Seeking Consistency in our theological systems, then Open Phones

And welcome to the program this afternoon, my name is James. White beautiful day here in Phoenix, Arizona. We're actually currently it is 77 degrees. It has been beautiful recently we scheduled winter in for a day or two and now we're into spring and Will be for the next couple months, and then it just goes from there.

It's I had to turn the air conditioning on in the car today once I got into it. It was a little bit on the warm side. That's just the way things are out here, and now the days start getting longer. It starts getting hotter, and that's just how it works anyways.

Welcome to the dividing line today. Our phone number here is eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one eight seven seven seven five three thirty three forty one is the toll-free number for You to participate in the program today.

When people ask Concerning the topic of the program which happens frequently. I have a little pop-up. I just simply type slash topic, and it says the topic is religious stuff. That's how I avoid Spending the entire last half hour Doing one of two things either explaining what the topics going to be which I generally don't know at that particular point in time or explaining how to tell time.

And the differences between time zones those are the two things that would take up the half-hour between 1 30 and 2 o 'clock every day. Every Saturday that is when we do the dividing line because they're just there's just issues there.

I'm not really sure what they are but anyways And many times I don't really have a specific topic. If I have been working on if you know if I've got someone's recorded program if I had For example Downloaded a Catholic answers radio program or something I'd have certain clips and so sometimes we have specific Topics that that we're ready to address, and I won't be taking phone calls, but we will take phone calls today at eight seven seven seven five three Thirty three forty one the only Specific thing on my on my mind today as I was thinking about the program Was the fact that As as I've been dealing with things this week dealing with various issues.

Upcoming debates and looks like in fact. I just got an email just a few minutes ago. I haven't even had a chance to finish reading it somebody wants to debate on Seventh-day Adventism, and I just I just Not not at all Interested in that as they would see which one they want to talk about Sabbath Sabbath Sabbath that's all I want to talk about and and In fact this guy looks familiar dr. Samuel Paciocchi, but Paciocchi, whatever graduate from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome.

That must have been interesting. No, I have absolutely no interest in that particular topic at all anyways. But we have possibilities of other topics as well. Many debates coming up this this coming year no no two ways about it.

But as I've been thinking about those issues the consistency the need for consistency in theology has again Crossed my mind as something that's extremely important and I Have to admit there are times when I I Talk about this subject, and I can just see the the eyes rolling on the part of certain individuals.

And I can see this in classes not not really in in my church thankfully. But I can see In in many places where I go and I'm asked to speak I can see the eyes rolling and I can see people going how they sort of do the The watch check thing you know where you sort of look at it, and you go well You know this guy can't be he won't be at this.

You know forever. He won't be doing this for too long and That kind of thing takes place the problem is that this this should be something. Oh someone just mentioned that that fellow wrote their big text from Sabbath to Sunday, that's nice.

Well, you know let me let me mention something right there. You know so I might say well, then why don't you debate him? Because I don't debate all topics. I've never studied that issue not my issue. I I suppose I could someday but you know one of the one of the struggles that I have is Maintaining balance in the sense that there's no way that anyone could ever meaningfully or with with any type of proficiency debate every issue there is to debate and In some ways I have to wonder if we haven't gotten about as wide as any one person could get as far as the number Topics that we that we address At least as far as single individual I suppose that a larger ministry would have a staff of individuals that could specialize in particular areas might be able to do more of course, but we're a we're a two-horse show and I do the debating and You know people you you should debate everything well I couldn't I don't have any special.

I'm not Superman. I don't have any special ability to Just all of a sudden I'm gonna go debate this and I'm gonna go to debate that all the time I do when you do something about Eastern Orthodoxy. Well, I don't know that I ever will.

You need to do more on Islam. Well, I Always want to go exactly how often have you support this ministry and generally they the people who said never have but What I just it's a it's a it's a balance.

It really is to find the balance between You know really trying to be way too general and giving surface level answers and not being able to provide a meaningful response. Or being so narrow that you only discuss one particular subject and even with a number of the groups.

Well, for example, you'll never ever ever hear me debating a Roman Catholic on birth control. There are different views amongst Protestants on that subject. I don't consider it a definitional issue on the gospel.

You're never gonna hear me debating it. Same thing with Sabbath issues with the Seventh-day Adventist or or things like that. Now, I would probably Be willing to debate a Seventh-day Adventist on the investigative judgment because that has to do with what?

Well with the Atonement, of course. It has to do with the nature of the Atonement the effect of the Atonement the purpose of the Atonement. You know all sorts of things like that. Yeah, that would be an excellent topic.

I I would I would expand myself out. As as mr. Pierce has just noted it would be worth my time to debate the evils of cloning Chris Arnson, I think that would be Something that would be worth debating.

I'm not sure who we'd get to take the other side that particular debate. But anyways, uh That's not nice to pick on poor Chris he's not even channel right now at least I don't think he's in channel I don't Know.

Well, I was gonna remember going out to the for the Java man. Nope. He's not in channel right now. So that's it's not nice to pick on Chris, but anyways, um. Who I don't even know who I'm not even gonna say that.

I don't know that. Oh, oh you mean the wacky Raelian check? Yeah. Wasn't wasn't she fun? But I tell you the Raelians took a black eye this this past couple weeks, didn't they man? Yes, we've cloned someone Boy.

It's almost like they have have cult just tattooed across their foreheads. Man they are who they are. Mmm, they're quite the interesting group. But anyways. Now you've got now you've got me completely and totally lost now.

Yes. The sprint man should visit her. Yes, she's definitely using cellular. She needs she needs a new new phone. There's no no tways, but I like that guy that guy is really cool. He's got best facial expressions there.

Well, okay. I was talking about something now. I haven't the foggiest Was talking about no I remember what I was talking about talking about to try and remain focused on on stuff and how many people. When you get it right on this and when you get it right on that and when you get right on this and how about this topic and I and sometimes I'll have to admit I get a little frustrated and it's and I Feel like saying well, when are you gonna write on it?

I mean, I mean, I I didn't know that other folks had a had it had the ability to tell me what I was supposed to write on but anyways, I Do try to maintain some sort of balance there and who is who am I talking to?

I don't know what I'm talking to. Theo. It's I'm just sort of rambling on at this particular point in time. But I was actually initially trying to start with a discussion of the consistency of theology and the need to have consistent theology and the issue actually arose as I was considering various the topics that I am writing on and that I am studying at the moment and I was considering how rare it is for people to Have as even a part of their thinking.

The idea is this belief that I am examining consistent with the rest of my theological system. How many evangelicals in the United States when considering religious truth at all if it is considered at all?

Ask that question seek consistency in some form sadly very few. It's no wonder then that we can remember a number of weeks ago We read that Barna survey and there is just you know The people are all over the road as far as their beliefs were concerned grossly inconsistent with themselves concerning what they believe and Why well because very few of them are ever challenged to actually value consistency in theology.

We're very much Western in our thinking and I've mentioned many many times the danger of of Pigeonholing or chicken holing our theology as in in Western culture. We have one belief about this area of life and one belief about that area of life.

And we never we never bring them close to one another to see whether they are Consistent with one another at all and so our doctrine of the church can be utterly separate from our doctrine of God or our doctrine of the cross or our Doctrine of the sovereignty of God and and all sorts of things like that.

We don't see that all these things are related to one another because let's face it it takes work to create a Consistent theology we always have to be thinking through things and some people might say well in fact if you go that direction Aren't you always uncertain?

Aren't you telling people they always need to be uncertain about their theology? No, I'm not saying they always have to be uncertain about their theology. There are certain things that are certain. There are certain things that are absolutely positively firm in in their truthfulness, they're absolutely positively firm in their Centrality to the Christian faith, and it's it's not a matter of constantly questioning everything but If we are seeking consistency if we are seeking consistency in our theological system We will recognize our traditions, and we will recognize when our traditions impact Our theology and our thinking and if we're not seeking for tradition.

I'm sorry if we're not seeking consistency. We will not recognize when tradition in essence rears its ugly head and Does what tradition wants to do and tends to do and that is tradition? Always seeks to cloak itself as if it is dogmatic truth.

Traditions want to look like they have been revealed by God in essence and If we are not aware of the role of tradition, and if we are not seeking consistency in our own theological system then those traditions can become enshrined as if they are in fact the Word of God itself and The result well the result is Always the same and we've seen in examining for example Dave Hunt's material exactly what happens when you enshrine your traditions so that They can no longer be questioned anymore, and so we need to seek that tradition and seek that consistency keep mixing those two words up.

And one of the issues that one of the reasons this crossed my mind is I'm I'm writing a chapter on church governance and I'm presenting the viewpoint of the plurality of elders and I'm you know I'm again I Some I was I was talking with An individual from another faith this past week who knew of me but didn't know me personally just had heard things about me, which is always a dangerous thing and The the topic came up, and I basically said you know I don't know what you've heard about me, but I personally I'm much more interested in Presenting a positive case for what I believe than in what anybody else believes.

I'm not one of those people that's you know there are certain people who are just totally focused on one religious group or another religious group and Their whole life is wrapped up in negativity, and that's that's not me my the reason that I I Engage in any type of attack upon other faith is because that faith in a positive way attacks the truth it's out of a love for the truth that I that I do that and So I Think that helped that person understand a little bit about me anyways and so Because of that I do things that most apologists wouldn't do that aren't necessarily wise what I mean by that well I'll use myself as an example here where I had a tradition that I had never examined and Someone could end up turning that on me at some time in the future.

I suppose, but that's fine. That's life. That's the way it goes. I grew up in a theological tradition That had a particular church structure and Like most people no one had to no one had to cram this into my brain.

But like most people I In essence How do I put this I've seen this I've seen this in my kids for example when you get used to One particular way of doing things, okay? You Find other ways of doing it to be strange, and if it's a religious thing maybe even wrong Wrong simply because it's well.

It's different And different well difference not good see and That that's you know. I think you all can understand exactly what I'm saying there. And so I knew that other churches did things in other ways but I had never really invested any time in and asking why and What was more I had never really put a whole lot of time into asking the question is the way that we do things necessarily the biblical way.

So I grew up in a standard Evangelical Baptist type of a context and for those of you who come from a different perspective Most Baptist churches that are not reformed Baptist churches practice a single pastor slash staff style of autonomous local church governance and The issue of elders and deacons becomes extremely problematic in Most churches especially most Southern Baptist churches in most Southern Baptist churches.

And my teenagers were spent in a very large Southern Baptist Church in most Southern Baptist churches you have a pastor then you have a staff and then you have deacons and The deacons in essence function as the as the elders, but under the pastor and I wasn't exactly I had to admit.

It was it was a little confusing to me because we had women on the staff and The men on the staff like the the the Minister of Education the the ubiquitous youth minister. The The singles minister the music minister the media minister.

I mean once you get into these megachurches you've got a minister for you know the the four to five year old nurse the four to five year old Preschool minister and the minister of parking lots and the minister of buses, and I mean there's there's you know ministers for everything and We sort of viewed them as as pastors sort of but not really.

Because we didn't ordain women as as pastors, but we did have women on. We had like a well the the the individual that was the singles minister the church knows that was a woman and So it wasn't like they were really Ordained as a minister, but we called them the minister of but we did said we didn't believe in women ministers in that sense and then the deacons.

Well I Never did quite figure out what the deacons were but the the deacons got together and voted on things and did things that was true. But but they could be overridden by the pastor. So the pastor it was sort of a monarchial monarchical.

There was a monarch. There was there was one person at the top who really Ran things in essence and Was Had had the final say in all things. And I remember going to to Bible College, and it was a Southern Baptist Bible College.

And so there really wasn't a whole lot of discussion of that particular issue in essence, but as I started looking at the New Testament and And started the process of being challenged to be consistent in my theology.

That's when I started noting that well, you know. Yeah, there are pastors and teachers in in in the New Testament. No question about that. But it seems that the first thing that the Apostles did when they would when they would establish a church.

Was they would. They would ordain elders for that church in fact Paul even makes this a priority the book of Acts records him doing this and so It wasn't the term elder either. It was elders. It was plural and I started seeing if what is this is pretty consistent.

They they're consistently doing this. I wonder if there's more to this and then I started realizing well, you know this overseers and elders that that's the same office because the Qualifications for both are the same and All you have to do is follow the usage of the terms through and and it's it's definitely that that's the same office.

So you have these elders these overseers in the local church and then you have deacons. But the deacons are not just mini elders. There's a clear differentiation between them and so Keeping that in mind.

I started going. Well, where did where do we get the the the idea there and that we have all these different positions like the Minister of this and the minister of that and and yet there's only one pastor and that pastor is sort of the you know in charge of everything where did where did all this stuff come from and Then that that dreaded thought crosses your mind.

I Wonder if it's important for us to think about this. Well, yeah, I guess it is because we're talking about the way God has designed his church to be organized and He would be the one to know the best way to do this and that's when you start realizing just how much human wisdom goes into tradition and Yet when you start talking to folks about it, you discover how quickly people get very very very Emotionally involved in their traditions and there's not a lot of willingness to really discuss tradition and What tradition Role is and and how we how we examine tradition and things like that.

That's not really that's not really encouraged in in a lot of churches these days and I can become uncomfortable and then the other Attitude pops up and this is this is the one that That I might talk about a little bit more if we don't get folks doing much calling in today, it's eight seven seven seven five three three three forty one and That is we go.

Well, wait a minute if if if the Bible says that we are to have this kind of Form in the church or were to do teach this kind of thing and and so on and so forth and so forth. If we don't do it that way Wow, are we really saved?

There's all sudden this jump and That's I really think this is exactly what the scriptures were talking about When they when Paul said knowledge puffs up Knowledge puffs up knowledge without love Puffs up it makes us It Makes us proud of what we know and because we know it then we figure everybody else should know it and Because we know it then we figure everybody should acknowledge that we in fact do know it and That breeds a Very un-christian attitude it breeds an attitude that really Contradicts the fundamental truth of God's grace and the fundamental truths of of of What grace accomplishes in our lives and I was I was thinking about someone just recently and along these lines they had contacted me about someone I've had in the program and and They were saying did you know that this has happened to this person's life.

And you know this person quotes from this person and and I guess Once I started asking some questions this particular individual who? As far as I could tell from initial contact is just a plain old reformed Baptist somewhere up in the Northeast Starts ripping on people like John MacArthur and John Piper.

And very quickly what I What I realized Was that This is one of those folks that demands absolute doctrinal unanimity. If you don't believe exactly as this individual believes and everything then obviously you are you are.

Well, you're missing the boat and You know, I don't believe every single thing the John MacArthur has ever said. I'm no longer a dispensationalist. I was raised as a dispensationalist, but I'm not any longer and I would disagree with a number of tenants of even a mild dispensational theology.

But hey, let's give John MacArthur tremendous kudos for the fact that here is a man who is so humble before the Word of God. He's willing to change his views. He's willing to say you know what I was wrong about that for example, he He changed his perspective.

I can hear whatever you're doing over there rich really clearly in my headphones. Just say you might want to know that He he used to deny the eternal Sonship of Christ. He held to a incarnational Sonship perspective similar to Walter Martins and Over time a number of individuals Talking to him and studying and and and he was he was a four-pointer too and and the exegesis of second Corinthians chapter 5 To recognize the reality of particular redemption and and he was willing to come come out with that knowing That there were all these these fundamentalist Baptists.

It would just rip his head off For things that I mean Everybody loves to attack the guy with the big ministries. I love going after John MacArthur of course and He's he's been willing to To change his perspectives and And do so publicly and say you know what?

I don't have it all figured out. I You know, I I I've studied this and this is the conclusion. I've come to give him kudos for that. Well, this individual is going after MacArthur. He's going after Piper and I I don't you know John Piper's written awesome wonderful stuff.

Do I agree with every single thing? He says no, I don't know almost anybody that I agree with 100 of the time. But if I Gracious if I stopped If I stopped Listening to people learning from people benefiting from people.

Because I disagreed with them on some some point somewhere I wouldn't listen to anybody. I Wouldn't I wouldn't have any communion with with anybody. I wouldn't have any fellowship with anybody. It's just I Don't understand that that mindset that people develop that well, you know.

That person once once said that well give an example that person once said that DL Moody Was a great man of God, well, we know Moody wasn't reformed therefore that person's terrible and I just I look at that and I go.

Okay, I don't understand that that mindset. I really really don't and it is not attractive. It is not attractive at all. And I I have a hard time with with folks Who take that perspective. 877 -753 -3341 Is our phone number if you would like to be on the program today?

Give us a call and we'll be continuing our discussion right after this. And welcome back to dividing line 877 -753 -3341. I must sound kind and loving today because a few folks actually Called it I've decided that's I Didn't say a biker dressed like a Furby.

I said a Furby dressed like a biker good grief. I'm being falsely accused in the channel right and you right now being an anti-fur bite and If anyone doesn't know an anti-fur bite is I would suggest you ask Pete from Canada.

Pete from Canada is weird. But we love Pete from Canada because we're not for Pete from Canada. You would not be listening to the dividing line live right now but Pete from Canada is is a is a Furby fanatic and He says I'm an anti-fur bite now.

We do have an anti-fur bite in the channel. That's the offeress and the offeress comes up with numerous interesting ways of dispatching Furby's. Most of which are probably illegal and But I don't think that Furby's are yet under controlled under the Animal Protection Act stuff they probably will be eventually if liberals have their way besides Pete's in Canada, and we all know about Canada.

Anyways, but I'm not an anti-fur bite, and I told Pete that if he sent me a Furby Oh Theo lurks tosses a Furby in a blender see there you go that there. There's how it works. If If Pete sent me a Furby dressed like a biker.

Then I would I would I would proudly put the Furby right here on my desk. And I would actually take a picture of me and the Furby with the There has to be a biker Furby. Otherwise, it's not it's not happening so there you go Pete.

There's see he's spreading his anti-fur bite rhetoric. What was you must see you're a classic liberal. You can turn any statement into its negation. Without even giving a reason why you're doing it classic classic liberalism.

There's there's a good example of it right there. Anyways, I am the foggiest idea what that has to do with anything, but hey it's It's it's what was going on the channel, which is sort of strange and sad all at the same time all right.

We have had a few folks who have All right everyone behave in there, let's be nice. Who have taken the time to call eight seven seven seven five three 33 41 is the phone number and let's go ahead and start with Jonna first hello.

How are you doing? I can hear you. Great. Oh good. I can. I just mostly wanted to thank you for your book dumb the powders freedom. For a long time I Had a hard time like understanding or defending the L and limited atonement and It was really I guess what I never realized even though I had gone and taken college like theology in college I never realized that like Armenians don't believe in a true substitutionary atonement and I guess.

So I just mostly want to thank you for your book and everything.

Let me explain that for folks who aren't I haven't maybe read the book that's one of the things I pointed out in the book. Was that at least historical? Armenians do not believe in the theory of substitutionary atonement.

They take a governmental view because they recognize that if Christ actually bears in his own body the sins of all People then there would be no basis for the condemnation of anyone. They recognize that God would not engage in the injustice of double jeopardy of punishing upon someone else the The sins that were already punished upon Christ and so they they rejected that most people today who are not reformed.

But who reject elements of reformed theology? May be Armenian. But they are a minion without knowing in essence that they are a minion and that that sort of ties in with what I was saying before and that is that they have a tradition, but they haven't necessarily.

Examined that particular tradition. Yeah. Yeah. No, and um, yeah, I actually looked up some of the references because I was like it just. Sounds strange. Yeah, sure. Sure. You know, it's just like well, wow, they really am.

Um, I happen to attend college at a Wesleyan school when he teaches sinless perfection. And I know that they defined sin is a voluntary transgression of a known law of God. To your knowledge do pretty much all Armenians.

Define sin in that way as far as you know, or well at least again, you have to identify whether you're talking about theologians who would self-professedly identify themselves as Armenians or if we're talking about your standard evangelical who has the Armenian traditions, but but doesn't realize that they you know, they have never looked at them and really examined them and.

Yeah, I would say that's primarily the the Armenian perspective. There are differences between us as far as the issue of our view of man's sin and man's Depravity and the extent of that depravity and the nature of that depravity they certainly wouldn't take that passage from Proverbs.

Or I think it's in the King James. The the rendering is the the plowing of the sinner is an abomination to God that is. Because because he's not doing it to the glory of God. They wouldn't take that perspective.

That would be too radical for most of them to to embrace right? Yeah. Well, anyway, thank you. Well, thank you very much for reading it. I it really wouldn't help anybody if you didn't read it. Thanks a lot.

8 7 7 7 5 3 33 41. The entire channel is right now. Mocking Pete and Pete is very easy to mock. But he's helping out at the moment and he really needs to learn how to not do that. But anyhow, oh. We have an another Canadian online, oh no.

Okay, before we bring him on let me let me do a little practicing here. Okay. We need to need to get ready here for anyone from from Canada and Could you come in here and turn the AC down to like 47? That'll that'll make it feel a little bit more like like Canada.

So, okay. Let's go ahead and talk with James in Canada. Hello. Hey, how are you? I'm sorry. Am I I shouldn't do that. I I'm a very politically incorrect person. However, okay. Did you know that Pete's a Canadian?

That's it's it's a scary thing but yeah, he's he's a Canadian too. Yeah. Are there are there more than two of you up there? Well, you know, I'm in Texas, right? And you have fled to the to the land of.

Well, let's not get into Texas right now, that'd be a bad thing anyways, yes, sir.

My question is I guess it's kind of in regards to limited atonement and I guess the moral will of God This has been suggested to me and I think maybe a derivation of it is actually taught by John Piper.

And I was wondering if I could get your perspective. Okay If the argument goes like this It's that because God I think it's just an axe chapter 17 that God now commands men everywhere to repent. Mm-hmm, and so everybody Everybody has been commanded to accept the gospel and Because God always desires that men follow his commands that God desires that all men be saved and They would use that to say well that that's what the passage I believe first Timothy and that's what.

That's what second Peter saying not wishing for any to perish. Yeah. Yeah, there's some reformed folks John Murray who would understand first Timothy 2 for in second Peter 3 9 as referring to The same kind of will in God that it is not God's will that anyone should murder.

Or that anyone should commit adultery or or that type of thing in essence God has revealed His law he's revealed his will in his law and therefore That this is in reference to this this kind of will. The there's really two different issues there and and that is I think it's proper to recognize The fact that you can I think profit from Seeing the will of God In two different ways in the sense that there is the perfect prescriptive will of God Contained in his law and then there is obviously the decree of God Which included very clearly according to Acts chapter 4 the crucifixion of Christ Which would then have had to included have included within it numerous other things.

There's everything good in recognizing that the reason I disagree in regards to second Timothy or first Timothy chapter 2 and second Peter 3 9 is not because I necessarily disagree with the Formulation regards to the will of God.

It's an exegetical issue. I haven't seen A response from someone who holds that perspective. I haven't heard a response exegetically to the fact that in second first Timothy chapter 2 You have within the context both before and after Paul is talking about kinds of men.

He's talking about types of men. He's talking about rulers and those in authority. He's talking about older men and younger men and older women and younger women and slaves and masters. And he's using all this generic language why he would in that one place all sudden switch from generic to some sort of universal individualistic language and Then you also have the difficulty there of explaining how Jesus Christ is The mediator for those who will not experience God's mercy is is Christ actually seeking to Appease the father's wrath on behalf of individuals that the father has specifically chosen not to save is there is there Something in the Godhead here where there's a there's a contradiction going on something along those lines, I don't know but that that becomes part of the issue and.

So I just have not seen a an exegesis of those passages that takes into consideration for example particular redemption in in sanctity to the idea of Why don't keep saying sanctity first Timothy chapter 2 the idea of mediation things at that same thing with second Peter 3 9.

I haven't seen An exegesis that follows the pronouns and the context and the purposes of Peter. And explains why all of a sudden there would be this this statement of this Universal salvific will in in the context in which it is it is found so it's not from my perspective so much an issue of The proper recognition of the will of God as it is exegesis those particular passages.

Would you feel comfortable saying that because God desires that men follow his commands and God commands men to repent that in that sense?

God desires all men to be saved. Well you when you say when you use the term desire God commands men everywhere to repent of that there is no question. The problem is I like to try to be a little bit a little bit more specific in the use of terminology and when you use Relation of his law and so I wouldn't utilize that that terminology.

I don't see that anything is gained from utilizing that particular terminology. God commands men everywhere to repent and as such holds them accountable for their continued sinful rebellion against him.

But that does not for me anyways translate into the assertion that. That you know if you use the term desire in that way then what term are you going to use to discuss? God's desire for the salvation of his elect people.

I Mean you can't what other word is there. I mean you know that's that's the problem as far as I see it is it. You you then have to start using words in multiple ways and you know that I Don't see the Bible using that particular word in two different ways.

I do see it using will in two different ways and so I'll stick with the biblical usage rather than worrying about the other one. Okay, okay, man. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. Bye. Bye. Hey.

See a I know is a I was going a but it was a it's all right. Anyone else call nobody else call. That's a shame it'd be really nice if someone else would Would call at eight seven seven seven five three three three forty one two good calls right there.

And before the end of the program too that was the amazing part That that would happen. You know that early on in the in the program those folks wait until the you know anyways. What were you discussing we were discussing beforehand the relationship of of Theology do I see two wills and a guy I don't even understand that question.

That Nick looks Looks very familiar to me. I'm going to do a little who is here. Do you do to do where is it? Oh there it is. Hmm the rural theologian, that's interesting. Ha. Anyways We were discussing the role of theology and and and I was talking about Well, I was talking about obnoxious Calvinist is what I was talking about.