I blogged about and that was Matt Thomas out in Hawaii and He's the fellow who writes just like Peter Ruckman does with the all caps and stuff like that and and He informed me that in fact I was just looking at what I posted back on the 18th.

If you want to hook up my webcam I can pray for you and ask the Lord and Savior of the King James Bible to deliver you The Lord and Savior of the King James Bible now there was one. I had not seen before but there you go.

And it was interesting to me because Brian Miller had at the beginning of the program. We've been reviewing Been telling me that That's just a straw man these I've never met anybody the King James Bible alone equals word of God alone.

That's just a straw man. It's easily knocked down.

Yeah.

And as soon as he says that the recommendites come out of the closet to demonstrate that Brian needs to get out a little bit More so there you've got you've got Matt Thomas and we're hoping that maybe Matt will call in some time don't know when haven't heard back from him for a while here and Then Starting yesterday a fellow up in Canada Dave Hunt fan.

In fact, I put a video up. I haven't blogged it yet, but it's on my youtube page. Responding to some of the questions he asked but they a Dave Hunt fan called up nothing to haul up. He wrote in and has been writing rather regularly.

He doesn't seem to have a whole lot else to be doing he can really crank him out, but he wrote to inform me that I am NOT a Christian either and I pointed out, you know, not even Geisler and Hunt say that and he says well if you read hunt real carefully that is what he's saying and.

Of course he won't read my books and so he's just sending us, you know I'll start sort stuff that have we've refuted many many times were but he won't read the refutation. So but the other thing is, you know, I said well feel free.

Don't feel free to call. No, you need to drive me a freeway of getting on your program or call me at this number. So so you're not a Christian and if I'm gonna prove it to your audience you got to call me.

Okay, so this morning there was like three more email long emails from from. Again, you know not even up to Dave's level really of argumentation, but and I just wrote back. So sir, you know, here's where the web this is when the webcasts on there's a number.

If you want to call feel free. Otherwise, you really don't need to be writing me anymore. So anyway, it is interesting to run into all these folks who? Present that I did want to before we take a first call I did want to sort of expand a little bit on what I said at the end of the last program on this subject and I only had like well three and a half four minutes something along those lines I was talking about the Westminster Confession of Faith and the London Baptist Confession of Faith.

They both say the same thing at section 1 Chapter 1 section 8 the Old Testament Hebrew Which is the native language of the people of God of old and the New Testament Greek which at the time of the writing of?

It was most generally known to the nations. Being immediately inspired by God and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages are Therefore authentical so as in all controversies of religion the church is finally to appeal unto them.

I had been listening to a I'm sorry reading a thread on the Puritan board where once again this issue was raised. I have addressed that a couple of times before there has been some discussions the Kami Ohanian first John 5 7 on the Puritan board that in fact I participated in a number of years ago and One of the discussions basically was if you don't use the received text The TR then are you in essence violating your ordination vows in Disagreeing if you don't take an exception to the Westminster Confession of Faith 1 8.

Some of you may have read.

The.

Encounter I had with Doug Wilson on this subject a number of years ago in Credenda agenda we had this this crossfire type debate. This dispute Oshio as they call it where you have I think exactly 100 words.

And if you've ever sat down with a and typed out 100 words. It doesn't take long to type out 100 words, but that's what you have to do. You have to go back forth back and forth. It's a it's a quick crossfire type thing in written format, and we did it on Doug's embracing of Theodore elitist is viewpoint of the ecclesiastical text.

Whatever exactly that is and you know as long as you don't get into specifics. You can you can really sound good talking about the text received by the church. And and used in all ages as long as you don't get into specifics if you just stay in the generalities.

That sounds great. But the wheels fell off of Doug Wilson's wagon when I got specific I Started asking him all right. How does this work and actually determine the text of New Testament? Because there are differences between the five editions of Erasmus.

Stephanus Beza the King James did not follow any one slavishly primarily followed the 1598 of Beza, but. What makes that to receive text first of all that was one of the first questions is okay? If you call this to receive text who received it what counsel when?

What did they examine. What data was available to them what manuscripts were available to them? What did they know about ancient history? Were they right about the things I said I'd like to what counsel did this and no one can ever tell me that because there wasn't one.

The closest you can get is the Roman Catholic Church enshrining the Latin Vulgate. And that's not exactly what the Western Confession of Faith was talking about obviously they're talking about Greek and Hebrew not Latin and.

So when it says which we have received. From who which one? Show me the manuscripts to give me the data. How do you determine? The reading of say Luke 2 22 or Revelation 16 5. Or the Kami Ohanian for that matter.

If the Kami Ohanian is in the TR. It's only in the TR because Erasmus put it there in his third edition. It was in the first two or the first two not the TR. What Greek manuscripts of the preceding centuries represent to us the exact text the TR.

You know you have to be able to be specific if it doesn't give you a text. That you can actually identify then what good is it is? It the the Scrivener's text that's not identical to the 1633 Elsevier brothers text which they themselves Identified as the text received by all so which text are we talking about?

We've got to be specific and they can't be that's that's the problem. They can identify a general family. They said well the Byzantine manuscripts in general, but the Byzantine manuscripts disagree. Between what's the one another you have to engage in textual criticism amongst the Byzantine text as well so.

Which one is it? How do you identify it and and when did the church decide this and upon what. That's what I want to know and so. When when someone says these things and when it says kept pure at all ages well.

When you look back through the history of the church I have a graph a graphic that I use in my presentations where. I Demonstrate that in the first millennium. What would be called the majority text in Greek at that point is not the Byzantine textual platform and?

So.

If your theory Creates a text that changes from century to century and era to era. I would say that's a problem and That's why I would say that you need to be very much focused upon knowing what John wrote not what someone a thousand years after John thought John should have.

Written and.

That's why this science and the pursuit of textual criticism is important and I think it's also why God has given us such a massive amount of information from which to draw in. Discussing these particular issues, but it seemed to me the number of my reformed brethren.

And I have a feeling a number of them would not even call me reformed. That sort of seems to go hand in hand with some of this. But a number of my reformed brethren basically would say we need to be limited to the data that was available at the middle of the 16th century.

Textually and.

I would say to you any citing anyone today That was writing before the discovery of the papyri. They just don't have a foundation upon which to stand not to address the illogical issues obviously but to address the manuscript evidence as it's presented to us, and you've got to realize every single generation that has produced a collation of manuscripts had to deal with the textual evidence that was available to them at that time and As that has increased thanks be to God not decreased isn't that a wonderful thing.

But as as that has it has increased for some people. That's a problem rather than a blessing and I say it's blessing and I would submit that only those who are concerned about Intramural discussion won't see it.

That's a blessing. Certainly as I attempt to bring the reliability of the text of New Testament to the table in debating people like Bart Ehrman or debating my Muslim friends or Mormons or atheists wherever it might be I Find that to be a great blessing, and I don't honestly know how my friends who don't do that Could take their argumentation into the public square.

Because they basically say well, you know what I really can't deal with you on this level. I've got to deal with you only theologically. And we have to establish the concept of church and its authority and all these other things for I can even start talking about the text.

But where did you get all the stuff about church in the first place? Well? I got that from the text. Okay, well that that that could prove a little bit challenging now. I Am 18 minutes to 45 minutes into the King James only radio program.

They had the second edition of this just last Week ago tonight. We go tonight. I think and Brian Miller wanted to answer some questions the beginning, but they had said they're gonna take phone calls and.

So I listened and I heard him say things for example like Erasmus left the Roman Catholic Church wrong. He didn't he died in fellowship the Roman Catholic Church. And so he was wrong about that and I heard him basically circle around a number of issues that I myself had raised.

He was trying to respond to some of the things I had said on this program or at least as someone reported to him that he said I said in this program, and I couldn't tell which and Finally he got to revelation 16 -5.

I had asked about revelation 16 -5 in the chat channel that the host Jason was monitoring.

And.

He didn't understand what the question was.

Now.

It's addressed in my book. It's could be much more clearly addressed in the next edition as it comes out. But it was dressed in the book. But it is about the conjectural emendation made by Theodore Beza that appears in the 1598 edition of his text which was used By the King James translators and how all the English translations prior to the King James all the Greek versions all five Erasmus and Stephanus prior to Beza all had ha ha see us the Holy One at Revelation 16 -5 and Theodore Beza looked at ha see us and he said, you know, that looks a lot like a summon us and That would make it flow better who was and who is new is to come as ominous future form of I me in the participial form.

So he changed it without any evidence. There weren't any Greek manuscripts to substantiate. He just made the change because he felt it looked better. It flowed better and That's what's in the King James.

So all the arguments about Preservation and about God protecting his work. You have to throw them all out the window. If you're gonna accept the King James reading of Revelation 16 -5, you just have to chuck them all.

Because God did not preserve that until 1598 he let Christians go for a millennium and a half with the wrong reading of Revelation 16 -5 until the successor of John Calvin. Yes, the successor of John Calvin came up with the right reading without any Greek managers, and so I had asked that question and Brian didn't understand what the question was and it says Alice.

I'm just good while some others so I called I called the number and The guy who took the call wanted to put me on the air. But Jason and Brian said net ain't gonna do it took no phone calls at all would not let me on there even to explain What they themselves raised on the air Revelation 16 -5.

The fact the matter is they don't want to engage me because they know they cannot. Now both of them came into the chat channel into our chat channel. I have to make ministries chat channel after the program is over and So I was able to directly challenge them and I would encourage anyone to read the log of that of that discussion.

They had no answers. It all was circular well by faith. And I asked about Revelation 16 -5 and the answer was well if you examined every single Greek manuscript in the world. Might be in one of them someplace might be one of them someplace.

And.

You're just like that is the only defense you can offer is that I can't tell you where it is. I mean doesn't that remind you of Hamza Abdul Malik in 1999 when I said you say these verses aren't in the Bible.

What manuscripts. Well, they're there. Name them. Well, I can't right now, but they're there the scholars say. So what scholars name. Can't give you any names.

Utter.

Incomplete intellectual collapse total irrationality total circular spinning in in midair. That that's that's all they have to offer. That's that's all there is to that position. They could not answer any of it and that's why our first phone caller is not either Jason or Brian.

Because they're not gonna well Jason actually said well, I'm not going on because you're a professional debater and you twist my words. So in other words you are dishonest and you would twist my words is the only reason the person won't come on.

So.

Again you know. Some people say well, why do you deal with stuff like this because this is the best way to illustrate its other. It's utter bankruptcy. It has no means of defending itself. It just can't Let well let him speak for themselves.

I'm gonna play the whole thing. We're gonna go through this keep correcting the errors pointing out the the category errors so on and so forth and if those Individuals themselves come to see that there is a much firmer foundation to stand on greater.

That's that's great. But that's not my point. I'm not really overly concerned about them. I'm concerned about the listening audience and them growing in their Confidence, but you're not gonna be growing in confidence about the Word of God by holding on to King James only ism.

King James only Ism is an absolute.

Capitulation of.

The historical field of battle. It's all it is. That's all it is so. Before we go on with that. I did say we'd get to our first caller and let's talk with Bill. Hi Bill. Hi, how are you doing today. Doing pretty good?

Always a joy to call you and always amusing to Watch the King James. Only position. Change the text critical methodology from verse to verse.

Yes, isn't it though. I mean for how many times do we hear them say well they are. Basing this on just one or two corrupt ancient manuscripts against the majority and then you show them Revelation 16 5.

Well, there might be one someplace. We can't find it, but it might be there somewhere. I.

Told I told Dan Wallace one time. Given how they felt and how they did text criticism. He actually thought it was pretty applicable. I said that what we should call King James only of them was unreasonable.

Eclectic.

Well, let's let's make sure people understand that there is another term reasoned eclecticism. That is that is used in scholarship of a certain mechanism of textual critical study. But yes, unreasoned eclecticism might be the the way to do so.

Yes.

Well, I do have one question. You may remember I called before on this issue and It tried to engage at least a small-scale debate with one particularly but not nice person whose name I won't mention.

But you know who I'm talking. Yes, I do. Anyway, have you ever posted on charisma before on? Charisma yeah on charisma forum not to my knowledge. No, okay. Well the well now this individual, you know I'm talking about the claim has come up that he debated you on charisma a number of years ago and Somebody pointed out that they doubted that a reformed Baptist would ever go.

It is it is truly amazing. How many people claim to have debated me who will never call this program and whose names I can't even figure out or or when? They do finally identify themselves ago. Well, didn't I send an email to you once?

Yeah, that's where I got you. I sent you 47 back, you know, and I felt I had filtered them long before that. I didn't even get a 47 of them, you know as. There's.

There's no end to the silliness at times. It was interesting. We were on one of the well-known boards and. And of course I had you know, I challenged him to meet on the debate board mostly. Mostly to Prevent interference because you get on those chat boards or whatever and you get 13 other people in there and it gets going a hundred different directions.

Well. Another poster came on and made the point. This guy was complaining about you and and. Something about you interrupted. Dr. Holland in the debate years ago or something like that and you had your own forum there and he wouldn't call your program because you could cut him off if you didn't like what he.

Well one poster hopped in there and said now I'm trying to figure this out. You've stated that you don't do moderated debate. It's all about this other poster and you've stated that you don't do unmoderated debate.

So I guess you do invisible debate. But anyway, I just want to cut the claim was that you had posted there I knew that a lot of claims that are just real specious or made about you guys. Yeah, three all the time like well number of well a number of Roman Catholic conversions you had.

Oh, yes.

Yeah, there's a lot of stuff I Frequently what sometimes happens people will post like they'll take something from an article I've written and they'll post it on a web board and I've actually had people Respond to somebody else who posts something I wrote on a web board and then consider that to be a refutation of me and hence It grows into a debate against me and I ran and all the rest of stuff.

So I you know, I I have no recollection of anything like that at all. I would love to see what somebody has to you know, some some archives that somebody has I used to back in all the 80s and into about 93 or so was.

You would have these things called BBS's Bolton board systems and on the Bible foundation BBS and on the Bible echo, I engaged lots of King James only folks back in the 80s even before I'd written the book and Into the 90s.

So if if someone, you know took something like that or you know, who knows? I have no idea where people come up with some of the stuff they come up with but it is rather interesting.

Well, yeah, I've just noticed that I mean basically the text critical methodology as I was noting just flips from verse to verse and You hear majority rules majority rules, but you throw first John 5 7 out and well, it's in.

In fact, I've heard this comparison. This is in well. It's only an X number of manuscripts, but Matthew 18 11 is only in so many in the NIV uses less and it's just kind of a General kind of a keep moving the goalposts and chain, you know.

Well, I really deal with the argument just throw another verse out there and all and all of it flows rather.

Obviously from the fact that you have an established text you're seeking to defend therefore at any particular point you develop a set of arguments that establishes that reading and whether that's the set of arguments you use in the next verse just doesn't matter because you're defending the Word of God and That's why I've said so many times these folks start with the equation.

The King James Bible alone equals the Word of God alone and whether they mock that as Brian did or not He functions on the basis of that himself and if he doesn't see that that just means that he's blind to his own presuppositions and his own traditions and that's that's the Problem.

So all righty. All right. Well, thank you very much. Thank you bill. Yeah. All right. God bless. Bye. All righty, let's. We've got just a couple minutes for a break. Let's even get a few more minutes of the radio program in here picking back up now.

By the way, this is this came up a week ago tonight. Brian Didn't understand what I was talking about when I played this section. He says that Bart Ehrman is right in his argument on page 211. He twisted that into my saying that he was supporting Bart Ehrman.

I never said that Brian Miller would support Bart Ehrman. What I said was that Brian Miller said Bart Ehrman's right on the issue of If there's textual variance and the original was not inspired. That's what I had said and here's where exactly where Brian Miller said that is where we had stopped Hello click click click click.

Yeah, there we go.

I.

Have no idea. Yep, yep. Yep.

There are mistakes in the Bible and God then. God is not the God who he claims to be. Bart Ehrman's, right. If you take James White. Bruce Metzger's. I was trying to roll the thing back there and I think he got a little bit on the confused.

I let me roll it back just a little before I seen get the context.

He's taught we're talking about is right by George. If There are mistakes in the Bible if there are mistakes in the Bible and Got then God is not the God who he claims to be. Bart Ehrman's, right. If you take James White Bruce Metzger's and Bruce Metzger's Teachings to their logical end Then we find out that there are mistakes in the Bible and then there is no stopping of fixing those mistakes.

You have anything to add Jason? Well, I think that. Okay right there.

That's all I was talking about is that he and Bart Ehrman both make the argument that if and now what Ehrman is saying Is if the later manuscripts have textual variance if God does not somehow supernaturally preclude every single writer from ever making a mistake if he does not supernaturally Cause every manuscript to read identically to every other manuscript then the original was not inspired.

Now I find that to be an absolutely absurd assertion. Absolutely absurd, but that's what Ehrman says, but here is a King James only us saying Oh Ehrman's, right? Well, if Ehrman's right, then Ehrman would tell Brian Miller that he's got a problem because there are no two Byzantine manuscripts.

There are no two old Latin manuscripts that are identical to one another. What's he going to do with the differences between the versions of the TR? And when you say this, they just they just up I just accepted by faith.

There's a preserved Bible somewhere must be the King James because King James been blessed. So it just must be the King James and that's that's that's all they can do. They don't have any other mechanism to actually deal in a meaningful way with this kind of factual Argumentation is just well, I just I accepted my faith dollar is to it.

And so they go from there eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. We're gonna take our break be right back Today.

Public crimes the criminal mishandling of God's Word may be James White's most provocative book yet. White sets out to examine numerous crimes being committed in pulpits throughout our land every week as he seeks to leave no stone unturned.

Based firmly upon the bedrock of Scripture one crime after another is laid bare for all to see. The pulpit is to be a place where God speaks from his word what has happened to this sacred duty in our day.

The charges are as follows. Prostitution using the gospel for financial gain pandering to pluralism cowardice under fire felonious isa Jesus entertainment without a license and Cross-dressing ignoring God's ordinance regarding the roles of men and women is a public crime occurring in your town.

Get pulpit crimes in the bookstore at a omen org. The history of the Christian Church pivots on the doctrine of justification by faith. Once the core of the Reformation the church today often ignores or misunderstands this foundational doctrine.

In his book the God who justifies theologian James White calls believers to a fresh appreciation of Understanding of and dedication to the great doctrine of justification and then provides an exegesis of the key scripture texts on this theme.

Justification is the heart of the gospel in today's culture where tolerance is the new absolute. James White proclaims with passion the truth and centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith. Dr. J. Adams says I lost sleep over this book.

I simply couldn't put it down. James White writes the way an exegetically and theologically oriented pastor appreciates. This is no book for casual reading. There is solid meat throughout an outstanding contribution in every sense of the words.

The God who justifies by dr. James White get your copy today at a omen org. Hello everyone, this is Rich Pierce. In a day and age where the gospel is being twisted into a man-centered self-help program.

The need for a no-nonsense presentation of the gospel has never been greater. I am convinced that a great many go to church every Sunday yet. They have never been confronted with their sin. Alpha-Omega ministries is dedicated to presenting the gospel in a clear and concise manner making no excuses.

Man is sinful and God is holy. That sinful man is in need of a perfect Savior and Jesus Christ is that perfect Savior? We are to come before the Holy God with an empty hand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Alpha and Omega takes that message to every group that we deal with while equipping the body of Christ as well. Support Alpha Omega ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

Thank you.

The Second Half: New Translations, Preservation, and the Radio Format

On a Tuesday last dividing line of 2008 looking forward 2009 lots of challenges going to be going to Australia this year Lord willing back to the United Kingdom and Hopefully have next week of the week after a real neat announcement about Something coming up in April here in the United States that I think is going to be very very very exciting.

So Keep keep your eyes on the blog and Very much appreciate all of our blog readers. We get lots and lots and lots of folks who read that blog and We started seriously doing YouTube when I returned from a conference at the beginning of January of last year.

So it's been basically 50 weeks we have we have been seriously working on using YouTube as a means of communication and Just last week. We passed 1 million video views of the videos that we've posted we have 2 ,200 subscribers now and I think we just passed a hundred and forty thousand channel views as well So that is very exciting.

Like I said, the thing that excites me the most is when I see places such as Indonesia showing up on our Website as areas where hits are coming in from we are we are reaching people that we otherwise just simply would not be able to get to and that's that's a very very exciting thing, so thanks to all of you who make that possible and So let's let's continue on in 2009.

Let's take our another phone caller. Let's talk with Travis. Hi Travis.

I don't I don't know if you remember me or not. I met you at at the apologetics.

Santa Fe I met a lot of folks at Santa Fe lots of real nice folks there.

I am I've been talking with and I he keeps quoting me article and I were on the.

NASB translation committee. I was a critical. I was a critical consultant. I was not on the committee. Okay, well he.

He has a lot of arguments based on the Greek. Uh-huh, and I just wanted to know if you could. Help me a little bit with that word. Sure.

You will find that almost all of these go back to just two or three major works that Did he did we lose him? No, okay. Sound like sound like you had hung up and So I thought we had had lost you there.

I apologize. There are just a couple of works that People rely on and then other scholars pick them up and repeat their conclusions and so on and so forth. Arson a coitus is a term that possibly might actually have even been coined by the Apostle Paul himself and If it was then we know exactly where it came from.

See Paul was extremely fond of creating compound words to describe elements of the Christian faith to a Gentile audience and his source is the Greek Septuagint. The large majority of those who comment on the meaning of this ignore the the Tremendous reliance that the Apostle Paul has on the text of the Greek Septuagint because that was the text of the Bible of the people that day.

So when he's writing to a church, it makes perfect sense that he would use The text that they themselves have before them. And of course the early church views those Old Testament scriptures as these scriptures and New Testament is actually being written at the time but when you're making reference to the scriptures, it's it's going to be to that Old Testament when you go to Leviticus chapter 18 Leviticus chapter 20 and you look at the text.

And now now rich is distracting me by pulling up his microphone. He's not supposed to do that. What are you doing?

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to distract you are just acting Evil person because you had to reboot and so we don't have a little thing to communicate back and forth with. Oh, yes, but in the gay marriage debate you go into heavy detail into dealing with the meaning of that word.

Mm-hmm, so I would just kind of throw out that you know, he might want to get that. Oh, definitely.