Gained Respect For Justin Giboney (Part 4) - Good Faith Disaster

All right, all right, all right, let's do this. We're gonna jump back into this racial injustice good faith debate. We're about halfway through this debate, unfortunately, which means that we have a lot further to go.

So we'll see how far we get today. Before I begin though, let me just say this. You guys watched Conversations That Matter yesterday? I think it was yesterday. I watched it yesterday. I'm pretty sure it was yesterday that he posted it.

But John Harris, man, the beginning of that episode, he's responding to, I don't know if it's a sermon or just a talk that someone from Ligonier gave about, it was supposed to be about socialism and statism, but it ended up being just a, hey, lay your weapons down conservatives kind of a thing.

And John was fired up, man. Listen, well, fired up for John. I'll say that. John Harris was fired up in his terms. But actually I messaged him right after I listened to that and just to encourage him, you know, and I think it's actually very related to the video I did yesterday where it's like, you know, I don't think evangelicals problem is that we're too involved in politics or too aggressive or too outraged.

I think actually we have the opposite problem. You know what I mean? We're falling in the passivity ditch. We don't need someone to encourage us to be more passive. In any case, definitely give it a watch on John Harris's Conversations That Matter podcast.

Yeah, yeah. I think that's all I have for introductory materials. I didn't go fishing today because yeah, trying to scale back how much I go out. Got other work to do. In any case, so let's jump right into this and we will begin.

Abortion, Racial Injustice, and Binding Consciences

To the point, and I think it goes back exactly to this point.

By the way, this is not a beer. I was asked yesterday if I was drinking a beer and it's not a beer. It's way too early to be drinking a beer not on vacation. This is a La Croix seltzer water. I was drinking one yesterday too.

And you know, to be honest, these are overrated. Most of the flavors are horrible, but this flavor, Guava Sao Paulo, Guava Sao Paulo, it's really good. It's really good.

I like this. Point of dignity. So if we're, let's say an all white church and this is 1955 and we have somebody who's black who wants to come join the church. I have zero problems burdening the church to say, we must bring them into membership or we should excommunicate everybody else.

It's gonna be a little bit different as we might talk about how we must process a particular shooting, or I think maybe even just particular calls of action. Even our brother was talking about how do we best equip people to, you know, restoratively.

I think there's gonna be a vast disagreement on how that happens. And I'm gonna not feel as free pastorally to bind people's consciences to particular acts in that way. So I think the more vivid and the more clear the opportunity is, I think we should feel a like manner, clear and vivid application of binding their consciences, calls to action in that regard.

So I'm gonna pull on that thread just a little bit. So let's, another debate that we have had is abortion. We've talked about different aspects of abortion. So institutionally, you would agree that that is, that would be something that institutionally the church should rally around and behind.

And if so, how is that different than something that would be a clear racial injustice, even if people in your church disagreed?

Okay, so this is a great question, a surprisingly good question from this guy. Cause actually, I actually used a very similar example in the last video. I talked about how, you know, we're already at the point of things being as bad as they can be.

Cause you know, people like to use the example of the Nazis. Well, if we were in Nazi Germany or in the slave times, you know, well, of course we'd wanna bind the conscious. But we're already there. We're already there.

Abortion is 10 times worse than the Holocaust. Abortion is 10 times worse than slavery. And by the way, I'm not using exact figures. It's just a figure of speech, 10 times worse. So that's a great question.

So let's see how he answers it. Because what he just said about, you know, you gotta make a judgment call, you know, and maybe in 1955, you know, you gotta excommunicate people for not allowing a black person in membership, but you know, processing these shootings and stuff like that, you know, Bible doesn't really speak about what to do in the case of a murder.

I mean, why would we bind people's conscience in that way?

Well, I mean, well, in one sense, those are kind of two different questions. To say that abortion is a sin, I think, again, you're talking about Christians, absolutely. That's a first tier issue, right?

You can't murder people, right? And that's affirmed you as a believer. How do people best process that? Particularly in this, there were, you know, some people say, you know, it's a sin to be a Democrat, like point blank.

And so when it started getting to that kind of parsed application, right? Or you must go to this particular one if you're going to love Jesus. That's where like, well, there's actually, we all need to hold the principle, but there's actually a lot more freedom in terms of how we hold that principle that we need.

Do you remember when I said that this man will never find an issue where he's going to take a hard stance? He can take hard stances on things in the past. This is endemic amongst evangelical leaders. They can take hard stances and pretend like, I would have been on the side of the abolitionists back in slave times.

I would have been the one pastor in Germany to say no to the third Reich. And they're full of it. They're full of it. This is all just LARPing, live action role-play is what it is. They're role-playing a courageous, faithful, you know, immovable man of God.

They're role-playing. Because in the one issue that is 10 times worse, where the Bible is crystal clear what to do in the case of murder, murdering your own child, whatever it is, the Bible is crystal clear what to do, what we should be promoting, what we should say about it.

It's crystal clear. And this man is now hemming and hawing, because he has to, because he's actually a coward. He actually has no scruples. There is no backbone in this man. There's only backbone in the issues of yesterday, right?

The issues that he has no part in. The issues of slavery, he wasn't alive back then. The issues of being a pastor in 1955, he wasn't a pastor back then. The issues of the Nazis, he wasn't back in Germany back then.

So he's very brave and has scruples and will stand for the truth boldly as a lion for issues that he has no part in. But the minute you have to risk your skin and say no to the Nazis before they become a force, right?

No to the Nazis before they're the totalitarian dictators of the land. The minute that that's what happens, when you actually have some skin in the game, he's gonna hem and haw and say, yeah, we gotta hold onto the principle of not killing Jews because they're Jews.

But how that process is and works out and all that, well, that's debatable. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We have to hold onto the principle of not kidnapping people so that you can sell them into slavery. But how that works itself out, if you wanna own some slaves, you wanna, maybe if you don't kidnap them, but you buy them from someone who kidnapped them, hey, we can agree to disagree.

See, that's the thing. These guys are all full of it. Because the Bible is crystal clear. This is what my talk is gonna be about. It's gonna be about guys like this. Guys like this, abject cowards in our time.

There is no, and by the way, this is also what John Harris's video was about yesterday, where he said, and this is something, I don't know who coined this, but this is something I've been talking about for years, wartime leaders versus peacetime leaders.

Honestly, we've never been at peacetime, but at least it wasn't open warfare back then. This guy would probably be okay when the warfare isn't open warfare. You know, he talks about the gospel. That's great, right?

That's great. But the thing is, the applications of that gospel and the applications of the moral, holy, righteous law of God, he didn't have to risk anything in those ways back when the warfare wasn't open warfare.

But now people are losing their jobs when they don't use pronouns. Now, taxes are funding abortions and states are trying to make abortion a part and parcel of their state constitution. Now there's some skin in the game.

Now there's some risk. And this guy is worthless as a leader when there's skin in the game, when your job is on the line, when your family's on the line, when your health is on the line. This guy does not have the backbone to say anything.

This guy asked a lethal question to this man. Good for you. Good for you. I'm not sure if he did it for the right reasons, but he asked a question that was lethal to this guy's system. Abortion is 10 times worse than slavery and Nazis.

So it should be very easy to say, oh yeah, of course, institutionally, the church should be for banning abortion, punishable as a murder if you commit it and murder for hire for someone who hires somebody to do it.

But he has to hem and haw. He has to. He has no choice because he's a coward. That's why he has no choice. You actually do have a choice, but it requires you to have some kind of a spine. To be really, really careful with.

So Be really, really careful when your skin is on the line. But the issues back then when other people had to fight those battles, but then you could be, you don't have to be quite as careful. You can draw clear distinctions from the Bible and all of a sudden you figured out how to interpret the Bible.

See, it's easy to interpret the Bible when you don't have anything to risk. But the minute you have something to risk, all of a sudden people are looking, they're on Google saying, what about, does the Bible really talk about abortion?

Looking for any excuse. Looking for any excuse. The minute you have to put your own skin on the line. People said it's a sin to vote. Damn it, can you believe it? This man would have been back in Nazi Germany saying, can you believe people think it's a sin to be a Nazi?

Can you believe it? Coward, an absolute abject grade. A coward.

That's what I'm saying. I think, no, we all need to agree with that principle. Human dignity. We all need to agree on that principle. A life is not less valuable based on what color skin it has, right?

No, it's made, like whoever's made in the image of God is worth that dignity, period, right? You didn't ask about skin color, you asked about abortion. Abortion is wrong. You can't kill somebody, right?

We think that's a basic application of loving life. How we go about working that out as it relates to policy or organizing.

Yeah, you know, abortion is one of those things we have to agree on, but if you vote to continue abortion and to constitutionalize it in your state, that might be, that might turn out to be the best way forward to limit abortions, by the way, to make it totally legal, not to protect them according to the law of God.

No, no, no, that might be the, we gotta agree to disagree. We gotta process it. Process it. As in ourselves. You don't have to process it. You need to kneel before the king. You need to submit yourself to the word of God.

Process it.

Give me a break. What people even do with that, whether it's just a matter they pray about all the time or there's all different kinds of ways that saints can do good works responding to that principle.

So I'm hearing from both of you, really, that when we talk about primary and secondary issues, racism is a sin. That's a primary issue. That's a dignity issue. Sometimes how we go forward can be confusing and there might be room to disagree on the way forward.

I do, is that a fair statement?

I'll go you, Justin. I think it's fair. I just, I think it hurts this conversation and we don't dig as deep as we could when we keep it in the abstract.

We talk about what could have happened. Yeah, yeah, you don't say. Jackie Childs over here, again, is a smart man. And my prediction is he's gonna be the one to dig deeper. He's gonna be the one to push his narrative forward and the conservative is gonna melt into a puddle of goo.

If you go back to the first video on this series, that's what I predicted. And I think this is about where it's gonna start because even the moderator can see there is no debate here. There's no debate.

This is not a good faith debate. It's not in good faith and it's not a debate. They agree on everything. But now Jackie's gonna push the issue and what do you want to bet that there will be no pushback?

And if there is, it'll be minor, like I'm concerned, I'm worried, stuff like that. Let's talk about what the church has done.

And what the church hasn't done. Historically, I think I laid out a pretty good case that the church has failed in this area, that the problem wasn't just outside, the problem was inside. And I think one of the problems that we have, even the way that was presented today, is you say

The Church, the World, and Historical Repentance

He's trying to bring it back to the issues. This is the thing. Jackie Chiles is a smart man and he's not a coward. He might be working for the wrong side, working for the wrong team, promoting evil, but he's not a coward, that's for sure.

The church were doing good.

We're never gonna change what's outside. But I would remind, especially my ideologically conservative brothers and sisters, that it was the world and the black church and the left that had to force the church to do anything on justice.

When it comes to ideological conservatives that have never given an inch on racial justice unless being forced by the world's laws to do so. That is shameful. We should feel some type of way about that.

So I hope We should feel some type of way about that because that's insane what you've just said. That's insane that the world is tutoring the church of Jesus Christ, the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords, the world, the pagan system, the satanic system is schooling Jesus's people on how to be good, on how to be good.

And this man is just gonna sit here and nod his head. Yeah, brother, you right, brother, you right. It's unbelievable. It's hard to believe. This series, I've said this many times. I had low expectations, very low.

I had low expectations about what these good faith debates would be. And somehow Gospel Coalition has met my low expectations and found a way to dig even further down into the depths of uselessness and just evil ideas and cowardice, really.

Every single conservative with the exception of Klusendorf, which even he had his problems, but every single one with the exception of Klusendorf was an abject coward. And I haven't watched the Andrew T. Walker one.

So I'm not talking about that one either. It's unreal. This guy's got to jump on that. What do you mean that the world has taught the church how to be good? What does the world know about being good? I mean, does not the Bible say that man's heart is just evil continually?

Does not the Bible say that? Doesn't Paul lay out a pretty good case for the wickedness of the world, the world system, the pagans? Yeah, I'm sure, Justin, that in your psychotic mind, that it makes a lot of sense that the world that can't figure out, hey, you shouldn't kill children, somehow can figure out how best to do racial justice.

I'm sure that makes sense to you, but I promise you that doesn't make any sense.

Hope that slows us down a little bit when we compare. Of course we know what the world is and all that, but why did it take the world to make that change internally?

When we start thinking about Because the change internally so often is absolutely evil. It's not the right kind of change. It's not the right kind of change. That's why. Because the ideas that you're putting forward, whatever it is, reparations and any proportional representation and equity amongst all wealth and income brackets and stuff, that's not biblical.

That's why, because it's evil what they're promoting. But you're just dumb enough to go along with it because you see benefits. But benefits? You got benefits?

I'm not gonna ask no questions. I'm not gonna ask any questions. It's unbelievable. About the history and take it out of the abstract, we see very clearly there's a void there that the church needs to fill.

The church has actually perpetuated some things that it needs to correct. And we need to focus on making those

Whether, and this is the thing too, it's a very sneaky kind of sleight of hand here because there were some things that the church needed to correct. That's definitely true. But the world doesn't have a clue.

The world doesn't know how to do that. The church knows. The scripture teaches us. We did not need the world to come in and give us their evil to fix what they perceive. See, the same thing is happening today.

This is not something that's in the past. If you look at the SPC with their alleged sex abuse problem, which doesn't really even seem to be a real problem in the sense of it's not a systemic thing, well, they're inviting the world in again.

They're saying, hey, help us because this scripture, it's not sufficient for us to know what to do. You guys gotta come in and bring your research groups and your law firms and all of that and teach us how to get this done.

It's really insane. It's really insane. This would be like a man who has a wife that he's not happy with. There's some areas that she needs to improve on. Maybe she needs to be more respectful. Maybe she needs to be more submissive.

Whatever it is, the man's not happy with his wife. And so he goes to the street, hires a hooker and brings her into the home and says, hey, hooker, teach my wife how to be a better wife. That's what this would be like.

And Jackie Chiles here is saying this with a straight face, with an air of confidence. And the people in this room that are supposed to be debating him on this are just like, oh yeah.

This is unbelievable. Those corrections, take it out of the abstract and do what we could do better ourselves. Well, what do you think about that?

Yeah, just go ask the hooker. Ask the hooker how your wife can do better. There you go. These people have such a low opinion of the church, but also God. Think about how these guys really feel about God.

God is speaking his word to the church. He's using his holy, the Holy Spirit of God is being used to renew us day by day. Helper, but actually the helper is really not enough. We need the world to come in, the spirit of the world, which is Satan, to come in and teach us how to do racial justice.

That's what we need.

I mean, he's making the case that the church has

The Sufficiency of Scripture and the Church's Witness

Yeah, oh man, this is gonna be a tough one. Oh man.

Get ready for this guy to cave. And if he doesn't, I will be very pleased. I have no expectation that he will not cave.

Delayed so that in some cases, well, either the African-American church or even the He's gotta blast this guy.

And I mean, he can do it in a polite way, but he's gotta nail this guy to the wall. What are you saying?

Those outside of the church have had to step forward to correct some of these wrongs when the historically white evangelical church has not moved.

Maybe in this, maybe where I start, I think we're using the church pretty unhelpfully. You know, the church is everywhere. I think a lot of times, you know, Americans, we feel, you know, we have the World Series and it's just us, you know?

So when we're talking about the church, I think it's important, you know, so we're talking about a strand of Christianity that has existed in this country over the past couple of centuries. The church is much, much, much bigger than that.

I think to Justin's point, I think he's exactly right about is historically Of course he's right, he's right about everything. I think it needs to be reckoned with, particularly with the Reformed tradition.

There has been a gross abuse of theological exegesis, like so that there's no systematic books that have anthropology handled right over the last couple of hundred years that deal with slavery, for instance, or what have you.

So there has been a systematic approach to silence or to subdue or to flatten what God has clearly said as it relates to people, particularly in this country, particularly over the last couple of hundred years.

I wouldn't say that it was only like that there was no conservative people who actually were advocating for particular change, but I'm also like, I'm thankful that the Lord did it by his power, regardless of the means.

You know, it's the Deborah and Barak, you know, all the glory went to JL. So I'm just thankful that the battle was won in that regard. With the particular question, though, I'm just, I'm approaching it just in terms of what does my Bible say?

And I'm trying to, I guess, limit courses of action to not be my kind of read of the land, but God has spoken, I think, sufficiently for his church everywhere. And that must mean it must apply here in America.

And if we're saying beyond what God says, we're actually not representing just Christianity, we're representing Christianity plus an Americanism that's kind of mixed in. That actually doesn't work other places either.

And I think we should be really careful to do that. I actually don't think that that helps the church's witness here in America. I think it actually hinders what is, and I think we've experienced some of the bad fruit of that, even in the last four to five years, where just politically, as a lot of Christians have bound themselves to particular political candidates or positions, it has not helped our ability to speak clearly or to even share what we actually represent.

And so I'm, yeah, I more so want to say, hey, I totally agree historically what has happened, but I think God has spoken sufficiently.

About what we do going forward. I think we need to do a better job. If he's spoken so sufficiently about what we do going forward, then why not give us some specifics? See, that actually wasn't a terrible little speech there, but if you notice, he doesn't give you any specific, honestly, you don't even really know what he's talking about.

Even at the end where you're pretty sure he's talking about Christians voting for Trump, because let's face it, that's probably what he was talking about. But even then, he didn't even name him. He didn't even say anything.

You don't even know what he's talking. Maybe he's talking about Biden, but you don't really know. And he's like, oh, the Bible's sufficient. I agree, the Bible's sufficient. And that's how I know there are certain courses of action that we can take, and then there are others that we most certainly cannot take because the Bible specifically condemns them, like your reparation scheme, like you're adding skin color to hiring practices, like the equity stuff and all that kind of stuff.

Like the Bible specifically talks about these kinds of schemes and says no. So you can't just say the Bible's sufficient and agree or disagree when actually the Bible says a lot more than that. The Bible condemns many of the things that Justin promotes.

You need to jump on that. You need to jump on that. And then he's like, oh yeah, I totally agree. I'm grateful to God that he did it through any means. So basically he grants Justin, given his little story, that the pagans are actually tutoring the church of God, the church of Jesus Christ, like Jesus, the husband, brought in Satan to teach his bride how to be a better bride.

That's the story Justin is putting forward, that Jesus brought in Satan to go tutor his bride. And this guy over here is like, yeah, sounds pretty good to me. Yeah, I'm grateful. I'm grateful for that.

Guys, I wish I was joking, but I'm not. That's what it's like. That's what they're promoting here. Justin's saying it. And Justin's saying it a couple times. Like he said it a few times and I think he's, maybe I'm giving Justin too much credit here, but I think Justin is looking for some pushback.

Like he's looking for this guy to grow a spine so that he can maybe allow, because sometimes people will do that, right? Like sometimes people will put a position forward that they want you to respond to because they think they know what your response is going to be and they feel like they've got a defeater for that response.

And the thing is, Justin is no idiot. He's a smart man. He's a lawyer. He's probably a good attorney. Let's just face it. He's a shyster, don't get me wrong, but he's probably a good attorney. And so he's got this argument probably to defeat whatever he suspects this guy's going to push back on.

And so he's repeated this audacious claim two, three times. And he's like, I want to make sure you know what I'm saying is, and then he says it again. That makes me believe that maybe he really wants him to, he's trying to get someone to put their dukes up, right?

He's trying to get someone to put their dukes up. And nobody's doing it. And Justin's probably sitting there like, there's gotta be an easier way.

It's unreal. He's like, sure, sure, sounds good to me. How do you respond to that, Justin? Yeah, I just think that's, again, we can limit the definition. So we're not just playing with definitions. We can talk about the American church.

We can talk about, I talked specifically about the majority church. Dude, Justin is there. He's like, let's go, let's go. And this guy's never going to fight him. And so I think we should lean into that conversation because the truth of the matter is we have to deal with specific issues in church.

One of the things that I said earlier today was over 50 of white Christians don't believe that the U .S. has been oppressive to minorities.

He's like, fight me, let's go, let's go. He's like, remember what I said before? Respond to it. That's what he's doing. He's bringing all his old stuff back. The conversation, we're 40 minutes into this conversation, 36 minutes into this conversation, and it has not moved from point one.

And Justin has picked up on that. Like we've been talking for 40 minutes and we haven't even addressed even one thing that I've said, or I'm sorry, we've addressed it, but we haven't debated it. All he's getting is agreement and vague nonsense.

Justin is bringing it back home. This is going exactly as I predicted. Justin is pushing, the other guy's melting. And Justin is like, it almost seems like Justin's a little frustrated that the conversation hasn't moved forward.

Like Justin is pushing. Guys, Gospel Coalition, I can't believe this. I just realized this. With the exception of Karen Swallow Pryor, who's a villain, I mean, we all get that. Each of these three debates has had me sympathizing a little bit with the other team.

Because they actually have some guts. They're saying what they believe. They're fighting, they're willing to fight. They want to fight, they want to sort this out. And I'm like, and they can't do it. They can't get the other person to say anything of any substance.

I'm sympathizing with the liberals here. That's gotta be very frustrating for them. Like, let's go, guys, let's go. We gotta figure this out. And the conservative's like, oh, I'm so grateful for you. I'm so grateful for your perspectives.

And you're just, you're such a gift to the church. And just, the Bible's sufficient, though. That's my thing. I just wanted to, I like what you said, but the Bible's sufficient. And the guy's like, yeah, but about the first thing I said, and the guy's like, oh, you're a gift.

You're a gift to the church, and I agree with so much of what you said,.

But oh, the Bible, the gospel,.

It's the gospel that we need to be focused on. And then the liberal's like, yeah, no, I agree with that. But yeah, but that first thing I said, though, and they're like, oh, you're a gift. That's what these debates have been.

I'm gonna drink some of my Guava Sao Paolo.

Again, that's an objective historical fact that we don't get. We have to deal with that, right? If, that means our hearts aren't right. So I don't disagree with you when it comes to, I don't think I've said anything that the Bible, I don't think I've demanded that people do anything that the Bible didn't say.

Justice, Restitution, and the Limits of Church Authority

If I look at, even if we look at You have, though. You have, though.

You have many times. And if we had a real debater here, he would point those out, but we don't. So what we're gonna get is, oh, you're so right. This is just a gift to the church. I'm so grateful for you.

I'm so grateful. Or if you're Sean DeMars, I'm so grateful for you. You gotta say it like a question if you're Sean DeMars. They weren't just about immorality. They're about injustice.

They're about how the poor were treated. They're about partiality in the courts. You look at Amos 5, and we can go on and on about that. Even when we talk about the reparations conversation within the church.

I mean, you can see that in Exodus 21, 22. You can see that in Leviticus 6. You can see it in Numbers 5. This is coming from the Bible, and this is what an ordered society is about. If we have a society where somebody can take something from somebody and isn't expected to give anything back, that's not an ordered society.

So I don't wanna over-spiritualize it. I wanna make sure that we understand there's some specific mandates or commands that are in the Bible that we need to do justice. And like I said, even with Jeremiah 22, it's pretty clear.

If you have people who have been oppressed, then you need to make, the church needs to be active in doing that. And it's more than just saying, just be nice to people or do whatever. No, it's saying, we've done something wrong.

We need to take affirmative steps. Because what I worry about with the perspective that you're coming from is it's the same philosophy that's created the status quo at this moment. Just preach the gospel when there's clear issues that are there.

And when we're clearly missing opportunities to give, we're protecting power instead of making sure that we're being the people who are peacemakers, creating wellbeing, creating a right relationship with God in society.

I think that separation that you've made between what we do in the church and in society is a little too broad. This is,.

I can't believe that they've gotten me to sympathize with Justin Giboney. I'm not even gonna call him Jackie Childs because I'm sympathizing with him. I'm Jackie Childs right now because in my mind I'm thinking this is outrageous,.

Egregious, preposterous, salacious. That's me. That's in my mind. It's going on in my mind right now.

Justin is exactly right about pretty much everything he said there. The Bible says specific things to do in specific situations. A lot of the references he gave, I know those references because I've thought about this a lot.

You know, the ones in Numbers and Deuteronomy and Leviticus. And it's like, he's exactly right. And that's why he's exactly wrong about what he's promoting because those verses teach something very specific and it's not what Justin's teaching, but he's right that we should be going to the scripture.

We can't just say we can agree to disagree because it is in the scripture. It is. And it doesn't teach what Justin. So this guy's got to jump on that and say, okay, you want to have a Bible study? Let's have a Bible study.

Let's talk about reparations and those references that you're giving in the scripture because we have laws from the law of God that talk about this, that talk about what restitution is and what it is not.

We have specific laws about specific situations. And if you're interested guys in what I have to say about this, go back and watch the list where I respond to Eric Mason's reparation sermon because he goes into a lot of the same stuff.

And I'll tell you why that those verses are the right verses. He found the right texts, but he's interpreting them all the wrong ways. And I specifically go into why you know that. Not my opinion, it's just if you can read correctly.

But Justin is here. He's like, let's do this. Let's get down. Justin wants to get busy. He wants to fight. I respect that. I respect that. And I think what you saw there was Justin getting a little frustrated and I don't blame him because I'm frustrated.

I'm frustrated with how this has gone. We're 40 minutes into this debate and there has been no debate. You haven't even, we haven't even talked about anything. And he even says, we could talk about definitions and be bogged down in definitions or something like that.

He says something about that. And I think he's insulting this whole process. It's like, are you crazy? That's what you want to do? You want to define the church carefully and then I'm gonna talk about how,.

Oh, Justin, you're the greatest person. No, yes.

And it's like, okay, enough of the, we've had 30 minutes of pleasantries. How about we actually talk about something? Justin's right. Justin's right. I mean, he's wrong about his positions, but he's right.

It's time to go. I mean, we don't have that much time left in this debate. And he's about to say something. I was gonna stop it right there, but I think we need to hear this guy out. It looks like he wants to jump in here because usually he's waited for this guy to say it's time for you to speak.

But it looks like he's like, let me respond to that. So maybe this is the time, guys. I have hope. I have a little flame of hope that's deep down in my little heart. It's not very big, but it's still there.

It's still there. Maybe this is the time this guy will wake up and respond. I'm hoping, I'm hopeful. It's a little flame. Don't extinguish it. Whatever your name is, what's your name? Brian Davis, don't extinguish that.