James Cone’s Children, Then In-Depth on the Immaculate Conception

James Cone, Black Liberation Theology, and Isaiah 53 at the Lewis Funeral

Welcome to the dividing line today. We wanted to get another program in uh this week uh that makes four for one week uh just letting you know yesterday's program is now up. It had been blocked globally uh by the algorithm on both youtube and facebook uh due to the fact that we played music and it's understandable it's natural.

I actually um you know john cooper's uh folks that take care of that kind of thing got in touch to me they got it taken care of fairly quickly. I think we're still on facebook still uh blocked on that one but it'll eventually be there as well.

Um and i did ask them i said in the future is there a way we can sort of preemptively get around this and they seem to feel like they're in the future. If we sort of planned it we might might be able to get around it.

We'll see. But it's hey it's it's for skillets protection i mean there are lots of people that would just live screen live stream everything uh for free if they could get hold of it and um that's sort of the end of everybody's uh ability to produce stuff.

Um so i i get it. But uh the interview with john cooper is now up and available from yesterday. Appreciate all the positive feedback we got from that. Everybody seemed to enjoy it especially daryl harrison um in omaha uh at just thinking virgil walker uh they seem to really enjoy the fact that uh john was wearing their hat and i i guess we need a hat now.

So um if we if we make an alpha mega hat again we've had them in the past i mean decades. That's true. That's true. Uh so we'll have to you know have a hat some hats maiden and send uh you know send send one off to john and uh then he'll then he can do the just thinking podcast wearing our hat.

That seems to be. That seems to be fair i think anyways. But yeah anyway uh start off. We're going to be talking about the immaculate conception today if you have roman catholic friends and and family and things like that this will be one that you're going to want to really tune in on.

But before that i want to talk about uh the dr rafael gamaliel warnock portion of the lewis funeral yesterday. Uh dr warnock is the senior pastor of the historic ebenezer baptist church the spiritual home of the reverend dr martin luther king jr and dr warnock appeared um at the funeral yesterday and he made a huge splash by one particular portion of what he said.

Now you need to understand that if you understand black liberation theology if you understand james cone if you understand union theological seminary this is what you would expect this is. But but what is what it is is it has caught people because i've sat.

How many hours have i sat here in this very studio. And in fact i remember the first time i did this um we weren't doing video. The walls were white. There was a for years we had a bookcase in that corner that was a prototype for my real bookcases and it was just propped up in the corner could have fallen over at any second.

Uh it was i mean i was tilted. It was terrible. But we didn't have video. So who cared. Um but i remember in 2008 sitting in this room and reading from james cone. So it's been at least 12 years that we have been speaking about james cone who passed away.

I believe it was last year the year before last and black liberation theology and the concepts associated there too and basically saying this is not christianity it it utilizes christian language but it is a fundamentally different concept than the historic christian faith.

And this is what is taught at union theological seminary. If you've not followed a lot of my tweets and things like that union i call union theological seminary the walker seminary it it apostatized before the year 1900 and yet it's still going.

So it's it's like uh it'd be like if uh we were on the 200th season of the walking dead. Now i've i've i stopped walking. I started stopped walking. I stopped i stopped walking as a walker. I stopped watching the walking dead quite some time ago.

But it always crossed my mind. Shouldn't the walkers be looking worse and worse with each passing. Uh you know i mean they do. Well there can't be anything left by now. I mean that there must be like just body parts all just laying around all over the place because everything was falling off as it was.

So that's that's union theological seminary. Uh it but it keeps moving. It's it's still rattling around. It's nothing but a skeleton. But it keeps rattling around. Well he's a graduate of of uh of union and cone taught at union.

And that makes perfect sense. You can teach anything at union. There's doctrine. The only doctrine at union theological seminary is that the one doctrine you can't believe is what historic christianity has ever believed.

That's that's about the only doctrinal standard at union theological seminary. So at the funeral this guy starts talking. And as you'll see he takes isaiah 53 and applies it to congressman lewis instead of to jesus.

And people are well first of all there's been a number of people that nah he probably wasn't. No he didn't do that. And no he did. It's it's plain and obvious there's no question don't even try to get around.

It is exactly what he did. And it is perfectly consistent perfectly consistent with black liberation theology. How does james cone say that god is black that jesus was black um that we are. That you are to try to black people to rejoice in their blackness so on and so forth.

It's not just a skin color though. It's never completely disconnected from that. For cone god is the god of the sufferers. He is the god of the oppressed. And so you are like jesus. When you were oppressed congressman lewis was beaten and was oppressed.

Therefore congressman lewis is like jesus. And therefore by his stripes america is healed. So it it follows logically if you understand the wildly and grossly racist and unbiblical categories of james cone and his now extremely popular influential offspring throughout the black religious community.

Um makes it makes perfect sense what he was saying and why he said it. But the vast majority of us still it still you know just grabs you and you just go what. Um seriously. But it's consistent with with cone.

So let's just take a look at it. This is so this is really low resolution. This is gonna look bad unless you like keep it down the bottom or something like that. But um here's uh here's the section that uh got everybody all in a tizzy and appropriately.

So i'm not saying i'm not saying there's an excuse for this. I'm just simply explaining to you that there's a background to this. It's not like you decide it doesn't sound good. I think this i'll throw out some just rank horrific offensive heresy.

No this is this is black liberation theology this is james cone. So here we.

Go we celebrate don lewis. He was wounded for america's transgressions bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him. We are healed so let's remember him today and let's recommit tomorrow to standing together and fighting together and voting together and standing up on behalf of truth and righteousness.

So there you have uh by his stripes we are healed because he was oppressed and god is the god of the oppressed and only the god of the oppressed. So if he was oppressed then we can apply this passage to him.

It it is the religion of wokeness um it it should cause us to just stop and go. Oh my goodness how could anyone do that. Uh and the number of people it is astonishing. How many people are uh defending what he had to say defending what he said.

By the way i'm not gonna be watching twitter today at all because the net is bad. I don't i do not understand how this works. Yesterday we went for an hour and 15 minutes john cooper and flawless just well i guess there was one slight drop out one but we did great and we had the zoom stuff going.

And today it's it's a roller coaster all over the place and we've already done all the resetting that we can and stuff. I i don't know. Sunspots aliens. I i have no idea but that's extremely distracting to me to to know that we're on we're off we're on we're off and and so i won't be watching twitter because that way i won't know and we'll just have to upload this when we get a chance to upload it and you know so um anyway just wanted to comment upon that because a lot of people were talking about it.

You know i just straightforward said this is blasphemous it is but you're not allowed to say that. Um blasphemy itself can is now a protected form of speech as long as it is racially appropriate blasphemy.

That's where we are. That's that's where we are. And it will not be long before youtube and facebook and instagram and twitter are enforcing those theological standards upon the rest of us. You you i hopefully by now you've realized that the stuff that you thought was tin hat stuff for me you're now experiencing yourself.

So it wasn't tin hat stuff to begin with and that's coming for us as well. So again while it is day let us work for the night is coming when no man can work. And that is a biblical truth and biblical reality.

The Historical Development of the Immaculate Conception

Uh okay so i wanted um to do something. It's been i think a decade since i did my last debate on the immaculate conception. I've done a number of debates. We debate up at the university of utah with jerry madatix uh we did marion debates with jerry uh on long island as well uh i debate christopher ferrara on the subject.

We're going to be getting that up on youtube. We just discovered that it was never put on youtube might as well get it there while we can uh give them a little something extra to have to delete uh in the not too distant future.

But um the audio is up on youtube. And is the audio on sermon audio. No we didn't that one fell fell through the cracks fell through the cracks. So um uh and it's interesting uh i'm not sure if i'll have time to remember to link to it but during that particular debate with christopher ferrara uh he interestingly used a fake augustine quote.

He didn't know i'm not accusing him of knowingly doing it. It's just there's such a long history such a long history of roman catholicism using fraudulent church history sources made up citations uh the donation of constantine the pseudo-isidore decretals just look up the history of these things.

There's literally thousands of alleged statements by early church writers um that rome has utilized to define doctrine and dogma that just complete fakes. And we know that today um but the the theology that was built upon those fakes continues.

And the reality is the majority of believers don't know where to go to look things up sometimes that there are there are still many many many untranslated volumes of for example origins works that have not yet appeared in uh in english.

We just found what was it an armenian manuscript. Uh that has um who was that was that chrysostom there was a a commentary on hebrews. It was just discovered from an important early uh early writer. And uh i'm really looking forward to seeing that published in english eventually.

Uh i don't read armenian. Uh that's not armenian. By the way i do i do read armenian does not armenian. Um and uh so but but and even those of us who have fairly decent patristic resources and not not just the 38 volume erdman set but um a lot of the early church fathers set uh that's that's published outside of the erdman's material and a lot of the electronic stuff and tlgcd roms and uh patrilogia latina and and all the rest that kind of stuff it's still challenging to track down a lot of the citations that appear in material serial of alexandria.

Okay figured. That's what you were looking at anyway. Um this might seem to many people to be somewhat of a esoteric topic where we're looking at the meltdown of the united states government and hence uh entering into a period of um fundamental degradation of the quality of life globally.

Um that's just the only outcome of what's going on here whether you like it or not this nation has been a force for stability and so you might say that's it all. That's all we should be talking about.

Well i don't know about you but talking only about that brings about depression. I'm not the only person noticing all the discussions of a sharp rise in suicides and and everything else that's going on uh in in the world right now.

And the issues of the gospel do not go away just because there's an election coming up and one side is doing everything it can to destroy the country before the election even takes place so that they can then rule the country for the rest of time driving into the ground.

Uh these issues will still be relevant on november 5th november 6th so on and so forth. And unfortunately especially topics that deal with church history end up being topics that are rife for abuse because most people have such a disconnect from church history from the sources of church history.

And of course i i'm if you're new to the program over the years many people have asked me what were the classes that you took college bible college seminary that have been the most helpful to you in doing apologetics.

And i've always given the same answers. Greek and church history. Uh greek hebrew to a lesser extent um knowing the biblical languages teaching the biblical languages um but then church history because every cult and ism abuses church history every cult and ism.

So the mormons will attempt to quote from sources of church history in substantiation of their claims. Now no one no one in church history believe what joseph smith believed by any stretch of the imagination.

But that won't stop people at byu from quoting things and putting them in a completely foreign context. And how many people can then call them on it jehovah's witnesses well known for their abuse of church history.

I've told a very enjoyable story in the past of my discussion with a pioneer jehovah's witness on the subject of the testimony of ignatius of antioch to the deity of christ and how he was just horrifically and purposely misrepresented by the watchtower society.

Many years ago i wrote a lengthy article on the subject uh that documented this this this type of thing. But but again for most people for most jehovah's witnesses they wouldn't know where to go and they would never even have the inclination to look when it comes to subject roman catholicism today i find amongst non-roman catholics so you know i could say protestants but i'm not sure that term has almost any meaning any longer.

Um it even those who use the term don't know where it came from. They don't know the historical context of the diet of spire in 1529 and the holy roman empire and charles the fifth and all the rest that kind of stuff.

Um and so non-non-catholics. In other words those who do not submit to the self-claimed authority of the bishop of rome. Now there's a number of community communions under that. It's not just roman catholicism that's sort of a blanket term that would refer to them all.

But you've got byzantine catholics and things like that that are in communion with rome but want to be differentiated traditionally liturgically within that context. And then you have the eastern orthodox churches and uh there is a resurgence of interest it goes in waves.

I've seen this more than once. I'm old enough now to start seeing these waves as they as they go along. Um but there's a resurgence of interest in uh in eastern orthodoxy and they have their own issues very very different mindset than the at least true eastern orthodox folks from the east uh american eastern american eastern orthodoxy sounds argues very much like rome.

But real eastern orthodoxy from the east has a very mystical mindset and a mindset very different from those of us in the west. And therefore the things they even would find to be central in argumentation are not the same things that we would find to be argumentation anyway.

The point is that a large majority of non-roman catholic non-eastern orthodox general evangelicals do not know where they stand in church history. They do not. How many times have you seen church history classes offered even when a church is big enough to offer christian theology courses or things like apologetics courses.

It's very very rare for people to know. And so when they encounter people from different perspectives very often we are talking past each other and not prepared to hear what's being said. When we speak of the marian doctrines we are speaking of one of the most important set of doctrines and dogmas within roman catholicism.

For this one reason if you go to heavily roman catholic areas culturally roman catholic areas if you go to mexico almost anywhere in mexico throughout central america in fact into south america you will find the most uh vivid dedication to mary uh the virgin of guadalupe you will find people who live their lives with the central religious character of their lives is mary.

And when you see the devotion when you see the candles you see the statues you see the churches you see the parades the the processions. Um you begin to understand why the pretended distinction between hyper dulia and latria hyper veneration and worship just dissolves.

It dissolves in those places. And mary is plainly worshipped within those contexts. Plainly worshipped. You can you can try to make those other arguments all you want. They fail biblically. They collapse biblically.

Both dulia dulio and latruo are both translations of ahav from the hebrew. That's just a fact. You can't get around it. You can. That's why you that's why rome denies solo scriptura. Because if you if you apply the standard of scripture falls apart.

But that's the experience that many people have. The marian doctrines we'll call them doctrines i'll explain between doctrine dogma in a moment are not only central to the experience of most roman catholics.

There's a lot of western roman catholics that diminish the centrality of the marian dogmas. They can't technically but they do experientially. So just as much as she is worshiped in mexico germany not so much.

Um sure you'll find pockets. But you'll find a lot of quote unquote roman catholics in europe for example to have really no marian devotion at all. There wouldn't be any even reason to discuss do the uo and latruo because they're not doing either one of them for really anybody.

So you get a wide range. But the point is that the that there have been three dogmas defined by roman catholicism over the past 170 years. Three. So here is. These are the examples that rome gives to us of her self-claimed authority to violate solo scriptura.

She rejects solo scriptura and to define as dogma dogma de fide by faith. The content of the faith and so you understand a doctrine is something that can be taught but does not necessarily bind the conscience.

A de fide dogma binds the conscience. You must believe this. So when you encounter liberal roman catholics at boston college for example who clearly do not believe in the infallibility of they do not believe in the immaculate conception.

They do not believe in the bodily assumption. They really don't believe in transubstantiation. They don't believe that a priest has sacerdotal authority to forgive sins. They don't believe in purgatory.

These people are not by rome's own definition true roman catholics. They're really not. And in fact there's a a strong stream within roman catholicism to say that they are de facto excommunicate whether the church gets around to doing it or not.

They are by their own rejection of these teachings excommunicate from the church. That's why there are certain priests that will stand up to joe biden and these other leftist democrats who claim to be roman catholics.

Uh well wait a minute. Uh that's not who i was thinking about. Who was the guy that. Um it's one of it was one of the candidates. Uh there's there. I think it was in new york where they went to mass and the priest said no.

And it was it was over abortion. Uh. And the point is their argumentation is that you're excommunicated you by your actions by your consistent support of the murder of unborn children homosexuality so on so forth you are excommunicated.

So i i will not give you biden in south carolina. Okay. Well and i think it's happened to others in new york because i remember something in new york. So i think it's happened multiple times. And you've got to give those rebel priests um props for actually believing what they've been told to believe.

I feel sorry for roman catholics. I really do. When when i first started uh engaging carl keating and jerry matics and patrick madrid and mark brumley uh and eventually uh others joined in staples came along later on.

Uh jimmy aiken came along later on too. Um this was this was the 80s and sure it was post vatican too. So there's already a great deal of liberalism. But at least you still had a pope at that time that was a roman catholic.

Uh sure once a while you'd say something liberal they'd say something conservative but but i feel i i there's a sense i feel sorry. Uh i mentioned yesterday not no the day for sometime this week i mentioned the story about the roman catholic kid that gets kicked out of uh of government in his university because he says to his fellow roman catholics in a roman catholic chat thing this is what the church teaches and we shouldn't promote something other than that.

He was right he was orthodox. Boom he's out and it was fellow roman catholics that ratted him out. So there's a sense in which you go it was easier back in the days when i was debating folks where they actually believed what it was that they were saying.

And you could you had a here's here's the dogmas of the church. But even back then we did a debate at boston college and everybody knew the vast majority people i knew when i was there i was 93. I knew when i was there that many of the priests that were attending were sitting there chuckling inside themselves that we were even having the debates we were having because they don't believe most of the stuff that we were arguing about.

Um so that's the situation that we're that we're facing now when we come to the dogmas then we have defined by faith. The last three dogmas defined by the roman catholic church have been in 1854 the immaculate conception of mary the vatican one council 1870 ish uh defines the infallibility of the pope.

And in 1950 you have the last dogma that has been defined by roman catholicism the bodily assumption of mary. And of course there are still people alive that today that remember when that uh when that took place.

So that's will be considered living memory. So we can look at these dogmas and we can test rome's claims. And the reality is when you test all three of these you discover that what rome is willing to bind upon the conscience of individuals today is something that no person attending the council of nicaea would have had any concept of would have ever defined as being part of the gospel.

Not a single one not a single including the two representatives from the bishop of rome would never have even conceived let alone did they believe or teach or preach or live in light of things that are now bound de fide as by faith a necessary element of the gospel and don't have time to go back to it right now.

But i encourage you to go back and listen to the debates we did with jerry maditax especially that first one we did on the maryan dogmas where he said we have the exact same warrant to believe in the bodily assumption of mary as we have the resurrection of jesus christ because it's the authority of the church it's the authority of the church that is the fault that that's that's that's sola ecclesia that that is the only logical functional option to solo scriptura is sola ecclesia.

And that's where he's coming from. So the subject of the immaculate conception comes up because i think last week a video appeared um on facebook and it was a video hosted by sam shamoon and he had william albrecht on.

Now william albrecht and i i think did some we we had some type of debate at some point uh i think it was an online thing back before online there's there's probably three debates four debates going on online every single night anymore it is especially since the the panic of of 2020 the great shutdown of 2020 um that has become the thing it is now constant.

Um i'm not so sure about the quality of these debates to be perfectly honest with you i think it would be better to have a little stricter controls than a lot of these debates have. But anyway uh but it's become the big thing and so there is just so much online stuff if you you could just you don't you don't need netflix as long as you can get into youtube you you could spend every night just watching watching watching watching all sorts of stuff that's going on right now.

And this particular encounter was uh i don't know it was about what an hour and 40 minutes something like that. I forget exactly how long it was. Um and william albrecht has done all sorts of online stuff especially with turrets and fan.

I've lost track of how many encounters turrets and fan has had with william albrecht and my recollection is that three of those have been on the subject immaculate conception. I'm not sure how you do that more than once but because church history ain't going to change um much during our lifetimes uh but evidently they've gone back and forth on this numerous times and i've debated it more than once.

I don't think i've debated the same person. Well okay i'll take that back. Jerry and i the first debate we did on long island um on long island was the marion doctrines and so we don't we only we did four doctrines in one debate and so it was really really fast.

And then later we did just one whole debate just on the immaculate conception. So that's a little bit different but anyway um basically you had about uh i don't know it's about a 40 minute presentation from william albrecht and then uh since on youtube you can do the youtube chat thing and you've you've got questions being asked.

Uh there was no pushback. There was no um uh no there was no debate. It was just him presenting his position. Uh he did present it as de fide dogma. Um he presented it as being the well i think he specifically said the unanimous view of the early church which is just the opposite of what his own sources say.

And that's why i was such a shame. There's no pushback there is nobody who had the sources. I've got uh ludwig got sitting right here and uh and shoemaker and uh carol and uh oh carol as well as carol the two different carols uh sitting over here.

But there was no pushback there was no challenging to anything. He said his material was extremely flawed extremely flawed and anyone who knows church history knows that. But it was just presented as and he's going to be back on uh to make further presentations.

So i wanted to um talk about this subject to equip our current audience with what this dogma is and why. No person who knows anything about church history or the bible should ever believe it or would ever believe it.

If you just simply stood back and said i'm going to examine the bible and early church literature because this is a dogma that finds its origination with a british monk named edmer at the beginning of the 12th century.

That's where it started. That's where it started. That's those are the facts and that's agreed upon by almost all historians. It really is. You wouldn't you wouldn't realize that listening to william albrecht.

But let's start with this before even getting into the definition and stuff like that. Because that is important it is important that we understand this. If you think the immaculate conception has something to do with the virgin birth of jesus you're really confused.

You need to understand. I i would estimate i would estimate that 95 plus of non-roman catholics think the immaculate conception has to do with the virgin birth. That that'd be my guess unless you're a former roman catholic but i know i've taught i've run into many roman catholics nominal roman catholics have no clue what the immaculate conception is either.

So there you go. I mean honestly if i were to give a quiz right now to our regular audience how well do you think you do. How how much confidence do you have that you really understand what the concept of the immaculate conception is like i said it's defined in in effebellus deus that's the name of the papal pronouncements papal bull um from 1854.

So you can find online and you can you can read it for yourself including the anathema at the end if you reject it so as it was defined this isn't a take it or leave it type thing. This isn't a well you know it would be better if you believe this.

No you are anathematized. If you do not believe this the the the the the papacy of 1854. What was the date on the papal syllabus of errors. Look up papal syllabus of errors. I i used to have the it's very similar time frame.

Uh within a couple decades. One of the other i think it's actually afterwards um 18 what it 1864 or 54 64. So a decade later. Oh yeah. Yeah um so same time frame. Look up the papal syllabus of errors.

It is not ecumenical. It actually denounces religious freedom. But this was rome at the time. This was non-post-modern. We are the one true church. Uh that's right. That's within six years of papal infallibility so uh being pronounced so height of hubris on rome's part.

But it's not ecumenical. And so when they anathematize anyone in 1854 who would question this. They mean the real anathema not the new modern. Uh jimmy achanized. Uh we can all still get along and and be good brothers type stuff.

No that's. That's not what they believed then. And i know it's really common today just not not to be concerned about that. That's just you know. Let's just talk about how we feel about it today. But for those who are concerned about truth you want to truthfully understand what the original author is intended.

So you can look up an effable an effable day is for yourself. Read it for yourself. See what it says. Uh and if you do you will come to understand that what the dogma is about is about mary. Now what's interesting you.

And this actually came up in some of the questions that were asked. And one one questioner was spot on. You cannot understand the doctrine of immaculate conception if you do not understand the concept of original sin as enunciated by and taught by augustine which tells you something.

Um if you're going to say it goes all the way back to the apostles then those people saying that nobody before augustine believed in original sin have a problem. And i know at least one individual who promotes both ken wilson and this stuff.

They don't fit. They don't. You can't do both of them because the whole driving force behind the concept of the immaculate conception of mary is the concern about the concept of original sin you have developing in church history especially after the rise of the desert fathers in egypt in late second into the really flourishing the third century the pillar saints people like them you have a tremendous increase in mariology and eventually mariolatry with that is concurrent with the development of the monastic movement and the concept of celibacy.

So with that comes eventually the issues relating to the perpetual virginity of mary and the sinlessness of mary. Now the issue of the perpetual virginity of mary which we've again we've gone over all these things down through the years.

Uh but the perpetual virginity of mary one of the marian dogmas um teaches that mary did not lose her intact virginal physical virginal state in the birth of jesus which is a fundamental denial of the incarnation.

If jesus was not born as a man then he wasn't the godman. But if mary remains a virgin then jesus beamed out of mary. The first source that suggests anything like this is the protevangelium of james which is plainly gnostic in its orientation.

Plainly gnostic not. This isn't doesn't come from the apostles. You know i could find anything about this in scripture. It comes from outside the bible and outside the faith but is now a dogma within roman catholicism.

Um that also is. Therefore why rome denies why rome actually teaches that these grown men traveling around with mary are either actually not her children at all but are children of joseph by a previous wife or our cousins.

So the natural use of language that you would use when jesus heals peter's mother-in-law. We know what a mother-in-law is but we don't know what brothers are. We don't know what sisters are. Those words have to be redefined by a later doctrine and dogma.

That's what you have roman calls. And that's why rome denies sola scriptura. You would never come up with rome's unique doctrines if you practice sola scriptura. If you actually just listen to what the apostles themselves said it's not possible.

They have to come up with some other source. And that of the source is tradition which is whatever rome says it is they can never tell you. Here is tradition. It's whatever rome says. And in fact from an orthodox perspective today tradition now includes the immaculate conception bodily assumption papal infallibility and all the rest of that kind of stuff even though nobody the first 500 years of the church never even dreamed of any of it.

But anyway uh that's why we have to do these things. So the immaculate conception back to that the immaculate conception is the idea that mary from the very first moment of her conception is protected from the stain of original sin by a pre-emptive application of the grace and merit of the sacrifice of her son.

So there there is a reason for the language. Because after hundreds of years of argumentation the dominicans and franciscans were beating each other up over this stuff. They had competing visions of mary where where mary would show up for one group and say she's immaculately conceived and show up for the other group and say she wasn't.

So hey you know um it's sort of helpful to have all these visions of mary. Um and of course if this was apostolic why are all these people running around arguing about it. But church history has a way of messing with the nice clean categories that roman catholic apologists like to come up with anyway uh when it was finally defined it was defined with a recognition of what the key objections were.

I'm gonna give you a list eventually here we're gonna we are gonna get around this eventually. Uh you've got till six or seven tonight. Right. 10 12. Okay good. Um hey i i i took a picture outside his house this morning at 4 22 a .m.

Um because i did i did inferno ride number one where i i did a 50 mile ride this morning and it was we set a new record for yesterday 118 degrees. Uh yesterday so it was 100. It was still 102 at 1 a .m.

So it didn't drop into the 90s and yeah yeah it did. Yeah so i had i had i had decided that i was going to go by rich's house and do a stalker picture. Uh where i'm where i'm out. Yeah i'm doing the you know thing.

Ah you know uh you're asleep. Haha. And um and i was the only person moving around uh at that that time it was it was fun. Uh why did i say that. Um see you we we we totally fell off the thing there. See you've got to stop you've got to stop.

I think you did i'm i'm i'm gonna i'm gonna blame you for it but uh you know sorry. Um yes i yes i know um so the the immaculate conception is arguing they they knew what the i said what i said was i was gonna i'm gonna give you a list of people who taught against the immaculate conception which included thomas aquinas and bonaventura and just a huge number of people popes and early church fathers and john chrysostom and all these people had no concept so they already knew what the objections were.

So you word your you phrase your your your statement your wording so as to get around the primary objections that you already know exist. And so the definition is put in such a way that it will allow you to explain.