Ask talkers. I always open it up to give the sass an opportunity to
come and make their case, to explain to us why we should believe in
whatever the position is, whether it's Roman Catholicism, Protestanism, Calvinism. Today
is not about atheism, so we're not talking tag and atheism. If you
call in about tag and atheism, I'm immediately going to skip you. We're
not talking about random obscure topics. None of that is the topic today.
The topics are actually communiately listed for you. Catholicism, Protestantism, libertarianism,
black ubil Israelites, arianism, Job's witnesses, Muslims, Unitarians, Mormons may
all call in gnostics. Those are all acceptable topics. Basically, we're not
talking tag and we're not talking atheism. We want to see if we can
focus on getting the Protestants, the cults, the sex the groups, the
Unitarians, and even of course the Roman Catholics, because I'm more and more
convinced that the best description for Roman Catholicism is actually a cult. It is
an irrational cult that enslaves its people to a religion of dead works, lacking
the power thereof as Paul says, focusing their people on ridiculous superstitions, apparitions,
visions fatima when they inevitably encounter the theological contradictions that exist in the religion
that are quite fundamental. For example, the top Roman Catholic apologists and people
were surprised that I said the top. I said tap because as far as
I'm aware, he has the large audience following namesake Catholic apologist. I mean
could say Matt Frad has a larger channel. But Matt Frad doesn't engage in
a lot of apologetics. He basically sits back, interviews people, and talks
in his ridiculous Australian accent. Oh yee on mate, freed on keways,
I'm an all Australian. I'm just being silly. I do impressions of everybody.
I know that romanchalics get their feelings hurt when I do that impression.
But we had another doubling down. If you recall some months back, I
mentioned the word triad in passing and Trent Horne assumed as the original tweet shows
that he thought this meant something to do with arianism. I said that,
you know, in our debate, you were incorrect by misunderstanding the fact that
Abraham worshiped the Trinity. Trent thought this was mind blowing, how no natural
theology teaches me that they worshiped a Unitarian God in the Old Testament. And
then he says, I asked if they knew that God was a trinity,
Jewish multiplicity in the Godhead could be akin to proto arianism. No. In
fact, the very point of why would argue that the Old Testament teaches the
triad is to prove that they were trinitarian Trent. So, as you can
see, his initial reply is quite literally a fundamental misunderstanding of the basics that
every Orthodox Christian knows by looking at the rueblo of Icon that the Old Testament
saints worshiped the Triad. And Trent says, you even had to use the
word triad to describe it, but you would say that modern people that worshiped
triad as in Jehovah's witnesses are not worshiping the once your God. So notice
that very clearly Trent didn't even understand the very common terminology amongst the Greek fathers,
the Byzantine theologians, the very theologians who dogmatized and solidified and explicated the
Trinity Cappadocians, Saint Maximus, et cetera. For Trent, he thinks this
is somehow bound up with Arianism, even though Trent attended, according to his
own description, for many years or presumably for many years the Eastern Right.
The Eastern Right hails Palamas as a saint, which actually makes no sense given
the fact that he was considered a damnable heretic for many centuries. And to
notice that the most famous work that he has is called the Triads. A
simple search would tell you that amongst the Orthodox world, Triad refers to Trinity.
Now what does Trent simply say? Oh, I misunderstood, you're correct.
No, he doubles down, because it shows that he's not even familiar
with basic terminology in the very Fathers that dogmatize the Trinity, doubles down and
says, no, uh. This is an Egyptian term. What the word
can be synonymous with Trinity, but it's more common as a grouping of deities.
Look at the nineteen ninety six Egyptology book from John Griffith. Now,
the more common use is not something that from an obscure Egyptologist Trent. The
more common use is what you should know from the Uniate world in the Orthodox
world of triad and meaning trinity. This is just silly. Now Trent doubles
down again and says that Old Testament Jews did not worship the Trinity. He
says it right here, did the faithful Jews who lived before Christ's incarnation worship
God? If they did, then they must have worshiped the same God or
the trenity of the Christians even though they didn't worship. Trent does not believe
that the Old Testament saints worshiped the triad, even though Jesus and John five
through nine says that they worshiped the Father, his Angel, and his Spirit.
So Trent doesn't even know that the Old Testament teaches the triad. Now.
I pointed this out in at the time of the debate, and after
we had our debate, and Trent and other people tried to save face and
tried to do damage control. He didn't mean that. Did it mean that?
He says right here, literally a few seconds ago, that they didn't
believe in the Trinity. So do you understand that Roman Catholics do not understand
the Trinity, and I don't mean in terms of an intellectual comprehension. I
mean they fundamentally have ridiculous, stupid theology. And in order to save face
and defend his natural theology, Allah of Vaticantwo's no stratate, Trent is literally
saying that they believed in a Unitarian God, the very thing that I said
was the problem in the debate. Trent still thinks that the Old Testament people
believed in a Unitarian God and not the Triad. So this refew it's all
of the Roman Catholic liars that's sat here saying that that's not what true means.
Why do Romancalolics feel the need to lie? And how could you be
this silly in your theology to be so ignorant of the Old Testament? Again
proving my point in the debate that how would you argue against a Muslim?
Do you not understand that to debate any Muslim requires going to the Old Testament
to prove the Trinity. I even showed a video that was my opening statement
in the day on Hookiekitchy debate to Trent, which apparently he hasn't watched because
it refutes his stupid heresy in Acts seventeen, in no way says that they
worshiped a Unitarian God. It's just like this guy is on another planet and
doesn't even understand what the debate is. And now the libertarian says he can't
hop on. Dude, I sent you the link. There's no reason why
you can't hop on this debate. It's an open chat. You wanted to
debate. Now you're saying he can't get on here? Give me a break.
Here you are you hopped on here? Now? Right? Where's the
actual video? I want you to I hope you guys understand that this means
that Roman Catholics don't have the basics of the Trinity. I'm pretty sure that
trinity is a pretty important doctrine. And you just saw Trent say that in
the tweet that he just put up the very thing that all of his defenders
were saying he didn't mean. He says it again. Now, let's remind
ourselves of a few moments of the debate with Daniel Haikikachu, because it turns
out Trent and Daniel have the same god, the Unitarian generic God of natural
Theism. Now, I know that Trent would confess to believe in the Trinity
and the deed of Christ. But he doesn't understand that he's got two conflicting,
contradictory positions in his worldview. And he doubled and tripled down in the
last hour on Twitter on this. So I repeat again, did the Old
Testament Saints worship a generic Unitarian deity the very thing that Trent and Roman Catholicisms
are taught to entrent just now within the last five minutes reaffirmed? Or are
they worship the triad as every Orthodox person knows? You just saying that this
is fundamental to us, And they're still wandering around, groping in the dark,
like the Pagans of Acts seventeen, not understanding that it's a triad in
the very beginning, because their theology is all jacked up and dumb. That's
why. Because they're in a giant machine that they have to make all of
these pieces work and make this giant algorithm that's a giant bunch of contradictions fit
together, and they don't. They don't even know what recapitulation is. They
don't even know what monarchicali trinitarianism is when it's fundamental orthodoxy. So Let's go
back to how we would argue with a Muslim to refute to Trent, were
the Old Testament Jews generic unitarians. Let's look at Jewish scholarship explaining to us
what they believed. Surprise is that the Old Testaments trinitarian. They were not
unitarian. Judaism specifically in the Second Temple period, was not a monolithic Unitarian
enterprise. The question becomes, what are the teachings of the prophets in the
Old Testament? Did they actually teach as Islam says, a radical unitarianism or
is it something more fluid, or is their differentiation in your In fact,
modern Jewish scholarship unanimously is undecided on this question. There's a lot of Jewish
scholarship that is listed here. For example, Daniel boy larn later, I
have Summer and I have a Siegel, and they admit that in the Old
Testament itself not due to a Christian deviation, but in the Old Testament itself,
we find many, many passages that show differentiation in Yahweh. That differentiation
is not just located in rabbinic debates. It also continues into later medieval debates
with Jewish cabbal law and you could see there. For example, Gursham Scholam
in his book on Kabala, he's the respected Cabalist theologian to the Middle Ages
or a scholar of medieval Kabala. He points out, for example, to
beat three beginningless lights that are mentioned. Now, I'm not a cobblist.
I'm just pointing out that this shows that the Jewish tradition is not monolithic in
its presentation. So I'd like to come back then to my screen to me
here and went out that the first display of Trinitarian theology in a law of
the prophets is, for example, here on this whiteboard. And I'm showing
this whiteboard because hopefully guys can see this. This is a tremendous amount of
texts. Now, this list of texts that you see me post. If
you've read Justin Martyr against Trifle the Jew is Trent even aware that Justin Martyr
argues from the Old Testament Theophanes to prove the deedy of Christ and his attempt
at proving triad. It's like Trent's never talked to a Muslim or never read
these church fathers. Oh but wait a minute, Trent didn't know what the
word triad meant. He thought it was a pagan, anti Trinitarian term when
it's constantly used in the Eastern Church Fathers. So now Trent is doubling down,
as we said, tripling down that the Old Testament saints did not worship
the Trinity. They worshiped a Unitarian God. Has he never read John five
through nine? Has he not read Second Corinthians three, where Paul says that
Moses looked face to face with Jesus. If no man sees the Father at
any time, as Jesus argues in John to the Pharisees and John five,
then who was Moses talking to? This is the point of Jesus' argument to
the Pharisees. I don't think Trent knows the Bible very well at all,
and particularly not the Old Testament at all. I think Trent knows a lot
of pop apologetics, because remember Trent was not too long ago a Deist who
converted to Roman Catholicism, and so I don't think Trent knows the Trinity.
I think he just accepts that the papacy got all this right. And that's
why most of his debates are cultural issues or the papacy. I mean,
maybe he's debated other topics. I don't know. I don't follow these paper
Roman Catholic apologists because they're typically pretty low tier. But I mean, this
is just sort of mind blowing to me. The I mean, what did
we just talk about last night? We spent how many we spent the first
hour talking about Old Testament predictions of the Messiah, and when the Muslim called
in, we started to go into various texts in Isaiah, and as I
mentioned, there are more than you would you could even imagine in Isaiah if
you haven't read Isaiah in a long time. It's called the Fifth Gospel for
a reason, Trent. Why would it be called the Fifth Gospel? If
the Old Testament teaches a Unitarian God. Why is the Messiah said to be
worshiped? Why does it talk about Yahweh, his Son, his Angel,
his covenant messenger, and his spirit all the way back in Genesis? You
understand that Genesis teaches the triad. Do you understand that when Tripho is against
Justin Martyr, Justin Marter keeps arguing from Genesis and other passages to prove that
who do you think Jacob was wrestling with it's like these people have never read
the Bible or something. Bah. But wait a minute, if we're talking
about Roman Catholics, that's actually fairly plausible. Outside of someone like Scott Han
I'm starting to think that maybe they don't actually read the book. It's a
closed book to them, as Paul says, it's a closed book to the
Jews, and second printhe it's the very passage where it says Moses was talking
face to face with Christ, that the Jews have the veil over their heart.
It's almost like Roman Catholics and Muslims have the veil over their heart.
Yeah, because they're facts similar fake religions. That's why they're religions of dead
works without the power thereof. And I'm just citing these because there's too many
to fit on a single screen there with typing it all out. You can
screenshot this later and go check the various textual references here for just examples of
Theophanes. And the reason I've included that Theophanies is that these are particularly useful
for demonstrating the manifestation of Yahweh in the Old Testament, proving differentiation, So
not just Yahweh, but also the angel messenger that he sends who has the
name of Yahweh as a root in Exodus, the same angel that's present in
the Burning Bush, that angel has spoken of as the messenger of the Covenant.
He's spoken of as in Judges turning the face of Yahwey towards Gideon.
Yahweh turns his face to Gideon. So are you noticing a pattern that the
refutation of Muslims is becoming the refutation of the Roman Catholics Because Trent's actually,
in a backwards way, back doorway correct that actually you and the Muslim and
that Jew do worship the same God, because it's the wrong God. So
Roman Catholics, Muslims, and Jews actually do worship the same Unitarian God,
and that's the wrong one. So actually, Trent, in a roundabout way,
is actually correct. And why does he say that? Because that's the
basis of his church's dogmatic teaching and knows Ratat And he doesn't even realize that
citing Acts seventeen doesn't prove this. Citing Romans one doesn't prove this. He's
just assuming that Acts seventeen and Romans one teach natural theology. When Romans one
doesn't say anything about syllogisms and a rationiosnation process about syllogisms and coming to some
conclusion at the end of a bunch of syllogisms about a generic god existing Romans
one says that it's on the heart of every man. It doesn't say anything
about intel electual syllogisms. It's not talking about natural theology in your ridiculous churches.
Since but Trent knows he has to defend nos Trette saying that he and
the Hindu and all of them wors of the same God. Isn't that interesting?
The Hindu also is part of this natural theology process, and he thinks
Acts seventeen backs this up. All Acts seventeen says is that God is the
one giving these providential gifts to everyone, and yet he is unknown. The
very point of the passage is that the God that they're after is unknown to
them, and yet Trent is telling me no. Actually, at the end
of a rational process, the pagan can reason out and come to at the
end of a syllogism, how many pagans are sitting there doing syllogisms outside of
Aristotle. Let's be real here, Come on, this is preposterous and even
his own people, his own cohorts, whom he's had debates with, are
falling out like tim and recognizing, Hey, wait a minute, the Roman
Catholic Church's post Vatican two teaching on the Jews is a direct contradiction to the
pre Vatican too teaching on the Jews. Yeah, exactly, Yeah, but
it's also a contradiction when it comes to Muslims and Hindus too. You don't
see that the Catholic Church regards with esteem the Muslims. Oh, he means
the ones that you called crusades against in the Middle Ages. You esteem them.
They adore the one God. What is the one God that shared between
a Muslim and a Roman Catholic When every Muslim will tell you that we don't
worship the same God as you. There is no generic unity that is shared
amongst an anti Trinitarian group and a Satanic group and a Monotheistic group. If
I believe that Satan is the creator of heaven and earth and that he lives
in subsistence in himself, am I then also esteemed by the Catholic Church with
the Muslims. Do you see how stupid this is? And then it goes
on to say, although they don't revere Jesus as God, they revere him
as a prophet. Oh so anti Trinitarians. So now we can substitute Eunomians
and Arians and Jehoah's witnesses the Church regards with esteem. The Arians does it
because I'm pretty sure at Niceah it calls Arius the mouth of Satan. So
now we regard Arius as the mouth of Satan, I mean, as a
as a true worshiper of the one God. You understand, Muslims are more
removed than Arians are from Christianity. There are multiple attributes that Muslims don't believe
in. They do not believe that God is imminent in the world, and
maybe even some Roman Calolicies don't believe that. Who knows. I mean,
this whole Roman Catholic system is a gigantic mess. And you've noticed they won't
come in debate anymore. All they're left with is why I'm a bad person.
That's all they've had for the last seven years is how I'm a bad
person. And yet they keep expanding in their carbohydrate intake. Have you noticed
that Abara and Lofton are looking even fluffier? Well, I guess when the
religion is no help, you take solace in the buffet and then dainties and
pastries. But it's not just Muslims. Oh. Whereas the Roman Catholic Church
formerly talked very negatively in its liturgical practices about Jews, now they're the elder
brothers and they're part of the Covenant. That doesn't make any sense. That's
a contradiction to previous traditional Roman Catholic teaching. Now where's the Hindu statement.
Yeah, Now, remember this is not saying that Hindus seek out and have
a natural desire for the One True God, because we could say that all
human beings have an innate desire for God because we all have a news.
This says that in Hinduism, in other words, in the false religious system,
the demonic system of Hinduism. And if you read Father Sir from Roses
Orthodox in the Religion in the Future, you can see very clearly that from
the Christian perspective, this is a horrendous, terrible, demonic religion. Does
Vatican two say that it doesn't mention anything about it being demonic? It says
in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through anexhaustible abundance of
myths. They seek freedom from the anguish of human condition through assatical practices or
a profound meditation, or flight to God with love and trust, God with
a capital G. Did you read the first sentence in Hinduism in a completely
demonic religion. Paul says that the gods of the nations are devils. David
says, the gods in the nations are devils. There's no better example of
this than Hinduism. Vatican two says in Hinduism they seek a flight to capital
G God with love and trust. And then it says similar things about Buddhism.
The deities of Hinduism and Buddhism are not the triad. They are not
secretly Jesus. If Jesus has a way to reach those people, he can
do that. But it is not the demonic system of Hinduism or of Buddhism.
That is the means by which they reach God. And that's the bizarro
language of Vatican two. And it's not just no Sir tat the same stings
said in lum Gentm. Sixteen, because these liars will always sit here and
say, well, we don't have to accept no TTE because it doesn't have
the same level of authority as the other documents, that you got to accept
them all. And what a ridiculous system anyway, because it doesn't even tell
you which documents are which Every individual Roman Catholic g hats to figure out which
documents are in which authority been The Plan of Salvation includes those who acknowledge the
Creator? Okay, what does that mean? Does that mean I only have
to acknowledge a generic idea of a creator like a freemason does or a theistic
Satanist. The first amongst these is the Muslims who hold the faith of Abraham.
No, you don't hold the faith of Abraham if you're anti trinitarian,
have you regulations? The only way to be the seat of Abraham is in
Christ because Abraham worshiped the trial. Did you hear me, Trent? Muslims
worship and adore the One God. No, Muslims do not adore God.
You understand, adoration is worship. So this implies that God accepts the worship
of anti trinitarian groups like Muslims. Muslims hate the triad. They hate Christ
because they don't believe that he is deity, divine and John says, if
you don't believe that Christ is God in the flesh, you are spirit of
Antichrist. So this is saying that people who have the spirit of Antichrist motivating
them to stamp out Christianity and the Trinity and the deed of Christ are part
of the planet of salvation also actually worship Christ. This is preposterous. This
alone is enough to tell you that this is not the true religion. This
is a departure from Christianity. And Trent and all the other frauds are defending
this, and they will keep doubling down and doubling down, upling down,
because to admit that they're wrong on this means this whole system collapses. And
Roman Catholicism is a giant cult and they cannot accept that. It is this
blatant, this out in the open, and this fraudulent, and it is
because it's in everyone's face. This is why they act so they act out.
So this is why they spurg out. This is why they lose it.
This is why they're calling you names and everything in the book. It's
all a manifestation of the deep down insecurity and fear that they know about their
papacy and what it does and how it acts and how deceptive it is.
Now on top of this, we had, we had Francis, let's say,
if there's anything else in this, yeah, let's talk about let's talk
a little bit about this, and then we'll go back to the point about
francis Is skittles comment, which I'm sorry that people can't figure out that Francis
throws a bone to the trads about once every few years and then he immediately
walks it back. He's done this the entire time. By the way,
all the post Vatican two popes have done this same, very this very same
thing, where they charge forward with two or three years of absolutely scandalous rebellious
behavior and then they walk it back two steps. You walk ten steps and
walk back two steps. It's a very common Overton window. You know.
It's a methodology, it's a technique of bureaucracy and control. And then you
throw a bone to the trads to keep them on the leash. And they
all fall for it. All these people fall for it because they're naive and
their dupes. And so Francis says, skittle stuff promotes skittles. Civil unions
openly everywhere and then says supposedly, oh, but we don't want f in
the seminaries. Oh, by the way, did he do anything about it?
Or do you just say something? Because the entire trad Catholic twitter world
is championing this like this is some great achievement. All your showing is your
own fool how foolish you are. Because he can talk all day long and
throw you a bone all day long, nothing changes. He's not doing anything.
He could reform these seminaries. He has the total plenary authority of the
Roman bishop, universal authority. He could extu communicate all of these airing bishops
in one stroke of a pen. He doesn't do any of that. He
throws you dummies a bone and you eat it up, and then tomorrow he'd
be back to the revolution. And it wasn't even twenty four hours before he
walked it back and cucked his comments, as Luigi showed on his Twitter.
So, by the way, as soon as I put up my tweet,
I said, how long count down to Francis apologizing for his comment. It
wasn't even twenty four hours. I didn't even get to put my tweet up.
He was already apologizing for I could even make a joke later, or
we can go back to any of those. And so let me go back
to my screen share here and points out that the triad there. I don't
mean to argue either, that the Old Testament explicitly uses the words triad.
Know, all this necessary, as the Jewish Show scholars are admitting, is
that the Old Testament believers spoke of Father. Yeah. I have to address
this because this is such a basic argument. That's so dumb. Okay,
it doesn't matter if the Old Testament saints use the word triad or not.
They don't have to use the word trinity. Okay. Do you understand whether
it's the Aphulis or whether it's Ttertullian using the word trinity in one fifty one
eighty. Okay, we wouldn't be so stupid as to say that nobody believed
in the Trinity until Theophilis or Tertullian uses the word trinity. Okay, you
understand how dumb that is. When Justin Marter argues for the Trinity, he
uses the Old Testament text, that means he's arguing that the Old Testament he
is the Trinity. They don't have to use the word trinity, just like
when you translate the Gospel into Intuit, you don't have to use the word
trinity, use whatever the Inuit word is for that. This is so dumb,
and I can't believe somebody as intelligent as Trent, who is intelligent,
is that he can't get this, or that he doubles down on these foolish
mistakes. Is bizarre to me, which tells me this is a cult.
Tell me what the difference is between Roman Catholicism and a giant cult. I
don't see it. And once Father Moses said that the other day, I'm
like, you know what, this is a giant cult. And they all
act like total cult leaders, I mean cult believers, I should say,
because they freak out and foament the mouth and lose it when you start bringing
this stuff up or Angel of the Lord or Son of Man and the Spirit
in a real distinctive way. And they do although I mean, imagine using
the New Testament to prove the Trinity and then trying to say that nobody knows
the Trinity until the word is used or until nicea. Do you understand how
stupid that is? If we're using the New Testament to prove the doctrine of
the Trinity, then it means the New Testament teaches the Trinity and the Old
Testament. This is so dumb. I can't believe anybody would make this dumb
of an argument. And by the way, it's actually the argument that Muslim
make. Muslim say trinity, not use to Totrian Torturian use word trinity,
invented, invented trinity, invented, nice yuah trinity. You're using the Muslim
arguments, Trent? Why are you people following these people? What is wrong
with you people? How are you so deluded? How are you so confused
to follow? You have no discernment at all. You don't have a discernment
to figure out that people pushing stabby for years? Why would you trust their
discernment on this stuff? I just I'm moauthful. I can't understand what it
is about you people that you find attractive about this stuff? Are you that
low tier in your argumentation? What do you mean you people? I mean
you people in the audience that follow Trent and Matt Frad and carbohydrate Lofton?
Like, how are you that loads here? I just I can't understand,
Help me understand come on the chat, please, please come on and help
me understand what is so convincing in these uber loadsier Muslim level arguments from people
like Trent Horn. I can't understand it. Help me understand. Please,
you don't see how lows here this is. I mean, I know a
bunch of you have watched Sam Schimun debate. And when Sam Chimun debates,
where does he prove the Trinity from? When he's debating the Muslims and the
Jews and the Unitarians the Old Testament? And here's Trent telling you that,
no, Jews didn't worship the Trinity in the Old Testament, the Old Testament
Saints worshiped a generic deity. Here's another Roman Catholic at least admitting that Trent
is way off base. I'm Roman Catholic, and Jay is right. I
don't understand what Trent is doing. Trent can't admit he's wrong, and because
to admit that he's wrong and something so fundamental exposes that Trent basically doesn't know
fundamental theology. This is embarrassing for a Roman Catholic theologian, an apologist.
Do you see what he says right here? Faithful Jews. Did they worship
God before Christ? He says they did, but not the Trinity. There
is no God but Trinity. So Trent triples down on the very mistake that
I called out in the debate. Trent is a Muslim. He's making all
the arguments Muslims make. Do you know how many times I've had Muslims last
night? The Muslim they called in what did he say? Or the Jews
not the worship Trinity, don't believe in trinityan book, don't see Trinity?
Oh well, okay, I guess that settles it. Trent Al Horn,
Shake trent Al Horn, follow the great son of Thomas al Suma al Abu
aquinas just I mean, I'm just gonna I'm gonna start calling him, shake
Trent Horn. What to do? T w t shaik Trent. That's when
they start singing the Koran. You know they're gonna have They're gonna like the
like that she has. They sing the songs to Ali Ali and they're gonna
start singing to Trent, to Abu ah boo. Anyway, I don't know.
So we're gonna open it up. Somebody said, Pearl is in Trent's
harm. That's funny Ai, I'm trent oh ah, all right, we're
gonna open it up. By the way, I used to think this idea
of Chris Long was kind of that's that seems silly and ridiculous. Then once
I saw Pope Francis pushing this Abu Dhabi multi faith center, all right,
I guess I was wrong. All right, we're gonna open it up.
That means you call in, you can make an argument on whatever you want
in the lists of acceptable topics today. The list of acceptable acceptable topics are
Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, Evangelicalism, Calvinism, Libertarians, libertarianism seeing that guy
still here, Arianism, Jovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Muslims, Black Heber Israelites,
Hebrew roots movements. Those are all acceptable topics today. Pagans neopagans.
So basically we're not talking tag and we're not talking atheism. We're only talking
about those other topics. So basically we could just call this well I was
gonna say, we would call it cults, but atheism is another topic,
so that didn't even work. But you call in on the space right there.
Now, I've got all the things ready to go. We can talk
about whatever topic you want. I've got Denzinger here, I've got all the
paper and cyclicals here. I've got the Giady document, the Alexandria document.
I've got the Bible pulled up. I got it all ready to go,
all right. Today's first requester is a libertarian man, Dennis Pratt, who
wants to discuss Holly, you got an immune, dude,