Mark 1:41 and Hebrews 2:9

Webcasting around 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.

The SBLGNT, Bart Ehrman, and the Shift in New Testament Textual Criticism

And good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 4 1 in the world of Greek scholarship and New Testament scholarship. There has been a lot of discussion recently about the release. Yes and dividing that line Via Skype we do not want rich out there who has worked so diligently and so hard.

To set up his laptop so you can take your divide your Skype calls. To feel unloved and unappreciated for that. So dividing that line. Are you ever gonna shave again? No, you're just gonna you're going for the Callahan.

Look is that that was. No, no, you you know. No I'm not used to it. Is that the new biker look? Guess so, but I can see it in a full-face helmet, but we'll get you one of those Military helmet type things, you know with little things to go at the top and then you big old beard that'd be great.

Yeah. Okay. Anyway, see you really distracted me there. I was I had a great opening going on and and what happens man I tell you anyway I don't know about two weeks ago or so somewhere around there I think was before I went to Peru there was a release of a new Greek New Testament now, it's it's the SPL GNT and Every time I've post that in channel.

The odd people in my channel and they're very very odd people in the channel. And by the way, if you've been trying to get into the chat channel today and can't it's because star links DNS servers are down you join by by Typing slash server space sixty three dot seventy seven dot ninety three dot thirty three and you will be in anyway.

The weird people in the channel started trying to come up with acronyms for SBL GNT and some of the stuff they came up with was really very imaginative. Most of it was just really weird. SBL GNT is the Society for Biblical Literature Greek New Testament now as soon as I hear SBL I start chuckling because Yeah, there are some some good folks who go to SBL for for chuckles mainly but the reality of the fact is the vast majority of stuff at SBL is so far removed from biblical Christianity that it's not even funny and So, I mean I would imagine all of the Jesus seminar scholars attend SBL as well.

So you'll find, you know feminist gay Deconstructionist seminars on Ruth and that kind of stuff at SBL. It's just it's pretty weird. Matter which direction you go and so. But the editor is Michael Holmes who has done a lot of work in for example, his apostolic father's set is widely used and and things like that and and so.

Ironically it was being made available for free if you have Logos 4. And so as soon as it became available at first day, I downloaded it. I mean, I collect Greek New Testaments. Why not? I have a 1550 Stephanos.

So I I downloaded it and and I haven't spent much time with it. But I've been seeing a lot of discussion on it on the textual criticism boards someone immediately went through and collated all the differences it's not a New critical edition in the sense of Having a critical apparatus where you can look at manuscripts and things like that.

It is its critical apparatus is limited to a comparison of former printed Greek New Testaments primarily Westcott and Hort and Trigellus and things like that. And So it is a it's really a compilation based upon printed Greek Greek New Testaments Rather than upon manuscripts.

It wasn't a like fresh collation or something like that. I Was Taken aback and and concerned and it and it really brought out concerns that I have About what's going on in New Testament scholarship today to note that in two places it has adopted as its textual reading a Reading that simply does not have anywhere near sufficient external evidence to be considered original but this is illustrative of What is going on in? modern New Testament scholarship, especially in the area of textual criticism and the study of the New Testament and really the abandonment of The search for the original readings of the Greek New Testament.

We know that Bart Ehrman gave that up a long time ago. He he both feels that we're just tinkering now as well as that tinkering really isn't overly relevant anymore that that more can be learned now by studying the scribal habits of Scribes and and in essence as I see it trying to climb into the minds of the scribes themselves and figure out what their world was like and what we can learn from the textual variants that they Introduced as if we can know that they're the ones that introduced them or they had a purpose in it or anything else you cannot go back into the mindset of people from 1 ,500 years ago you you'd like to pretend that you can and you can write lots of papers pretending that you can but the reality is Someone might have a purpose in In a textual variant they they they might very well there might be a reason a feel even a theological reason.

Why? Someone Copies a text way to do or it could be completely random. I mean Just just think for a moment. How many times you have been sitting there? And you have been writing something. Let's say See right now I need to be writing some articles for Well for the reform Baptist theological review.

I love our BTR. It's a great resource I've written for him before and Richard Rosales needs some articles and I I've got so many things I want to be writing on but I'm doing so many things all at the same time.

It's hard to shut other areas down and just focus on that and but I just need to be disciplined and do that and So, you know, I have I love my office. I love my library and my my desk is such that I Have one of those corner units and then I have units sitting next to it so it's a you know, it's a whole corner of a room and I'm sort of facing right into the into the very corner itself and so I've got a big 23 inch screen and I put my MacBook and hook that up as a second and then that becomes a secondary monitor and so I've got a lot of a lot of space to work with there and and so I can put books over to the right and to the left and and Copy out of those books and things like that if I'm using paper books I mean anymore half the time you're using your electronic books, but that's that's how I do it.

So Let's say you're sitting there and you're writing there are so many times I will be copying out of a book and I will look back at what I've typed and I'll start chuckling. I'll start laughing at The mistake that I made If I've been interrupted the resultant textual variant that's that was introduced by my my being interrupted at a certain point and I suppose, you know 1 ,500 years from now someone could analyze my books and find an error in a citation and try to climb into my mind and figure out what was really going on, but the reality was I got a cell phone call and When I look back at what I was copying I picked up the wrong point or or duplicated something or or whatever and that's really all that was it was about and I just feel that so much of the effort today is going into Doing something other than then really establishing the original text in New Testament.

Now when it comes to standard copyist errors, that's one thing I mean, we know the types of errors that human beings make we all make them we all look back at something and we Skip a line inadvertently we go down to the homo etelea ton similar endings Dittography repeating something because we're not paying attention.

There's all sorts of things we continue to do to this day that the ancient scribes did that's not mind-reading. That's just recognizing The human being and and how we work and how we write and how we see and how we hear.

Some of the scribal errors were due to the fact that people were listening as the text was being read to them. And we know exactly how that works. Well, I I took shorthand in high school. No, but do they even have shorthand anymore?

I doubt they do. I suppose somebody has to but You know with with computers today and with voice technologies the brain don't do it, but I I took shorthand in high school and you had to listen and Write and it was interesting some of the mistakes you would make not only in trying to read your own writing But just the things you heard or thought you heard.

I mentioned that I'm using this new live scribe pen when I do debates, which is this really cool thing. I was gonna I need to Do a blog article or a video about it or something because it's just it's just incredible.

And it was fascinating to go back over the notes that I was writing while I was listening to Robert's and Jenna speaking in our purgatory debate because that was the first debate I used the live scribe in and To be listening to what the pen was recording because it records what's being said at the time you're writing something.

So you can just go back and tap on what you wrote and it'll play back What was being said at that time you can do the same thing on your computer screen? So it's it's amazing it uses the the mp3 recording of what was going on as the time index for the notes.

You're writing. It's it's really something anyway, I I was listening to a portion of that and I listened to what some Janice was saying and then I watched you can watch on your screen as your notes will appear in your own handwriting and I saw that I replaced What some Janice had said with a synonym.

I used a synonym for what he had actually said now. You know when someone else is speaking Especially if you're sitting behind them. And Sometimes the sound isn't all that good back there and you're you're writing and you're not only writing what they're saying.

But you're also making a comment about what you want to say about that in the rebuttal period etc. Etc. Etc. It's really easy to see how you could in essence paraphrase what the person was saying even though you're trying to use his exact words and.

So I understand how all of that works and that's not climbing into a scribes mind. That's not doing what what Ehrman and others are doing today in in pushing for in essence the exegesis of the scribes rather than of the text.

Thinking that the textual variants themselves Everyone is significant. That's a Fundamental change in outlook from what we have had for years and years and years. And what I mean by that is Vast majority of scholarship up until the last 20 or 30 years would view First and foremost the reason for textual variation was simply due to a scribal error an error of hearing sight, etc, etc now everybody's always looking for the Theological reason or the cultural reason or this reason or that reason why a scribe would make this kind of change now some of that They still say was inadvertent that you know because this person had such-and-such of a kind of Upbring or something like that, then they would have heard the text in this way or whatever.

But the point is that there has been this massive swing away from in scholarly study the the actual manuscripts now my majority text or Byzantine priority Platform friends. Like Maurice Robinson Will say yeah, and you're just getting what you deserve because you abandoned the text a long time ago.

Well, okay. I hear that. But this is more than that there was a I think Maurice Robinson would recognize that that there is a a way of of doing textual criticism that still takes seriously you need to have a Wide enough witness in the manuscript tradition for a reading to be considered as having any possibility of being original and When you run across readings that have such a narrow narrow witness in the manuscripts.

That has to be a huge huge mark and you'd have to come up with some massively compelling argumentation To overcome that well that that standard has dropped a great deal and in the new SBL GNT two of Bart Ehrman's Favorite texts have now been placed into the main text of this Greek New Testament.

I refer specifically to mark 141 and Hebrews 2 9 mark 141 and Hebrews 2 9 and those of you who were at the debate with Bart Ehrman back in 2009 know that in the afternoon prior to debate actually, I think it was the morning prior to the debate.

I gave a presentation On these very texts and the night before I had invited Bart Ehrman to attend. He did not. Mainly because I I really could tell from his perspective. He did not think that I would have anything Meaningful to say about either text anyway Mark 1 let's let's give the context here.

I think that this is important. Mark 1 starting verse 40 a leper came to him begging him and kneeling. He said to him if you choose you can make me clean. Moved with pity. This is the standard translation.

That's the key term there moved with pity. Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him. I do choose be made clean. Immediately the leprosy left him and he was made clean after sternly warning him.

He sent him away at once saying to him see it you say nothing to anyone but go show yourself to the priest and offer For your cleansing what Moses commanded as a testimony to them. But he went out and began to proclaim it freely and to spread the word so Jesus could no longer go into a town Openly but stayed out in the country and people came to him from every quarter now.

There's a couple things to note immediately about the text. The textual variant is right at the beginning of verse 41 it is the second word in the Greek language the very first phrase in the English translation moved with pity is the reading of the vast majority of manuscripts and the vast majority of manuscript families.

And that that's an important statement for me to make but I'll try to explain more of it later as as we as we look at this the variant reading which is now the primary reading of the SBL edition of the Greek New Testament instead of Splunkness Thais, which means moved with compassion.

We now have Orgas Thais, which means moved with anger. And being angered Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him. I do choose be made clean now. You you you're probably aware if you have listened to the program in the past especially when I was preparing for the ermine debate.

That Bart Ehrman makes a great deal of this. In fact, I imagine I imagine he might actually not be overly happy that they've done this because Part of the the weight that his arguments have had has been that no one Hardly anybody knew about these variants and now if they are a part of this text and his his arguments may not be as interesting to people but He says well is Jesus an angry Jesus or compassionate Jesus.

It depends on which manuscript you read. Now the reality is that there are other texts in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus is moved with anger and so Mark 3 5 for example after looking around them with anger Grieved at their hardness of heart.

He said to them said to the man stretch out your hand and he stretched out and this hand was restored so Jesus acted in anger elsewhere in the Gospel of Mark. So the the main argument is well, we can understand why and why a Scribe would want to change The idea that Jesus was angry to the idea he was compassionate and Yet there is there are no scribal variations at the other places in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus is angry.

So the real the real issue is is there I Mean you can argue either direction on the basis of the text. But people like Bart Ehrman are saying look, there's no reason why it would have gone from pity to anger even though the two words look similar and Therefore it had to go that direction.

Well, that's not true because notice that In the rest of the story in verse 43 after sternly warning him He sent him away at once that's verse 43 it's literally he cast him out he threw him out and He sternly warned him.

Now, where is that coming from? Well, we we know that the guy goes out in verse 45 and begins to proclaim it freely. Even though Jesus said don't do this It seems he didn't go to the priest. So maybe Jesus was aware of what this man was all about.

I Speculate on stuff like this all you want. And and did a scribe reading this strong language in verse 43 and what goes on afterwards and The result being Jesus can't even go into the into the cities anymore.

His ministry has been impacted by this man's disobedience. Could it be that someone thought it it looked wrong for Jesus to have basically been suckered by this guy. The Jesus was compassionate to him and and He shouldn't have been he should have known this was coming.

And so they changed it to Orgothice. To angry. I mean so you can argue either direction once you want to start doing this mind game type thing. The question is what Do the manuscripts say and the vast majority of manuscripts and And the vast majority of manuscript families, so the Alexandrian the Byzantine these Manuscript families and the term vast majority we talk about families given how few there are sort of silly but This is a Western reading and even at that it's a minority Western reading and So you have a reading that comes late and its first appearance is in Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis Codex D.

Now why is that relevant? Well It's very relevant because Codex D well It's not overly reliable. When Theodore Beza gave the manuscript it's called Bezae Cantabrigiensis because Theodore Beza Calvin's successor at Geneva was the one who Donated it it had been given to him donated it to the University of Cambridge and When he did so he wrote a letter that accompanied the manuscript which is dated 18th of May 1582 and in the letter according to Scrivener Bezae recognizing the widely divergent text it contains on the whole suggested that the manuscript was more fit to be stored up than to be published.

So Bezae did not find it to be an overly helpful Manuscript it was more fit to be stored than to be published. Scrivener says the most striking feature of Codex D is its perpetual tendency to interpolation by which term we understand The practice of adding to the received text passages often of some length.

Which whether genuine or spurious are found in this document either alone or? in company with a very few others. And that's exactly what we have with this reading because Codex D is the only Greek manuscript we have that contains Orgesteis.

The others are Latin manuscripts, which may well remember Codex D is a bilingual manuscript. It is Greek and Latin. These other manuscripts may have been impacted either by D or by its prototype and So notice Scrivener notes.

This is very common for this particular manuscript to have these unusual readings. With most critics it may be feared that the obvious faults and palpable glosses So especially conspicuous in this one book have engendered a natural But not very reasonable habit of unduly disparaging our venerable document as a whole.

Scrivener later speaks of the excessive freedom of the Greek text of Codex Bezae Cantabrigensis. Bruce Metzger said textually no known New Testament manuscript contains so many distinctive readings. Chiefly the free edition and occasional omission of words sentences and even incidents.

So you see the writer of Codex D? Would be the exact kind of person that would interpret the text see the strong words of Jesus Is casting this man out strongly warning him it would be very like the scribe of Codex D to interpret that and change.

Moved with pity or compassion to move with anger. Curt and Barbara Allen said when D supports the early tradition the manuscript has a genuine significance, but It as well as its precursors and followers should be examined most carefully when it opposes the early tradition.

Remember this this is the first reading. This is the earliest reading we have of this so the Allens would be opposed to that and Even DC Barker Parker who wrote an entire book on this manuscript Said the fact is that the longer I have studied it the more I've become convinced that it's many unique readings only rarely.

Deserve serious consideration if one is trying to establish the best available text well That's the problem folks a lot of people have given up on Trying to establish the best available text and so here we have this insertion of this reading and It has been presented now in the SBLGNT and When you look at the apparatus for it It simply has Orgis Thais it says Holmes and Wh margin so in other words the editor of this text and the margin of the Westcott and Hort text that's That's what it gives over against Splunkness Thais which it lists the Westcott and Hort text regalus and IV RP as the sources for that.

The other since we already have two calls and want to get to it fairly quickly here Hebrews 2 9 Hebrews chapter 2 verse 9 if you want to go there. Once again, this is one of Bart Ehrman's favorite texts and I again addressed it at the very end of my presentation prior to the debate with him and This one is not based on codex D.

The text says but we do see Jesus who for a little while was made lower than the angels now crowned with honor and glory. Because the suffering of death so by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone and.

And The term there is coddity by grace. Over against Coris, which means apart from that's the variant reading and so That has been what has been now put into so it says hapos Coris they you in the SBL GNT so apart from God He has tasted death for everyone and On this one Coris in the apparatus of the SBL GNT only has Holmes's name after it.

Everything is listed against it. So in other words all of the preceding printed texts that he Is drawing from disagree with the choice here. It's one of the reasons to be honest with you. I prefer Committee done texts whether it's translation or textual choices.

Because when you got pretty much just one guy you know, he might do a great job on many things but there is the tendency of Being unduly influenced by things now once again in this situation. You do have A Origin making reference to this and in fact seemingly indicating that Possibly many manuscripts in his day or at least some manuscripts in his day.

I think Ermin has Overstated the case. I've looked at the origin quote and it can be understood in various ways but at least we can trace it back that far which is earlier than then codex D for the mark 141 reading and So It's it's two best sources are Some manuscripts of origin make reference to it and then you have manuscript 1739, which is a 10th century manuscript but it is a 10th century manuscript that we can pretty much tell is it was copied from probably a third century manuscript.

So it is a first generation copy from a very ancient manuscript. So it has some weight to it. But the problem is and I can't illustrate this for you unfortunately over the air or over the net, but if you look at what Cordis they you and karate they you would look like in Unseal text remembering that unseal text the original text in New Testament all capital letters.

No spaces between words. No punctuation you can see how the change could have been made. I Don't think unlike Bart Ehrman and others that it's some kind of massive huge theological issue. Because if it's by the grace of God It's simply saying that the entire crucifixion is a part of God's gracious work of salvation.

If it says Cordis they you then you'd have an interesting concept of the Aloneness of the Sun in bearing the the sins of Christ's people. But again, my concern here is that what you've got are almost celebrity readings now.

Rather than saying, you know, let's go ahead and put this in the margin. Let's let know people. Let's let people know That there are some manuscripts that say this. But they're later manuscripts these the manuscripts to do it but the vast majority I mean Hebrews is a really clean book textually.

The vast majority of manuscripts and families etc, etc say otherwise it concerns me that we're sort of losing touch With with the manuscript tradition itself. So those are two readings. I'll have a couple of the comments.

Let's go ahead and take our our break. I'll have one more comment on Hebrews 2 9 and we'll get to our phone calls Dwayne and Gerard Good Gerard from Australia. We'll talk to you in just a few minutes.

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 and Omega ministries and help us to reach even more with the pure message of God's glorious grace.

Thank you. 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.

The Trinity is a basic teaching of the Christian faith. It defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us. James White's book the Forgotten Trinity is a concise understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters.

It refutes cultic distortions of God as well as showing how a grasp of the significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a Christian and Admit today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit.

The Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the Trinity. Dr. John MacArthur senior pastor of Grace Community Church says James White's lucid presentation will help lay person and pastor alike.

Highly recommended. You can order the Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at a omen org.

The Meaning of John 15 and the Perseverance of the Saints

And welcome back to the dividing line just just one further comment before we go to our our calls. It would seem to me that as The information of the manuscripts, you know, I was when I was in Peru I happened to stumble across a link on one of the lists I was on that had the entirety of The major pretty much all the papyri Digital images of all of them.

I Was I spent all one morning in Peru in my little teeny hostel room downloading all these images to my hard drive because I had always wanted to find them as that kind of information becomes more and more Available and I've said for a long time.

It's it's not gonna be long till you can just whip out your your your your handheld computing device and Bring up any one of these manuscripts and examine it for yourself as that becomes more and more available and as more and more lay people Become involved in that.

I think there needs to be more discussion about what a a believing Consistently biblical approach to textual criticisms criticisms gonna look like and The leaders in that field these days are going farther and farther away from the church and from faith in how they handle things it would seem to me that taking into consideration the primary reading of each of the families and Giving the Byzantine reading more of a hearing than is is normally the case.

But still looking at how early and ancient a reading is first and foremost. But making sure it's a part of the manuscript tradition not just simply of one manuscript over here or I mean the the the orgestice reading based on on Codex D.

Just there is not enough external evidence for that and. And so I think we need to be trying to provide somewhat of a corrective to a a ship that has gone way over to one side and That's that's not that's not unusual, and I'm hoping that Some other folks will be publishing some works on that type of stuff in the not-too-distant future eight seven seven seven five three three three four one dividing that line on Skype and.

And David in Missouri has been very carefully or very patiently waiting. Well, I don't know if he's been patient or not I can't tell but we'll find out so let's talk with David. Hi David Dwayne. I'm sorry Dwayne.

That's fine. I've been very patient. No pro in John chapter 15 where Jesus is what you're what's your take on that? Well, there's a there's a whole paper on John chapter 15 on our website if you okay, how do I find it?

That's okay? If you if you go to Alpha Omega Ministries you click on articles. And then click on old version since that's the only thing we've got unfortunately and I believe. Yep, there it is if you click on believe it or not Jehovah's Witnesses, it's an odd place for it discussion with a Jehovah's Witness on John 15 is the very first title at the top there and That's just simply vintage dot ailment org slash John 15 at HTML.

There's a lengthy discussion there, but but fundamentally. The the thing to remember about John chapter 15 is Jesus own interpretation. That he provides a little bit later on when he he says that it is God's purpose that the Verse 8 by this my father's glorified that you bear much fruit and so proved be my disciples if you don't bear fruit.

You're not one of Jesus's disciples so people Misunderstand the analogy by going well, there's these leaves they've got to be in him. Which means they've got to be Christians. But Jesus's own interpretation is is that it is only by bearing fruit that you prove that you're his disciples in the first place.

There's all sorts of false faith. There's all sorts of you know. The sower and the parable not of the sower but of the soils is. Is a similar example to this where you have people that that show growth.

There's a springing up of something but it doesn't last and the the fundamental biblical teaching remember by the same author some people would dispute that but most people say by the same author that wrote John 15 and Also is the one who wrote in 1st John chapter 2 they went out from us so it might be demonstrated.

They're not of us because if they had been of us, they would have remained with us. Well, but remember but remember if if if these what is the sign of spiritual life. You say he's in Christ and you're using that that's a very loaded Theological phrase he's he's he's using a parable here and he's talking about branches in the true vine and.

So what what is it that indicates the presence of spiritual life? Is it the mere existence of a branch or is it the bearing of fruit? That's that's the question. And I think I think if you walk through it all the way through as I do in that article.

Did you were able to pull that up? No, but I will after we hang up. But the other question is is there any reference in Revelation to being in the book of life and name and then having your name? I believe so.

And if so, how can that be? Well, I Someone would have to pull up the the text because I'd want to look at it. Because I'd want to make sure that I When I say I'm pretty certain of that. There is a there is a text at the end of the book of Revelation that is disputed and I want to make sure I'm not talking about that so If you if you had a specific reference then I could look at it, but off the top of my head.

All right, yeah send it in or something we'll take it we'll take a look at it. All righty. Thanks. Dr. White. Okay. Thanks a lot. Right ready to go to Australia. Alrighty. Hello Gerard. Hi, how are you?

I'm doing just fine. How are you? It's been a while. It has. Well, I've been talking with with clan member with David old about it. Great, and I just told I just told him I just told him that next time we can skip the America the Sydney Atheist.

Within 12 hours of my landing. That would be good crowding you out. Someone someone the channel just said I sound like the the gecko on the Geico commercials. So thanks. Thanks a lot. I appreciate that anyway He didn't say you sounded like the gecko he said I sound like the gecko so I could try speaking more American like you do Australian but I just.

Anyways, what's up? So we had a baby eight months ago. I think I told you I was pregnant at the time.

I like how you how you are so close to your wife that you would use the personal pronouns like that. That's that's sweet. Here in the United States. That sounds a little bit weird though, because most people going.