THE LIVESTREAM - For The Anons On X outlines ambitious 2025 plans, including a new studio by May and tripled live stream frequency, while defending anonymous accounts as vital tools for pushing the Overton window against establishment pride. Hosts address the theological shift from Jehovah to Yahweh in Reformed circles, speculate on its link to Christian Zionism, and debate political figures like Vivek Ramaswamy and JD Vance regarding their faith. The episode concludes by rejecting Hitler as a Christian model, favoring Cromwell or Washington, and calls for financial support to fund expanded team compensation and equipment. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Help Us Reach More People00:01:26
Leave us a five star review on your favorite podcast platform.
I get it.
It's annoying.
Everybody asks, but I'm going to tell you why.
When you give us a positive review, what that does is it triggers the algorithm so that our podcast shows up on more people's news feeds.
You and I both know that this ministry is willing to talk about things that most ministries aren't.
We need this content for the glory of God to reach more people's ears.
You're doing a great job.
We've got several hundred reviews so far, but we'd like to reach a thousand reviews by the end of this year.
The year of our Lord 2024.
If you haven't left a review yet, take a moment and help us achieve our goal.
Much of the culture war today is fought by anonymous accounts.
For a long time, even the massive ex account Libs of TikTok remained anonymous until it was doxxed.
In the Reformed world, many Christian men tackle controversial topics behind the shield of a fake name.
Critics, including establishment organizations and Christian leaders, Dismiss these accounts for refusing to attach their real names to their ideas.
But Anons argue that it's necessary for their safety and their families.
Are anonymous accounts a display of cowardice and petulance, or do they hold a strategic and noble role in the culture war?
Triple The Content Output00:11:33
Tune in now as we discuss.
All right, guys, here we are right out of the gate.
The first thing that I want to talk about is we need your help.
We have some lofty goals for the year of our Lord 2025.
One thing is, we are once again, we're going to keep a similar set because I really like the set, but we're going to double the size of the set so that on occasion we can have more guests and things like that.
We're going to do some different looks.
And so we are actually moving into a new space in the near future.
Next year, it's not going to be January, but next year, you'll see some changes with the design and aesthetics, but by Lord willing, May of next year, we're going to be in a new studio.
So that is going to cost some money.
We're going to need some help with that.
In addition, I've said this a few times, but I want to say it again both Michael and Wes are going to be coming on part time.
So right now, all they're doing is just the Wednesday live stream.
And part of the reason that it's been successful is because they're not just showing up and piping in, but they actually are writing the show.
And so every single week, they're alternating and writing corresponding articles and at minimum outlines and blurbs and then finding statistics and charts and quotes and All these different things, and then, uh, as you would expect Stephen Wolf to say, they do the reading, uh, so they're coming prepared for each topic each week, each show.
Um, and that's part of why this Wednesday live stream has been so successful.
But what we want to do next year, 2025, is we're going to do it uh, three times a week.
I think I said in a previous live stream that it's going to be 4 p.m., but but we're actually going to do bump it earlier, yeah, or yeah, so it's going to be 3 p.m. central time, not just on Wednesdays once a week, but three times a week.
So it's going to be Monday.
Wednesday and Friday.
And that's going to start, Lord willing, the first week of January.
So, the very first week of January in May, getting a new studio space, like an actual new facility.
But starting in January, still some new set designs and things like that.
You'll see a new aesthetic, a new, you know, optically, it'll be a little bit different.
But the biggest thing is triple the content, triple the content.
And so, we're going to have Monday, Wednesday, Friday live stream at 3 p.m. Central Time with me, Michael, and Wes preparing for those shows.
Some of them are going to be Boom, this cultural, you know, political event just happened, and we're getting after it.
You know, quick turnaround, 24 hours, and here's our thoughts.
And then some of it will be long form.
It may be that every single week we have one of the three shows is an ongoing 10 part, you know, dialogue on some particular topic that's really important.
Then, in addition to all that, we're also with Right Response Ministries, we're going to keep the Friday special.
We feel like this year we tried it with something new.
The people love it.
We got to give the people what they want.
It's, you know, It's been, I think, a hit.
We've had, we did Boniface Option over Andrew Risker's book with me and Eddie Robles and Andrew Risker.
We did, what else did we do?
We did Haunted Cosmos.
We did Cultish.
We did, oh, we did The Jews, spelled, of course, J O I C E, Jews, talking about, you know, different things, you know, Kool Aids and, you know, Capri Sun, things like that.
But that was me and Andrew Risker.
It was Israel.
We did a nine part series on Israel, but it was fantastic.
And we're going to make that public.
By the way, so you're going to start seeing the whole nine part series with me and Iskar on how Christians should think about Israel.
You're going to find that it's going to start dropping publicly on our website, our app, podcast platform, Spotify, Apple, and then also, of course, on X and YouTube first Friday of the first week of January.
So we're going to release episode one through nine, one episode a week on Friday.
So the Friday special is going to continue, and we already just recorded last week.
Q2.
And so you're going to, Q1 is going to be me and Iskar on Israel, made available to the public starting the first Friday of January.
And that'll be nine weeks.
And then you're going to find the second quarter, and that's me and Dr. Stephen Wolf.
It's a 10 part series.
It's on natural law versus theonomy and natural affections and nationhood.
What is a nation and all things Christian nationalism?
And so I think that's going to be super, super helpful.
That's going to start rolling out Q2 of next year, starting in April.
And that's a 10 part series every Friday.
So you've got the live stream three times a week starting January next year, Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 3 p.m. Central Time.
The Friday special will drop.
Probably either seven or eight o'clock.
We'll make a decision when we get closer, but seven or eight o'clock on Friday Central Time in the evening.
So you've got the afternoon live stream, Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and then in the evening, the Friday special will drop.
And then with the Friday special, you also will have early access being made available to you.
So right now, you can get the whole series with me and Isker just for five bucks a month on Patreon.
If you go to patreon.com forward slash right response ministries, patreon.com forward slash right response ministries.
And sign up at the lowest tier as a member.
You'll get all nine episodes ad free of me and Iskar talking about Israel and how the church and Christians should think about the modern state of Israel today.
And starting in January, you won't just get that series, but you'll also get the entire 10 part series with me and Stephen Wolf on Christian nationalism.
So you have 19 episodes on Israel and then on Christian nationalism.
Me and Wolf saying maybe other nations could do Christian nationalism instead of just Judeo nationalism for Israel.
And then everybody else has to be a propositional nation.
So You'll have 19 episodes, nine with me and Isker, 10 with me and Stephen Wolf, all available in January if you join Patreon.
If not, then just hang tight, and each week they'll drip off on Fridays after the live stream later in the evening.
So you're going to have three live streams a week, the one Friday special week, and then we'll continue.
Of course, the Lord's Day sermon will be available on all of our platforms on Sunday.
And so that's five major pieces of content.
And we're going to start doing clips again because part of it is it's helpful, it's strategic.
And part of it also, Nathan and I were just talking before we started live streaming, but it also allows us maybe to, if people are going to say what they're going to say, and you can only control things so much, but we want to, as much as we can, to set the tone in the direction of discourse.
Part of what's happened this year is this is our first year not doing clips because we were biting off these new endeavors, like the Friday special had never done that, the live stream had never done that.
But next year, we feel like we actually are able.
So Wes is going to help us with that and getting clips from the live stream and occasionally the Friday special and things like that so that we can.
Put out our own clips instead of allowing, I'm a boss babe in a three piece, you know, lady suit who hates my husband account three, four, seven to clip Joel Webb instead.
And then she sets the discourse, you know.
So we want to actually clip out.
And also, I'll be frank, you know how much money people made this year off of Joel Webb?
A lot.
We didn't make it.
But right, like our full episodes are going to get 10,000 views.
Every now and then there's a banger, we get 30,000 views, something like that.
And if I do something on Nephilim and giants and mermaids, then we get like a quarter million.
But for the most part, our full episodes are getting 10, 20,000 views.
But other people are going to clip out some five minute thing that they think is unhinged, that's completely not.
If you watch it in context, it's what every Christian believed until 100 years ago.
And they're going to get 400,000 views.
So I would like for us to clip it, and we can get 400,000 views, and they can pound Sam.
So those are some of the things.
So three live streams a week.
The Friday special, adding some clips in there to make it more palatable, bite sized for you.
The Lord's Day sermon and in a new studio.
And Michael and Wes, for them to do that, they're doing it just one time a week, but for them to triple their workload and for Wes also be cutting clips and doing some video editing, it's just that basically they have to, by God's grace, they both have vocations where they're allowed to pull back.
But they're not able to pull back from their work and keep the same wage.
Pulling back means a pay cut.
And we think that it's right and pleasing to the Lord and honorable that we would make that up as a ministry.
So if they're giving us their time, Then, whatever they're losing at their day job, we want to be able to make up in compensation from right response.
So, the studio, some equipment, some compensation for Michael and Wes, we've got some needs.
And so, by God's grace, we've outlined the budget for next year.
We think that we're well on our way, we think that it's achievable.
But here at the end of the year, I would be remiss if I did not ask those of you who have been blessed this year by this ministry and want to see us continue and take things to the next level next year in 2025.
Would you please prayerfully consider supporting us here at the end of the year?
You will receive a tax receipt so that you can deduct any amount of giving from your taxes.
And here at the end of the year is a great time to set us up so that we're right on target for meeting our financial goals, so that we can meet the goals that really matter our ambitious goals of producing high quality and, by God's grace, high quantity amount of content this next year.
So if you're interested, In supporting this ministry, we from the bottom of our hearts, we thank you.
We appreciate it so, so much.
All you have to do is go to rightresponseministries.com forward slash donate.
Again, that's rightresponseministries.com forward slash donate to give a tax deductible gift.
You can do that, and ideally, if you're able to do it by the end of the year, we appreciate it.
And then again, go over to patreon.com forward slash rightresponseministries.
If you'd like to watch the full series on Israel with me and Andrew Isker, and you'll be right there and ready to go in three weeks or whatever it is for January when the full 10 part series with me and Dr. Wolf on Christian nationalism drops.
Okay, without further ado, let's go ahead and if you can, like the video for the algorithm so that it picks up and gets out to as many people as possible right now where we're live streaming, not after the fact, but those of you who are in the chat right now, like the video, give us a thumbs up, put a comment.
On there, put something in the comments to just trigger the algorithm to get it out to as many people as possible.
And without further ado, we will begin.
All right.
Okay.
Kick us off, Michael.
We are going to be talking about Anon accounts and the question of what their role is, what their purpose is.
Are they helpful?
Are they not helpful?
One of the things that is interesting to think about with Anon accounts is that they are largely a product of a new technology.
This whole idea of an anonymous account, as we term it, 5, 10, 15, 30 years ago, certainly would not have been even something on anybody's radar.
It's not like you had, and maybe you had a blog at one point where you were typing and you had a pseudonym or something like that.
Luther Reached Ordinary People00:07:26
Driscoll had a couple of those back in the day.
Fair enough.
Yep.
It did.
Got him in trouble.
It did.
Hey, real quick.
Acts of Boniface said, liking it as hard as I can.
I just got to say, I don't believe you.
You can like it harder.
Like it even harder.
I need you to create right now, speaking of Anons, multiple Anon YouTube accounts and multiple Anon X accounts.
And you need to, if you are not liking this video as I speak from at least 30 different isolated accounts, then you are not liking it as hard as you can.
We appreciate you, acts of boniface.
That was a joke.
We know.
No, so it's an interesting situation that we're in in history where the idea that people can put their views out for many people to see and can hide, quote unquote, In anonymity.
We say hiding because we're not sure that's exactly what's going on here.
But this actually is not a new phenomenon in history.
This is not a new phenomenon.
And I think that's something that we forget and critics of anonymous accounts forget.
And so one of the things that I wanted to do to start off with here was to look at a little bit of the history, not of anonymous X accounts, that would be anachronistic, but just anonymous contributions to the cultural dialogue and in particular, even Christians doing this, right?
And so you can take this idea back a long way, but I went back to the Reformation.
And one of the interesting things that's been noticed about the Reformation is that Martin Luther's ideas, in a large way, I mean, it didn't destroy Catholicism.
That wasn't his goal, but it did.
It won the day, at least for Protestants, right?
Fantastic memes.
Do we have a screenshot of some of the Luther memes?
I didn't think we had any.
All right, I'm going to describe it in great detail.
Great, the greatest detail.
Not that great.
It's pretty simple.
Picture peasants standing in front of the Pope who's seated on a throne, and they're wearing robes.
They're lifting up their robes, bare bottom, farting in the Pope's face.
Yep.
God bless.
That's the Reformation.
When I think of the Reformation, I think of Anon accounts meaning the Pope.
Amen.
But one of the things that historians and thinkers have pointed out is that Luther was really echoing ideas that had already been put out before.
Jan Hus, John Wycliffe had been pushing similar ideas.
And you can talk about God's providence, but we know that God works providentially in history through means.
And one of the things that was different with Luther than with Hus or Wycliffe was that the printing press had been invented.
And so people have said that the battle of the Reformation was actually the battle of the printing press, the printed word, which allowed Luther and others for the first time in history to compete with the published volume, the amount of volume that the Catholic Church was able to get out into public through tracts and pamphlets and things like that.
And it's actually quite remarkable.
Luther himself, here's a quote it says, a simple comparison between the vernacular editions of the Catholic publicists and the output of one evangelical, Martin Luther, suggests a wildly unequal battle for the hearts and minds of the literate laity.
In the first decades of the Reformation.
Over the period of 1518 to 1544, Luther's publications numbered at least 2,551.
For the same period, the Catholic publicists produced 514 printings.
And so, one of the sheer realities behind the Reformation is that the printing press allowed Luther and the people who were with him to jump onto a new technology and to get their message out in a massive way.
Populations that could not have been reached before.
It's been said that half of the pamphlets produced during the Reformation were anonymous or had pseudonyms attached to them.
Wow.
You think about that half of the stuff put out to push the ball of the Reformation into motion were published anonymously.
Wow.
I didn't know that.
You're telling me that for the first time.
I think that's pretty remarkable.
I think, you know, we sometimes think of the Reformation as this battle of.
Theological minds clashing in pure debate.
And certainly, you know, Luther's famous for his debates.
But also, it was just anonymous people getting their voice out there.
Speaking of anonymous people in the chat right now, I can't help myself.
I am a sucker and they sucked me in.
I got guys saying, you guys need to call out the Jews more.
Guys, all right.
I did a nine part series with Andrew Isco on the juice.
I just went on Calvin Robinson talking about the Jews.
10 minute clip of me talking the entire time was picked up by Candace Owens and played publicly just two days ago on the juice.
So we are juicing on all cylinders right now.
So you just.
You gotta let us talk about something else.
Trust the plan.
Hang tight.
There are other things going on in the world.
It does matter.
Israel is a problem.
It is a problem.
But we are addressing it.
And by God's grace, I think that we have a winning strategy.
Okay.
One thing on Luther, too, he didn't really like Erasmus and the Pope and all those, didn't really succeed too much in convincing them.
They didn't join him.
Right.
But man, the presidents loved it.
They were picking up his stuff, they were reading it.
The papal bull would come into town and they would burn it because his message.
Were all those pamphlets and all those things, other people writing them?
It reached the people that actually affect the change going.
Now, elites and the people, there's a push and pull that both make an effect.
But man, during the Reformation, it was the people and the peasants that were sick of the Roman Catholic Church and their overbearingness that pushed it forward.
And so Luther, then think to today, his appeal wasn't necessarily just the elite, just the ivory tower, highbrow academic discussion, which he did.
But he was also reaching out to the commoner and the people and saying, Do you feel this too?
Does this resonate?
In fact, it's widely recognized that the anonymous pamphlets that were produced were really the representation of the voice of the common people.
Like that's been widely regarded.
The common people who were ready to ally themselves with Luther against the financial and spiritual tyranny of the Catholic Church.
And so what you're saying, Wes, is 100% right.
But on the other hand, historians have also recognized, and this is a quote here it says, a large portion, perhaps half of the Reformation pamphlets, omit any indication of author or printer.
Partly, why?
To avoid the risk of prosecution, partly perhaps to indicate a mighty but anonymous swell of popular support for reform.
And so even back then, there was a need for some of these to be anonymous.
Number one, to focus on the argument, not the personality.
But number two, say that again.
To focus on the argument and not the personality.
That's one point of being anonymous, is not just to dunk on people over 65, although that is valuable.
It needs to be done respectfully.
But there also is, there needs to be a passing of the torch.
I'll say this real quick.
People are living longer.
Lifespans are actually very recent.
As of recently, they're starting to go down because the West has lost its mind in many regards.
But on the whole, lifespans have increased, and a lot of work is not out in the field.
It's not manual labor.
And so boomers are currently in the process of building the base on the moon and harvesting organs and making half of their body like a cyborg and living for 4,000 years.
Focus On Arguments Not Personalities00:08:54
If they could.
And never give, they would.
Yeah, exactly.
Boomers would literally never pass the torch.
Ever if they could, and they're doing everything they can.
I mean, you got guys like you know pushing 90 and they're like, I'll never let go, you know, like Jimmy Carter from the crypt, you know, trying to hold on to power, you know.
So, um, that's that's real, uh, unfortunately, that is that is very, very real.
And, um, and so, you know, that you know, anon accounts exist for um, for pushing the Overton window and and for uh, forcing even when a particular generation doesn't want to neck uh, let the next generation to you know to make that happen.
Uh, but beyond that.
Anon accounts are incredibly valuable because a lot of times the ad hominem attacks and all these people will just gloss, they'll completely ignore the idea on its own merits, its own substance, and just say, well, so and so said it.
And that works both ways.
So, if you have some kind of institutional power or credibility or these kinds of things, a lot of times you can just constantly be posting L's.
And your base will just eat it up.
So you can just say something.
Or right now, because we live in a sea of wokeness, and even conservatives, I would argue, are still soft woke, most of them.
So what do you do?
You find you want to get something across.
Well, what you do is you replace a white man with a person of color and have them say the same thing.
Or you replace a white man with a white woman and have her say the same thing.
As conservatives against this onslaught of progressivism and blah, blah, blah.
And so we need a stalwart.
We need, you know, when the enemy comes in like a flood, you know, the Lord raises a standard bearer against him.
Who are you going to call?
Alibeth Stuckey, you know?
Samuel Say, you know?
And it's like, that's ridiculous.
That's absolutely ridiculous.
You know, if these people are saying true things, great, kind of great.
Alibeth, I'd love for her to say powerful, true things in her home to her children.
But Samuel Say, as a man, that's great.
But we don't need truth, it should be able to stand on its own legs.
But there are cultural moments where it's wrong.
And you can argue all day long about how anybody should have been able to say this.
You shouldn't have had to get a woman to say this.
You shouldn't have had to get a black guy from Ghana and then Canada to say this.
And you can make those arguments.
But the Overton window is where it is.
Yes, we're shifting it, but at any given moment, The nature of discourse is where it is.
The culture is where it is.
And you can't just pull the Overton from 50 miles away, you know, lasso it like Wyatt Earp or something.
And you need somebody right outside who's pulling, but then you need some people who are inside pushing, which means that you're making arguments to push the Overton from within the Overton.
And so my point is that a lot of times, exactly what you're saying, people say, well, this argument about.
Um, you know, how we should take a stand against uh anti white discrimination.
Uh, I'm not going to listen because it's being made by a white guy.
Well, um, you can call Samuel, say you know, but you could also have an anonymous account, right?
That's one way to push the discourse where it's not lost, you don't give your enemies the foothold, uh, to make it about the person, but they actually have to deal with the argument.
Yep, there's a reason you open any like logic textbook or you go through logical fallacies, ad hominem is right up top, it's always the first one.
And to be fair, if Pete Hedgeseth, if he hosts a marriage conference, I'm not going.
People can lose credibility on the topic.
And you could say, I'm not listening to you on that.
And so there are accounts, and people certainly could say, I'm just not going to go there with you.
This isn't worth and valid enough for me to counter the argument.
But by and large, if it's just someone that's nameless, someone you have no connection with, right?
The argument has to stand on its own merits, rise or fall on it.
Somebody just asked, How many Anon accounts do you have, Joel?
I think you've covered this before.
I have Anon accounts.
That have so many followers that if I told you which account it was, it would absolutely blow your mind.
You'd be like, oh, snap, that's him.
No, the reality is, I got on Twitter two years ago for the first time, and it took everything I had, everything I had for two years, constant training, constant learning, just to be able to manage one account.
And it's not even entirely my account.
Nathan is also on the account helping me when I get locked.
So, no, I just, it's funny, like people do the memes like Joel commanding his Anon army over here.
And it's like, I don't think I could do that even if I tried.
I can send a signal message.
I did send a signal message.
I don't apologize for it because when you're getting dragged unjustly by large accounts of people who are slandering you, and you text some friends and say, Hey, could you put this into a cohesive thread and post it on my behalf?
I think that that's absolutely fair game.
But no, I don't have Anon accounts because technologically speaking, I don't think I'm capable.
All right.
Well, it's interesting because the Reformation, which we would say, It was a largely spiritual movement.
It was a political movement as well, right?
It was a cultural, political, spiritual movement.
So was the Revolutionary War, the War for Independence, and the events leading up to that.
And that was even more of a war of annons, was the Revolutionary War.
I mean, the people who were writing both the Federalists and the Anti Federalists had the pseudonyms and the anonymous postings going like crazy.
I mean, they, like, they, it was reputable people.
Who had anonymous accounts, and it was some people that still were not sure who they were who were posting at the time.
It was not really memes or 144 character tweets, but it was short pamphlets, right?
And I actually was pretty funny finding some of the material that they used for their anonymous names, their pseudonyms.
So, historical figures were very popular.
So, these were actual people posting pamphlets anonymously or pseudonymously in the Reformation.
So, they had.
Agricola, Agrippa, Argus, they had Caesar, Caius, Cassius, Juvenus, Senex.
They had, I mean, the list just goes on and on.
On top of that, they had just occupations signed a bricklayer, signed a countryman, signed a farmer, a yeoman, that sort of thing.
English writers were very popular.
John Pym and Junius and Old Whig.
But the one that cracked me up the most, and there was a long list of this, occasionally authors used humorous pseudonyms.
When they were writing satire.
So these are real Revolutionary War founding father era accounts that were releasing pamphlets.
So we had Alexander McSarcasm.
Isn't that fantastic?
That's great.
We had Betsy Cornstalk.
We had Croker.
There was one, Federalissimo.
Federalissimo.
I mean, Jemima Loveleap, Mr. Scribblarius, Mustard Grinder.
The list goes on and on.
And as I researched some of this, I realized.
This idea of not only having an anonymous account to avoid being exposed, to avoid your livelihood being taken away from you, or in some cases during the Reformation, the Catholic Church would, you know, would imprison you and lock you up and kill you in some cases.
So there was that aspect, but there was, there's a rich history of really funny or really serious historical, like you pick an anonymous pseudonym that you want to emulate, like Senex or something like that.
You pick a funny name like, Alexander McSarcasm.
This sort of thing, I'm going to go out on the limb and say it.
Anonymous activity, political, and religious speech is part of the American spirit.
It's part of the European spirit as well.
But it's not just be very serious and stern and only write anonymously if you're writing this extremely well thought out, educated, erudite philosophical pamphlet.
No, there were people who were just publishing fart memes.
Yep, right.
And mocking.
Here's the thing mocking, there is a biblical, theological case for mocking, and mockery is absolutely effective.
It can be done in a simple manner.
Anonymous Activity Is American Spirit00:07:33
And biblical.
Well, that's what I said.
There's a theological case for it.
So mocking is permissible in biblical terms.
That doesn't mean that it's always right.
You can do it wrongly, you can do it rightly.
And that's in the moral sense, in the biblical sense.
But then there's the sense of is it effective or not?
And it is highly, highly effective.
We need anon accounts to mock certain people off of Twitter.
There are certain people who are on X right now who.
Need to be on blue skies.
And by God's grace, a lot of them have left.
That's right.
Still waiting on Owen Strand.
But there are some others that I think, by God's grace, if we can get just a few more in on accounts, I think we can do it.
Yep.
And the church would be blessed.
I'll say, too, it's broader than just X.
We talk about X a lot because that's where a lot of people we interact with are Instagram, YouTube, TikTok.
These are all platforms.
It's really powerful, I think, when you see, I remember seeing on Instagram, I'm not on it much, but it was like Delta Air and their first all woman staff flight.
No.
But you go to the comments and it's people just mocking it relentlessly.
And it's really powerful culturally when an average user, who could be an 18 year old girl or a 20 year old man, they pick up their phone, they see something, and what they see going through it is people pushing back and saying, This is nonsense.
This is ridiculous.
It has a really powerful effect because it then normalizes, Yeah, actually, that doesn't make any sense why I would have a flight fully piloted by women.
Who cares?
What does that give me?
Like, all that's doing is checking a box.
And so, sure, X slash Twitter.
But Instagram, YouTube, and by not attaching your name, you avoid the risk of getting that phone call.
Hey, HR would like to have a meeting with you.
So, whether you're pushing the ball forward, you're choosing to partake in the cultural battle, be it on Twitter, X, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, those are also great places.
That's true.
If you're on them, you're using them to the glory of God, which is right.
It can be hard sometimes.
There's awesome.
X is the best way to be done.
But you're right.
All of it matters.
But X is the best platform because it's one of the largest and freest.
Largest and freest.
And X is different.
YouTube, you know, like, yes, people can respond in the comments and things like that, but it's not really a fair way to, like, he said this and now he's responding and doing that.
It's long form, you know, video and those kinds of things.
Whereas X is, here's a point, counterpoint.
Here's a point, counterpoint.
It's the freest platform since Elon bought it, but it's still large.
Like, there are freer platforms, but a lot of them are smaller, significantly smaller.
And I'm not saying that those platforms don't matter either.
I'm grateful for those platforms as well.
But X, I think, is very strategic.
That's why two years ago, once Elon bought it, I never wanted to be on Twitter because it can be a time suck and you have to guard your time and all these different things.
We'll talk about that a little bit later in this episode.
But I just realized it was too valuable to pass up.
At that point, I had to cut some other things out of my life, like my wife.
No, I'm just kidding.
I don't have my kids.
No.
But I had to cut some other things out of my life, some things that I could cut, like hobbies, things like that, and make time for X as a discipline.
Because I believed that it was a ministry, that it was effective.
I saw the potential of it.
I saw where it was heading.
I saw that this is going to be the largest and freest platform that there is.
And I realized at the time, we had like where it would just automatically like repost if I said something, you know, like a description for a YouTube video would post as a tweet.
And so we had two years ago, we had 400 followers on X.
And I was like, man, this is going to be work.
But by God's grace, in two years, now it's about 27,000 followers and continuing to build.
And I'm hoping that, you know, by the end of, Next year, to have close to 100,000, which by the way, if you're watching on YouTube right now, go over to Right Response Ministries.
No, it's Right Response M. Yep.
Right Response M. At Right Response M on X, if you have an X account and follow our account.
And our videos go live on X, just like they do on YouTube.
Yeah, it's worth saying too.
Like, we talk about these battles because there are thousands and thousands of people on the sideline and they don't interact.
Right.
And they're not, you know, in the fray, but they're watching and they're noticing and they're taking notes.
And they're using that data to decide where to move, to decide what to fund, who to donate to.
So we're not talking about squabbles that are just only affecting 10, 20, 50 individuals in a very small circle.
I've estimated when you look at posts like the View Count, I think there's a pool of about 200,000 semi religious, dissident right individuals.
These people are representatives, they're senators, they're podcasters.
I mean, Tucker Carlson found Santiago Pilago, Pilago, yeah, Pilago on X, brought him on to talk about the vibe shift.
The elites are there and they're watching.
And by being strategic, having great arguments, it has a powerful effect.
The thousands of people watching.
Seriously.
And those are all accounts.
I think Santiago Pliego is smaller than my account.
Probably, yeah.
And he, exactly, he had a great post.
Tucker Carlson saw it, had his people give Santiago a call, and Santiago got a 10 minute segment on Tucker Carlson to reach thousands and thousands.
If not a million.
I mean, you could argue.
So here's part of, you know, we got to go to our first commercial break, but this is what I want us to come back with.
I want us to come back and immediately start talking because I don't want us to miss out on this conversation.
There are guys, pastors who are disparaging, saying, like, you're wasting your time.
Like, you can be crude.
You can be objectively like, hey, that's not just biblical, you know, a biblical permissibility, you know, a style of mocking.
But no, like, you really have crossed the line.
This is just, you're telling someone to, you know, shut the blank up, you know, things like that.
Like, that's just, that's sin.
You're sinning.
So, there really is a line.
We're not saying, hey, it's all free game.
No, there really are morals and there really is such a thing as sin.
But we don't just have that.
We don't just have pastors saying, make sure you don't sin and here's sin as biblically defined and what's objectively immoral.
But we have pastors disparaging guys with Anon accounts because they're saying it's frivolous.
They're saying that it's ineffective.
They're saying that it's a waste of time.
Like, I actually care about having a Christian nation and you, Christian nationalists, on X, what have you done?
I feel like I just see Will Pharaoh dressed up as Mugatu.
On Zoolander, you know, he's like, I invented the piano key necktie.
What have you done?
Nothing!
Nothing!
You know, it's like my first day on X, and I'm saying, I invented the piano key necktie, you know, and you've done nothing for Christian nationalism.
And here's the thing you can make a legitimate argument that Anon accounts on X are responsible for Trump being the next president of the United States.
It's not nothing.
You're wrong.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, but you just.
Maybe you're a boomer, maybe you're a Gen X, but you don't get it.
And that's fine.
Stay in your lane, right?
Whatever that lane is, save babies from the slaughter, preach exegetically from the scripture.
Praise God.
Do those things.
We honor you, but stay in your lane.
You don't get it, and you're wrong.
That Springfield, the cats and dogs where those immigrants are coming in, that was broken by an anonymous account.
And it potentially changed, because then he brought it up in the debate, among other things, the course of the election and the course of the United States.
Breaking The Cat And Dog Narrative00:03:14
That's right.
They're eating the cats, they're eating the dogs.
The Trump dance.
From an anonymous dude with a, who's the guy from Waco, Texas?
The cult leader, David Koresh.
Oh, DS, yes.
The guy with a David Koresh profile picture.
He's the one who broke it.
Captive dreamer.
That's hilarious.
Just getting out there.
Classic.
All right, so we're going to go to our first commercial.
When we come back, we want to read a tweet.
That was posted today, um, that is entirely unhelpful.
That's a perfect negative example of what we're talking about.
Uh, what we'd like to see more pastors, um, and older Christian uh saints who we appreciate and honor, what we'd like to see them avoid.
And uh, so we'll get into that.
Uh, but before we go to the commercial, I gotta say one more time because a bunch of you just tuned in now give this video a like, help us out.
If you're watching on X, like it.
Um, you need to have your laptop open and your phone.
On YouTube with a laptop, on the phone with X, you need to like the video on both platforms.
I need the retweet happening.
I need comments for the algorithm.
Help us out, get this out to as many people as possible.
Let's go to our first commercial.
We'll be right back.
Now is the time to leverage the MAGA economy.
With the private family banking system, you can leverage savings in government qualified plans such as IRAs, Roths, 401ks, and 403bs.
Remember, your 401k type savings.
Are a future target for higher income taxes.
Properly implementing private family banking methods will enormously impact your short term cash use and success in building long term, multi generational, tax free wealth.
If you have consumer debt, no problem.
They can help accelerate the payoff.
If you have a small business, this gets even better.
You can invest in the stock market or buy gold or Bitcoin while simultaneously making money on your savings.
Does this sound too good to be true?
Will come and join a community of business owners, entrepreneurs, and investors who will show you how to multiply your money while enjoying added income tax protection and building legacy wealth.
Join this parallel economy group today.
Send an email today to banking at privatefamilybanking.com.
Again, that's banking at privatefamilybanking.com, and one of our partners will contact you.
Also, don't forget to click.
The link in the show notes below and download a copy of their free ebook, How to Build Multi Generational Wealth Outside of Wall Street and Avoid the Coming Banking Meltdown.
America is a country that was founded for the purpose of allowing Christians to do their duty before God and not to have their consciences ruled by the doctrines and commandments of men.
Reese Fund exists in order to see the Ten Commandments properly applied, not just as a plaque on the wall, but to actually be used in business as though they're commandments from God that we're supposed to obey.
Our goal is to find businesses.
And to buy them and to build them up.
We want to find manufacturing businesses and use them to make sure that we can maintain our capacity to do things here.
Reef Fund, Christian Capital, boldly deployed.
Applying Commandments To Business00:15:27
All right, I have Will Ferrell on the mind.
Welcome back.
I've already used, what movie did I quote?
Zoolander.
Zoolander.
Okay, so here's another one for you.
I think I can help with this Pam Pan situation, this Anon Anon situation.
So, I'm very much aware.
I've noticed that I'm getting dragged, as the kids would say in the comment section.
I understand the concept.
It's a pretty basic concept anonymous, anon.
I get that.
But I have heard it both ways Pam, Pan situation.
Can you name that movie?
Will Farrell.
I think it's who's the other guy?
John Riley.
John C. Riley.
Nathan named it.
Nathan, that's a bonus for Nathan.
But it's when he's in the interview.
And then all of a sudden he pops out from behind him.
They're both in the same interview.
And he's like, I think I can help with this Pam, Pan situation.
So, Anon, Anon, in the technical sense, Anon is, of course, right.
That's of course right.
But I have heard some of the best and the brightest offline to my face say Anon.
I'm not going to mention who they are because I don't want to.
Just because I'm getting dragged by the Anons right now doesn't mean that I need to publicly name who these other guys are so that they can drag too.
That would be an effeminate move.
I'm not going to do it.
I will own it myself.
But I'm going to keep saying Anon, at least for the remainder of this episode.
I feel like I've already dug, I've said it a thousand times in this episode alone.
The hole is too deep.
I can't get out.
I'm looking at you from outside the hole.
Like, that's right.
There's no way I can't get out.
So I'm going to keep saying Anon, but for everybody who says no, it's Anon.
The word is anonymous.
Perfectly fair point.
I understand.
But I've just got to go to my grave at this point, Anon.
All right.
We're going to read a tweet.
It'll be on your screen.
I'll read it out loud from a pastor on X who's middle aged, not older, probably about your age, Joel.
And he had this to say about young men, and we'll talk about it.
So here it is.
I, this pastor says, note that those taking issue with a previous post, and the point he made in that post was that courageous men's lives will not be marked by only fighting Christians, but will be marked by their courageous conflict with unbelievers.
So he said previously, courageous men will fight unbelievers, not just Christians.
Many people are hiding behind anonymous names with a history of mostly fighting other Christians.
So he's saying, those who took issue with my post, they're people that have, for the most part, anonymous names and they're fighting other Christians.
This is cringe.
I cringe even to read this.
Would y'all consider your type of anonymous internet courage fighting other Christians, quote, based?
Or am I using the wrong word, kings?
Seems totally mid, though, doesn't it?
No cap.
Ugh.
Eesh.
That was hard to type.
It was hard to say.
Probably because I'm a grown man, not talk how to speak by teenagers on TikTok.
How do y'all do it?
Here's the point.
This is what he's saying.
Look at your lives and the lives of your leaders.
You talk about a Christian nation in theory only.
It's merely a fantasy for you all.
Proof?
What's the proof of this?
Because neither you or they spend any meaningful time or at all reaching the lost so they can be converted.
You aren't courageous or masculine, quote, kings.
You are little boys playing with computers and phones, arguing with believers, and podcasting in the safety of your four walls.
Christians are soft targets.
Neither you, your anonymous accounts, or your leaders, those you listen to, are impressive.
Well, that was impressive, though.
So we may not be impressive, but that was impressive.
That was, yeah, I mean, that was seriously one of the worst tweets I've read in my life.
I mean, that was insanely bad.
As the Apostle Paul would say, I must be out of my mind to speak like this, but humor, a little fool's talk.
The amount of emails this year alone, by the grace of God and God's grace alone, that I've received of people who have come to faith for the first time, converted to Christianity this year alone because of our podcast.
It's a lot.
It is a lot of souls being won to Christ.
And anonymous accounts helping us by sharing our content, by pushing the discourse.
Yeah, no, it does make a difference.
Here's the deal if you're tweeting 14 hours a day to the neglect of the clear things that you're called to do by God in Scripture with your marriage, with your children, working outside of the home as a man in dignified ways and trying to not only be a provider and a protector, Presently for your family, but lay up an inheritance for your children's children, being a good churchman.
That means a member in a local church and serving your church there.
If your Twitter life is coming at the expense of those things, then touch grass, man.
Yep.
For sure.
100%.
For sure.
Then you're in sin and you need to repent.
But that's not what the tweet we just read says.
The tweet we just read, what it says is it claims, it asserts as a definitive.
As though the person who wrote it has omniscience, that every Christian anon account that's pro Christian nationalism, that they're not doing anything, that they're not evangelizing, that they're not doing the work of an evangelist, they're not sharing their faith, that they've won zero souls.
And not only that, but it also ropes into that in its accusation all of their leaders.
And this is why you don't name it.
It's effeminate.
It's not just effeminate, it's wicked.
It is.
And this is why.
Intentionally, what will happen, guys, do this again and again and again.
They won't name the leaders because as soon as somebody else says, Are you saying that about Joel Webb?
Are you saying that about Stephen Wolfe?
Are you saying that about Brian Sauvay?
Are you saying that about Eric Kahn?
Are you saying that about Andrew Isker?
And then you say, Oh, no, no, I wasn't thinking about them.
I was thinking about raw egg nationalists, who's not even a Christian.
Like, no, You were.
You were thinking about us.
You said Christian nationalists.
Stephen Wolfe literally wrote the book on Christian nationalists.
And Anonymous accounts that are pro Christian nationalism and their leaders, right?
I think it's safe to assume that that would be Christian nationalists with podcasts and platforms that are putting out material that these anonymous accounts support, listen to, and share.
You're talking about CJ Engel, you're talking about Andrew Iskier, you're talking about Stephen Wolfe, you're talking about Ogden, you're talking about me.
That is who you're talking about.
And here's the deal we are winning souls, we are winning souls, and discipling them, and discipling them in the local church setting and online.
Through podcasting and through pastoring in both realms.
And there are many Christians that I know of in my church alone that have anonymous accounts that are spending, clocking in real hours every single week with their wives, with their children, and with other members in the church, discipling them, or with non Christians who are colleagues in the workplace and those things and sharing their faith.
So just no, no, you're just, you're wrong.
Now make a different argument.
Say, Some of the anonymous accounts that claim to be Christian and support Christian nationalist leaders have gone too far.
I understand that you could use an anonymous account to push the discourse by being a little bit outside of the Overton window, and that these things objectively don't go against biblical principles.
They just go against modern sensibilities.
And I think you might be wrong, or maybe you might be right, but that is permissible, and I acknowledge that.
But in the objective sense, there are some things that are simply not allowed in scripture.
Some things really are objectively sin.
I noticed that.
You know, these anonymous accounts have said X, Y, and Z. They've used perverse, crude language, sexual language.
They've degraded women.
Okay, now we're cooking.
Let them cook, right?
That's being a pastor and bringing your pastoral sensibilities to the social space.
I've done that.
Yep.
I have done that.
Hey, dude, that one, you got to delete it.
You got to take it down.
I'm sorry.
But that one, it's not just, I'm pushing back against the post war consensus.
No, that one, you're just sinning.
You're just sinning.
So there's a place for that.
But what Wes just read, that tweet is not that.
That tweet is all anonymous Christian nationalist accounts.
Are losers who have never done anything for the kingdom of God whatsoever.
And all the Christian nationalist leaders that you're following, AKA Joel, Stephen Wolf, all of them, they also haven't won a single soul to Christ and they don't do the work of evangelists.
Brother, that is a bold claim.
That's a bold claim, especially on your first day.
So maybe not having an X account was a good idea.
Yeah.
I don't have examples of it pulled up, but one of the other ones that gets levied from our camp is.
They're in their mom's basement and they're losers.
So many of them.
And not every single one of them is literally married.
But my goodness, of guys that I think of that are ananas, but I know in some capacity, they are hardworking family men, often with multiples of children.
Like the amount that truly are, literally, like truly in their parents' basement because they don't work a job that can get them out of there, it has to be in the single digit percentage.
One of the big accounts on Twitter, write some really good stuff, Kryptos.
Dude has like six kids and just about as many grandkids.
And people assail him or whatever.
Like you won't attach your name to this.
He is so accomplished and so well read and so successful privately and outside of this life that if you're going to try to use this banner, well, those that wouldn't attach their name to it, they won't do that because they haven't accomplished anything and everything that they said would be discredited.
No, they've accomplished so much, so many of them.
And so that falls into the realm of slander when you're saying these people have accomplished nothing, they're losers.
No, actually, that most of them are very successful, good, godly men that you just poisoned, slandered, and lied about.
Amen.
Dude, if guys knew who Smash Bales was.
Like, I've had the privilege of getting to spend some time with him in person, and I would consider him a friend.
But they just assume, like, you're an anonymous account, so you must be 350 pounds in your mom's basement, and you've done nothing in life or for the cause of Christ.
One day, I mean, obviously today is not that day, and it's not my right or my position to do this, but one day I hope that he's secure enough to where he can just come out and be like, here I am, come at me, and nobody can do a darn thing about it.
But Some of these large Christian nationalists, uh, Anon accounts are not only are they not overweight, out of shape losers, but they are some of the most accomplished.
Um, yeah, it's impressive.
Every time they dock someone, this happened to uh, Lomez, they like docks this writer named Lomez, he's written for First Things, just an attractive, handsome, well accomplished dude.
Like, every time they dock someone on the right, like, oh, turns out they're well adjusted, family, good looking, healthy, right?
Come again because right wing.
Views tend to align, not always, but it does tend to align with people who have discipline, are hardworking, are healthy, are pro family, pro marriage, all those kinds of things.
It's the leftists that look like orcs with purple hair, right?
And it only makes sense.
That leftist progressive worldview pairs perfectly with an orc.
But the right wing worldview, especially whether you want to call it the new dissident right or Christian nationalism or in an old sense, because it's really old ideas, because it's really not new, it's just being dusted off and rediscovered.
But paleoconservative would be another good term for it.
These are old views that appeal to.
To men who are disciplined, accomplished, in shape with high testosterone.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's the goal of the guys.
We're going to do a full episode sometimes.
Politics is biology.
There's so much great research out there.
So, X is one way to push the Overton and to change the discourse and to disciple and shape people and all these.
Absolutely.
Another way is literally just to get people to work out, to stop eating seed oils.
Yep.
You can, like, seriously, studies have been done about this at a certain point.
Your testosterone hits a certain point, and all of a sudden, it's like, I don't even know what happened, but I just came out of the voting booth, and for the first time in my life, I voted Republican.
Right.
Down ballot.
Yeah.
If you have high estrogen, you vote Democrat.
Overweight women vote Democrat at higher levels than women that are in shape, just at a raw statistical level.
Yep.
Yep.
All righty.
That's great.
That's good content.
I love it.
I have a question.
You guys help me out here because this is a legitimate question that I have.
What.
I'm not asking us to speculate, but like, let's steal, man.
Why are some of the establishment, even Christian voices, opposed, do you think, to this whole Anon army idea?
Like, it's in our history.
There are good reasons for it.
Is it the abuses that we see sometimes?
Because certainly, of course, there's a sense where if I'm behind a curtain, I can go too far.
Is it the abuses?
Is it.
Is it fear of abuses that aren't realized yet?
Or is it just Steve Day said something a little while ago?
He said that the older generation doesn't understand the language of memes.
A meme is not about what the historical context of an image is.
A meme is about the immediate message that it communicates in that moment, and nothing else about the meme matters.
And his point was there's a different language that's being developed online that people who didn't grow up online or don't spend a lot of time online don't really speak very well.
So, is that a sense here?
Is this a generational thing?
Is this a tech language?
What is the disconnect here?
Part of it is I think some of the establishment is upset about it.
Like, in the simplest explanation, is that because the Anons are currently attacking them.
Yeah.
Right there.
I mean, it's pretty simple in that regard.
So, I think that's like we'd be naive if we didn't acknowledge that that is at least one factor.
I'm not saying that's all of it.
I think they may actually have some principles.
That the older, you know, more established Christian leaders who don't like the Anon accounts, I think some of their distaste towards the Anon accounts comes from principle.
Generational Disconnect Explained00:12:29
But we have to acknowledge that if it's not the exclusive soul factor, it is at least one of the factors that they also don't like the Anon accounts because the Anon accounts are dragging them and making them look silly.
Yeah.
So that's part of it the Anon accounts currently are against them.
That is absolutely part of it.
Beyond that, I would say that.
Because of just technological innovation and all these kinds of things, it is easier than ever before, ever before to say something publicly.
We've never been able to, because even in places that had free speech, just practically speaking, there was only a few people in the entire world who would be able to freely speak to thousands of people.
Because the ability, whether it was Caesar and Rome and an amphitheater, A pauper couldn't do that.
And so it wasn't until the Gutenberg printing press that you could actually, somebody could, but even then it cost money.
It had to be approved by an editor or printing press.
Yeah, it had to be approved by different people.
So this is really one of the first times in human history that, so yes, there's a rich heritage of anonymous accounts and a real purpose for that.
But this is one of the first times, I guess what I'm trying to say is this is one of the first times in history that you can have.
An anonymous account, an anonymous person, or somebody writing under a pseudonym who sucks.
Unvetted.
Like unvetted, but not just unvetted, like they're not good.
Yeah, yeah.
Like there are, like I have to be honest, like there are plenty of anon accounts, and I'm not saying they're not good because they've gone too far.
There are guys who do that.
That's a separate category going too far.
They actually have broken some kind of moral boundary.
They've actually entered into an objective level of sin.
There's that.
That's not what I'm talking about right now.
What I'm talking about is take morals aside.
I'm saying there are actually plenty.
Of Anon accounts today that are just not good.
Right.
Like, your hot take is it's not insightful, you're not wise, you're not very intelligent, you're not very effective.
It's just.
You don't get it.
You just don't get it.
Yeah, exactly.
Like, it's not good.
So, my point is if I'm trying to steal man, right, and be fair to some of the older established Christian leaders, especially the guys in our camp who I love, who I think are wrong on some things, but I love and respect and appreciate.
Those guys, I think, if they were arguing from principle, I think they probably wouldn't say this.
But what I'll say on their behalf, because they may not say it themselves, is one of the reasons they don't like the anonymous accounts is because the anonymous accounts are currently against them and making them look silly.
So I'll add that reason.
I think to give some reasons that they might say themselves, they would say, yeah, but also when John Adams or Jefferson or somebody, one of the founders is writing under a pseudonym, they were good.
Right, right.
Yeah.
You know, and when I know good enough that we still read them now, exactly, they were well read, intelligent, you know.
But now, like anybody can have an anon account, and they're not all good, right?
Joel, can you and I would say, yep, you're right, that's that's fair.
So, that would be one reason I would offer to answer your question.
Do you have can you repeat the question real quick for the audience?
Just what's the why does establishment disparage the anons?
I think it's tough when you're, say, very successful in one area.
So, take the example of Charles Haywood.
Built a multi million dollar business, sold it, and he's dedicated the rest of his life.
Shampoo warlord.
That's just, he's a king.
He's awesome.
I'm about to be a Tesla warlord.
People don't even know.
If you know, you know.
Yeah.
I'll get into it later.
Go ahead.
So he built a multi million dollar business, and then he's dedicated his life now to reading right wing and left wing works and being a political commentator.
So say you're really successful and he worked hard.
I mean, like his family was struggling.
He did a lot.
So if you left that arena, you were successful.
Maybe that's pastoring or ministry or something else.
And then he took it and he went online.
He thought, I have some good ideas.
I have some thoughts.
I've done the reading.
And you went on there, and then immediately, people that hadn't accomplished a tenth of what you accomplished were picking your arguments apart, and people were siding with them.
If you had any level of pride, it would be very easy to say, Bucko, listen here.
You don't know what I've built.
You don't know what I've done.
You don't know what I've read.
Yeah, that's kind of snarky.
And yeah, I may have had a gap there, but you don't get the bigger picture, and I know better than you.
So it's been going from one arena where you're successful.
Maybe you've built a school or a church or a business or a ministry.
You've built that all up, and then you want that respect to carry over.
All right, now I'm saying this and I want you to view it the same way and take it with the same rigor, and it's not that good.
And people tell you to your face immediately when you don't even know who it is that wasn't that great, wasn't well thought out.
It takes a lot of humility to say, Yeah, actually, I was wrong.
Yeah, I need to tighten that up, which it's tough.
Pride is a sin, I think, probably of all of them.
Many sins are a function of pride.
And so you have to have a certain level of humility to have your ideas tested in the public square where anyone and everyone can say, That was stupid.
And a lot of people can agree with them, and you can feel foolish.
Yeah.
That was very well said.
Yeah.
Pride is absolutely one of the factors.
And yeah, I think, you know, there are, well, so, you know, can there be particular sins that might be, can different peoples, nations, peoples, races be known for one particular sin?
And then, or three particular sins, and then another nation or people group known for another sin?
I would argue yes.
Yes.
And not that they're marked by it for all of time.
I'm post millennial.
I think all the nations eventually are going to flock to Mount Zion.
So it doesn't mean they can't be redeemed.
It doesn't mean people can't change over time.
But at any given point of time, in a present moment in history, can Americans be marked?
And that doesn't mean each and every individual American, but in a general sense, can America be known for one particular sin, like gluttony?
Yep.
You know?
Whereas You know, another nation like Ethiopia is probably not known for gluttony.
Right.
You know, yeah, that's a thing.
Can generations, right?
So here's what I'm getting to.
Can generations, particular generations, be known in a general sense?
It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions to the rule, not each and every individual person, not universally, but generally.
Can generations be known for particular sins?
Yes.
And I just think we need to be honest.
Yes, we need to be respectful as a younger generation.
We need to honor.
At the same time, we also need to be honest.
Boomers do not apologize in a general sense.
They do not apologize or admit when they're wrong.
That generation is known for that particular sin.
Every generation has pride.
So I'm not saying that boomers are uniquely prideful.
I'm not saying that they're more prideful than Gen X or millennial or Zoomers.
That's not my argument.
But pride has different expressions.
Pride can reveal itself through different avenues.
And the particular expression of pride that I'm speaking of.
Not being willing to admit when you're wrong.
I think that that does embody the boomer generation to a higher degree in general, not every single one of them, but in general, more than Gen X or millennials.
Like I have always, and all glory be to God, must be out of my mind to talk like this, you know, humor a little fool's talk.
But by the grace of God and His grace alone, nothing in and of myself, innate to me, but by God's grace, I've just always been much more comfortable admitting when I got something wrong.
So, I was pastoring in California in 2020 when COVID hit and all that, and we skipped four weeks of church.
And when we started meeting, we couldn't meet inside because we didn't have a building.
We were kicked out of the school that we were renting from.
And so we met the only place we could, which was outside.
We would have met inside if we could have, but we were outside, and about half of the members, a third of them, didn't come back at that time, at least not for a couple of weeks.
And then they started to trickle back.
But the two thirds that did come that first Sunday when we started gathering again after four weeks of missing, about half of them wouldn't have come back if we didn't agree to wear masks outside.
So I'm standing on a platform preaching outside wearing a mask.
Is that stupid?
Yes.
And that picture, every now and then, it makes the rounds on the internet.
People be like, oh, is this your based, you know, courageous guy that you're talking about?
It's a picture of me outside wearing a mask.
And I'll be the first to admit, yeah, that was stupid.
Now, pastorally, I would have missed out on half the church coming back if I didn't do it.
I was not the guy saying, let's wear a mask.
But there were other leaders that were saying, let's wear a mask at the time.
And more importantly, about half of the members.
We're saying, let's wear masks at the time.
In fact, a third of the members that didn't show up were angry at me because I said, This is a historic Sunday.
We're excited.
It'll be our first Sunday to come back together.
And historic, because at the time, outdoor services, even a drive in service where you went through the radio, you did like the little microphone, the device that goes, yeah, exactly, like a drive in movie where you turn to a certain station on the radio and it comes in your car.
Like that was illegal by Gavin Nusalimi, the governor of California.
That was illegal at the time that we were going beyond that.
I know it all sounds silly now, but at the time to do a drive in where the family was staying in their car with the windows up, that would have been illegal in the state of California because we started meeting in April, the end of April 2020.
But we went even beyond that.
That would have already been breaking the law.
We broke the law even further by doing out of the cars and outdoor service.
But still, there's this picture.
But here's the deal I have all the caveats that I just gave.
You know, certain members wouldn't have come back if I wasn't wearing the mask.
And this was going on and this was going on.
And we were still hosting a legal service.
And we beat John MacArthur by 10 weeks.
You know, everybody gives, you know, he's the hero of COVID.
We were meeting 10 weeks before he started.
Like, I can give all those disclaimers.
But here's the deal I'm wearing a mask outside and it's still gay.
That's right.
So, what did I do?
And I didn't just do this four years later in hindsight.
That very first sermon, the first 15 minutes of it was me apologizing.
For missing four weeks and repenting because I was wrong.
And every time that picture surfaces, not every time because there's so many trolls, I just can't respond to all of them because I got a wife and kids and a life to live.
But occasionally when that picture surfaces, some major account and it's getting a lot of attention, this is how I deal with it.
I don't just give all the disclaimers that I just gave, I also make sure to say, oh, and also, I was wrong.
Boomers don't get it.
Yeah.
I was wrong, said never by the vast majority of boomers.
You know how easy it is?
People, seriously, this happens all the time.
This is just part of life because we're all human, we're all fallible.
But people will get you in a stranglehold.
Do you know how to break out of that hold so easily?
It'll blow your mind.
Just say I was wrong.
About 10,000 word apologies that are so long, my thumbs don't have any actual apology in them.
It's actually just a 10,000 word double down.
And it's an explanation, but never an apology.
Yeah, you don't actually have to do that.
The elites don't want you to know this, but you can just say, I was wrong and move on.
And I've had to do that again and again.
So, with like even with the Tobias thing, I'm not going to get into all that.
I'm going to say one little point.
I felt like I messed up at least in one way.
Other things I think are arguable.
You can make an argument that this was wrong.
I can make an argument that it wasn't.
There's people on my side, people on your side.
But there was one thing, one thing, and even this, people are like, Joel, you shouldn't have even apologized for this.
I, you know, because there's an argument that could be made.
Apologize Instead Of Doubling Down00:07:51
I'm aware, but I know my heart.
Other people don't.
I do.
And when I said, I was doing the meme, as the kids say, the Troy movie with Brad Pitt, where he says, and that's when, why nobody will remember your name.
When I said that, I was doing the meme.
I was being funny.
I was also being prideful.
I know my heart, and I know that in my heart at that moment, there was at least some degree of pride.
So, you know what I did when all this is blowing up?
As others clarified, I apologized.
Some clarify, and others repent.
And I said, okay, is there anything that I can repent for?
That one.
I know my heart.
That statement actually could have been made without it being prideful.
Because, and everybody said, oh my gosh, Joel's just, you know, he's, he, he, he, look, just another example of how he only cares for earthly power and earthly glory.
Guys, one of the greatest judgments in the Old Testament that God deals out to people is not just that their name would not be written in the Lamb's book of life.
That matters most.
Eternity.
Is your name remembered in heaven?
Is it remembered by God?
Is your name written in the Lamb's book of life?
Sure, that's ultimate.
But to pretend that ultimate things matter and then everything else doesn't matter at all goes against scripture.
Paul says physical training is still of Some value, right?
Spiritual training, ultimate value.
Physical training, still some value.
Well, likewise, your name written in the eternal sense, remembered by God, written in the Lamb's Book of Life, ultimate value.
But your name being remembered on earth also has some value, not ultimate value, but some value.
And I would argue biblically, great value.
Because stated in the negative, on the flip side of the coin, one of the greatest and strictest, harshest judgments that God dealt out is He said that with certain individual men, Who had sinned against God in high handed ways.
God said, I will blot out his name, not just from the Lamb's Book of Life, but I will blot it out from earth, meaning I will cut off his offspring.
He will be forgotten.
To be forgotten is actually a terrible thing.
It is a terrible thing.
And to desire, you can, you can, now desires can be sinful, sinfully incentivized, or they can be righteously incentivized.
And that's for God to know and for the individual to also do the important scrutiny and heartwork to examine themselves and to say, as David did, Search me, O Lord, see if there's any fault in me, and wherever there is fault, to repent.
But that said, it is not inherently, automatically, sinfully motivated to desire legacy and glory and to be remembered, not just in heaven, but on earth, because we know that it's a strict judgment to be forgotten.
So there you go.
There's the disclaimer.
I could explain that explanations till the cows come home.
However, I could also just say, yeah, all those things are true.
But also, I think in that moment, I was riled up.
I was frustrated because of the situation, things that were going on.
And in that moment, as I said those words, your name will be forgotten.
I can make a biblical argument, I can make a practical argument because your last name is very difficult to pronounce.
But also, there's a moral point to be made.
Speaking for myself, I did have arrogance in my heart.
Part of it, at least part of it, stemmed from pride in Joel's heart.
So then publicly on Twitter, I just said that.
I just said, This sounded arrogant.
And then I went further.
I said, And you know why it sounded arrogant?
It sounded arrogant because it was arrogant.
And I said, Praise God that his love doesn't just cover mistakes, but it covers a multitude of sins.
And I'm sorry.
I said something that boomers can't, like, again, in general, not all of them, not each and every individual.
But in general, they can't say that.
And so I do think the generations can be marked by particular sins.
And one of the particular sins for boomers is pride, not necessarily more pride than other generations, but pride with a particular expression, the particular expression being an extreme hesitancy and reluctance to admit when they get something wrong.
That was my point.
There was a good comment from MB East, and then maybe we'll go to our second commercial break.
They said they had a friend, and just maybe we'll have it right up here.
I had a friend that said, It rocked my faith that my dad never apologized, he always excused himself.
And then blamed they or then blamed me.
People's faith is impacted when they have a dad or a parent figure that it's always, it wasn't my fault.
You don't understand.
Apologizing and repenting is a powerful thing that, when it takes the argument away from your opponent and is also encouraging to other people, like they repented.
I've got the sin I know.
And it's as simple as that to confess and repent to the Lord.
Second commercial break.
Yeah.
All that, though, back to all we got on this to sum it up because of Michael's question, which I thought was a good one.
What are some of the reasons that the older establishment Christian types don't like the ANOs?
One, Because the anons make them look silly.
That's a practical argument.
I think that's at least partially true.
Two, in their defense of the establishment, because anybody can be an anon, and some of them actually aren't very good.
But then three, because most of the establishment guys who are in positions of institutional power where they actually have levers where they could at least attempt, whether successful or not, to gatekeep, the would be gatekeepers tend to be the older generation.
That's lived long enough and achieved enough to get into those seats of power.
And the older generation would be the boomer generation.
And the boomer generation, I believe, is particularly marked by not more pride than other generations, but pride in a specific avenue expression, namely not willing to admit that they're wrong.
And the idea that it's one thing to get thoughtful feedback in a peer reviewed study.
You know what I mean?
Right.
But it's another.
When your magnum opus, your life's work is picked apart by a 17 year old with a picture of William Wallace or Matt Stratton.
Yeah, exactly.
And that's hard for anybody.
That's hard for any generation.
Yeah, yeah.
But that is particularly hard for boomers because it is so foreign to them.
So foreign.
And boomers, I believe, out of the generations, not that have ever lived of all human history, but out of the generations currently alive right now, when I think of just the four main ones, boomers, X, millennials, and Z.
I think I can say, not each and every individual, but in a general sense, boomers are far and above less likely to say I was wrong than those other three younger generations.
And so, anons pointing out that they're wrong with a particular generation that never admits when they're wrong, that's tough.
That probably hurts.
All right, here's our next commercial break.
All right, that's it, guys.
I tried to warn you the time has finally arrived.
Our early bird pricing is gone.
But.
Don't despair.
We've gone above and beyond to make this conference affordable to all.
So even now, it's only $170 for an adult, it's cheap for teenagers, and free for kids.
What am I talking about?
Well, I'm talking about the Christ is King Conference, How to Defeat Trash World.
It's happening April 3rd, 4th, and 5th, the Year of Our Lord 2025.
That's a Thursday, Friday, Saturday, three full days, jam packed with eight main sessions, three panels, and an extraordinarily based lineup of speakers.
Join The Modern Day Kingsman00:02:37
So register at RightResponseConference.com.
Again, that's RightResponseConference.com.
Register today.
Throughout history, a kingsman was someone loyal to their king.
Someone who served with unwavering dedication and honor.
The modern day Kingsman is loyal to the King of Kings, Jesus Christ, proclaiming his sovereignty in every area of life.
And that's the mission behind Kingsman Caps.
Founded by two brothers, Johnny and Justin Sanchez, Kingsman Caps exist to proclaim that Christ is King, one cap at a time.
And this isn't just any hat, this black and gold colorway is a limited edition.
Crafted with premium features that you won't find on your average dad hat.
Check this out a crown shaped sports cap design, diamond air holes for ventilation, a flexible rubber back strap, a plush triple quilted sweatband for ultimate comfort, and my favorite, the hidden treasure pocket, discreetly located inside the sweat wicking liner.
And don't miss the verse inside Psalm chapter 2, verses 10 through 12, reminding us to serve the Lord with fear.
And rejoice with trembling.
Again, this isn't just any cap, it's a statement that Christ is King.
And right now, you can carry the crown with a specialty holiday discount.
Use code King10 at checkout for savings on this limited edition premium sports cap.
Head on over to KingsmenCaps.com to grab yours while supplies last.
Again, that's KingsmenCaps.com.
Join the Brotherhood and become a modern day Kingsman.
Loyal to the King of Kings.
Carry the crown because Christ is King.
Visit KingsmenCaps.com today and use code King10 for 10% off your entire order.
Merry Christmas.
Are you a Christian struggling to find companies that align with your values and beliefs?
Well, then Squirrelly Joe's has you covered for all your coffee needs.
All of their coffee is hand selected and roasted fresh every day by a family of fellow believers.
Try them out and you'll savor exceptional coffee while knowing that your investment supports.
A company committed to following God's teachings and upholding truth and righteousness, ensuring that your hard earned money contributes to the growth of God's kingdom.
Stop giving your hard earned dollars to pagans who support evil.
Avoid Unforced Spiritual Errors00:15:08
Right Response listeners have access to an exclusive deal.
Your first bag of coffee is free.
All you have to do is cover the shipping.
So head on over to squirrelyjoes.com forward slash right response.
Again, that's squirrelyjoes.com forward slash right response.
To claim your first free bag of coffee today.
All right, guys, I understand.
I looked like the lead singer of an emo band.
Here's the deal we recorded that commercial this afternoon or this morning, right before today.
We needed to get it out.
I didn't have my hair done at the moment.
Plus, I was going to put on a hat.
And the last thing I'll say is this look, I just spent in this episode 20 minutes talking about how we should just own it.
Yeah, I looked stupid in that commercial.
But here's the beauty.
I can't defend myself with this, not by saying, oh, but really, I looked awesome and it's just your lying eyes and you should, you're the one who's wrong.
No, I look stupid.
My one defense is I have in the past looked even stupider.
Remember the double part.
Never forget.
All right, Michael.
All right, so we're going to start landing the plane.
By the way, a little bit of free publicity.
Both Wes and I grabbed that hat during the break and felt it and handled it.
It is not just nice looking, it feels really nice.
Because people do the cheapest hat and then they just put their Christian label on it.
That's not what they did.
This is really nice.
Like, I've never, honestly, I'm not a huge hat guy, so I'm not the best.
But Wes, all things clothes, he cares.
Unfortunately.
Unfortunately, yeah.
For better or for worse.
Wes is gay.
No, I'm just kidding.
He's not.
But it's really good quality.
Yeah.
Like it, yeah, it's really good.
Yeah, it has what is that?
Psalm 2:10 through 12.
Just leave it inlaid in there.
Yeah.
So, yeah.
Check it out.
Okay.
Back to you, Mike.
Good.
So, what we want to do before we handle some questions is spend a few minutes and not presume, but offer some guidance or some help or some thoughts towards the anons out there.
So, for what it's worth, here are some thoughts from us.
And one of the things that we wanted to make sure we said was there is a difference between an unforced error.
And an unavoidable error, not even an unavoidable error, but an unavoidable trap, right?
And so the difference would be: um, you are running for public office, and a reporter says, 'You know, do you affirm the biblical traditional view of marriage?' Here are your tweets where you and yeah, here are your tweets.
You said this, um, you said you affirmed the biblical view of marriage.
Do you still stand by that?
Yep, you said sodomite, in which case you respond and say, 'I sure did.' After consideration, I've decided to become worse.
So that's the sort of behavior online where you're standing.
Um, boldly for truth, you're not being you're not hiding your message, you're not hiding in a way where your words are could be interpreted as unclear.
You're being direct, you're being bold, you're being um forthright, you're putting an edge on it, even putting an edge on it.
Yeah, yep.
And that's and that is the sort of thing where culture or um wicked media or wicked whatever the society that we live in will see your online words, your interviews, that sort of thing, and we'll say, Well, because of that, in our eyes at least, you are canceled, right?
And maybe, maybe a governor.
Who's a rhino or something like that was thinking about putting you in some sort of advisory position, sees that you have been bold in that way and says, Well, I'm not going to have you be part of my administration.
And so, in a sense, you lose that battle, but you do it because of clarity and boldness and even sharp words that needed to be said on an important topic, right?
Biblical.
Like Dusty Devers, praise God.
So, he's been faithful and he's been bold and he's been outspoken.
And And right now, providentially, in this present moment, he could do all those things.
And in a unique providential lay of the land, somebody being unseated, he could win state senator in Oklahoma.
He could not win president.
Right.
Right.
Not today.
Right.
Could he eventually?
Possibly.
Amen.
By God's grace.
I believe it.
Yeah.
Amen.
And so things are going to continue to change.
We're going to keep pushing.
But the point is that there are those kinds of things where it's.
You didn't mess up.
It's not shooting yourself in the foot.
You didn't mess up.
You were being faithful, but you're in some context throughout history, like it's Babylon or whatever.
And it's like Daniel.
If it wasn't for a providential, miraculous intervention, literally God saving him from being devoured by lions, then he would have lost his political seat by virtue of being eaten alive.
And nobody could have said, Oh, that's an unforced error.
You shot yourself in the foot.
No, no, Daniel was doing what he was commanded by God to do, praying.
And now, some looking into that text, some would say, yeah, but it was an unforced error in the sense that he was praying with the windows open.
And they would look at Matthew 6 when you pray, pray in secret for your father.
Here's the deal that was unique to Old Covenant Israel.
So there was actually part of the covenant when Solomon built the temple.
He literally gives in his invocation of christening, his christening of the temple, he prays as king of Israel, representative of Israel, and covenants.
This is a covenantal prayer with the Lord.
And he says, whenever anyone, even if they are far off or in captivity, prays and faces this temple, you will hear from that.
And so, what Daniel had been doing, this is my exegesis of the text.
Daniel didn't ramp it up.
It's not like here's a decree from the king, and now I'm going to intentionally become worse and shoot myself in the foot.
No, he just kept doing what he was always doing.
So, he didn't throw extra punches and he didn't pull punches either.
He always prayed.
And because of a particular covenant established through Solomon at that time related to the temple, especially what Solomon said and covenanted with the Lord is if Israel ever found itself one day in captivity, held far off, that if anyone would turn and face the temple, facing Jerusalem, Israel, and pray and cry out to.
So I think Daniel, the entire time, since he was a young boy, the entire time that they had been in exile in Babylon, he had been praying three times a day and facing, he wasn't just facing the windows, just sticking it to the man.
He was facing a particular A set of windows in his apartment that were faced a particular direction that happened to be towards Jerusalem where the temple was, in keeping with a covenant established by Solomon, praying for the deliverance of captivity of Israel.
That's why Daniel was doing that.
And we know that was the case because his adversaries knew exactly where to stand to see what he was doing.
They knew exactly.
All this was known.
So that was not Daniel adding punches.
He wasn't pulling them, certainly, but he also wasn't just sticking it to the man, shooting himself in the foot.
Yeah.
So there's that.
And that is commendable online behavior.
Yeah.
Right.
But there's also the category of an unforced error where maybe because you think it's anonymous or maybe you just don't think that it will ever matter, you are dipping into the realm either of blatant sin, like Joel said earlier, or even just extremely unwise, right?
Where a future employer or a future senator who wants to have you be a chief of staff or just even a future father-in-law, if you're a young man, right?
And your future father-in-law sees that you are posting with an anonymous account that gets doxed or something like that, there are the unforced errors.
That we want to encourage you to avoid.
Yes.
Not necessarily because they're morally wrong, although they could be, but they will just, they have the potential to drastically harm or hamper.
To ruin your life.
Yes.
What would be your life?
And your allies.
Yes.
They could connect you to someone else and they could leverage it and good guys that you love and you wanna see succeed get hampered because you were extremely undisciplined.
Yes.
And not maybe even sin and not taking a stand for truth, but just at a certain level, you open fire unintentionally.
On your own, guys, you were unwise, yeah, and that really goes back to something Joel said earlier, which is a striking comment to hear.
Where he said he disciplines his Twitter usage, right?
In all things, men, young men, we are to be disciplined, even in your social media posts from an anonymous account, because discipline is the crown virtue before really all others.
Discipline precedes every other good thing that will happen in your life, and so even in your sarcasm, even in your Critique and criticism and cultural engagement, discipline in all things.
Yep.
Yep.
Amen.
Someone should know your social media.
This is good.
And it doesn't have to be your pastor.
Doesn't.
Stephen Wolf, he said this last week, not every pastor gets it.
And so there could be a case where you've decided to be online, you've decided to engage, to comment, to interact, and someone should probably know, right?
Tons of men have covenant eyes.
They haven't had a problem in years, but the accountability helps them that if ever they were tempted, there's a guardian there to say, ah, no, hang on.
So probably someone in real life that would call you out or say, hey, this wasn't the best idea.
Someone should know.
And that person does not have to be, and maybe even shouldn't be, in many cases, specifically your pastor.
Hey, pastor, here's my handle.
Here it is on Instagram and on TikTok and on X.
That might not necessarily be prudent.
Now, that could be perfectly fine if your pastor understands, you think he's a good mentor that would keep an eye on you.
But someone should know.
So, someone's able to say, My brother in Christ, I want to see you take political power.
I want to see you run for office.
And if that's still up by the time you do it, it's going to be difficult for you.
Or this could have the potential to.
And it's happened, not just once or twice, many different times to varying degrees.
Good men that were undisciplined, not even sinning, and it hurt them, it hurt their allies.
So, have someone that'd be able to say to you, I saw this hit 30 minutes ago.
Still time to delete King.
Go ahead and just pull that offline.
That's going to be your best bet for yourself.
And again, and for those people, you are not just alone.
You interact with us and anyone else online.
You're at some level reflective of them and reflective of the people you ally with.
So, for your sake and for those, someone should know.
It doesn't have to be your pastor, but someone should be able to pick up the phone, give the call in a good way.
Not a bad way, but a good way.
Yep.
I just heard, and I don't remember who it is, so forgive me for forgetting some of the details.
Recently, I heard a story of someone who was coming into the public eye.
and had not even considered tweets from back, you know, six, seven years, teenage years, things like that.
And as soon as this person was mentioned as a potential, even maybe a Trump administration person, people on the left went and just screenshotted everything, the entire internet presence of this person.
And then someone had told that person, you need to go scrub your accounts from when you're a teenager, did that, but it was already too late, right?
And I forget all the details, but it either really hampered or took this person off the list of consideration altogether.
Yeah.
Wow.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
All right, comments?
Any other suggestions for Anans?
No, that's good.
Yep.
I mean, I think you're not going hard enough.
That's your word to the Anans.
However hard you're going, there is no aspect to it.
You need to go harder.
If you're not spending 14 hours a day.
Yeah.
No, I think you guys gave good words.
I like what you said, Wes, in terms of having somebody have some accountability.
Yep.
And it doesn't, there's no Bible verse that says it has to be your pastor.
So, like, to say, well, it has to be your pastor because he's in charge of shepherding your soul.
And so he needs to know what you're doing.
Okay, like, well, then what about what you're doing, you know, in home?
Like, does your pastor should you have security cameras in every bedroom of your home and your pastor reviews the footage of every day?
Like, yeah, no, no, like, you are not responsible for reporting everything you've ever done to your pastor.
Um, but I think you should have accountability from someone, yeah.
So, you might get your pastor involved if your trusted friend points out, Look, my brother, this is now three months and you've just been raging in anger, like sinful anger all over social media.
It seems like you actually have an anger.
Problem.
Yeah, go get spiritual, godly counsel then.
Well, and that's what it would be is like, you know, so have an accountability partner that does not have to be your pastor, but then having that accountability, if they and you and the conviction of the Holy Spirit, you know, begin to work on your heart and you realize, no, I really am in sin, then, you know, if it's like, I've been in sin, you know, like I've messed up with, you know, one tweet or something, and okay, then I'm going to do better.
But if it's a pattern like you're saying, it's ongoing, then that's when you would go to a pastor and say, hey, I need some help.
Yep.
Yep.
So, yep.
Okay.
Yeah, I think that's really good.
Let's deal with some questions.
What do we got?
Let's do super chats, maybe first.
Yeah, I don't know if I can.
Some of the super chats, I don't know if I can answer.
Might have to just give some $5 refunds.
I can read Michael's.
This is a good topic I want to know more on.
So maybe put a pin in it, Michael, and anyone else interested.
Michael asked Is there perhaps any connection between the renaming of Jehovah as Yahweh in recent years in Reformed circles and their move towards Christian Zionism?
He means in English, particularly.
Yes.
So like English, Old Testament translations.
I want to know more about this.
I don't know enough now to comment, but in the new year.
Three episodes a week.
We might be able to do one on it.
Yeah.
My understanding is Jehovah is more particular to Jesus.
And that Yahweh is more like the Godhead.
There's something with the vowels with Yahweh in the Hebrew that they get funny with.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, they just take them out.
It's just, yeah, it's YHWH or something like that.
I think it's more pantheistic in nature.
So that transition from a more specific covenantal name to that, as I understand it, could be interpreted as a broader, more pantheistic, just the God that there are many routes to.
Just a very high level, that.
Switch and then going from the Hebrew Zionism, that would be the connection there.
Okay.
Yeah.
The over reliance on Jesus.
Like just a more general God, whereas Jehovah, that's what I was trying to say, is in terms of like Jehovah Jesus and Yahweh God, what I was trying to say is like Jesus, you know, when we say like, and I pray this in Jesus' name, amen, like it's very particular.
Whereas like you would see, you know, a lot of politicians would be like, you know, they'll say God, but they may not say Jesus.
Isn't it?
Because Jesus is particular and God, like Vivek, Haji, what's uh, Ramaswamy?
I had said it.
He's Indian.
I like Johnny Quest, but the point was uh, in saying Haji real quick, just to cover that, uh, no, I don't want him to be president, right?
Um, it's America, yeah, it's America, okay, but anyways, um, yeah, and he's Hindu, right?
He is Haji, he's not wearing the turban, but he's he's Hindu.
I stand by Haji, so anyways, uh, Vivek, like he's gonna say God and pass it off because he knows he's in America with.
You know, at least nominal Christian audience.
Navigating Nominal Christian Audiences00:07:05
Again, because he went to a Catholic school.
So he knows what he's saying when he says that to Americans.
He knows what he is connoting.
But he'll say God a lot more than he's going to say Jesus.
100%.
Whereas JD Vance, you know, who's Catholic, now, to be fair, isn't he married to a Hindu?
Yeah.
He's married to a female Haji.
But he also converted not too long ago.
That's right.
So give it time, let him cook.
Five, six years.
Still, let him cook.
He was already married when he converted.
He's busy, too.
He's, no, but his first responsibility is to wash his wife in the Word.
And we need to pray that she would be converted.
We can pray that Vivek also.
But I am much more hopeful for a wife with a Christian husband than a man whose wife's not a Christian.
Who already went to Catholic school.
He already went to Catholic school and wasn't converted.
That's far less hopeful.
So, not a lot of hope for Vivek, but the wife of JD Vance.
But here's my point Vivek is going to talk about God.
And if he was more honest, he'd say God's.
You know, because the response would be, which one out of the three million are we talking about?
So he's going to say God, like Yahweh, instead of Jesus, more particular, like Jehovah.
Whereas JD Vance, he literally said, like, when somebody was shouting the audience behind him, like, Christ is King, not God, but Christ, Jesus Christ is King.
And he turned around and he said, That's right, Christ is King.
Now, are there problems with Vance?
Yeah, sure.
Right.
Yeah.
But man, I'm excited.
Yeah, man.
Like, give it time by God's grace.
Let's pray.
But saying Christ or Jesus, Is to saying God as saying Jehovah is to saying Yahweh.
That was kind of your point, right?
Someone in the chat said we got the Hebrew all wrong.
It's possible.
We'll do more research.
You're very clear.
We are not experts.
I gave the disclaimer.
I'd like to know more about the energy.
Beginning and ending.
Yeah.
And here's the whole theme of the episode.
As far as I'm concerned, I was wrong.
Boom.
Ow.
You thought you had me in the arm bar.
I was wrong.
I'm free.
Get out jail free card.
I continue saying things.
All right.
Funny question from the other Paul.
Great guy.
Did any of you gents have a goth girlfriend?
I did not ever.
I did not.
Negatory.
All right.
No.
Negatron.
And some support from Jeff Hafley and from Treadle.
Thank you both.
Yeah.
Yeah, thank you guys.
I appreciate it.
Wait, hold up.
Let me just read them.
I know what you're doing there, Wes.
I'm not going to read them quietly, is what I'm saying.
Okay.
Trotto, I appreciate that.
Yep.
Johnny Quest.
Johnny Quest.
All right, cool.
Any other questions out of the super chats now?
The cheap seats?
We'll go with the more relevant questions for today's episode then.
There was one on Revelation.
Peter Sawyer, we see him in the chat a lot.
During the early church, the church looked down on forging a letter under somebody else's name.
Is that the same as using an anonymous name?
No.
I would say no.
No.
I think that's immoral.
Forging is, that is a lie.
You're signing as somebody else who the consequences could fall down on their head for what you're writing.
What about ghostwriting?
You're framing someone.
So say, like John MacArthur, I got a new book on Ephesians coming out.
Really, an intern writes 80% of it.
Is there any credit in there?
The interns never write 80%.
I've talked to some people behind the scenes with those things.
They organize it and put it in book form.
That is absolutely true.
But you're working off of everything with MacArthur.
It's like, how can you write a book every three weeks?
You've written 4,000 books.
My father in law has all of them too.
There are 40,000, and they all exist on my father in law's bookshelf.
And all the CDs too.
That's rough.
But no, it all comes from preaching.
If you're preaching 50 weeks a year, give or take, and you've done that for 50 years, It's not just like, oh, we're taking the sermons from these six months and making it a book.
It's also by the time they were making books and John MacArthur's name started getting out there, he had already been a pastor preaching 50 times a year for 20 years.
So you already had this backlog, this repository of whatever, a thousand, a couple thousand sermons.
And then now, and you're just adding another 50 sermons to it every single year.
So you're taking all that, and John MacArthur, from what I hear, at least most of the time, manuscripts.
So you're actually taking his writing, his real writing that he actually did, and And he does it, you know, going through whole books of the Bible.
So you're taking, you know, and yeah, so it's, so yes, people are involved in helping MacArthur's books be crafted.
And I would say they're organizing it.
It's like, what do you call it, Nate, with like abridged, you know, like it's abridging something.
They're making a consistent stream of thought and putting it into chapters and where this one goes and that one.
But they are working off of the original content, the ideas, the theology.
And even many of the sentences and words, I would say the majority is what John MacArthur wrote in his manuscript.
So, something like that, I don't have a problem with.
However, I would say personally, if it was me, I would want to just give those people credit.
So, I would say written by John MacArthur and edited by, and you could even put it in the back of the book, but with a team of editors that helped.
Special thanks to so and so, so and so.
And that might even be in there, but he produces a lot of books.
There's a big system there, so there may be help in organizing.
So, the Ghostwriter, all that means that Ghostwriter versus Forging, I think, are different.
Oh, snap.
Nate just popped in here.
He said, What about Ligonier continuing to produce R.C. Sproul books four years after, I mean, seven years after he's dead?
William Perkins, the same thing happened with him.
He was a Puritan.
It's the same as MacArthur.
Publishers published their works, you know.
But they're working off of things that Sproul actually did write, whether it's essays, you know, that were published in some theological journal but were never, you know, condensed and put into small book form, or whether it's manuscripts from sermons, or whether it's a lecture that he gave in a studio or whatever.
It's taking stuff that they actually did right and comprising it, organizing it.
And so, all I would say to answer that question again, same as RC Spoll, even after he's dead, is the same as John MacArthur while he's still alive.
Anybody who's having their hand and helping make that finished product deserves credit.
Just like a movie, a movie you don't just see the director, directed by so and so, and then blackout.
No, the credits go on and on and on and on because I'll say it like this if Hollywood has the moral caliber to be able to recognize that every single individual involved in this product, Should have their name recognized than Christian ministries should too.
Amen.
So add the names.
But forging, I think, is actually immoral.
Okay, another question.
Credit Every Individual Contributor00:14:59
Top Tacapi 93.
What is a bigger threat to Christianity, white supremacy, or the rise of orthodoxy andor Eastern orthodoxy?
Neither.
We were more critical.
We did an episode on Eastern orthodoxy about a year ago.
You know what?
I would much rather a young man, cringe as it is, Go to an Eastern Orthodox church, marry a good girl, and get his life in order, then be an atheist or a Nietzschean or something like that.
So, rise of Eastern Orthodoxy, please be Protestant instead, much less cringe.
Well, it depends.
Parts of Protestant.
If I was holding my gun, I'd be like, what kind of Protestant are you?
What type of Protestant?
Protestantism, Catholicism for me would be second.
If I had a gun to my head, I was in prison, two choices.
Eastern Orthodox, a third.
500 spaces below that, though.
Being cringe, being pagan, Being a Nietzschean.
Right.
So I don't view that as a threat right now.
We get a Christian nation.
I think it will have to be.
And then white supremacy was part of the question.
Do you view that as a threat?
No.
There are always, here's the deal.
But I see actual, you know, talking about anons and I see, you know, actual racist statements being made.
First, I would need to see those statements.
Sure.
Because some of them, I'm not saying none of those statements.
There's not one person who's racist.
That wouldn't be my argument.
But I would say, depending who's saying, oh, there's these racist statements, I would.
I would have to say, like, well, let me read the statements because you might not be the best judge.
Like, for instance, like, I remember this was like a TIFF, you know, on X, like a month ago, where it was like people were saying that Kofi needed to go back.
All right, right.
Yep.
And some people, I'm not going to name anybody, but some people were like, they said he has to go back to Africa.
And I looked back over the tweets and I was like, they didn't say Africa.
The dude is literally from England.
He has a British accent.
Yeah.
He's not American.
And what they were saying, now you can still say, like, well, I disagree.
I don't think he should go back, or I'm glad he's here.
Like, fine, that's fine.
But you can't say they're racist for saying someone who was literally not even born in America, who is a citizen of another country, should go back.
But so when people say we have a rise of white supremacy, that's why I'm saying, first, I would need to say, I would need to see which tweets you're talking about, because I know plenty of guys in our camp who would have said, Kofi needs to go back was racist.
Whereas I would say, no.
They weren't saying he needs to go back to Africa because he's black.
They were saying he needs to get out of America because he literally wasn't born here.
And right now, he's being dumb.
He's posting cringe.
And not helping Christians in America.
Right.
Or like Samuel Say, who I've spoken at a conference with him.
I love him.
I've got nothing against him.
I think he's a great guy.
But he was getting dragged and was like, hey, I'm going to step out on a limb and be courageous and say, I don't like Christmas hymns, your American Christmas hymns.
And he got dragged.
They weren't saying, you're black, so you don't get to say anything.
No, that's not what they were saying.
They were saying, of course you don't like them because you're not a Native American.
Right.
Yeah.
Oh, the foreigner.
Is saying he doesn't like American history and heritage.
Shocking.
You're from Ghana, then Canada, then here.
So it was nothing about him being black.
It was about you are quite literally a foreigner.
So, all that being said, when people say the rise of white supremacy, I'm not saying that there aren't actual real racist, and racist is just not a good word, but real sinful prejudices that the Bible would actually condemn as sinful towards whole races of people.
Without any justifiable cause, simply on the basis of them being a different race, a sinful prejudice against them in biblical terms.
I'm not saying that doesn't exist.
What I am saying, though, is the two examples that I just gave with Kofi and Samuel Say, I know that many of the people who are saying there's a rise of white supremacy would have listed those as examples, and those don't count.
Yep.
Those are not races.
So, okay.
Anybody else?
Caleb Babrikking?
I got this.
Caleb.
But Bricky, yeah, you're right.
Come on.
I'm sorry.
Come on.
I literally just said that.
Okay.
What's the question?
I'm going to ask it.
Are you a fed?
What do you think?
I have been asked that before.
There was a guy who came to our church.
Great guy.
Yeah, really good guy.
We're still in a relationship.
This is a hilarious story.
It is funny.
But we're still in a relationship, still keep up.
And he was a member in the church, a faithful member, ended up transitioning to another church, but a great guy.
And he's like super duper.
What was he?
Security.
Well, obviously, we're not going to say his name, but no, his job.
Outside of our security.
Right.
But before that, in terms of military.
Oh, Rangers special.
Yeah.
Like he was legit.
Yep.
And still, he's older now, but like fantastic shape.
Yep.
You know, like just.
He's a great dude.
And he's smart.
He's just a great guy.
I wish he was still in the church.
But, anyways, great guy.
And he had a hard time coming to the church.
Initially, he was watching me for a long time online, online, knew that I was like 10 minutes away from our church.
And he's like, I.
I think that, like, he's like, this guy's a.
There's no way he's not a fed.
He's just like, he's saying, too, like, he's too based.
He's too based.
He's got to be a fed.
It's got to be a trap.
Don't take the bait.
But then he did take the bait, and it was delightful.
Yeah.
He was in the church.
We had a wonderful time.
And sometimes you don't take the bait.
That's true.
But sometimes the thing that guys are calling bait is actually just courageous obedience to Christ.
And that you do take the bait, but you do take the hill.
And some of our guys right now in our camp are calling the next hill where Christ is saying, Come, take it.
Yeah.
And they're calling it bait.
So there's real bait.
Don't take it.
There are real hills.
Let's take it.
Well, and sometimes the hill that we're to conquer is bait.
And it doesn't matter.
We're going to take it anyway.
Yeah.
That's right.
Yeah.
Sometimes you're right.
Sometimes the enemy actually does, like, sometimes it's like he really does set a trap.
The righteous and those who are wise know it's a trap.
And then we spring the trap on purpose.
Because it's like, yeah, it's going to be a 10 on one odds against us.
And I like our odds.
Yep.
Yep.
If Christ is for us, right?
One can cause a thousand to fly, you know.
But if God is on our side, who can be against us?
And we got some more super chats.
Go ahead.
I was going to say to some people, too, it can seem like you kind of sprang out of nowhere.
I've known you, Joel, now for 10 years.
2014 was the first time I met you in San Diego.
You didn't come out of nowhere, straight from Langley, plugged into Georgetown.
You've been in ministry for a long time.
I've been to your church in that ministry.
Yeah, you didn't come from nowhere.
I think you put in a lot of faith work over the years that led to the growth response in the last few years.
Thanks.
Yeah, having people that know you long term definitely helps.
And by God's grace, our church is small.
It's only three and a half years old.
So we're about 200 people.
But there are some, like my parents, my mom and dad are members in our church.
Nathan is my cousin, and we're related.
And then I've got a brother in law in the church.
And then people, we've got like what, eight families that came with us from California that have been with us for, I've had a relationship with for over a decade.
One of my best friends is a member in the church that we met, roommates in college.
It's been 18 years.
So, yeah.
That helps.
All right.
What's another one that you guys want to read?
Oh, here we go.
Thanks for defending sanity.
Thank you.
This is Jeff Halfley.
Is that what we're doing?
Yep.
Jeff Halfley.
Was Cromwell the greatest Christian prince of the last 400 years?
If not, who would you nominate for the title?
Adolf Hitler.
I was about to say, I literally knew that was coming.
I could have helped myself.
No.
Frank got them.
So, real quick, that's, I think, a good one where we're talking about like strategy and stuff like that.
You can disagree on historical events.
Like, some guys are going to say, no, I just, I don't.
I'm sorry.
There's a difference in saying the morals are right.
We should eradicate an entire race of people, and that's great, and I support it.
Okay, well, I got a problem with that.
Pastorally, I got to deal with that.
But somebody's saying, no, historically, I just think the numbers are wrong.
Rushduny thought the numbers were wrong for 30 years.
For 30 years.
Okay, we've talked about that.
He was on.
So, guys who disagree with the history and they're like, no, I just think it's wrong.
The Nuremberg trials are like, a lot of them were performed by Bolsheviks.
Right, the Soviets.
So, the Soviet communists.
Who, in part, were made up by Jews, are the guys who are tasked with the Nuremberg trials to find out how many crimes the Nazis performed?
That's a little sus.
So, anybody who's saying those kinds of things, you might be wrong.
Right.
You might be wrong.
And if you're going to go against the mainline consensus, then yeah, you need to do the reading.
You need to come put your best foot forward and have some strong arguments.
You shouldn't do that lightly.
You shouldn't just be a contrarian.
Who's like, well, 80% of the population believes this, so then I'm going to believe the other.
Like a lot of guys right now, like the flat Earth thing.
People are like, Joel, you got to be flat.
You're super based, so you got to be flat Earth too.
No, just because something's a minority position doesn't mean I automatically take it.
I'm sorry.
I think we've been to the moon.
I think the whole conspiracy saying that we haven't been to the moon, honestly, I think that that's just to rob one more achievement from white men, believe it or not.
So I actually think that we have been to the moon, and all the guys who are saying space isn't real and NASA is fake and, I think, ironically, you're actually teaming up with the progressive libtards who want to say that the white man has never done anything worthy of achievement.
Yeah.
So you're actually, I think you're the loser.
Okay.
So, all that being said, here's the point.
You can be flat earth and be a member in our church.
That's fine.
And you can disagree with the numbers and you can disagree with some of the reasoning and stuff, you know, like Churchill cutting off supply, blah, blah.
That's history.
The morals, though, the morals is where we get into it.
I just.
From his own words, from his own words, I do not believe you can make a defensible argument that Hitler was a Christian, much less a great Christian prince.
That's why I know, much to the disappointment of some of the anons online.
It's like, no.
You know, it's funny.
Like some of the guys are like, I was just about, right?
Like for months, you've been in controversy and you've stood up and protected this member in your church against an onslaught of big names.
And this whole time, for months, I could have sent you a donation, but I was just, I haven't done it yet, but I was just about to.
And then, and then, and then you, uh, you, you helped Joseph, uh, Joseph Spurgeon with, you know, blah, blah, blah, and, and said that Hitler's not a Christian prince.
And so now I'm, it's like, really?
For two months, I've been getting raped and stood my ground.
And you didn't give a donation, but, but you were going to give it in the next 15 minutes.
And the time it was just like your, your $15 donation.
So, no, I don't believe you.
So, no, I, I don't think that, uh, Adolf Hitler was the last Christian prince.
Here I stand.
I can do no other.
And my point is back to, you know, Anon's and, and not just morally, but strategically, what wins?
Um, That is just, it's not a winning argument.
So I think it's actually immoral, which is why the views themselves are immoral.
The views, the moral, the history you can disagree with, but the views, the views are immoral.
But then also, aside from just morality, and that should be enough because we're Christians, we love Jesus, we want to be moral.
But then strategically, I want to win.
So part of the reason, like some of you, you're like, Joel, you're super based.
I just saw you were picked up by Candace Owens, or I saw you on this, or I saw you on that.
And then you start following me, and then some of you get disappointed because then I'm based, but I won't be quite as based as you want.
I'm not a part of some kind of covert group to try to take down NASA.
I'm not making a t shirt that says Hitler was the last Christian prince.
You're like, oh man, I had such high hopes for Joel, but he's a disappointment.
No, Guts, I'm not retarded.
I'm sorry.
You're not looking for courage.
You're looking for stupidity.
And so, if that's what you're, then yeah, I'm not going to be your hero.
I'm sorry.
Daryl Cooper, Martyr Made Podcast, great.
It's great.
The member of my church, I'll defend him to the cows.
Come home.
Guys who disagree on the history of World War II, I'm with you.
I will defend you.
Any pastor trying to put you under church discipline, I will publicly say that's wrong.
There's a lot of things that, like, I'm your guy.
But actually rewriting some of Hitler's own words and saying, That he truly loved the Lord Jesus Christ and had no sinful animosity in his heart towards Jews.
I'm not able to make that argument.
And even if I was, it is not a winning argument.
We've said it countless times.
We need models.
Cromwell is a good one, George Washington is a good one.
You want to be a little spicy and go against mainline consensus history?
Great.
Stonewall Jackson is a good one, Robert E. Lee is a good one.
Adolf Hitler is a retarded one.
So stop it.
Just, just, can I throw Franco in there for how effective he was?
Franco is not as good as, uh, um, and J.R. Tolkien, greatest author of all time.
Loved him.
Yeah.
So Orrin McIntyre, we'll plug him.
Yeah.
He's a friend.
We like him.
He's coming to the conference.
Uh, but Orrin just did a podcast like two weeks ago or a week ago, and it was, uh, he was commentating, reading an essay and, uh, and commentating on it.
And it's, uh, this guy who wrote an essay off of observing a conversation.
He was in a pub.
With C.S. Lewis, and C.S. Lewis was the lib in this particular conversation.
Rare C.S. Lewis L. and Tolkien was the conservative.
And Lewis, because Lewis was a Protestant, whereas Tolkien was a Catholic.
And so Lewis was like, you know, in the popular view at that time, Tolkien was going against the popular view.
And Lewis was, you know, lining up with the mainline consensus in that moment on Franco.
And so Franco.
And he was like, well, we don't like him.
He's a tyrant.
He's a fascist.
He's an authoritarian.
And, you know, he's breaking way too many eggs to make this omelet.
He's gone too far.
And Tolkien was like, well, They were killing Catholics.
The communists are killing Catholics.
They're killing nuns.
They're killing kids.
And worse things.
And worse things.
Humanizing Historical Figures Like Franco00:05:36
Yeah.
That we won't say for the algorithm with YouTube.
But they're doing terrible things.
And so Tolkien was sitting there defending Franco and saying, yeah, like heavy hand, no doubt.
No doubt, heavy hand.
But this dude is not a villain.
So Cromwell, better.
Better example, probably.
Franco, though, I'm going to go on record and say, permissible.
I picked Stonewall Jackson over him.
Yeah.
I picked Cromwell over him.
I picked Robert E. Lee over him, but I am not going to sit here and dunk on Franco.
I don't think he was terrible.
So, to make a defense of Franco, Franco, Franco, what do you say, man?
It ain't on, on, on, what do you say?
Depends if you're saying Franco.
Franco, I say Franco.
Okay, Franco.
Haywood does say Franco, though.
Yeah, I've heard him say it.
Yeah.
He's more cultured.
He's better with redskins.
That's like people who pronounce every foreign word the way the foreigner would pronounce it.
That's right.
I'm an American.
I deserve the right to say whatever I want.
Okay, so Franco, I'm going to say Franco.
But Franco, I do think, is permissible.
Anybody who's coming out and saying, like, oh my gosh, he was terrible.
And this is, guys on the right are saying good things about him.
Those guys are libs.
They've always been libs.
They just look like conservatives in 2018 because the libs were winning.
But those guys are libs.
James Lindsay is a lib.
Michael O'Fallon, God bless him.
He's a brother in Christ.
He'll be in heaven.
But he's a lib.
He is.
And so, yeah.
So I think anybody who's defending Franco, that's great.
I would say, though, I think if you want to steal, man, put your best foot, Cromwell, back to the question from Jeff Halfley.
Cromwell is a better Christian Prince example.
But I would say Cromwell, great.
Franco, defensible.
Hitler, retarded, guys.
It's just not a winning strategy.
I don't think it's defensible, and it's not a winning strategy.
The post war consensus has to be utterly obliterated.
But obliterating the post war consensus and everything I don't like is Adolf Hitler does not require us.
To say that Hitler was a Christian prince.
And I'll say this last it's similar to Napoleon.
Napoleon demonized.
This is what history does over time because Hitler's still kind of recent, it's 80 years.
But this is what history does.
Napoleon demonized.
And then for a brief moment with some sectors, lionized.
So he's the embodiment of evil.
No, he's the hero.
He did nothing wrong.
And then eventually what history does is humanize.
Demonize, lionize, humanize.
Demonizing, shifting to lionizing phase on Hitler right now.
And what I'd like to do is, can we just skip over like what Martyr Maid has done, what Daryl Cooper, and just humanize?
That's what he did on.
He did not say Last Christian Prince, but what he did say is, well, Churchill wasn't so great.
And here are these factors, these factors, these factors, these factors.
Still think this was immoral.
Still think this was wrong.
Also, it's not as bad as what the seven Hollywood movies every year for the last 80 years have been saying.
And And we don't need to lionize them, but we do need to humanize them.
And when we say humanize, that doesn't mean a defense that there's nothing wrong.
Humans have faults.
So, humanizing means there was some good.
There was also some bad.
But the post war consensus, I think part of tearing it down does involve this isn't a major part, but I think it is a minor part.
It does include humanizing Hitler.
It does not include, it is not necessary to lionize Hitler.
Here I stand.
I can do no other.
I really think that we can beat the lips and tear down the post war consensus and have a muscular, Right, dissident, right, Christian nationalist without having to say that Hitler is the last Christian prince.
I really think we can.
I'm going to throw out my honorable mention John Winthrop, first governor of Massachusetts.
Great one.
All right.
Great.
That's it.
I have a special surprise for you all.
It's not really a surprise.
Julie mentioned it earlier, but Nate, if we're ready with that particular piece of historical.
Oh, beautiful.
We got it.
There we go.
Boom.
So this is the Luther meme.
The Luther illustration of the common German folk farting at the Pope.
Beautiful.
And is that like almost, it looks like it's almost even the fart is so potent.
Yeah.
It is setting like on fire.
It's setting like the Latin Vulgate.
Yeah.
Wow, that's what's happening.
Latin Vulgate, of course, pronounced Latin Vulgate.
Correct pronunciation.
I'm sorry.
I'm in a mood today.
I am in a mood.
All right.
Well, okay.
Let's call it a day.
I hear my family.
They're here.
Gotta go.
I got a Peruvian chicken waiting for me.
Oh, okay.
Sounds great.
Well, thank you guys for tuning in.
Again, if you're able to help us out, we really appreciate it.
We've got like three weeks left in the year, and we have some very ambitious goals to do some huge things.
Earlier in the episode, I'm not going to say it again because we're too late on time.
Huge goals with right response.
If you've been blessed by this ministry, yeah, we have subscribers, and yes, we have sponsors, but a lot of that doesn't really bring in a lot of revenue.
We do the sponsor thing because we're trying to restore Christendom and like the hat commercial.
We plugged the hat, and we charged very, Very small amount to help that company out.
So, by and large, it's our donors.
It's our donors.
That's how we keep the lights on.
And so, if you're willing to support this ministry financially because you've been blessed by it, we would greatly appreciate it.
Donate To Reach Ambitious Goals00:00:43
Go to rightresponseministries.com forward slash donate.
We'll have one final live stream for the year on Wednesday.
And then we'll probably do a couple episodes during the holidays that are reruns.
And then, boom, first week of January, three live streams a week, 3 p.m. Central Time on Monday, Wednesday, Friday.
And the series with me and Iskar on Israel, all nine episodes starting to come out first week of January, all the way through first week of March on the topic of Israel.
So, thanks for tuning in, and we'll see you again soon.