AD and Josh Sommer - Why the Sufficiency of Scripture Matters in the Social Justice Debate

Introduction to the Conversation and the Social Justice Context

Well, what you're about to watch is hopefully the first of a number of different videos that I'm gonna do with Josh Sommer if you if you've been online and Facebook and some reform circles. Josh has been a participant in some of the Debates and conversations and stuff online.

He has since deleted his Facebook. So you might not see as much of him, but he has a YouTube channel. You should check it out. I'll link to the channel in the description of this video. He also has a website's website Josh Sommer.

I think it's calm. Yeah, probably should have checked that before I did this. But anyway, I'll link to that in the description as well. Josh is a real cool guy. He's a Baptist. So he's cool, even though he's a Baptist.

But smart dude and a lot of fun to talk to you. What I've been trying to do is to think of ways that and and and Josh. You know reached out to me kind of about this as well. Think of ways that my content can be relevant both in the long term.

But also in the immediate context because I do a lot of stuff about sort of hot topics now. Things that are relevant in our context today. But I want my content to have some, you know. Applicability years into the future god-willing.

So hopefully this is the first of a lot of that kind of stuff as well. It's about the sufficiency of scripture and we relate it of course to the social justice controversy. It gets you know a little spicier towards the end.

Although some of it is kind of more foundational and stuff like that. So, I hope you enjoy the whole thing. Here we go. This is AD and Josh Sommer. All right. Well, I have joining me today. Josh Sommer.

Josh why don't you introduce yourself to people so they know who you are? And why would I be talking to you?

Josh Sommer's Background and Ministry

Yes, we used to interact interact there. Every now and then but I've not been on Facebook for the last year maybe almost a year and a half now and just just kind of I Didn't have it on my phone because it was a distraction and so I just finally ditched the whole thing and now I'm pretty much Exclusively on YouTube.

Nice blog. So you can find me at Josh Sommer org. But or or YouTube so that's pretty much the only two places I exist online. A large part of that was, you know, just kind of trimming down distractions as a result of having my wife and I having our first child and then and then our second 14 months later, so There the two are close in age.

And and then on top of that I took a. I Was blessed to take a pastorate for a church Victory Baptist Church here in Kansas City, Missouri. And so I've been pastoring there for the last five months or so.

I and and I'm a graduate of Spurgeon College at Midwestern Theological Seminary. So awesome, man. Awesome. I'm right there with you on Facebook.

I still have a Facebook but I was with you on the the phone distraction as you can see. This is my phone. One of those where. Yeah, you know, oh. That is great. Anyway, cool, man. So so, you know, we were talking, you know a few weeks back about what we could possibly do together and we try to make some bite-sized chunks of what what hopefully are more foundational issues to some of the problems that I talk about on my youtube channel and Things like that regarding all of this Social justice mess.

The Sufficiency of Scripture as the Starting Point

Yeah. So we decided to talk about Scripture today, which I think is the starting point all the time, right for sure.

Yeah, and so, you know.

One of the things that that we kind of talked about and I think I've you know I've mentioned this on the YouTube channel before is the sufficiency of scripture. What that means how it relates and and and.

And what the problems that we see right now in this this social social justice controversy regarding the sufficiency of scripture are. So why don't you kind of take us through sort of what you had in mind as far as you know?

Why this is the starting point and why it's so important.

Yeah, for sure, I would love to and actually we could probably spend three hours here doing a historical kind of survey of maybe what led up to this point, but suffice it to say that the the reformers and the Puritans.

Or just to say the reformers in the post-reform Basically had it in mind that you know, God was the principle of being he was the explanation for all creation. He was the the foundation, you know, the prime mover the first cause, you know the explanation for for for the world and and for us and We live in the context of having God as our creator and then and then the principle of knowing Were the scriptures?

And and only the scriptures there was there was not another way to sufficiently know God, but through through the text. There was not another way to sufficiently know God. There was not another way to Sufficiently know how to live in light of who God is in God's world and So they they had this pretty much airtight Method when it came to doing their theology and then and then living out their lives.

Everything was seen as streaming from those two principles those You know God and Scripture that those were those were basically the foundational principles. That's why if you open up the Westminster or the second London Baptist Confession of Faith The first chapter is chapter 1 the scriptures and the second chapter is God and and the reason they started with those two things and I would say the first five chapters or six chapters are actually you know first principles, but but scripture and God are especially so and The reason for that is because all of the doctrine following afterwards, you know 32 chapters in the second London all you know, the the 30 chapters after the first two chapters really are are streaming from those first two doctrines those first two principles the scriptures and God and It's a very both the Westminster and the second London.

They're very logical documents and and they go in a logical order and We don't really do our theology like that anymore now more or less when you open a systematic theology I know Wayne Grudem has been criticized for this.

You won't find a prolegomena. You won't find You won't find a first principles chapter instead. You'll just kind of be dropped in to this this list of theological topics the first of which is scripture or God and then scripture and everything will be kind of assumed but not talked about not disclosed at the beginning and All that to say is is is thinking like that over the last probably 150 years Has led us to I think completely misunderstand what the sufficiency of scripture is when we say the scriptures are sufficient we we We mean to say that within the context of of scripture being one of the first principles All of our doctrine all of our practice can ultimately be grounded in the text of scripture either by Explicit reference or by good and necessary consequence.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 and the Inspired Word of God

Yeah. And and I think you know so this obviously, you know. If you're watching this you probably know that where this comes from this the primary text here is 2nd Timothy 3 16 and 17 that I'll just read it.

This is from the new hotness CSV version. All scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching for rebuking for correcting and for training in righteousness. So that the man of God may be complete and equipped for every good work.

That's that's where this is this coming from. Is that right? Oh.

Absolutely, and I'm glad you bring that up because I am going to pull that up right now. Yeah. One of the things in terms of our of our and we were just talking about that this before we went live. In terms of our hermeneutic methodology and something I tell my congregation a lot in in Sunday school, especially is is Method is as important as the content itself.

So you're in your method how you do theology and in this case how you do biblical interpretation. And your assumptions behind that that is going to affect at least at some point. Your conclusions, right so if you don't have the method, right, you're eventually going to have the conclusions wrong.

And so coming to 2nd Timothy 3 16 and 17 you have Paul is saying at the very beginning all scripture is Inspired by God and now you could take that line alone and and summarize it all the whole Bible comes from God and and another way you could say it is All the scriptures come from one divine mind one mind.

Mm-hmm. Now the practice as of late has been to say you. Really in practice. You can't make that assumption. Yeah, we need we need to we need to we need to understand Paul's theology and I use the law sometimes as an example because Paul talks a lot about the law and there's been a lot of controversy over over the law and and what that is for the New Testament Christian, but you have.

You have something like the law for example, and you have authors out there. They they're writing books like Paul's theology of the law and then they're building their entire doctrine of the law. From an abstracted source out of the scriptures they're abstracting Paul out of the body or out of the corpus of the text and they're saying this is is how we get our doctrine and that is totally contrary to how We would have done it historically as a church as as as people who would consider them more reformed Christians, right?

That that's not the method that the Reformers used it's not the method that the post-reformers used and and so that all scripture is inspired by God there in 2nd Timothy 16 a. That is that is very important.

But I think we just read over it and then we kind of insert it into our theological theological encyclopedia as a footnote. Really? It's it's it's everything in terms of how we see the Bible and how we come to the text to interpret the Bible.

Beth Moore, Paul, and the Authority of Scripture

Let me give you a let me let me let me read a little a tweet to you. And and because this strikes me as a perfect example of what you're talking about by kind of you know We all know this passage. We could probably most of us could probably quote this without without looking it up this is a this is a this is a tweet from Beth Moore.

She just tweeted this this morning. I think or maybe it was yesterday. Providence that's that's the providence of God. She basically says she says this he says my basic take on life thus far is This if tons of folks say one thing and Jesus says another I'd pretty well go with Jesus on it.

No, I was not subtweeting the Apostle, but I'd like to say something here. I believe wholeheartedly all Scripture is inspired by God. Authoritative and truth, but the persons themselves Paul and Jesus are not equals.

I know this is hard for some to swallow, but Paul is not our Savior. Paul would be horrified. I believe by the way, he has been deified. So much to say about that so much to say about that and it's not only about this topic.

But it certainly seems like she's getting at this exact kind of thing. You know, she says all scripture is God breathed.

But clearly doesn't treat it that way. I don't know. Well, here's well and here's the problem. This is it. This is a great example. I'm glad you found that and glad she she tweeted it because it gave us some something to talk about.

The the on the other hand, I'm not glad she tweeted it. We've been told for so long and I and I just told you before before we went live. You know, I I have went to two. In my in my education in my formal education.

I've gone to two Bible colleges and Well, I guess technically three. But two where I actually attended on campus and both of them were considered Conservative right. The first one was in San Diego. San Diego Christian College was founded by Tim LaHaye and I know we we we this on his on his eschatology and But and his dispensationalism but but Tim LaHaye would have been considered a conservative Christian would have held high the banner of inspiration and the inerrancy of the scriptures and and and so did the professors there I I had I I was taught a lot at that school and I had Faithful a faithful Greek professor had my New Testament survey with him and and a lot of great professors there that were influential to me, but I can remember clearly Professors actually discouraging students from using other parts of the Bible to interpret the text that they were in so for example, you couldn't go to the gospel of Matthew or something like that to to throw light on something Isaiah said that that you know, you can't do that.

Which totally throws a wrench and how we see progressive revelation and things of that nature. But but all that to say is When your method is like that and our method really has been like that for the last hundred and fifty years I think it was really a reaction to not only the Enlightenment but but Perpetuated in the early 1900s with German higher criticism and and so on and you have basically an over commitment to the historical grammatical method of Interpreting the Bible now no one denies that history is important crucially important that the rules of language are crucially important in interpreting the Bible, but that's not the only piece of the puzzle and but when it becomes the only piece of the puzzle all you're left with asking is what did Paul intend and And how would have Paul's audience understood Paul Paul's historical audience.

Mm-hmm, you cannot broaden the scope of the text to to to to flow beyond that very small historical Delimitation and. So that becomes very problematic. So you get language like this like you find in Beth Moore and like you find in a lot of even scholars Who are are considered Bible scholars?

They're saying, you know you know, what's the theology of Paul or what's the theology of Jesus and You know There's a place for understanding the personalities and the concerns of the different biblical authors and their historical context and things.

That can be very helpful and and it can be enlightening but that's not the core foundational principle of understanding what God has said to us and. So what Beth Moore says, you know. She's kind of putting Jesus and and Paul on this.

You know contrasting them. She's kind of opposing them in a sense. She would probably never admit to opposing them. But but her language suggests that there's more meaning in Jesus than there is in Paul.

The problem however with that is that God is speaking through both and. And when God speaks it doesn't matter what instrument he uses to do it. It doesn't matter if it's God the Son Who in his human nature is receiving divine right immediate divine revelation from the Holy Spirit or if it's the Apostle Paul who is?

Receiving immediate divine revelation from the Holy Spirit if God says it it is absolutely Authoritative. Yeah, please. So it doesn't matter where it is in the text. Yeah.

I find I find that that comment so so dangerous from her because it has Kind of an air of plausibility to it. Like well, okay We got the Son of God and then we've got a man just like me and one is the Savior one is not.

These are true statements. Obviously. Nobody deifies Paul the way she's pretending but what she's actually talking about is is you know is Paul's words really it's Paul's words really any and she seems to be saying that if you hold Paul's words in Scripture to the same level that you hold Jesus's words that that's some kind of idolatry or something like that that's kind of seems what she's what she's trying to say and While that might seem plausible at first blush All it takes is a couple of deeper thoughts like wait.

Well, what is she saying here? You know, you know, I mean.

It's it's the it's the old tired argument that the LGBTQ community has always used that well Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. Yeah, and because Jesus is king because you Christians emphasize Jesus above everybody else He's he's your God.

He's your Lord. He's your Savior. He didn't say anything about homosexuality. So why are you guys tripping, you know? And and and that's the exact assumption behind Moore's words there. Yeah. Yeah, so let me ask you this so so so.

The Sufficiency of Scripture and Critical Race Theory in the Church

Sufficiency of Scripture, right? How do you how do you see this playing out in the in the social justice debate. Because because some of your content I know Is is directed at some of the social justice players, you know, and so you've thought about this stuff a lot.

So, how do you think this fits in? You know, give me kind of a summary if you could for sure.

Well, I think a lot of what you've said on your channel is probably going to be a lot more enlightening than what I'm about. To say you've done a lot of work on this and I appreciate it. I watch try to watch almost everything you you put out.

It'll be it'll be more rocking. I know that much. I Would say this in I think the I think the most explicit example that we can find that that might shed light on the relationship between you know the sufficiency of Scripture on the one hand and on the other hand the the critical race theory and intersectionality on the other is.

Is what happened at the convention this year? Where you have what was his name? Was it Williams?

Yes woods. I forget. Oh, yeah, there it is. Dr. Woods. Yeah.

Where he comes out and he basically in defense of resolution 9 and and the and the language of resolution 9 in Defending it he says, you know, and you've talked about this a lot. I've talked about this a few times, you know Critical race theory and and intersectionality or nothing, but use it can be useful intellectual or intellectual analytical right and Now now he's saying the the pious sounding part of the statement is that you know.

Well, these these tools need to be submitted to the authority of God's Word. This is this is When we say the scriptures are sufficient we're not saying yeah The Bible is is pretty good and it can it can get us pretty far.

But but ultimately there's some other tools out there that we can grab a hold of and use In order to to be better Christians, right? There in other words what's assumed I think is that there's this like next level of Christianity and and in Apprehending that we can use these extra tools these extra biblical tools That we can find in pagan philosophers.

Yeah, you know and and The problem with that is that that it actually contradicts the historical doctrine of the sufficiency of scriptures and I think the scriptures and I think what it does actually is it has Huge implications on 2nd Timothy 3 16 and 17.

Yeah. It actually in fact it actually directly contradicts verse 17 one of the things that James White has said in reply to Roman Catholics is He's asked them the question is it is it is it a good work to teach that the Pope is infallible and No Catholic would deny that they would say of course They have to and and then and that well then it should be in the scriptures because the statement in verse 17 is That every good work is Found in the scriptures.

The scriptures are enough to teach us every good work either necessarily or explicitly.

That is so. That is so true. And I think that you know, most people can remember like I said have memorized 316 Without trying most people could just give you that. I wonder if I wonder how many people could actually.

Quote the the 17th verse as well and that's in such an important verse because it says that scriptures God breathed. And it says So that the man of God may be complete and as you said equipped for every good work.

Every good work the Bible can equip you for yeah.

And other word other words that can be used for that word complete is is capable proficient. The NAS has it adequate? So it's it's it's the inspired Word of God that makes the man of God these things.

Yeah, and and and it's the Word of God that equips this man.

For Every good work, but so but Joshua, let me let me stop you right there because because here's what I think you don't understand. So so get let me give you a perfect example. So You know, would you say I think I don't even this is a rhetorical question I'm sure you would say that that you know.

Performing life-saving heart surgery on somebody is a good work. But the Bible doesn't equip you for that. So so so clearly there's room for us to bring in experts that aren't that you know. Outside of scripture to do good works is there not?

Well, actually the principle behind saving someone's life is an inspired principle. It's it's it's the it's it's it's assumed right in the in the in the sixth commandment you know the value of life is is goes all the way back to the doctrine of creation and Genesis 2 that man was created in the image of God and and is therefore Valuable because of this value that God has imposed upon the creature on man.

And so the principle guiding a doctor's desire To save someone's life in that operating room is an inspired principle. And and so the scriptures do equip you To to know that Preserving human life is a good thing is a good work and it and actually it the scriptures tell you in principle How to do that now, you know.

You have the natural sciences and things like that where the scriptures don't tell us how to build a rocket ship the scriptures don't tell us how to How to how to do that heart surgery, right? Right so far as procedure is concerned, but that's not what Paul is talking about in verse 17, right?

Well, and I think you know The other thing that I've I've gotten that pushback before and I've seen it in blog posts and different presentations that kind of pushback and What what I find so interesting about that is is that that you know The heart surgery like you said, it's procedure.

It's not it's not a tool that you use or or or technical language that you use to decide whether or not heart surgery is Good. You see what what critical theory is and some of this stuff, you know, you mentioned resolution 9 at the SBC convention about how useful Critical theory is to this is talking about how we define What is good or bad like what sin is because I think everyone would agree that that that racism.

There's there's a sin behind that. But I think where we disagree is that is the Bible. Sufficient is the Bible good enough to equip you to identify What that sin is and how to identify it? I say it is I think it's completely sufficient.

You don't need these Newfangled theories about oppression and power dynamics and things like that that actually not only are they not found in the Bible But they actually tend to overturn what the Bible says so we're talking about like Like like the idea of what work is good and what sin is and what righteousness is like.

That's not the same thing as heart surgery, right? Well, and I would also add. This is specifically within the context of the Christian faith. Yeah, second Timothy 3 16 and 17, right? Paul is instructing a young pastor Timothy and In and basically how how to be a pastor who is who's therefore equipped for every good work and.

There's a distinction to be made between a natural good or a civil good. You might say that anybody can perform believer or unbeliever. Right and you know jumping in in front of a bullet an atheist can do that for someone to save someone's life, right so.

The good works here are talking about what is what is a I believe is talking about. What is a good work in terms of the Christian life sure in terms of within the faith? How the church is to live and how the man because it even says the man of God, right?

It's not a this is not a naturalist. This is not a pagan. This is not this is a man of God and how the man of God can be equipped for every good work now. It can't be denied that the man who's not a man of God can can give a thirsty person water sure.

Can can politic for better policies within their society and indeed in the Roman context in the first century. That was happening all the time. In fact politics was a big part of Roman life. You don't hear Paul saying or or making the case that these good works here that's being talked about in verse 17 looks like necessarily a.

A political activism. This is this is a this is how to live in a light of Christ. What are good works within the context of of the faith of of faith in Christian life? Yeah. Yeah, and and and you know.

Specifically what we would want to at least what I would want to oppose is Bringing something like critical theory Into the practice in of the church. In other words, like this is how we learn You know how to not be racist or how to identify racism and it seems to be specifically Saying well, you don't actually need any of that stuff.

If you're you know, the Bible is sufficient for that the Bible it can complete you in that in that way what I find interesting about this is it doesn't really you don't really need to think about this too deeply to see that that this Is this is not right because you know critical theory is something that was developed not that long ago.

So if we need it to really fully identify these structures Then all the Christians that had the Bible before critical theory was developed were incomplete. Right. So like I just I just I don't know how how do you hold this together in your mind if you're thinking that this is so important that we need to have a resolution because.

Because honestly like there's only limited time for resolutions at the convention, right? So this must have been pretty important. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, well you're forgetting something, you know, these are these are only useful tools submitted to the authority of the scriptures. Well, and I and I I was talking to somebody about this. I can't remember if it was my wife or maybe somebody at the church you cannot submit a Satanic policy to the authority of the scriptures.

Mm-hmm. You know sinful things refuse to be Defined by the Word of God. That's the nature of what sin is. It's it's rebellion against God. It's a transgression of God's righteous. Holy standard. It's a want Of any conformity to the law of God, right?

And so how do you take something that is Basically consists of an anti biblical Anthropology and then go on and say That's submitted to the authority of the scriptures. You can't do that. That's like saying well, let's take communism and support and say communism is subjected to the authority of the scriptures.

That just doesn't work. It's too mutually exclusive principle, right. And what strikes me as as as.

Essentially what the what the Israelites were trying to do when they built that golden calf. It's like, okay. Well, we're gonna still worship Yahweh. This is gonna be all submitted to Yahweh. But we're gonna do it like we're used to in Egypt, right?

Like right. It doesn't fly. It's think it's syncretic syncretism.

Yeah, let's build let's build let's build an image and and in our piety We're gonna say this image is intended to represent Yahweh, right? You know. And and but the whole the whole Method the method the way they were going about doing it was wrong.

It didn't matter what their intentions were at that point. I just thought of that just now. That was pretty good, right?

The Dangers of Methodological Drift and Theological Deficiency

Now that's good stuff man. And and the thing is like this is a topic obviously like you said in the beginning we could we Could do a whole series on this probably we could do videos the rest of the year on on the issue.

Sure. Sure. But and it's and it's a subtle thing that I think because a lot of these people as you said, you know. They have reputations of being conservative and I'm not saying that they're not brothers and stuff like that but but you know you let a little bit of this stuff kind of wiggle into your thinking and.

Causes all kinds of chaos as we are currently seen well and on that note, you know in terms of you know Having brothers in Christ who have bought into some of this stuff you can think back to the the the direct attacks on on the doctrine of inspiration and things like that in the in the early 1900s on through the 70s and the 80s and There there were true Christians, I believe.

Who did not buy into the total? You know the total lapse of the doctrine of inspiration. They didn't quite buy into it. They didn't become heterodox, but there was something in their doctrine that allowed for later followers or students to more easily accept, you know a a Heterodox view of the scriptures and then maybe take Karl Barth as a really good example of that who I'm not sure if Bart was a Christian or not, but I do think there were actual Christians who because of method and because of doctrine and because of errors smaller errors.

They were equipped to more easily buy into something like neo-orthodoxy right and and They were probably brothers in Christ. But they they they they had things in their theology deficiencies in their theology that paved the way so to speak.

For other people to buy into it and I think we see the same thing now where you have people Who seem to have lost complete? view of the gospel. They're on the furthest side of the spectrum right into this critical race stuff.

And I'm not gonna name names. But but but then you have Christians who like for example, I have some friends at the seminary who you know They'd say well we need to be concerned about this social. This is good.

This is social justice. Christians need to be concerned about justice and and because of some Misunderstandings and because of some errors within their own thinking they've sort of tipped their hat To to the direction that this movement is is going in but I still count them as brothers in Christ, you know I mean, so there's a difference between You know kind of inconsistently approaching this issue which I think a lot of people that's probably the majority actually and those who have just totally ditched a focus on Christ a focus on the gospel to fight this social justice or You know, yeah income inequality or whatever it is.

They want to reparations and all that. I mean, right it can get crazy.

But yeah, no, definitely definitely. Well, I I did want to to maybe wrap up in a minute. But I wanted to give you an opportunity if you had any last-minute thoughts here and and you know I I think this went really well.

So hopefully we'll do this some more, you know.

Method Matters More Than Content Alone

Yeah, for sure. I think there's a lot of meat to kind of chew over here. Yeah, definitely. So especially as it relates to the the sufficiency of the scriptures. Absolutely. Absolutely.

So do you have anything that you want to say before I kind of wrap wrap this thing up?

Not really, I think we've covered most everything at least as it relates to to kind of I would say that you know. Just to leave everybody with this thought method is is going to affect your conclusions.

And if you're not assuming the divine nature of the scriptural text You're going to come up with wrong exegetical conclusions at some point. You won't always come up with wrong exegetical conclusions.

Sometimes they'll be true. But if your method is wrong, your conclusions are eventually going to be Affected by that deficiency within your methodology. So the method is almost as important. It is as important as the content itself.

We need to make sure we get the way we do things right so that we come away with the right conclusions. So that's that's.

Jarvis Williams, Critical Race Theory, and the Sufficiency of Scripture

Yeah, no, I I'm sorry for for cutting you off there. No, no, you're fine. I completely agree and I think that's probably something that we'd want to talk a little bit more in depth about. Um, but um, let me let me leave let me leave everybody with this.

This is a quotation from a person who um, who's a professor at a seminary a southern baptist seminary. Um, and this is this is the kind of person that I have no doubt would um would heartily. Um quote, um Second timothy 3 16 and 17 would heartily say he agrees with that but but I want you to hear this quotation and I don't think this is like, um This damns him to hell or anything like that but but it gives you a window into some areas of his thinking that have been maybe Corrupted a little bit and so here's here's uh, dr. Jarvis williams.

He's he's. He's asked by matt smethurst. Which book do you wish? Every evangelical christian would read and why? Williams answers in this way. He says richard delgado's critical race theory in introduction listen to this.

A necessary book because evangelicals still tend to be decades behind on race critical race discussions and so if you asked Jarvis williams, you know in context of the discussion of of second timothy 3 is Richard delgado's book necessary.

He would say no not in that context. But if you were just talking to him About what you need to be complete In today's discussion about race relations. He would say you need this book. And so again, i'm not saying this damns him to hell.

But it gives you a window in you know The bible if you just have the bible you're decades behind on the race discussion in this country decades. And unfortunately that puts almost every christian that's ever existed Decades behind when it comes to righteousness and being prepared for every good work.

This is this is a not a small thing here um. And again, I want to emphasize I don't think this damns him or anything like that. But it gives you a window into why this matters so much. Um because the bible is Uh completely sufficient to prepare you for every good work and all of that.

So anyway, thanks everybody. Thanks josh for this conversation has been awesome. And uh, we'll do this again. Take care. All righty. Thank you. Well, I hope you found that helpful. Um, I sure enjoyed myself talking to josh.

And if you did enjoy this, please, uh, go ahead and subscribe to his youtube channel again. The link is in the description of this video um, and also just shoot me a comment or a thumbs up or whatever just to let me know that that you like this and You want more of it?

Um. And um, you know again, I I appreciate you know, all the support that i've gotten over The last couple years it's meant a lot to me. So hopefully, uh, i've provided some value for you as well and josh is a really smart guy as well.

So hopefully he provided value for you here. Also Anyway, uh, I hope that you found this helpful. God bless.