South Dakota Road Trip Dividing Line

Well, greetings and welcome to the divine line. My name is James White. I'm coming to you live from our mobile command center somewhere in South Dakota. Yeah, South Dakota. I covered all of Nebraska today, not East West, the short part.

And we'll be heading into Bismarck tomorrow, literally sitting here before the program. We have a, we have what's called a fleet cart, you know, try to save money when we can. And so I have an app on my phone, wish I had it on the computer, that tells me which truck stops I can go to, because I need to go through truck stops.

When you're 57 feet long, you go through truck stops. You don't play with the pumps out front where the cars are. They didn't design it for that. Anyway, it tells me where to find them. And, you know, and so I can look, it shows me a map and all the stations within 50 miles.

There is nothing between where I am in South Dakota and Bismarck along, well, anywhere, any route that I take. There ain't nothing on our cart. Now there are stations, obviously, especially up on I -94, but not many of them.

So I'm literally, I just got off the phone with a station about 200 miles into the trip that, you know, I just had to call and make sure, because it's sort of hard to tell online, do you have the, you know, the truck pull-through lanes with the deaf and stuff like that?

And so, yeah, that's the one I'll be heading for tomorrow. But yeah, there's little things you have to do, especially this far North. There are not many humans up here. It's beautiful country, but not a whole lot of people.

And so your choices are limited. I was sent a link by Dr. Nick Needham. He was interviewed on Room for Nuance. It's an hour and 45 minutes. It's a long interview. I'm looking at it here. I just downloaded it.

I'll probably listen to it tomorrow and you're going, wait a minute, you're gonna be having a debate Saturday morning. Why aren't you listening to the other guy? Cause I already know what he believes.

I already know where he's coming from. And there's just so little depth to it that, you know, I know what's gonna happen. I know what I'm up against. So might as well listen to something edifying. Listen to Nick.

Haven't seen Nick since 2019. My goodness, that's seven years. And Nick's getting older like me. So pray for his health. He really is having health struggles. We sort of gone the opposite directions along those lines since, you know, I mean, I was having issues from 2020 to 2025 and then I've been working hard at it and have reversed that trajectory for now anyways.

Who knows how long that'll last. But he's got some real, real physical challenges. And so we need to pray for the brother. He's done a great service for the church. And some of my favorite memories of traveling over there are sitting in, I think it was called the White House Restaurant.

It was a restaurant right across from the hotel I stayed at in Inverness. And he and I just spending hours driving the staff crazy because we're sitting there talking church history. And with humor thrown in, not just serious stuff.

He has, his sense of humor is a little bit like the Sahara Desert. It's very dry. You have to learn to appreciate it. And so, and I know he listens to the program. So love you, Nick, and continue to pray for you.

And we'll hopefully get to learn some more from you listening to that. And I will try to remember to link it. Remind me guys to remember to link that when I do the writeup for today's program. So we're gonna do a little more geeking out today.

I won't tell you about this one right now. You've never seen it before. This is the first time I've shown this one. And I'm really glad they made this one. It's gonna be a really cool discussion later on.

But that is P66 and it's from the Gospel of John. And that's all I'm gonna tell you right now. We're gonna spend some more time with it. By the way, I'm going north and north and north, but it's, I think I only see one night up in Bismarck.

That will be below freezing, actually. Let me look here real quick. And you may not care. Yeah, well, tomorrow night, it might get down to there, but then 44, 51 for a low on Sunday. Well, that's because of rain.

When you travel in a mobile home like this, you have to think about things like, is it gonna be freezing? I have a heated hose. I have a heated bib cover to put over the water stanchion. And then that changes how you connect the water up and all sorts of stuff like that.

There's things you have to think about. And it's still a whole lot of fun to do, and it's a whole lot more fun than dealing with TSA. So there you go. We did have someone, however, the stuff you see on X, I still believe it's worthwhile being there.

Yes, I have an epic-sized block list. And some people are so proud. They never block anyone. No, I'm not going to sit here and subject myself to idiocy every time I open up that feed. There's all sorts of stuff that I have no interest in seeing.

Christian Nationalism, Immigration, and Due Process

So anyway, but there's this guy, and for some reason, the last program we did got a lot of clips reposted. And I'm gonna talk about one of those in just a moment. But some guy commented on the reposting of one of the clips that there I am, how did he put it?

Wasting my children's inheritance on RVs and cats. Now, I don't bring any kitties on my trips. That would be the perfect way to lose them, I can assure you. There are some people I see out here that do travel with, it's one thing to travel with a dog.

I see a lot of people at the rest stops and stuff like that, they're getting out and they're walking their dog and stuff like that. Okay, but I don't have a dog right now. And I have a bunch of cats who I miss, but they're being taken care of by my wife.

And so I don't bring them along, so I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. But I don't own this, this is Alpha Omega Ministries, the truck is Alpha Omega Ministries, and this is how I travel.

And I suppose I could get rich to figure out what we were spending each year on airline tickets. 2019, I flew 165 ,000 miles. Samara, Russia, Kyiv, Ukraine, Johannesburg and Durban, South Africa, Melbourne, Australia, two months in London.

So that was a fair amount of funds going to that. And so, I mean, traveling in an RV isn't free, but especially at my age, now I'm getting to go places I couldn't get to go before. And you're like, yeah, to South Dakota.

Yeah, guess what? The kingdom's still being built in Northern Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota, all over places like that. And I was in Sterling and Dr. Sean Cole, the pastor of Emanuel Baptist Church that I spoke at just last evening, reminded me, and I needed reminding, that I had been one of the first professors he had at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary about a quarter century ago.

And I'm gonna tell you, that is encouraging. Yeah, Rich just said, so cool to see the recording posted from Sterling. I would like to have let people know it was gonna be live streamed. I didn't know it was gonna be live streamed until five minutes forehand, a little bit late to do it then.

But you can see that I'm fairly casually dressed. I'm not poorly dressed. I'm not dressed like Jimmy Agin. But that's how we do things. I had driven for hours during the day. I get in, I come to the church, and we speak, we answer questions.

And here I'm meeting one of my former students who has pressed on in ministry. Somehow I didn't destroy his life by being one of his first professors. And he's written books. He gave me a book that he had written.

I should have had it in here. Sorry about that, Sean. It's basically right there, but on the other side of the wall. And so it was just neat to get a chance to do that kind of thing. And a lot of ministers who have my experience just don't go to places like that.

And I understand why. R .C. had a 5 ,000 seat limit at the end of his life, but that's because he was, everybody and their uncle wanted him to come. I've offended everybody. So that's not as much of an issue for me.

But it's enjoyable to get into places like this. And Dr. Cole, I just saw this, wrote a post in X to me. And he said, thank you for your ministry and blessing your congregation. I've had great feedback.

In God's providence, one of our women who attended last night got to share the gospel with two more missionaries today. She called me so excited that she got to defend the faith. And that was one of the things we were talking about is defending the faith and not just how, but why in essence.

So yeah, that's why we do what we do and why we're pressing forward with the work. And that's why I'm out here. I think I'm in Piedmont. I think, I don't know. It's so hard to tell. But anyways, I'm out and it's really dark out here.

I might try to get out. And if it's not cloudy, you might see some dark skies for once. Once we get done with the program here. Anyway, so I was driving along and I try to drive safely. I try not to be uber distracted by things.

But you hear that phone ding, ding, dinging. And I see, I'm sent a message that someone that I have responded to in the past on theological issues. And Jack Poso, he has, that's sort of the name he goes with is Posobiec, I guess, online, let me see here.

He's got 3 .2 million followers on X. And so, big guy on X. But he is a Roman Catholic integralist. And evidently someone sent him a clip from the last program. And on last program, I commented on why I hadn't commented on the Samuel Say situation.

Still amazing to me, by the way, that the behavior of people. I mean, I've seen so much vile stuff about Sam from these people. I mean, not only just vile language, but just, I mean, these people are such blatant in the historical meaning of the world, racists.

So many of them are. Not every single one of them is, but it's really, really prevalent in this movement. If Samuel wasn't black, if he was a Frenchman, he would not be getting treated the way that he's getting treated at all.

There is a lot of racism in this Christless nationalism. There really is. It's sad to see. But all you have to do is read the comments and then click on the name and, oh, look, Christian nationalist. Oh, look it again.

Oh, there it is again. 99 out of a hundred of them. Oh, okay, you're starting to get a pattern here. Interesting, all right. Anyway, but it's astonishing the hypocrisy of this movement. Because it was only a few years ago, all of us together, these guys and me and people like me, all recognize the same thing.

The government's not our friend. The government wants to have autocratic power and liberty and freedom and the ability to preach the gospel, not high on their priority list at all. And so here you have a situation where we haven't heard from Samuel Say.

I mean, I would assume that my feed would be filled with comments from people. Here, here's the link. Here's what he said. I haven't heard anything yet. Have you? And all I've seen is supposedly a repetition of a statement from a governmental agency.

And all of a sudden, all these guys who were so skeptical about everything are like, oh, and then of course, you've got somebody, somebody put Joel Webbin in a Pharisee outfit and paralleled him with the Pharisee from Luke.

Oh God, I am so thankful. I am not like this person over there and that person over there. It was perfect parallel because that's exactly what that discussing prayer was. And it's astonishing he couldn't stop himself in the middle of it and go, oh, that was stupid.

Anyway, these guys all of a sudden are more than happy to trust a governmental agency and not even listen to what a Christian, they may not think he's a Christian because he spoke against them. He spoke against Christian nationalism, which is the essence of the gospel.

And just the hypocrisy of it is just, oh, disgusting. So anyway, that clip of me discussing a little bit of this on the last program and just going, isn't it weird how things change? And isn't it strange that the scripture says you're supposed to have the right of cross-examination, be able to face your accusers, innocent till proven guilty, all that stuff coming from the Mosaic Code, that stuff all of a sudden doesn't matter when you're black.

And like I pointed out, people are saying, well, we can't let just anybody in. Okay, I get that. I agree. I was complaining loudly. I live in Arizona for crying out loud. I mean, we're the freeway for all these massive groups of invading people coming up through the border during the Biden regime.

And that was treason. Joe Biden can't be held accountable for anything because Joe Biden left the earth a long time ago, mentally anyways. But the people, the puppet masters that were pulling the strings are absolute traitors.

And they should be hung by the neck until dead. I mean, that's what the law says. When you open the borders, you invite invading armies in. That's the definition of being a traitor. And that's what they did.

And none of this changed any of that because Samuel Say did not come across a border. He's not here to change the electoral politics of the United States. He's a pro-life advocate. He's a defender of babies.

He is not the people that the Biden regime wanted to be bringing in. I assure you of that. And what violent crimes has he committed? Well, I would think that the Christless nationalists, well, he said bad things about us.

That would be the violent crime. But it is astonishing that they can just draw a direct parallel and not even see the differences. It's, anyway, so this Jack Poso guy posts that link and says, yeah, this is just globalism.

You don't get a pass on immigration laws or any laws just because you go to church. What kind of a Christian leader would talk like this? Now, here's my thinking. He didn't listen to it. The clip that's floating around is nine minutes long.

He didn't listen to it. There's no evidence that he's even trying to interact with what I actually said. So somebody sent it to him and said, hey, would you comment on this? Would you take a shot at this guy?

And he did. Out of ignorance, the man seems to be exceptionally ignorant when he made comments about Mary and stuff like that. Again, it was very shallow, very low level stuff. And so it does seem like a lot of these people with the millions and millions of followers, it's, you know, Dinesh D'Souza.

It's like, I need to produce, and this is happening in a lot of social media. When you put yourself under pressure, I need to produce X amount of posts per day. And some of that I think is financial pressure to get the interactions, to get the monetization, stuff like that.

Another good reason not to monetize. But when you start doing that kind of stuff, what you're producing is so shallow, it's surface level. That's what Dinesh D'Souza did. That's what this is from this guy.

And it's probably just simply, you know, this group of people doing their things and taking a shot my direction. And so, you know, I don't know if they think I'm gonna be intimidated by this or something.

They don't seem to understand that they don't have power over anybody who isn't trying to get clicks and build a platform. Our platform already exists and it's been built over decades and it's been built on consistency.

It's not built on coming up with new wild and crazy things to say, to keep a cadre of loud mouth, immature young men clicking and giving on Patreon. That's not our audience. So I don't have to play those games.

So sorry guys, I'm not intimidated. And in fact, it sort of makes me chuckle because if you think I'm a globalist, then you're as stupid as the people who thinks I'm being paid by Israel or something.

I mean, it's just, it's fantasy. I feel for you, I really do, but it's pure fantasy. It really is. So anyway, found that interesting that, you know, someone, cause I don't, he doesn't listen to this program.

Somebody sent that his direction to go, hey, talk about this. And so that's what he did. So anyway, so I'm looking forward to hearing from Samuel. I assume it's going to happen before long. And I want to, yeah, okay.

Okay, I just happened to look down at the screen and someone commented, why are all these people crashing out over Samuel Say on camera? Why is he so important? This reminds of the left crashing out over Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego being deported.

Something is way off. So I can sit here and talk about God's law, hearing from the accused, cross-examination, my continued distrust of governmental agencies and things like that. And that's the same thing.

You people don't think very well, do you? It's like logic and rationality are your enemies. It's astonishing. And so then Poso says, just globalism using Christianity as a skin suit, me. So again, he didn't listen to what I said.

And I don't think he's actually got the guts to actually interact with it. I really, I don't think he's got the equipment to actually interact with it. I've never seen him say anything particularly insightful and useful.

But again, most of the big, big, big accounts that are obviously heavily monetized, that's sort of what they're all about anyways. But so that being said, let's go ahead and geek out for a little while.

Acts 15, Icon Veneration, and the Debate over the Atonement

I might go a little short today. I don't know. I didn't have, I had to get in, get set up, had to put Starlink out, stuff like that. So I thought I was gonna be doing a program with Tony Acosta tonight, but he had something come up at church.

Fully understand that, make the church is always the more important thing. Oh, by the way, I was gonna comment. I did get to listen to most of the opening statements of the second debate between Jay Dyer and David Wood.

I'm in David's opening statement when I had to stop to do something. The one that I really wanna listen to on Icon Veneration is behind a paywall. Have I had debates behind paywalls? Maybe, I don't recall.

I've got a fly in here who will die after the program's over. PETA might find out about that. Anyway, that's behind a paywall and I ain't paying for it. I'm not paying for anything with Jay Dyer. But it eventually will come out.

And when it does, then we'll get a chance to comment about it. It was, I thought it was interesting. And I think valid that in his opening statement, David paralleled the Acts 15. Certain men came preaching that you had to be circumcised if you're gonna follow Christ.

And he paralleled that with certain people came from Empress Irene, teaching you had to venerate icons to be saved. And it's a perfectly valid parallel. It really is. And so I do wanna hear how that debate went, but how long will it be behind a paywall?

I don't know, but I ain't paying for it. They didn't have to pay to listen to mine. Oh, by the way, there was one other thing. On last program, I mentioned my confusion about why you would do a debate review while playing a video game.

And by the way, we're putting out, we're putting the graphics out for the upcoming stuff in March in Jonesboro. And let me see if I can find it. Yeah, here it is. So Stephen DeYoung and then a Peel substitutionary atonement debate with Jeremiah and myself versus Will Hess, who's written a book against it and someone else.

I thought I knew who the someone else was, but evidently he's not interested in doing it, I know. And I discovered Jeff Johnson's gonna be speaking on the atonement, that's really good. But anyway, so Stephen DeYoung did that debate review with the video game stuff going on and found that strange.

But here's the strangest thing that I forgot to mention. He didn't know how to pronounce Craig Truglia's name. He kept saying Truglia and it's Truglia. In fact, I heard Mr. Truglia explain how to pronounce his name to someone at the debate.

So, I mean, he had always said that to me. And so Craig Truglia. And I found that strange that Stephen DeYoung would not know how to pronounce his name. Evidently, maybe they've never spoken before. I don't know.

I mean, not all Eastern Orthodox know all other Eastern Orthodox. But I would think there would be some thing. Yes, yeah, I just looked over, Simon commented in our chat channel about that dividing line that I mentioned.

And yes, it was Rick Stamp, the JW Stafford devotee long, long ago that had called into the program. I thought it was Martin Smart. Maybe you're right. Maybe it was Rick Stamp. There was just a small group back then.

I mean, they didn't have the internet to be able to network the way they do now. All right, anyway, all of that said, let's look at a papyri, papyrus, singular. So you've never seen this one before. It's not in my New Testament presentation.

Papyrus 66 and the Pericope of the Adulterous Woman

I need to track it down so that I can put it in there. But I'm really, really thankful that Westhoff and his guys put this one out. This was, this showed some thought, it really did. This P66, as you can see, is in fairly decent shape.

In fact, I wonder if I have, come on, scroll, why will you not scroll with me? What? Oh, I hate that. A new version of Keynote is available. Yeah, the one you have to pay for. Go away, I'm never doing it.

Here is a shot of P66, and let me see if I can, oh, we don't have the Mac this time? I'm not sure why. Oh, I know why, I know why, hold on, hold on, hold on. I think I, we have the technology, we can fix him.

At least I thought we had the technology. Oh, there it is. Too many cables. Does that do it? Ah, there it is. Yeah, all right. So there is, well, here, there we go. There's P66, and this is what I showed during the presentation.

You will notice, this is an unusual picture. I really like this one because it shows you what the book looked like when it was still in one piece. So now it's all been separated into individual pages, which are much easier to preserve, and things like, and to read, and stuff like that.

But that's what it looked like when it was first found. And you see down here, see where the damage is? You can see it on the facsimile too, but the damage is where you would expect damage to be on most books.

On the outer portion, because here's the spine, so that part is normally protected. But out here is where you get the damage, and most of the damage is gonna be down here, and then a little bit less or so on this side.

That's why you get that kind of a, most papyri have that on one side or on the other side, that kind of look to it, just from the damage of being 1 ,800 years old. What you see here is the beginning of John, John 1 .1.

You can actually see there's Halagas right there. Kai Theos with the Nomen Sacra, Ein Halagas. So anyway, so this gives you an idea of what it looks like. P66 and P75 are our two biggest, earliest witnesses to the Gospel of John.

We have a fragment, P52, but that's a couple of verses. As far as having a major textual presence, P66 and P75, and yes, I have a P75 facsimile now. And in fact, there's Kai Theos, Ein Halagas, there's P45, okay, P46, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Come on, let's get to, yeah, okay. Oh, okay, nevermind, there it is. Yeah, there's P75, and if I recall correctly, this is what I have. It's down here. I could pull it out and look for it, but I won't do that.

We'll wait till we display that one, but I think I have the same page. So this is the beginning of the end of Luke, or you can see Luke on, and then here's the beginning of John. These are our two most important early witnesses to the Gospel of John.

And it's interesting how the scribes worked with each one differently. P66 is not as carefully copied, and it seems possibly because, this one here, it's because the scribe copied phrase by phrase, which is how most of us would copy.

Most of us would pick up a couple of words, a phrase that makes sense in our mind, read that, then copy it down, then go back and read the next one, copy it down. That's how most human beings do it. Whoever copied P75 didn't do it that way, and they didn't even do it word by word.

They did it letter by letter. Now, that would seem tough to do. You'd have to have a certain, kind of mindset to do that. But the errors in the manuscript in P75 are normally single letter errors, rather than transpositions of words, phrases and things like that, which is what you normally get, and what you get in P66.

So, that's where you have an interesting difference between the two. So, all right, go ahead and take that down. So, here is why I think this particular facsimile was really wise to produce. Sorry about leaving the microphone up there.

Hopefully it didn't make too much of a difference. I'm gonna pick it up here. All right. And there is a major textual variant right at the bottom of this page. Last two words, actually. And it goes, so this is, let's look at this here, 745 to 52.

John chapter seven, 45, 52. And then on the backside is 752 to 816. What's the variant? Well, it would go right there. That is where the entire Percipate Adultery should be if it was in the Gospel of John around the year 200 when this was copied.

It goes right there, but it's not there. And it's not in P75, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus. The first manuscript it is in is the Living Bible of the early church, Codex Vesey Cantabrigensis, the most unreliable New Testament manuscript we have from the fifth century, so the 400s.

But it's not there. It is, the text just goes on. There's no markings, there's no indication, no break whatsoever in this manuscript. It just, it's just not there. So it is a testimony to the early state of the text prior to a major insertion.

And just to remind folks, the material in the Percipate Adultery, the woman taken in adultery, let he who is without sin cast the first stone, all that kind of fun stuff. The Percipate Adultery appears multiple places in manuscripts of the Gospel of John.

That's extremely unusual, especially for a large block of text. I mean, this is one of the two largest textual variants in the New Testament. There are two 12-verse variants, the Long Writing of Mark, Mark 16, 9 -20, and John 73, 3 -8 -11, the Percipate Adultery.

But it doesn't just appear here. It appears at other places in John, and it even appears in some manuscripts in Luke. Now, as far as I know, it's certainly for a variant this large, that many words, it's the only example of it in the New Testament.

There's nothing else like it. So it's completely unique. It's clearly a later text looking for a place to land. Many people consider it their favorite Bible story. And so people in the past considered it a favorite Bible story too, but that's not how you do textual criticism.

You examine the manuscripts, you stay committed to one thing, and that is, what did John write? What did the apostles write? That's the main thing you want to know. That's the only thing you want to know.

And if you keep that as your goal, then you're going to recognize that John 753 through 811 was not written by John initially. You know, if you want to come up with some theory that, well, he wrote it later and then told people to stick it where they wanted to put it in his gospels.

Now, you can speculate about all sorts of things and find whatever. But the reality is that the earliest witnesses to the gospel of John do not contain that text. And there's the example. So I thought that was brilliant of them to choose that so that you could have it.

And so there you go. I'm looking at this over here. Anyway, I have not even had time to read this myself. So maybe I can remember to do this though that is a graphic that I came up with. So there is a new article at AOMN .org written by Simon Escobedo and Mike Porter.

The Sinaiticus Variant and the Deity of Christ in 2 Peter 1:1

I knew them both when they were much younger. Well, Simon and I are about the same age. Mike Porter's younger than us. Anyway, a Unitarian Appeal of the Sinaitics Variant at 2 Peter 1 .1. So now here's an example of where social media engagement can produce valuable information.

As long as you don't let it drive you insane and as long as you stay focused and are seeking to do the right thing, it can produce valuable information. It can drive you to distraction too. But this was posted, I guess this morning.

Yeah, this morning. A two-part article, part one, Simon and I and Simon Escobedo, part two, Mike Porter. And so if you really want to geek out, then here is how you can geek out. And it looks like this is something I'm really looking forward to working through.

Well, okay, the pretty graphics I posted in our chat channel, and those are helpful. And, but if you like the textual criticism stuff, this is what we talked about in the last program. And I said, I expect an article, not in the sense of I expect an article, but I expect an article.

There's a difference between the two. The transcription does not actually communicate to you. But this is the article that obviously we were thinking about. And it comes out of engaging a Unitarian on this subject.

And in this instance, it was a unique challenge to one of the texts that we generally utilize in presenting the deity of Christ. So when I talk about the threads of evidence that the New Testament presents to us in regards to the deity of Christ, one of the subjects that I address is called the Granville-Shark Constructions.

And there are two primary texts I focused on, and that is Titus 2 .13 and 2 Peter 1 .1. Now, they're different contexts, because Titus 2 .13 has a bunch of stuff in the verses before and after that give you strong contextual arguments to read Titus 2 .13 as our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, with great God and Savior both being applied to Jesus.

The descriptions of what Jesus does in 2 .14 are pulled directly from the Old Testament, and they're all about Yahweh. So the author is plainly seeking to make a point. And so you got a lot of contextual stuff with Titus 2 .13, but 2 Peter 1 .1 is a greeting, so you don't have the context.

But 2 Peter has a number of Granville-Shark Constructions in it, and so one of the things I've criticized the Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation for, for many decades, is they will accurately translate the Granville-Shark Constructions elsewhere in 2 Peter when it says Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Even when it is an exact 1 .11, I don't have it in front of me, but off the top of my head, 1 .11, 2 Peter 1 .11 is direct parallel. If you put the, I could pull the presentation up here. If you put the Greek of 1 .1 and the Greek of 1 .11, the only difference between the two is God and Lord.

Even the word order's the same. The grammatical forms are the same. They are identical. And the New World Translation will translate 1 .11, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. But it won't render our God and Savior, Jesus Christ at 1 .1, because that goes against their theology.

So this is something we have talked about many, many times. And so what happened was a Unitarian attempted to challenge that rendering of 2 Peter 1 .1 by pointing to a textual variant where it doesn't have God, it has Lord.

And Codex Sinaiticus has the Nomen Sacra and I, did I show this on the last program? I'm looking at it right now. It's on the screen, but I don't remember if I did. Let me just look here real quick and see if, oh, I moved all those into screenshots.

At least I thought I did. There it is. Yeah, well, wait a minute. Nope, that ain't it. Yeah, I can't pull it up right now. Well, I suppose I could. Why won't it copy this? I don't know. Well, it's acting strangely.

Anyway, I had not noticed that. At least it hadn't, I didn't remember it. So the discussion began, well, how do you respond to this? What kind of weight do you give Sinaiticus here? I mean, Sinaiticus is an important witness, but it's going against Vaticanus, it's going against the other early witnesses.

And one of the most important things that was immediately recognized as we looked at the textual data, and this is where Claude got involved, the AI Claude, is the fact that there is a major break between Sinaiticus' reading and the next manuscript that contains curiaeus, curiaeu, I believe, at that text from like the ninth century.