Dr. John Sanders Debates Review, and a Barna Survey

And welcome to the dividing line on a Friday evening It is an unusual time for us to do a dividing line of course, but again

We are trying to make those folks who for some reason like to listen to this zany little webcast

Happy even though my flight tomorrow to Dallas Requires that I be gone by the time we normally get started not only by a couple hours but we're gonna miss our regular time and rather than get everybody messed up as far as Don't keep taking it up there get everybody messed up as far as timing goes we would rather just get the program taking care of this evening and we can do so and get up on the web and those of you who are

Listening in live the few of you in the channel you get to participate this evening

Yes, indeed, of course most of the folks in the channel never do that, but who knows maybe it'll work out this evening don't know basically tonight we want to report on what took place over this past weekend and Then also there is a new survey out that I want to take a look at that Nothing overly shocking in it but it certainly does give us a snapshot of a lot of evangelical churches today, which explains a lot of stuff that we have to do on a regular basis and It's a pretty sad some of the stuff that we've we've got in the survey anyways

As most of you know who follow the program fairly regularly last weekend

Friday night and Saturday Night of last weekend this for those of you listening to archive programs would be

November 1st and 2nd of the year 2002 we had debates in Florida specifically

I Think the first night. I wasn't actually Tampa's Clearwater in Clearwater, Florida right next door to that or maybe

Palm Harbor somewhere around there. I have yet to really figure out the

Relationship of all the suburbs in the Tampa area, but anyways we had a debate

Friday night at a place called the grind gr ind and it's not because they sell coffee though they do and in fact at one point during the cross -examination

My opponent my opponent had a lot of sort of quiet times some what we call in radio dead air and Where he wasn't saying anything, and and it would you know those awkward silences?

That donkey told Shrek about at one point if you know what I mean and Right in the middle of one of those this was right after the break someone back at the

Well, it's not really a snack bar, but you could buy snacks and cokes and things like that so I guess it makes it a snack bar, but they also had a latte machine and So right is it's perfectly quiet you hear as somebody froths up one of those

Disgusting coffee drinks you can tell them out of coffee drinker, but anyways it smells alright, but I just can't stand taste but anyways and Both started laughing and all sudden

I realized people watching this in the video are gonna wonder why in the world he and I are laughing and so I sort of broke in and explained for the sake of the audio and the video

Why we were laughing and because I'm I sort of doubt that particular sound made it all the way to the to the tape

I don't know so anyways It was sort of funny, that's it's a youth place.

It's a high school type youth place, and it was a really very excellent place for a debate because the you know the stage was the right size and the audience was nice and close and the folks there cooperated greatly with us as far as Getting stuff set up set up was easy and I think it's gonna look really good on the video and This was the debate on Inclusivism and of course

I'm assuming everybody knows, but I guess I shouldn't assume this that my opponent was dr. John Sanders from I believe it's

Huntington College and Dr. Sanders has written a number of books and the two books that were the most important I would say that resulted in his being asked to participate in these debates was one book that he wrote on the subject of Inclusivism the concept that salvation is only in Jesus Christ, however people can be saved without a conscious knowledge of who

Jesus Christ is that a a positive faith move toward God whether that be on the part of a

Buddhist or a Muslim or a Hindu or Or any pagan in the in the outback someplace

That that positive move toward God is going to bring them eternal life and that they're gonna be saved but they're gonna be saved by Jesus Christ and that is the subject of a book that he wrote on that particular subject and I repeated myself them and Looking around trying to see where I put those things.

Oh, they're still inside of a bag I can't get to him and then his other book The God Who Risks on the subject of open theism and so dr.

Sanders is one of the two main leading proponents of both inclusivism and open theism

PhD professor scholar He presented papers at ETS last year in defense of his position

If you go to the June 2002 issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society You will see

Individuals there. Dr. Bruce Ware from Southern Seminary Clark Pinnock Gregory Boyd John Sanders Bruce where presents his view of why open theists should be excluded from the ranks of evangelicals each of the three respond then where Has a rejoinder to their responses

Very good reading very important reading You can get that edition from the

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, I think it's seven bucks anyways so obviously there are only

Well, there's only really one other person we could have gone to To do both debates that would have been

Clark Pinnock. He was contacted did not respond to us We could have gone to Gregory Boyd at least for open theism

I'm not sure exactly where he stands on the subject of inclusivism. I think he's more of a mainline Armenian at that point but We certainly, you know over the past number of debates we've had over the past.

Well, it's only been what six six weeks Five weeks six weeks since we also had a debate with Martin Tanner in Salt Lake City.

We certainly have sought to have the best representatives of the position that we that we can find and And Yet in these three debates,

I think it's fairly clear that the positions that we were debating did not fare very well as far as being able to present a meaningful and solid defense of their of their position and so What happened

Friday night was that it was well There's probably one reason why almost anyone's going to want to make sure to get the video of the inclusivism debate and that is because it was at a at a more

Youthy informal venue then we were asked to be

Informal in our dress and so this is the first time I've engaged a scholarly debate and it was a scholarly debate in the sense that We had all the time

Constraints in in place and so on and so forth I did not have a tie on and Actually that did happen one other time that was in 1992 in Omaha and those were not videotaped.

So there's no actual Video evidence that I did not wear a tie that night But it was so stinking cold up there in Omaha in November of 1992

That the second night I wore a sweater a warm sweater

Rather than something that said it just didn't go with a tie type situation So I didn't wear a tie or maybe and I think about I may have had a tie underneath it.

Well anyways so so instead I You know,

I heard the name of this place the grind it's gonna be a youth place. I'm assuming there's gonna be youth folks and So I came prepared to fit in and so you're gonna want to get the videos because I did this debate wearing well, actually,

I'm wearing the same shirt right now a cobalt blue Oakley t -shirt and it's sort of got a mock turtleneck.

It's not a full turtleneck, but it's got the Oakley icon on it and a pair of Old Navy painters pants and Oakley pit boots and an

Oakley watch and I had my Ice blue X metals on the desk next to me. I look like I worked at this place

I mean I was surprised people didn't come out to me and ask, you know for directions the bathroom or to open up a door

Form or something along those lines because I really looked like I worked there and of course, dr. Sanders wore khaki slacks and an open -collar dress shirt

Just just had never been that context before. I don't think so Anyways, oh by the way, all of you in the chat channel who have been just hammering me about the fact that these debates are

Not yet available in mp3. Okay. Now the person to talk to is in channel. Talk to him

Okay I expect to see just as much grief as has been laid on my head for the past three days aimed toward you know who as as you know, okay, so let's let's just Be fair here cuz that's that's not part of what

I do. Okay, you know, I did the debate somebody else Makes it digital, you know what?

I mean? Okay. Anyways, so It was

It was a it was an interesting debate. Dr. Sanders started and these were the first two

Debates that dr. Sanders has done. I was not aware of that And let's just face it.

Dr. Sanders was not comfortable the first night I don't know if it was just this was the first debate that he had done

I don't know if it was due to the fact of where we were that he felt uncomfortable at a tie -on,

I don't know what it was, but Anyone those the folks that went? Simon Escobedo Warren Smith Simon brought his daughter

Abigail Abigail worked very hard in helping us to set up that first night, especially We had to tape the cords down for all the cameras and stuff and she was doing all that stuff and and they did a wonderful job, but Both Simon and and Warren have commented on the fact that it was like two different Two different dr.

Sanders's because the first night The opening statements in very soft -spoken

Lots of pauses And not the pause is not not a pause where you're trying to you know

You've just made a big point and you're letting it sink in I mean pauses where you're looking at your notes sort of like oh, where was

I? Well, what do I want to talk about next? Here's a point we can talk about and and you sort of just go over there and you talk about that a little bit then you go over here and talk about and It just wasn't a really scintillating presentation

And of course, I got up there and and I had my 15 We only had 15 minute opening statements

And so I was you know presenting some some truths about salvation and the purpose of God and and of course

Dr. Sanders is one of one of those types of folks who says yes. I am an Arminian He is not like Norman Geisler who is an

Arminian but doesn't want to be called Arminian. He's not like Adrian Rogers. Well, I'm not any of these things just no

I'm an Arminian. That's that's the theological perspective I come from those are my presuppositions and so on so forth and so It was very clear from the beginning where our differences were going to be focusing and as we then had the rebuttal period we then we took a break and then we had a question and answer and This this was at least consistent over the two debates

The It was very clear to me and I understand this

I went to a seminary one of the seminaries I've gone to was Way way to my left

Theologically and so at the time I wasn't completely certain why the Lord put me in that situation

Where I had to go to a seminary that was I was constantly having to fight as far as my beliefs and things like that now

I know in hindsight why it was but I Understand the mindset that was his and in essence

When he tried to respond to what I had said from John chapter 6 I presented John 6 37 all the father gives me will come to me and Tried to contrast that with the idea that in inclusivism

The father brings many people to eternal life, but he does not Bring them to Christ.

They don't find out who their Savior is until after death and That the context

John 6 is not after death. It's in this life and it and basically I was saying this needs to be explained and So in the rebuttals, he basically said and of course and he's looking at his written notes.

He goes And then the stuff of John 6 well, you know, that's the old Calvinism Arminian debate We're at loggerheads about that and he went on from there.

That was it. Now, of course, that was the Center part of my presentation and it was dismissed

Well, we're at loggerheads on that and I hadn't been given any Response any exegesis, it's just like yeah, well, you know

Calvinist Armenians disagree about things like that so we got in the cross -examination period in the second half the debate and I I was asking him questions and and I was trying to You know

We had two debates to do and I wanted to make sure the second one took place because the second one is scheduled Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando the next night and and so I I you know kept

It kept things very focused and and very pleasant as much as I possibly could given the subject that we were addressing and So I I asked him at one point during the cross -examination

I said well You know, are you saying that the Bible is not sufficient to answer this issue?

And he had said in his opening statement, I don't believe the Bible even addresses this issue in his opening statement he said the

Bible is not answer this question and The next night he basically said similar things that from his perspective

This is just you you make your starting assumptions Arminian Calvinist and so on so forth and those assumptions really can't be decided

There's there's really no truth one way or the other on that You just make your you start some place and you go from there and then you compare things and it's not like the

Bible is actually sufficient To answer the question as to whether any of these things are right

That's the perspective That that that dr. Sandra has held and it became very very clear

Especially the second night and so during the cross -examination. I asked him. Well, then what does John 637 mean?

And I'll never forget this there there's normally in in each debate there's sort of a defining moment

That sticks in my mind and and that as I think back over the debate itself

I recall that particular moment and I can remember where I was sitting or standing or you know

Whatever the situation might be a couple weeks ago with Martin Tanner. I it's when I asked him about Psalm 82 and He he said well,

I've not looked at the context seems like okay. All right, you know I just remember what sort of what the what the platform looked like and what

I was doing at that time and and In the first debate with dr. Sanders. I said so what does John 637 mean?

And here I look over at a man who teaches religion and philosophy PhD he opens his

Bible up and he's turning to it and he's like well,

I And he gets there and he sort of pauses. He looks at looks at well you know,

I I really haven't done much work on this passage actually and And it's silent and I'm like,

I mean I'm getting uncomfortable Because I you can very much tell that he's uncomfortable and of course

I Can feel both Warren and Simon's eyes

Burrowing into my my head Because they're going Haven't done much work on this passage.

I You know from our perspective and and this again, this is here's this illustrates the difference in perspective from our perspective this passage is

Central and vital and if you're gonna take a an Arminian position Then you're obviously going to Have studied the key texts before you adopted your position, but you see that's not how it works

Outside of conservative circles because those conservative circles don't believe that the Bible really is fundamentally the final authority in all things or that it has the ability to decide such things and So from his perspective, well, you know,

I've adopted the Arminian perspective. So I There are certain passages that are seem to be amenable to the reform perspective, but that's not where I start so it's really not that's really not the issue and So I basically had to Abandon the question.

I literally had to say well, you know I'm not gonna ask you to give an answer to something you've not looked at Because the point had already been made.

I mean to anyone who's trying to follow this Just my sitting there and forcing him to come up with something that he really hadn't looked at would be

Irrelevant, but the point had been made to everybody else and that is here's someone who's adopted the

Arminian position, but they have no answer For some of the key texts that present these truths it was

It was amazing it truly truly was and so When the debate was all over I got to meet a bunch of folks that I've that have you know, listen to the dividing line regularly a bunch of folks come out to me young folks at Clearwater Christian College and Places around there in the

Florida area that listened to the the dividing line got to meet bunches of night and really neat people nice folks and and Only I'd only talked to one person.

I had any questions about what I had had to say at all and I was a little concerned I wanted to make sure no hothead

Calvinist and there are such thing as hothead Calvinist. We're going to jump all over Dr.

Sanders who just Obviously has never been in this position before you know,

I have I'll never forget the little Roman Catholic nun that chased me around the Plumber auditorium in Fullerton back in the mid 90s during the break shaking your rosary at me going

You know, I've You know been there done that got the t -shirt and that kind of thing doesn't bother me but I could tell that this guy that type of a

Encounter and one of the question a couple of questions that were asked during the question -and -answer period We're a little bit rough a little bit gruff and you know, but Dr.

Sanders handled that. Okay, and so anyways, it was a very very Interesting debate and Hopefully those who start considering inclusivism will find it to be to be useful and we'll be able to get that from us well the the next evening what happened the next evening is that we had to go from Tampa to Orlando, which is a little bit of a drive and So we left in the morning and And Didn't take quite enough vehicles.

We were just too packed in fact Some of our more memorable personal remembrances of the trip are due to things that took place after the second debate on the way back

Which included poor Warren and Simon and Abigail having to sit in the back of a passenger car with the equipment and Luggage stacked on top of them all the way from Tampa to Orlando.

They could not move it was it was a Little rough because we could have used one more car.

It would have just worked out a little bit better. But anyways, we we drove Down to Orlando stayed

With some friends there at Orlando at their at their home during the afternoon and went over to to RTS Dr.

Sanders did play basketball with some of the folks there that afternoon and Demonstrated that he is a very very good basketball player.

He's not tall but he is as fast as greased lightning and Excellent excellent basketball player, so I'm not sure what that means.

But anyways So we anyways we went to RTS and RTS in Orlando has a new

Chapel and It was very nice Chapel facility. Nothing was set up yet And it took a little while to get things set up at least

I had to help put things up our guys got our stuff up pretty quickly, but we had to sort of start from scratch got everything set up and Unfortunately, the air conditioning wasn't on the air conditioning didn't come on till the break

So you will notice that we're all dressed nicely in suit coats for the first half the debate and then we're down to The coats disappeared during the break as we were about ready to melt up there

So we take the jackets off right as the air conditioning started up. So anyways, but Disappointing crowd

I'll be perfectly honest with you. We we hoped to have a Packed house.

It's not all that huge of a facility But we we didn't and in fact a lot of people that were there

We had seen at the grind the night before they had made the drive We even met some people who drove down from Georgia and and all over the place

Not a lot of the RTS folks were there at all I'd say 20 or 30 maybe from the seminary bothered to show up, which

I found very strange in light of the fact that Here you have John Sanders coming in and it doesn't matter who

I am at least I would think that one of the leading proponents of Inclusivism and open theism and this is good to be the debate on the more

Central of those two issues as far as the nature of God goes. It's open theism I just sort of expected a little bigger turnout, but we didn't have it

But anyways, that's the the joy of Videotape is that people who were not able to be there were able of course will be able to watch the debate for themselves

So anyways, we got everything set up and and Dr.

Sanders as I said was was a different person the second night I don't know if it was the academic setting that made him more comfortable.

Of course, I would think Going to reform theological seminary. He's walking in the lion's den and maybe that was it.

Maybe he was more focused I don't know But everyone commented the fact that he he seemed considerably more passionate and prepared for this particular subject than he did the night before And in fact, he had an excellent opening line

Where in the first, you know 30 seconds or so he made the comment somewhere along the lines that I don't have the exact quote, but He says some long lines of so I believe in open theism

And how in the world would anyone come to believe in an asinine thing like that and it caught everybody's attention It was it was self -effacing.

It was it was very good I mean if I were in an Arminian seminary defending limited atonement, for example, it's something like I would have done and there weren't

Nearly there weren't really any of the pauses where he's looking

You know, look at the notes going where am I gonna hear there were a few of those later on Because one of the things that obviously hadn't had a lot of experience doing is

Making notes on your notes as to okay handle this subject first this one second prioritizing on the fly in Giving rebuttals and responses.

That's something you really do learn to do Only over time and with experience and since this was only the second debate that doesn't give you a lot of experiences to draw from so much more interesting presentation

Of the open theistic perspective, however, I can the one who went first Because the first night he was defending inclusivism the second night

I was defending the idea that God has exhaustive divine foreknowledge of all future events

He wanted to sort of get a little more specific on that and that's fine but I was giving the defense of that so I went first and And Presented as strong a case as I as I possibly could in light of objections of open theism and Then he went he went afterwards and then we had the rebuttals and again, though The thing that's gonna come out very clearly in both of these debates when you view them listen to him on mp3, whatever it might be is as In so many of our debates.

There's one side that provides exegesis, there's one side that that draws its position from the the exegesis of the text of Scripture and there's one side that primarily has philosophical presuppositions and builds its case from there and It became painfully clear by some of the statements that he made about Scripture and Scripture's inabilities

To really address some of these topics Really what the fundamental issue in this debate was if you allow the scriptures to speak for themselves and if you if you believe that you must believe only what the scriptures teach and That you drive your theology from the scriptures that's completely different than if you begin with certain philosophical presuppositions and then go to the scriptures to find passages that are amenable to your particular presuppositions while admitting that others may go a different perspective different route and hence you end up with the

Bible being self -contradictory or incapable of dealing with the issues and that came up in the cross -examination where again

I asked him biblical questions. I asked him to exegete passages of Scripture and his

Discussions with me were all based on well, does God have this kind of knowledge or what theory of time?

Do you subscribe to etc, etc? Did not ask me to deal with scriptural passages or provide an exegetical response to almost anything at all

The contrast was was very very strong. Well, maybe you were there

Maybe you're listening in. I'm not sure how in the world you'd know that we're on right now Let's see. You're in the chat channel, but 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 41 is the phone number 8 7 7 7 5 3 3 3 41 if you have some questions about the the debates be happy to Respond to those and we'll continue with our review of the debates from last weekend right after this

It's all works righteousness, you know Can I manufacture grace

Some religious place by weeping hard on your face saying prayers some dead saints, you know

And Welcome back to the dividing line. My name is James white we're giving you a little bit of review as people are always asking for an update on what took place during the debates and of course, there's also

There's also a desire to Hear sort of my viewpoint of what took place.

It's one thing for you to Watch the debates, but it's another thing get a little bit of the inside information

That you wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain from listening to those particular debates so anyways

We were mentioning the the debate Friday Saturday night at Reform Theological Seminary and open theism.

And Again, there were some defining moments mainly due to the presentation of exegetical passages

And And again people Sort of have to watch this to see for themselves But I again would ask direct questions.

Well, what does Isaiah 41 mean? What does?

Psalm 139 16 mean when it says the our days were ordained for us and so on so forth and I was amazed that this was one of the interesting ones

I Asked about Psalm 139 16. He said well I don't have the book with me right now, but dr.

Boyd, I think Talks about that. So I reached over and I picked up Greg Boyd's book and I sort of showed it to him

Yeah, yeah that one He he indicates there's some translational issues there now again

One of the first things when I first started looking at open theism number years ago. That was first book I got was

Boyd's and I remember looking at that and I remember Couple of friends of mine who know original languages like Simon Escobedo Jeff Neal all of us commented sort of separately about the the fact that we found

Greg Boyd's Retreating to the King James Version and Psalm 139 16.

Absolutely amazing. I Mean, how can these folks? Try to make it sound like they represent the cutting edge of modern theology

When they have to retreat to an error in the King James Version, the Hebrew is quite clear.

It's it's not There's not a really a question here at all. And so here I've got dr.

Sanders quoting somebody a secondary source Boyd and he's not even really certain exactly what

Boyd said and so My follow -up question seemed to really bother him because Bruce Ware in his book

God's lesser glory the diminished God of open theism Took Boyd apart on that And as Bruce always is he did so in a kindly fashion but he

Demonstrated that they're just there's just no reason to to adopt that kind of methodology. And so I asked the question

I think it's a fair question. Have you any response to what Bruce Ware said in rebutting?

Gregory Boyd's comments on Psalm 139 16 and he I Simon Confirmed this because I got the feeling but you know,

I'm sort of busy during a debate So I I don't put a whole lot of stock into exactly how I feel about certain responses

But he confirmed this every time I'd mentioned the name Bruce where he would get this strange uncomfortable look on his face and The response to that was

I don't even understand it. Well, no, not really or something along those lines he had no response to it and The same thing happened when

I pressed the passages like Genesis 50 Isaiah 10

Acts 4 I don't think we got tax well yeah I think we did get tax for when I presented the passages that present compatibilism because of course one of the key issues between open theists and classical theists is open theists affirm libertarian free will that is the

Fundamental element of their belief and they have some pretty strong arguments Against those who hold to simple foreknowledge

Armenians who hold that God simply knows the future but not because he decreed it That's there's is a consistent position to believe in libertarian free will and in fact their argument would be that if you want to believe in libertarian free will then you need to deny to God exhaustive divine foreknowledge and so anyways,

I then presented compatibilism that Man's creaturely will is compatible with God's sovereign decree that in one action you can have man

Freely acting on the intentions of his heart while God is acting on the in his intentions, which are always holy just and good man

Of course is in Genesis chapter 50. For example Joseph's statement that You meant this for evil

God minute for good The parallel is very clear in the Hebrew. And so I asked him what's what's

How do you understand Genesis chapter 50? How do you understand? And Another one that came up is his his belief that the cross was not

Actually, the cross was not like the incarnation Determined from time immemorial and that even up to the garden there may have been other ways that were open

And so I quoted him and then I went back and quoted from Mark 10 where Jesus told the disciples We're going to Jerusalem.

This is what's gonna happen. And his answer to that one was well, those are all conditional and I said, could you show me the text where they're conditionals?

Well, no Genesis chapter 50 What about this and this is when he started things saying things like hey folks and he says this to the whole the whole

Audience he says folks we haven't we haven't figured everything out yet Open theists.

We used to there's a lot of Dr. White's asking very good questions here, and we haven't figured it all out yet He says but remember

Calvinism wasn't built in a day and That was sort of the divine the defining moment.

We've I don't know but we haven't figured all this stuff out yet we'll get to it eventually, but hey Calvinism wasn't built in a day and Again it illustrated the the vast difference in the perspectives that are ours where I'm I'm not trying to build a system

And then force it on scripture. I want to draw my system from the scriptures and it was it was truly a

A Lot of the conservatives in the audience just have a hard time understanding the mindset that could go into that kind of a of a statement

They just have a hard time understanding the the whole perspective out there where you basically have this concept of The scriptures just aren't sufficient to answer the the issues that are being that are being raised and so In both debates the audience questions were very unevenly aimed at dr.

Sanders that normally happens when a A couple of things have happened

If your audience is primarily on one side Then they'll always pick on the other other guy and that that was undoubtedly the case

Open the isms not the most popular view on the on the planet at least as far as an organized thing goes and so anyways the first night this guy's moving around the room with a handheld microphone and That's how the audience questions were handled and I don't know

I think One or two had come to me and all the rest were going to him And so I started to sort of playfully go man.

Oh, he loves me So I got a couple couple more questions, but almost all of them were aimed toward. Dr. Sanders Well what we decided to do the second night was to take audience questions on cards, and I'd like to like to really

Thank mr. Findlay and the other folks with him Who sort of jumped in and and did some stuff they weren't expecting to do and Helped to make these debates even better We collected the cards and The thought crossed my mind when we did that I didn't say anything about but the thought crossed our mind

I wonder if they're even gonna get enough questions for me To make him even well.

I didn't we were gonna do ten questions We ended up doing nine five for him and four for me So start with him then back and forth back and forth and finish with him

So we had to answer one more question than I did We only got four questions that were directed my way and at least two maybe three of those four were sort of like the

I Don't want to make this and you know the totally negative way, but sort of set up questions basics are like how could dr.

Sanders believe this in light of this Because they're just they weren't that many people there that you know were sympathetic at all to what he had to say

So anyways the audience questions were Handled that way gentlemen stood at the podium and read them and then the person to whom is addressed would have a minute to respond and another person 30 seconds to comment and That's how it worked and then dr.

Sanders went to The Tampa Bay Airport caught a flight out the next morning. I I'll admit this is one of the toughest things ever done

It was a long drive back We got back to where I was staying around 1 20 in the morning the next morning

I've debated for two nights in a row and The only thing I can compare debating to is back when

I was younger. I would play chess and You would sometimes have a very long chess match in a

USCF sponsored chess tournament and You would be Exhausted. I mean you felt like you had run in a marathon

Because it is that you're using the same kind of mental focus in anticipating and planning and thinking and it's it's a very intensive intellectual exercise

And so when you do two debates over two nights, which I've only done a couple other times before You're pretty well wiped out by that time and just due to scheduling issues

I was scheduled to preach twice the next morning and The first service is at 8 a .m

So we get at 1 20 in the morning and I have to not only get up the next morning and preach

But I also have to bring all my luggage with me so I have to pack as well, so I got about four hours of sleep and get up the next morning and Those are some of the toughest

I've ever done. I'm gonna tell you the the Lord had to give us some supernatural capacity at that point because there was there was no gas left in the tank at all and It was it was very very challenging, but we did that and then flew back

Got back by a Sunday evening Here in in Phoenix and Head back out again tomorrow for those of you in the

Texas area, by the way, just in passing. I will be at countryside Bible Church Sunday morning two services and Sunday evening for one service and I think countryside

Bibles and Irving somewhere around that area I think I don't know. I don't know Dallas very well been there a few times but Never hadn't

I really don't get to know an area unless I have a rental car and I get to drive around and start looking at a

Map and figure out where I'm going and stuff like that. So so like Long Island I know where I am on Long Island, but I don't know where I am in Tampa.

I don't know where I am in Dallas or like that but countryside Bible and that'll be this coming

Sunday morning. So that there's only one other thing we're doing this year as far as Heading out and that is at the end of November the weekend,

I think after Thanksgiving I'll be doing a seminar on the Trinity in the st

Louis area and we'll try to Need to try to get that up on the website because we get a lot of folks who just show up we had we had one couple heard about it on the website and Made a vacation out of it and drove down from Georgia or someplace

Just to be at the second debate. It was it's amazing. So we'll need to try to get that information up on the website as soon as we can so folks in the

Midwest can make plans if they want to attend. It's gonna be a Friday Saturday Sunday situation on the subject of the

Trinity's so that of course st. Louis being the Home of the United Pentecostal Church International.

We tried to arrange debate on the Trinity with the leading one this

Theologian David Bernard, but dr. Bernard is not interested in debating. And so we do have the one debate we did with Robert Sabin And at that time, dr.

Bernard was interested in debating, but now he's not interested in debating any longer So we we made the availability there

We tried to work things out and just didn't he's not interested in doing so so that'll be coming up at the end of November then

December actually stay home. It's it's an amazing amazing thing and then Start in January gets busy yet.

Once again, Long Island and Omaha, Nebraska and all over the place so very very very

Difficult stuff. Anyways, eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one. I'm looking at all the folks in the chat channel and Just a few comments, but I just don't get the feeling that there's gonna be a lot of phone calls on this particular subject

Even though there's lots of folks who do want to have those Tapes in their hot little hands, and I'm sure they'll be made available as soon as is humanly possible so changing the subject

We As this isn't news a Lot of you have probably seen this but those of you haven't it is a

Sort of a sad thing. I was sent a an article We have another

Barna survey out and Tell you what it it it certainly looks like what we're always saying about the necessity of sound theology and the importance of Teaching the word in Is certainly proving to be the case as we look out across our land.

In fact, I was In I haven't had a chance to talk to him yet, but I was sent an email this morning from a friend of mine

Who had a real difficult experience? Just yesterday He was asked to teach at a particular place and and when he just a few minutes before he's going to teach

He's approached and you know, I was looking at your presentation your PowerPoint presentation and you know, let's avoid any of the doctrine stuff

We don't want to offend anybody And he's speaking at John 6. It's like, you know,

I just I Just sit back and go good grief. I Mean, what are you teaching?

That's what doctrine is doctrine is teaching. We want you to teach but we don't want you to teach That's what's that is literally what's being said.

Let's avoid any teaching while you teach You know, it's just Anyways Here's the article.

It's quite quite interesting nine out of ten adults Own at least one

Bible and eight out of ten consider themselves to be Christian Eighty percent of the

United States, huh? Yeah, but you'd never know it from the smorgasbord of religious beliefs professed by most people a new nationwide survey

Conducted by the Barna research group indicates that a large share of the people who attend Protestant or Catholic churches Have adopted beliefs that conflict the teachings the

Bible in their church there are some fundamental Christian precepts that most

Americans have held on to the new survey reveals and this is Fascinating to me the new survey reveals that more than three -quarters of all adults adopt each of three classic

Christian beliefs For instance the concept of the Trinity God is one being in three separate and equal persons

God the Father Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit is deemed to be a reality by 79 % of adults

Women are considerably more likely than men to accept. The Trinity is real by an 85 % to 72 % margin but few members of either gender doubt its existence now

Just think for a second. How many of those folks do you think have the foggiest idea?

What that question means? I mean that one just leaves me

Just shaking my head going But why? Especially given some of the things they're gonna say later that they believe it

It's just amazing the idea that every person has a soul that will live forever either in God's presence or absence

Hmm put the word hell in there and you'll see these numbers go down is also embraced by 79 % of American adults again

Women are more likely than men to hold this view 82 % of women compared to 72 % of men The third perspective is that the

Bible can only be correctly interpreted by people who have years of intense training in theology this argument

Which goes back to the process of Reformation of several hundred years ago was rejected by 76 % of adults

The segments most likely to agree with idea this idea were African Americans and Hispanics 24 % of each group and Catholics 22 %

Even among those segments However, less than one -quarter believes that accurate comprehension of the Bible is beyond the capacity of the average person that's very very interesting in response to most of the other nine theological statements evaluated a majority or large minority of Americans expressed points of view that conflict with the

Bible Three of those matters dealt with the nature of spiritual beings six out of ten Americans 59 % reject the existence of Satan And they believe in the

Trinity, but they reject the existence of Satan there you go Indicating that the devil or Satan is merely a symbol of evil

Catholics are much more likely than Protestants to hold this view 75 % compared to 55 % although a majority of both groups concur that Satan is symbolic 75 % of the

Catholics as Satan doesn't exist So much for the authority of the teaching magisterium

The rejection of Satan's existence seems to conflict with the fact that a slight majority 54 % also contends that a human being can be under the control of the influence of spiritual forces such as demons

People 57 or older were the group most likely to doubt Satan's existence 64 % and also emerged as the most likely to accept the notion of demonic influence 39 % compared to 55 % among baby busters and 62 % of baby boomers.

What's a baby buster? Yeah, I thought that was something you bought at Dairy Queen. What's a does anyone know what a baby buster is?

I don't know what a baby buster is. I Don't keep up with the generation stuff here. Anyways a slight majority of adults 51 %

That's a very slight majority believes that Check this one out. This is this is just lovely believes that praying to deceased

Saints can have a positive effect in a person's life Oh, yes, not surprisingly. There is a massive difference between Protestants and Catholics on this matter

Well, we would hope so with Catholics twice as likely to embrace this idea 80 % versus 41 % what is surprising is a large share of Protestants that believe in praying to dead

Saints a notion dismissed by most Protestant churches amazingly one out of six evangelicals 16 % and half of the non -evangelical born -again

Christians 50 % Also believe in praying to dead Saints 6 out of 10

Hispanics possess this belief Oh, yeah, we're teaching real well in the broad stream of evangelical churches.

Sure brother More than one -third of the public 35 % also believes that it is possible to communicate with others after they die

Well, of course haven't you watched that television program crossing over? Yeah, sure. No, I've never watched it

I'm not going to this perspective is related to a person's age half of all adults under age 38 endorse this view duh

Compared to one -third of the boomers mid -30s to mid -50s and just one out of seven older adults three out of ten non -evangelical born -again

Christians What in the world is a non -evangelical born -again Christian believe in communication with the dead?

once again Catholics were more likely than Protestants to embrace this view 45 % of Catholics 26 % of Protestants well, so yeah that probably goes with the praying to the

Saints part that makes a little bit of sense although most adults are aligned with either a

Protestant 54 % or Catholic 22 % Church a Large minority of Americans believe that when

Jesus Christ on earth he committed sins. Isn't that wonderful? Currently slightly less than half the public 42 % holds this view while half 50 % say

Jesus did not sin 50 % got it, right? Hey, there you go The people groups most likely to contend that Jesus sinned include people under age 38 49 %

Notional Christians, what is a notional Christian? notional That's not supposed to be emotional.

No notional Christians 51 % Well, what in the world is this and atheists and agnostics?

They're asking atheists and agnostics 62 %

That's Boy this is Protection from eternal condemnation for one's sins

Is widely considered to be earned rather than received as a free gift from God. Well, duh

That is the natural bent of man half of all adults 50 % Argued that anyone who is generally good or does enough good things for others during their life will earn a place in heaven

Although that view is generally considered to be Catholic doctrine. Oh, oh I can see all the

Augustinians going At that particular point considered to be Catholic doctrine and is one of the core beliefs over which the process of Reformation was waged well sorta

Four out of ten Protestants accepts that except this view of salvation Insured by good deeds which tells you they're not

Protestants. Yeah Almost half of the non -evangelical born -again Christians also adopt this view.

I still don't know what that is Inspired the fact that they have prayed for the forgiveness of their sins and asked

Jesus Christ to be their Savior Actions, which they believe were the basis their assurance of salvation. I guess Jesus just can't quite hack doing that Apparently large numbers of the non -evangelical

Born -again adults believe that people have a choice of means to salvation either the grace alone or the salvation through works approaches.

Hey If they figure that there's all sorts of different ways of worshiping then why can't they be all sorts different ways getting saved?

Who needs any type of you know, real revelation God anyways? Huh and yet another break from biblical teaching three -quarters of adults 74 %

Agree that when people are born, they are neither good nor evil. They make a choice between the two as they mature

Yeah, in other words the concept original sin is rejected by most Americans in favor of a rational choice approach to human nature

That doesn't surprise me at all At least seven out of ten members of every demographic segment examined accepts the notion of choice over that of original sin

Unexpectedly the survey data revealed that a slight majority of evangelicals also by this notion 52 % doesn't

Surprise me in the slightest If the patterns underlying these views seem inherently contradictory

That may be at least partially explained by people's willingness to draw from a variety of conflicting theological sources

This is perhaps most clearly evident through the finding that the plurality of adults 44 % Contends that the

Bible the Quran and the Book of Mormon are all different expressions of the same spiritual truths

I Think you may have missed what I just said. Let me wake you up again 44 % of adults that's almost half

Agreed with the statement the Bible the Quran and the Book of Mormon are all different expressions of the same spiritual truths

Isn't that special? Only 38 % of Americans rejected that idea

Wow, well, there's a little bit more of this take a look at and of course the phones are ringing off the hook.

Oh No, they're not. Okay. Well, maybe they will during the break But we're gonna take our break and come back with this snapshot of American evangelicalism right after this

So many stars Strong and true And welcome back to the dividing line not too many people out in evangelicalism saying along with With campy there

Steve camp. We call him campy Is not changing one command well, how about being clueless about about 80 % of them seems to be anyways

We were just looking at sources of truth and the amazing statement that 44 % of those surveyed

Agreed with the statement the Bible the Quran the Book of Mormon are all different expressions of the same spiritual truths

Well, that really shouldn't surprise you we are talking about postmodernists here and the idea of Spiritual truth being consistent is not a part of postmodern thinking

So why not as long as it's a quote -unquote spiritual book? Yeah, throw them all together It doesn't make a difference just 38 % of Americans reject that idea.

That's the 38 % that haven't quite figured out postmodernism yet The only population segments at odds with this view are those who are 57 or older That's good 35 % accept the notion 36 % rejected the remaining 29 % get this the remaining 29 % don't know

Don't know. I don't know. Maybe they are maybe they're not Evangelicals only 10 % agree with the statement, but 84 % disagree.

Yay Evangelicals non -evangelical born -again Christians who I still don't know who they are 40 % agree 45 % disagree and adherence of Protestant churches 39 % degree 47 % disagree

You'll notice that they didn't talk about the Catholics there Taking matters a step further the survey discovered that most

Americans believe truth can be discovered only through logic human reasoning and personal experience a majority of Americans 54 % embraces this perspective

Which is at odds with both the traditional Protestant belief The Bible is the source of truth and the Catholic perspective that the

Bible and papal authority convey truth Well, actually it's a Bible in tradition if you really want to be accurate here

Anyways men were more likely than women to buy into this viewpoint 57 % compared to 49 % of women

Protestants and Catholics also differ considerably on this matter 46 % of Protestants agree with the notion

But and I know we have at least one Catholic listening right now in the channel 62 % of Catholics also agree with that perspective isn't

That fun, well this one should be interesting How about on homosexuality?

There you go The final perspective addressed in the survey dealt with the issue of homosexuality by a two -to -one margin

Americans reject the idea that the Bible does not specifically condemn homosexuality it is important to note, however, that while 53 % disagree and 27 % agree with the statement a large proportion 20 % said,

I don't know Often such a large share of people expressing ignorance is indicative of uncertainty even in the part of those individuals who expressed a point of view in this case just 15 % said they strongly agreed with the statement while nearly three times as many 41 % strongly disagreed

Ah That doesn't surprise me at all again,

I Graduated from the first seminar I went to and a

Bible college and I couldn't have given you more than one or two passages at most that address the subject of homosexuality directly let alone give you any type of Meaningful discussion of the things that Support the issue of homosexuality at all.

It wasn't Until years later. I had to begin studying that and hence the writing of the same -sex controversy with Jeff Neal Well, there's a little section here on reflections of the on the outcome of the survey and since the phones are just ringing off the walls and I Warren's not here to sing

Elvis with me. I'll go ahead and look at this section, too The results are a reflection of a nation whose theological views are increasingly inclusive of many faith traditions

According to the director of the research George Barna author of numerous books about the religious beliefs and practices of Americans Including the state of the church 2002 was not surprised by the findings.

Well, I'm not either Well as Barna say over the past 20 years, we have seen the nation's theological views slowly become less aligned with the

Bible Americans still revere the Bible and think like to think of themselves as Bible -believing people, but the evidence suggests otherwise, that's for sure

Christians have increasingly been adopting spiritual views that come from Islam Wicca Secular humanism the

Eastern religions and other sources because we remain a largely Bible illiterate society how about Bible illiterate church to Fewer alarmed or even aware of the slide towards syncretism a belief system that blindly combines beliefs from many different faith perspectives

Well, I can guarantee you one thing Everybody in our chat channel is well aware of that because we have these folks come in all the time we have these folks pop in and they don't know they're they're landing in the midst of a bunch of primarily rabid

Calvinists and oh the Viewpoints that get expressed in In the chat channel are absolutely positively amazing.

Yeah, I think that's we had this guy from Germany Eventually banned the guy because he just After a while, he was just taking over the channel with his endless wacko liberal stuff, but Man, this this guy sadly really really really expresses in the utter incoherence of his thinking the kind of thought that is

Especially in European nations amongst young people it was I think everybody who talked to him has to admit it was a sobering thing to try to present facts this guy and then just Watch it bouncing off like shooting a 22 at a tank.

I mean it just had absolutely no impact at all just Anyways, I go back to the article

Barnett indicated the passing on of a Christian heritage from one generation to the next appears to be rapidly dissipating in America.

No kidding Our continuing research among teenagers and adolescents shows the trend away from adopting biblical theology in favor of syncretistic

Culture based theology is advancing at full gallop Citing a wealth of statistical evidence drawn from his books on teens lifestyles and religious beliefs

Real teens Barnett noted that relatively few adults are alarmed by this trend Since teens and adolescents are merely reflecting the trail that their parents and teachers have already blazed

Well, I'm afraid he's right about that The data described in this report are based on a national telephone telephone survey

Among a random sample of adults ages 18 or older living within the 48 continental states The survey include the responses of 630 people was conducted in August of 2002

The maximum margin of sampling error associated with the aggregate national sample is plus or minus 4 .1

percentage points at the 95 % statistical confidence level for those of you who are of Mathematical geeks all the interviews were conducted from the

Barnett research group telephone interviewing facilities in Ventura California which does not help me to think a lot about that because it's

California and California is weird Anyways, oh, hey. Hey, here we go.

I didn't see this part. They define these terms. That should be interesting And Born -again

Christians were defined in these surveys as people who said they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ That is still important in their life today and who also indicated they believe that when they died

They will go to heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ their Savior Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as born -again

Okay Evangelicals are a subset of born -again Christians in Barnett surveys in addition to meeting the born -again criteria

Evangelicals also meet seven other conditions the seven conditions of being an evangelical

Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today Believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non -christians believing that Satan exists

Believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace not works Believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth asserting that the

Bible is accurate in all of its teachings and describing God is the all -knowing all -powerful perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today

Being classified as an evangelical has no relationship to church attendance Or the denominational affiliation of the church they attend respondents were not asked to describe themselves as evangelical

Amnesty, I believe all those things don't go to church. There you go. Notice the Trinity wasn't in there so I guess

Jehovah's Witness might be a Evangelical Notional Christians, here we go

Notional Christians are defined as individuals who consider themselves to be Christian But either do not have a personal commitment to Jesus Christ or do not believe that they will experience eternal faith with God based solely on his grace and mercy

Consequently, they do not fit the evangelical evangelical or born -again classifications

Actually, they don't fit any classifications We run to those but yeah, I'm a

Christian what is a Christian I don't know I'm clueless anyway And that's it.

We weren't told about baby busters. I'm still don't know what a baby buster is And then you have the the chart down below giving you all the breakdown of all that neat fun stuff and Wow, very very

Very sad actually. Hey, you know while we were sitting here I got it. Oh Cool Boy that this is why we do it live.

I just got an email While we were sitting here, I would I mean what two minutes ago?

I got an email less than two minutes ago from Catholic answers Yes cat the

Bible answer man debate special offer Order the Bible answer man debate online and receive the tape set

Protestant ministry becomes Catholic absolutely free Isn't that great here's the thing listen to this fascinating radio debate between Catholic answers director of apologetics

James Aiken and noted and it and a Noted Protestant apologist who we will not name.

It doesn't say whom we will not name It just simply says and a noted Protestant apologist and you'll see the

Catholic versus Protestant controversy in a whole new light The Bible answer man is widely heard is a widely heard

Protestant apologetics radio broadcast hosted by Hank Hanegraaff president of the Christian Research Institute Normally it airs many misconceptions about the

Catholic faith and there's no one from the our side there to refute it but not long ago actually was we were able to get our director of apologetics on the show for a live three -part debate with a

Protestant apologist whom we will not mention Because we will not debate him again

That's why and because we never have debated him because it was not a debate I've pointed this out many many many many times before mr.

Aiken will not debate me it proved to be one of the best Catholic versus Protestant debates ever

Now we come to the name the debate was between James Aiken of Catholic answers and James way of Alpha Omega Ministries author of a book on Roman Catholicism called the fatal flaw

The fatal flaw hasn't been in print for ages people My my goodness, uh, well at least they were nice about it

These two men have done their homework and communicate with each other in a very respectful and charitable manner This debate is a model of what ought to be happening.

Whatever the essential differences between Catholics and Protestants to discuss No, we need a debate. This was not a debate when you have phone calls.

You don't have equal amount of times That's not a debate Anyways, D D D D D D and that's the end of that Well, you know,

I tried to order one of these things once the link didn't work And in fact look in here this link would not work if I clicked on this right now

These folks just don't get it. They send this stuff out with hard returns smack dab in the middle of a URL Well, I shouldn't tell them that should

I My technical my technical guy wouldn't do that.

Would you technical guy? Nah, you know how to do this, right? They don't know how to do this, right? I'm gonna put this down. Oh Well, you know, it's cool to do this live because I just came in and it's

Take it take a breath. Yes. Well It was it was fun Shoe some shop says the doc is on a roll.

Well, I guess y 'all turned on the things you could Listen to at least a few minutes the program. Well, you know that Barna survey was

Nothing new. I mean how many times of have we said everything that was said in that survey?

And what's the fundamental reason for all the stuff in that survey? Not teaching the Bible Not teaching verse by verse it's tradition it's giving into the culture does not surprise me in the least in the least just Does tell us something about what's coming in fact that that's a particular

Discussion in the survey reminds me of a URL where'd

I get that? Oh off of one of these lists I'm subscribed to someone noted a discussion about a organization called the ooze

Ooze I think it's the ooze calm if I recall correctly and it's sort of a countercultural youth thing,

I mean one of the articles in there is what ten reasons why your church stinks or something like that and it's it's the new way church is going to be done and You know

Institutional church isn't reaching the youth and so we need to do it Well, that sounds real good But you know

There's this thing called, you know The Word of God that's supposed to define the nature of the church and these people could care less

The idea of the Word of God defining how things which who believes that and Since so much of the institutional church has abandoned that very perspective

They can't exactly turn around and then have a problem with these folks When they say we're just could go farther with it.

I mean when evangelicalism has embraced the seeker sensitive type of Defining your your entire church worship service on the basis of what lost people feel comfortable with How can you turn around and say hey, why don't we just chuck the whole thing of church and go with something new?

There's there's certainly not any Logical basis upon which to do that I suppose So It's all

I Preach all the time Folks, we just have to be faithful in the context in which we're in because I see

I I don't know what my children are gonna face Just read

I just read Wally bolts comment about the use

What is that URL? I suppose I should mention it. In fact, I put it in my favorites Where is this thing?

Someone posted a URL this week? that I Could it tell you

I've never Seen anything like it. There it is.

It's the a man website and I'll go ahead and tell you where it is because you've

It's a HTTP colon backslash backslash 777 dot n

Venture that's n venture e .com Forward slash what

I say backslash. Oh, sorry forward slash It's seven just put in the HTTP thing and put seven seven seven dot n venture n venture e .com

and Then sit back we've had a lot of fun with with this particular website this week

Mm -hmm because I think this guy's serious I said and channeled because someone did someone even ask is this guy really serious and I said

Well, if he's not then he he deserves

He deserves an Academy Award or something but Go there and you'll see what

I mean. I mean go to the sinner's prayer and That will be enough the fact that this individual a ends every single sentence with amen every sentence ends with amen

He will not use commas We've been practicing this in channel Trying to write everything in the style of allegedly according to this website this is

Wait a minute. Oh Where'd it go? What's what's the guy's name here? Opening Oh Johnny Hutton.

Oh Johnny Hudson. Is that who it was? I think it was Johnny Hudson Yeah, click here to read and listen to Johnny story evangelist.

Johnny Hudson. I'm not sure if that's him though. I Don't know but anyways, this guy loves

Jack chick and I'm just reading from it the gospel of Jesus Christ knows no commas.

Amen Now Wait a minute, wait a minute

If you if you look at this right where it says the gospel of Jesus Christ knows no commas.

Amen He then reproduces a page from a Jack chick comic and look at the page it contains commas

And it doesn't have the word. Amen in it. Well that that may mean he's not really honestly a

You know, he's oh here's the guy that's not Johnny Hudson, that's another dude. Hey, wait a minute

I just picked out the picture of him and that's a picture of George Bush on his computer in the background. That's That's weird very strange.

Well anyways Take that's a he's a different guy. Oh, he's not Hudson. He's different guy.

Okay. Well, I don't know Read this over and and you're going to be absolutely positively astounded

Because if this guy's serious, I Don't know what to say and if he's not

I Still don't know what to say. It is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen on the website on the internet truly just absolutely amazing

It sort of does prove that I wasn't making it up in the King James only controversy because he's

King James only When I said that I had actually run into people who

Try to speak in Such a way that they only use words found in the

King James version of the Bible Can you imagine trying to order a cheeseburger at McDonald's only using words from the

King James version of the Bible? That would be really very difficult But anyways, well, you know what?

Mr. Technical person since no one called and I have now put out one of the zaniest websites on the planet

Let's let's wrap this baby up. We don't want to do any more damage to the world than we've already done and Especially since cheeseburg,

I know how would you say cheeseburger in King James? I don't think the word cheese appears but milk does and sour does so and beef does well meat does and Bread does so you'd have to do something with meat bread

Sour milk off see I can't figure it out. Well anyways It started off pretty good

But then you know when I started reading those percentages of folks and what they believed I lost it it just it was gone that was it and So so next week

Lord willing We're back to a regular schedule will be live on Saturday at 2 o 'clock

Mountain Standard Time And we'll look forward to seeing you then here on The Dividing Line.

Talk to you later The Dividing Line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -0318

Or write us at P .O. Box 37106, Phoenix, Arizona 85069

You can also find us on the world wide web at AOMIN .org That's A -O -M -I -N dot

O -R -G where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks Join us again next