The Debate that NEVER HAPPENED!

Welcome to the Apologetic Dog and the Gospel of Grace

And welcome to the Apologetic Dog. If this is your first time here to the Apologetic Dog, please hit the like button. That helps the algorithm circulate my content to a broader audience. The Apologetic Dog is an apologetics ministry where we contend for the gospel of grace.

And when I say the gospel of grace, I'm saying a salvation that looks to Jesus Christ by faith alone, in Christ alone, and God gets all the glory alone. Amen. So I want to dive right into this. Something happened this past weekend, but I can't say that it is actual debate.

I want to explain more what I mean by that is every time I asked a question, every time I made a point, my interlocutor just totally disregarded anything and everything that I said. But as I thought about it more and more, I thought, you know, it's not all in vain.

In fact, I want to let you know that the gospel of grace was proclaimed, and that will reach an audience into the church of Christ world. And so in that, I want to rejoice and again rejoice. And so here's a few clips of me being able to have the opportunity to share the gospel on this platform.

So nobody will be saved that doesn't come in contact with a soul winner? With someone that preaches the gospel of grace apart from works. Okay, so they have to come in contact with a Calvinist to be saved?

No, there's Arminians. So where we differ more fundamentally is on what the gospel is. You think it's not miraculous, you don't need the Holy Spirit for anything, it's by your obedience that you can achieve an eternal reward.

For me, I recognize that we are depraved, not seeking after God from birth by our nature, and so we need something miraculous that the gospel brings. And it's not trusting in our own works, but trusting in the finished work of Christ.

What I want to leave people with is total depravity is the backdrop of showing how miraculous the grace of God must accomplish to bring us out of that dead state. And so I've been appealing to Ephesians chapter 2.

That's probably one of the best cases. That's where I wanted to stake my case into saying that our nature. Now he appealed to Galatians 2 15 that you have those that were born as a Jew. You don't become a Jew the eighth day you're circumcised.

You are circumcised because you're a Jew. My point is, nature is talking about those that are born of two parents. So I want to leave us on this high. The total depravity is the curse of Adam. That's awful, right?

That is the sin that has been imputed to all mankind by one man's sin and trespass, brought condemnation for all of mankind. That's what the Bible says. You have to try really hard to redefine that. But we see in Ephesians 2 3, we were all by nature children of wrath like the rest of mankind.

But God, God being rich in his mercy because of the great love in which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, God miraculously made us alive together with Christ. By grace you have been saved.

The gospel of grace is I look to Jesus Christ and his finished work plus nothing on my end. And so faith isn't something that you just muster up. It's not something that you try really hard to think about.

You know what would be interesting is if we got into talking about if two people had the same amount of information given to them, why is it that one would look to the Son and the other reject? Now in his position, one has to be holier than the other.

One has to do more obedient works than the other one. And it's just arbitrary why one chose and the other rejected. It was just because of their libertarian free will. But we know better. We understand all of mankind have been cursed by the sin of Adam.

And so the fact that anyone is saved is by the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit that takes out that dead sinner's heart and gives them a new living heart that looks to Jesus Christ in faith alone and God gets all the glory alone.

And so his position historically is called Pelagianism. Pelagians taught that you were born perfect. And where he would differ with Pelagius is that Pelagius said that it is possible to live a sinless life.

It's possible. Now Caleb in his last programs has said that that's impossible. It's never gonna happen. Well if one day you're sinlessly perfect and then another day happens and it's sinlessly perfect, well you follow that logic out.

Pelagius was right on your terms. You're just being inconsistent at that point. And think about it. Why Caleb has to make so many emotional appeals. He believes in his own goodness, in his own flesh that he can be made right with God.

You got to get into those watery graves of baptism to have your past sins washed away. That's not the gospel of grace. Baptism is a beautiful picture, a likeness, like the verse that he quoted in Romans chapter 6.

It's a likeness of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. For us to come to newness of life takes the sovereign hand of God coming upon us. Now remember, he does not think that the gospel has any miraculous work of God.

It has spiritual benefits. But when we talk about death, it's done, right? For the wages of sin is physical death. Now he knows that he cannot get into that position because babies that die physically, why did that happen?

Now he has to say, well that's just a part of the natural world. Adam, even though he disobeyed, had he obeyed, he has to say he still would have died 930 years later. That is absurd because scripture calls death an enemy.

Death is a result of Adam's sin. And so when babies do tragically die, it is because of the sin of Adam. But my position is even though a baby does not deserve to go to heaven, I believe God in his mercy and his grace, he regenerates that baby.

Not because that they're pure and innocent, but it's because God in his grace and mercy does this miraculous work. And so please look to Jesus Christ in your faith, plus no works of all, plus nothing else.

He is the perfect Savior, and his obedience was never tainted by sin. And so if you're looking to yourself in your own obedience, well that is to contradict the gospel of grace. Thank you so much. Well, that was the best part.

Why This Was Not Really a Debate

And that's okay. God's Word tells us that when his Word goes forth, it never returns empty. It goes for the very purpose that it was intended to. So why am I saying that? Why am I calling this not a debate?

Well, I'd be curious in the side chat. Let me know if you've seen the debate interaction, and share with me some of your thoughts. In fact, if you have some questions about some things, post that and I'll bring it up on the screen.

And if you would like for me to address something within the debate, I have the debate queued up, and so we can maybe go to different portions of that. But before I get into showing you how Caleb just did not answer any of my presentation, any of my arguments, apparently he has an axe to grind, and he wants to make heavily emotional appeals to people that maybe don't understand the arguments.

Hold on one sec. Sorry for that. Siri was being summoned across the room. And so what I mean by emotional appeals is, it's okay to bring up the question of where do babies go when they die, but when you start making it personal, and to me that just is kind of uncalled for.

And like I said, if you watched it, you know exactly what I'm talking about. But that was his whole rebuttal is, Jeremiah, your position can't be right, because that just means that babies go to hell.

And it's just interesting, because the more I've thought about this, I really don't think Caleb can do an actual debate. When I'm saying actual debate, I mean with a moderator. I mean when I ask a question, and if he starts to run away, and then I'm able to interject and say, no no, you're answering something else over here, I'm asking about this.

I legitimately think that Caleb and his father Johnny are not able to do an actual kind of debate. So I wanted to, before we get into the actual exchange, I want to tell you something that I was pretty disappointed about.

So before the debate, Caleb was was very cordial. We talked on the phone, we emailed, we text, and I told him through email, I was like, hey, can we avoid using any graphics that would be, you know, a depiction of the other person's view that really is just a gross misrepresentation?

And so I had to really fight for this, and I just wanted to show y 'all some of this correspondence. Something else that we agreed upon is that if we used any video clips, planning on using any video clips in the debate, that we would share that with the other one and give the thumbs up and okay.

And so he used multiple video clips that he did not send me, and I just, I remember in the debate, we'll put it in air quotes for the time being, I remember being very disappointed that Caleb was being dishonest with what we corresponded with and we talked about.

So I just wanted to share this with y 'all. Caleb said, right now this is the only video that I have lined up to use in our debate, because when we talked on the phone, we said if you are going to use any more clips, just send it so the other one can proof it to make sure it's not something that crosses over the line.

And then he says, in our last phone call, you brought up horned babies and babies with snake fangs. He says he's removed all that, and I cannot express to you how hard this was to tell him, please don't put any inappropriate pictures.

Let's just stick with the arguments. Let's just stick with substance. This is a debate that people are looking forward to, and he really insisted on being able to use graphics. And if you watched the debate on my channel, well obviously I blocked out my son because he used many pictures on Facebook.

And real quick, I'll just show you this. If it'll pull up, we had a text message. Here we go. We had a phone call that was over 50 minutes, and I was really trying to say, hey Caleb, do you care if we exchange presentations, like the slides and the videos, to make sure that everything is above board?

And he did not want to do it, and I just said please don't use Facebook photos of me from the past and try to make it look a certain way. And I will say this, I did not say please don't use pictures of my son, but that's what he's saying in his mind is, well Jeremiah didn't say I couldn't talk about JJ Nortier.

And so I just want to express to y 'all how disappointed I am, the dishonesty of Caleb beforehand. We committed to, like I said, rules. We talked about if you were gonna add any more videos or slides, we would proof it for the other one.

And just to let you know, I was not gonna be okay if he used pictures of my son, but I was fully prepared to talk about the nature of babies when they're born and what happens as a result if they were to die in infancy, what that looks like life after death.

So I was prepared to talk about that, but I was very disappointed that he talked about my son, and he violated the second commandment. He had graphics of Jesus with his arm around Satan, obviously trying to poison the well and demonize my view.

And so I blocked that out if you, like I said, watched the debate on my channel. And so I just want to let you know that we had some established rules at the very onset, and Caleb did not care. And so that was disappointing.

But you know what, that's okay, because the gospel was preached. And honestly, I can rest easy at night knowing that God would use this for his good. So I see a little bit of liveliness in the comment section, and I just want to encourage everybody, if you have any questions or comments or you do want to show support in some way, I would appreciate that in the ministry.

And so Carl sent in a super chat, and Carl is, we'll just say, not on my side of the debate here. He does represent a member of the Church of Christ, and I want to say thank you to Carl. We've kind of corresponded behind the scenes and sharpened one another, asked each other questions, and I would consider Carl a friend.

In fact, Carl called into the program, and I plan on playing that later and discussing the question that Carl asked. And I think Carl's question, you'll have to hang on to the end of the episode, but I think Carl's question was the best question asked of me of the whole night.

And so let's see here. Gavin James. What's up, man? Gavin said, I watched the debate. I remember you saying it was excellent. Now it wasn't a debate at all. I remember saying that towards the end, and I remember thinking, you know what?

For what it was worth, I was able to articulate the gospel. I was very proud about that and very thankful to the Lord about that. But going back and re-watching it, listening to all the people's disappointment for how Caleb was not honest and really seemed to make it a personal attack against my family, no.

And I would say the exchange in terms of argumentation, Gavin, you and I would have had so much better of an exchange on the arguments, and I know your heart's desire, Gavin, is to make sure that you do not misrepresent your opponent.

And so yeah, I've had time to go back, and for one, it was kind of a blur in the moment. And towards the end, I did kind of have peace. I had to say a prayer in my heart and just ask the Lord that he would let me just have a deep breath and just continue to stick to the game plan and preach the truth.

And so yeah, I remember saying that towards the end, Gavin, that it was excellent. But really in the moment when I said that, that it was an excellent opportunity to preach the gospel. But in terms of actual debate, all the violations of the rules aside that me and Caleb agreed to, it wasn't a debate in the sense that, this is how I knew it was about to fly off the rails, is I didn't get to go first.

Now I went back and looked at some of our emails, and he said, okay, each one of us is going to give three speeches, they were going to have, we agreed on me asking questions first, and it'd be up to a minute, and him getting two minutes to respond.

But I thought Caleb knew that the affirmative is supposed to go first. So right out the gate, and when I went back to look at our emails, he did have his name first, and then my name, and just kind of had, you know, three speeches, and then the the cross-ex, and then the audience Q &A.

But I thought that meant with the understanding that the affirmative goes first, because that's standard debate, and then the negative comes in. And so when that didn't happen, obviously he just jumped straight in and just said, hey everybody, Jeremiah says all babies are going to hell, or at least the the reprobate non-elect ones.

And I just remember thinking, like, what in the world? I get bringing up that implication, and us talking about it. So it felt like a disconnect when I went second, and when I gave my presentation, which I rehearsed, and I usually don't do PowerPoint presentations, but I worked on this because I knew that that that's kind of what he likes to do, and I thought, well that would be good, we'll both have a presentation that would charitably represent our arguments and our positions.

But I realized very quickly, Caleb did not care what I had to say. And so I'm just saying, Gavin, that's why I'm not saying, or that's why I'm saying that this was not a debate. Not one that people would watch and really learn and see two clashing world views.

And so Carl and Gavin, just know, I think y 'all would have done a much better job than Caleb. So if you have any questions in the side chat, or comments that you want me to say, you may have to copy and paste them a couple times, because I miss it.

I miss those. Carl, I appreciate this comment, man. Carl says, oh yeah, Carl did warn me, and that's okay. Let's see here, make sure you tell them what he said when the debate was over. Yeah, kind of going back to some, well I'll read this first.

So Carl says, which we'll make sure everybody knows, that he does agree theologically with Johnny and Caleb. So I guess that means that Carl denies the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which we'll get into a little bit this evening.

Carl has said, I did not like him using those pictures. Appreciate you saying that. There must be honor in debates. And Carl did warn me, and hey, I knew what I was getting into, and I thought, we'll go ahead and roll these dice, and hey, God uses that.

So I do appreciate the cordiality, Carl, between you and myself. And so, something that the babe of all babes just reminded me of, is when we were talking about me and Caleb on the phone, like I said, for almost an hour, and I was really just pleading with them, hey, we don't have a moderator, so can we like, check each other's slides to make sure that everything's okay, that you're not gonna use old Facebook photos of me, and try to twist them.

Caleb was like, no, no, no, you can trust me. Lesson learned, I will not be doing debates without a moderator, and I will not be doing debates that do not allow me to interject when I ask a question, if they're starting to run off and talk about something else that does not pertain to my question.

And what was very strange, as I left the studio, is, you know, Caleb came outside, and we shook hands, and he said, Jeremiah, we really like you, we'd like to do more content with you, and he said something very strange, he said, when your wife calms down, which I understand, hopefully we can connect again, and I was like, well, for one, the babe of all babes, and the apologetic puppy was not in the studio, thank the good Lord they were not there in person.

I just remember thinking, you know exactly what you did, and we'll play a clip where, you know, he basically said, oh, you can talk about my kid, and so forth, but no, I mean, we're supposed to to show honor and respect, and have a Christian-like spirit in these things.

And so yeah, she just wanted me to make sure to remind you all of that. Before we dive in, I have a number of clips. We probably have ten or so. What do y 'all say out there? Let me know if you got a chance to watch the debate, and if there was some things that you did like from my side, or if you did think that Caleb raised some interesting points, and want to know what I think now, definitely put it in the side chat.

And like I said, you may have to put that in there a couple times. Oh, here we go, truth defenders. Defend that truth. The apologetic dog, question, infant mortality throughout history outnumbers those that lived.

That said, if all infants go to heaven, would that contradict Matthew 7 14? And that scripture, we'll go ahead and pull it up, because I want to read the verse right before it also. Let's see, don't know if that's gonna get me there.

Okay, Jesus says, enter by the narrow gate, for the gate is wide, and the way is easy that leads to destruction. And those who enter by it are many, for the gate is narrow, and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

Now, the question is saying, that's a whole lot of people going to heaven if all babies go to heaven. Well, it's interesting, because I believe this is talking about how the world at large is led into deception, and to the way of destruction.

I don't think that would necessarily contradict this verse. There are many infants that die in infancy, but think about this. This is about my best crack at trying to say, for one, you do get in conversations of eschatology and post-millennialism, which would already have a way of having to explain this, which I am NOT a post-millennialist, even though I have a lot of post postmill brethren out there.

I think about this, when Jesus returns, and you have all souls that have ever lived, I don't know what that number is gonna look like. I know from my viewpoint, all of those that are saved is gonna be as vast as the sands on the sea, and all the stars of the sky.

And so, I don't know if this verse is meant to convey that three-fourths of the world, the people have ever existed, will miss the boat of salvation, and then a very small few. Now, there is something to be said about a remnant, and I'm okay with Scripture kind of making some type of qualifier of saying that of children, for of such are the kingdom of heaven.

Now, that doesn't mean that all babies go to heaven. I just look at that verse, and I think about the character of God, and I conclude, well, that would make sense. That would make sense, even though they are totally depraved, they don't deserve heaven.

My conviction is that God saves to the uttermost, and he would regenerate an infant that dies in infancy, tragically. So, very good question, very good question. Everyone has to kind of reconcile those things, even those...

I remember something that MacArthur said years ago, when we look at Revelation 5, verse 9, people will be saved out of every tribe, tongue, and nation. And he made a good point that's always stuck with me.

What about those tribes, those nations that have never even heard the gospel? Well, if it were true that their babies go to heaven, well, then that verse would be essentially fulfilled in that. So, there's a lot of discussions that ask those similar type questions, and I think they're good questions.

I think they're good questions. Awesome. Truth Defenders. Anybody else out there? Anybody else? Let's see. I want to brag on this coffee mug that I have. It is Bluetooth temperature regulated, so that means I'm good for a while.

Let's see. Okay. Planted in the Word. Thank you for your chat here on the side. Planted in the Word says, in the debate, Kaleb brought up something that he seemed was a gotcha. He said, if all have a sin nature because of Adam, then why did Adam and Eve sin?

That would be good to address again. Yeah. He did ask me that, and I wanted to let everybody know everything that Kaleb said, he has said before. So, he did not say anything new and innovative, and imagine, imagine if in cross-examination, he was not allowed to run away from me and was being forced to answer my questions.

I'm just saying that we'll get into some of these clips. And so, I think, yeah, this is one of Kaleb's opening questions. What about Adam? Well, Adam sinned by choosing to sin with Eve. Now, to be fair, like, when you look back at R .C. Sproul's commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith, which I'm not a Presbyterian, love my Presby bros, he has a whole chapter on the mystery of iniquity.

And I see it as less mysterious as R .C. Sproul, even though Adam was not created with a sin nature. It'd be impossible because God is holy, holy, holy. Adam was created in an upright state. Genesis 1 says he was created very good, but he was created in such a way with the potentiality to sin.

So, where did this inclination to sin come from? Now, Kaleb's not sophisticated enough to actually ask those deeper questions of where that impulse to sin is. That's why when he heard me in the debate, I just said, well, Eve was deceived by the serpent, and Adam willfully chose to sin with his wife.

And so, that's, like I said, didn't matter what I said to Kaleb. He, like I said, he was a one-string banjo. He just wanted people to hear one thing, and that's that Jeremiah thinks all babies go to hell, or at least the the non-elect ones.

So, that's why hopefully you see the thumbnail, it's like, that's not even my position. Anyway, so what I think is really important when you go back to the garden in Genesis chapter 3, is there is a third agent that came on to the scene, which is Satan.

He is a moral, spiritual being, able to cognitively think, discern, and mainly deceive. And so, the fact that you have another agent coming into the picture, I think that is a game-changer. I think the harder question is, why did Satan sin in the throne room, essentially, when you look at Isaiah 14 or Ezekiel 28?

But when we talk about Adam, there was a kind of proverbial push. Now, he is still morally culpable, he chose to do it, but what I mean is, there was a temptation that Eve, as the weaker vessel, Scriptures say, she was deceived.

And so, Adam is hearing the doubt from the evil one, knows that he's wrong, and then he sees Eve fall. And so, what Scripture does tell us is that Adam was created in such a state, if his external context was altered to that degree, then his nature is able to willingly choose to sin.

And so, some people, they don't find that very satisfying, but the big point is, well, there was a deceiver that came on to the scene. That is ultimately in a chain of events of what caused Adam to sin and bear moral, accountable choices.

But the harder question is, why did Satan sin? When he was Lucifer, when he was blameless and created perfect, essentially, where did his impulse to have pride in his heart? And so, to me, that is where the true mystery of iniquity lies.

But good question, good question. Hopefully, that helps a little bit. Okay, so Ian Tate, thank you for your comment. The Church of Christ teaches sinless perfectionism, and that when someone repents of sin, they are considered perfect once again.

That is a good point. I often say the Church of Christ look at Jesus's death on the cross as a reset button. And so, for them, at large, and this is a good representation even for those that maybe don't like me saying this, when they come in contact with the blood and the watery graves of baptism, it washes away all of their past sin.

And so, from that point on, it's just up to you to repent and repent. And I like to say, well, you better have a perfect repentance, because if you forget to repent of your sin, then you're toast. So, thank you for that.

Death, Baptism, and the Curse of Adam

I want to transition now into saying, once again, why I don't think the debate actually happened is because Caleb did not interact with my arguments, he didn't interact with my opening presentation, and like I said, he just had an axe to grind, and it was based on emotionalism.

And he said, well, we're all just emotional beings, so it counts. I'm like, that's a red herring. That doesn't mean you get to make emotional-based arguments, especially those that do not represent my position.

And so, one of the most basic logical fallacies is what's called a straw man. And man, Caleb was lighting up some scarecrows during that debate. So, what I want you to know is something that they're probably gonna do and it cracks me up, is after the debate, Johnny and Caleb are gonna start responding to my arguments.

And so, they already released one clip. I want to play a little bit of it. And this is the kind of thing that if Caleb were to bring up some of these points in a actual debate, then it would have been great.

We could have actually talked about the issues, but that's not what Caleb was after. Out of the mouth of babes comes perfect praise. Well, how are they lying? And then Jesus using them as a symbol to say, these are the people that you get the honest truth from.

Y 'all let me know if y 'all can hear that, but notice as Caleb is kind of going through one of his speeches here, he's saying, how is it that Calvinists think that babies are just liars, but it's Jesus that says, out of the mouth of babes come truth.

Well, when I heard him say that, I'm like, well, you misquoted what Jesus actually said. When Jesus' triumphal entry, there was a bunch of people singing Hosanna, praise to him from the highest, and there was children in the midst saying, Hosanna, Hosanna.

And this was prophesied, I think, in Psalm chapter 8, and Jesus is just saying, out of these mouths of babes, they are right in addressing me as Hosanna. And once again, I thought, man, that would have been a great point to bring up in the debate, and we could have talked about everyone's favorite word, context.

Context is the death knell to Church of Christ theology. I'm gonna be kind to Carl in the side chat. I know Carl understands, and Gavin James, that context is king. And so if you're not talking about context, then you're really not even, you know, in the ballgame at all.

And so, thank you, Carl. Okay, Carl's sending...hey, Carl, when you send in a super chat, I do appreciate that, so let me see here. Oh, this is a good question. Now, we may need to bring this up later, but Carl is saying, do you agree that Adam's sin removed him from the tree of life?

This removed all humanity from that tree, which we will get back in Revelation...we'll get back in heaven in Revelation 2, Revelation 22. For one, Carl, I want to say thank you for bringing up the fact that the tree of life is mentioned more than once in the Scripture.

Man, that's some good coffee, by the way. All right, since you sent in two super chats, I want to make sure I answer this succinctly, and if I don't hit it on the head, Carl, let me know. You don't have to keep sending in super chats, even though I do appreciate that.

Jeremiah, do you agree that Adam's sin removed him from the tree of life? This removed all of humanity from the tree, which we'll get back...oh yeah, yeah. So this is actually, Carl, what I was prepared to talk a lot about in the debate, because a lot of what I tried to make a case for was Romans 6 23 says, for the wages of sin is thanatos, death.

Now, I get that Ezekiel 18 20 says, the soul that sins shall die, the sons will not bear accountability or the iniquity of their father, so we have to talk about that context. But think about this, when Adam sinned, the penalty for his sin was he personally was removed from the garden with Eve, and they were not able to either continue to eat of the tree of life or to eat from the tree of life as a reward.

And what I want to point out is, that is a direct penalty for Adam's sin. Now, when we talk about all of their children, you gotta think, Adam and Eve, now they're gonna begin procreation outside of the garden, outside of the tree of life.

So when they reproduce, they are not in that covenantal context of blessing and fellowship with God, and so all they have now is death. And so yes, that was a penalty for Adam's sin, and all of Adam's posterity suffered for that same particular sin which results in death.

And so when you ask me, yes, we will go back to, I want to say the tree of life is plural in Revelation 22, you may have to double-check me on that, but what we will experience one day in glory, for those that have been saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and Christ alone, we will experience something better than what Adam had previously in the garden.

So, great question. If you want me to continue to speak on that a little bit, Carl, just let me know. Thank you for your questions. And that goes for anybody else in the side chat. I really appreciate the support.

The Church of Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Righteousness of Christ

So I want to critique this video that Caleb and Johnny posted after the debate. They're now starting to engage with my arguments. Imagine if that is how the debate truly went. Now, I want to say this too, as I conclude.

Some people might say that it's out of place, out of etiquette, and untoward for me to talk about his son, JJ. Hey, I've got a son. You can talk about my son. That's okay. He's cute. No, Caleb. Those that are totally depraved are those that would dare to talk about someone else's children.

When you said that, I thought, nope, nope, not playing that game. And the thing is, I respect Caleb and Johnny, and I want to treat them as such, especially during a debate. All right, can you hear me?

The scripture declares, there is none righteous, no, not one. Have you ever asked yourself the question, why is that? Why is it the case that all of mankind hates God? Okay, I'm about to do a little bit of systematic biblical theology.

So there are many verses. The first one off the top of my head. James 4 .4 says you're either a friend of the God, or you're either a friend of God, or you're an enemy of God. You're a friend with the world and an enemy of God, and the point is you cannot serve two masters.

And so when the scripture says that we are at enmity with God, and so let's maybe go to, let me pull up the scripture here. When we go to Romans 8, this is where we get the word, hatred comes for the word enmity, to be at war.

And so that's why Romans 5 .1 is so important about having peace with God. So if we were to have actually debated this point, Jeremiah, why do you think mankind hates God? Well, not only does Romans chapter 3 talk about how all men, you know, there's none righteous, no, not one, they go astray.

Romans 1 talks about how they do not give honor and glory to God, they suppress the truth and are righteous, yeah, but it doesn't say hate. Well, I was prepared to talk about this logical fallacy that I saw Caleb do on tons of his past content, and it's called word composition fallacy.