(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Most of the show we're just going to be kind of having a conversation. So you can just bring us both up on the screen. And really what I kind of want to start the show with was to discuss how much I just absolutely hate YouTube. What is your feelings? I share that emotion. I definitely agree with you. I can see why you hate YouTube so much. I hate YouTube as well. They just nuked our channel. We put a lot of work into it. We had a following. We had, what, just over 3,000 subscribers, I believe. And now it's gone. Because we exist. Because we breathe air. And we don't espouse the establishment narrative. Well, in all fairness, I have to be honest, I definitely knew that this day would come. So if we get big at all, if we have a lot of views on a particular video, or we get enough subscribers, I knew that we were going to disappear. And so, of course, our days were limited. But I wanted to be on YouTube just so we could at least reach some new people. And I think that we did that. I think we definitely reached some new people. I mean, our most recent episode was climbing fast. I think it was already our top episode just after a couple days. And I really enjoyed it. What did you think? Yeah, I loved the show. I liked the opportunity to just kind of listen to two people talk about creation from different angles. And I think that the reason why it garnered a larger audience than usual, like you mentioned, I mean, 24 hours in, we were at like 5,000, 6,000 views, something like that. I think it topped out at 7,000 or 8,000 views before YouTube nuked us. So, no, it was a highly entertaining, some would say controversial edition of The Baptist Bias. What was controversial about it, Ben? You tell me. I'm going to plead the fifth on that one. Okay. Well, of course, I do want to talk about the show and talk about why we did it. And the reality is, I just, the goal of the show, the goal of The Baptist Bias for me is simply just to reach new people and to talk about new topics that haven't been discussed before. So it's not really to preach necessarily another sermon. It's not necessarily to cater to our niche or anything like that. But at the same time, I'd like to cover topics that I am interested in. I'm super interested in creation. I listened to Dr. Hovind for a long time, back in 2013, 2014, 2015. I pretty much watched, I think, every single one of his debates. And I really liked a lot of the information that he presented whenever he would debate various college professors. He traveled the country. He spoke to a lot of different people and was really pretty popular. Then, by the time I kind of figured out where he was, I ended up realizing he was in jail, which was unfortunate. I was really sad about that just because I really liked him and I wanted to go and find his material. But later on, I ended up obviously going to Faithful or Baptist Church and grew a lot more spiritually since then. However, at the same time, Ken Hovind, whatever you think about him, he definitely dominates the sphere of young earth creationism. Wouldn't you agree with that? As far as material online, he's a pretty dominant voice out there. What would you think? Yeah, I would say he definitely has notoriety in that area. I think he has a name. He draws attention. And a lot of people have seen his content, for sure. I mean, I've met a lot of people who have come to the new IFB, actually through him, like they started watching his content first, and it led them to check out Pastor Anderson or Pastor Jimenez and some other people like that. Some people have found him through even the documentaries after the Tribulation. He was in that one. But yeah, I would say for sure that he's well known in the realm of creation science. There's no question about that. Well, again, there's other big names out there. There's Answers in Genesis is a big name. There's other young earth creationists out there. So it's not like he's the only one. But in my mind, he's a pretty big voice. Anybody that's King James only especially is probably going to gravitate towards his material. I think a lot of people have seen his debates and everything like that. So from my perspective, you know, I wanted to have guests on my show that have a big breach and are big names, regardless if I agree with them, think they're saved or any of the other categories. And I know there's a lot of people maybe that are a part of one of our churches or one of our Friends churches that would nitpick over, you know, some very specific doctrines on Dr. Hovind and have some even some legitimate questions about some of the things that he said are done. But the reason why I wanted to bring him on the show had nothing to do with any of those things. It was simply, here's a guy who's got a big voice in the creation sphere. I have a lot of knowledge as far as what he teaches just because I've seen so many of his videos. And I've heard Pastor Anderson espouse a slightly different viewpoint when it comes to how to present the earth being 6,300 years old. And because I've listened to both of them so much, I thought, you know, there's a lot of difference here. I think it'd be interesting to get them both in the room and have them kind of discuss these particular issues. And one of the ideas, you know, this idea for the show kind of came from you because you had mentioned to me having a discussion like a follow up discussion between Pastor Anderson and Matt Powell. Is that right? Yeah. So in 2020, Pastor Anderson and Matt Powell did a live stream together as part of Framing the World. And Paul Wittenberger put that on. Pastor Anderson's son was also part of that. And they talked about this doctrine of apparent age and Pastor Anderson in that live stream with Matt Powell talked about how he applies the apparent age doctrine to everything in the universe. And I felt like that was a really intriguing position that he took. And in the years following, I really thought about it and studied it and gravitated toward that view. So I thought it would be really interesting to get him on and to revisit that subject because I feel like it's underrepresented in the overall discourse on creation and creation science specifically. Not a lot of people, I think, really cover this. And so I saw it as underrepresented topic and, you know, I just really wanted an opportunity to hear him flesh it out a little bit more and talk about it a little bit more, offer some more detail. Yeah. And I think whenever Pastor Anderson had a conversation with Matt Powell specifically, Matt Powell maybe hadn't really heard some of the things that Pastor Anderson was going to say before. And so it was kind of difficult for them to carry a discussion. However, I thought, you know, if we're going to have this show, why not bring someone on that's really well versed in what I believe is kind of a differing opinion. Dr. Hovind, let's just bring him on and we could have an epic show, which of course we did. I didn't know that we were going to get nuked necessarily. But I mean, I'm just trying to come up with ideas and ways to have a great show. And from my perspective, you know, it didn't really matter what I believe. I just was trying to, you know, generate a lot of attention and get a lot of people excited about creation and the Bible and get people talking. And I think I did that. What do you think, Ben? Well, for me personally, it worked because I've been studying this subject a heck of a lot more than I ever have in the last couple of weeks. And especially now, even after the podcast, I've been talking about it with more people than I ever have. I'm more interested in it than I've ever been. So it worked for me personally, and I feel like if it worked for me, it probably worked for other people who listen to the show as well. Everybody has an opinion, I feel like, on the podcast, whether they agree with applying Apparent Age the way that Pastor Anderson does or disagree with it. They all have an opinion and they're all talking about the doctrine of creation. And like you said, there's a difference between these two individuals. And so I really liked the fact that we were able to get this subject on the podcast as the main topic. And not only that, though, that we were able to give people two different angles on creation. Well, of course, you know, getting these guests wasn't even necessarily an easy task because we didn't really have much contact with Dr. Hovind. I think I had asked you to just reach out to him and we presented the idea, which he's very accommodating. He's willing to come on a lot of different shows and talk about creation. And we told him that we were going to have some different guests, eventually evolved into us telling him, hey, we're going to get Pastor Anderson on. And we kind of presented that information to him. Once we had kind of secured Dr. Hovind who was willing to do the show, then we ended up reaching out to Pastor Anderson. And I specifically had to talk to him on the phone for a long time to get him to want to do the show just because he personally is not interested in having a debate, really, usually in any situation. He's kind of reluctant to do something like that. And I tried to tell him, like, you know, the goal is to try and have a discussion. And I tried to explain to him how I thought it would be good for differing views to come out there and for people to kind of have this chance. Plus, he doesn't really like Ken Hovind. So, you know, he's kind of changed a little bit on that. And so it was kind of difficult for me to get him to want to do the show. After kind of talking him into it, he ended up realizing that he was kind of excited about it. He started listening to Dr. Hovind and was excited to kind of challenge some of his viewpoints. Now, in all fairness, he did tell me that he wasn't going to necessarily be nice if something came up that he was really strongly against or had strong feelings towards. And that really came across. I didn't really know exactly what that was going to look like. I didn't know how Dr. Hovind and him would interact. I didn't know how Dr. Hovind's viewpoints... I didn't know what he was going to bring up. I didn't know how much age of appearance Dr. Hovind would give credence to or not give credence to. And, you know, we fleshed out the questions that we were going to have on the show and we sent it to both parties. Both parties were, in my mind, about as prepared as you could possibly be for the show. We stuck pretty much to the narrative apart from questions from callers or some of the chat questions because we had no idea what people would ask. But they both were very aware of what we were going to have on the show. I mean, how many times did you reach out to Dr. Hovind? Well, we talked a few times, at least with whoever runs his email. And I did give him the full list of topics we would be discussing just because I wanted him to be prepared for what we would cover on the broadcast. And you did the same thing with Pastor Anderson, correct? Yeah. And so, yeah, they were prepared and I think that we just wanted to stick to the age of the earth. And, of course, we wanted to talk about the area in which we anticipated disagreement, which is how to apply this teaching of the apparent age of the universe and the earth. A lot of mainstream creation scientists will give credence to that doctrine sometimes, but not all the time. And Pastor Anderson had a different view. So I thought, hey, let's do this, right? Let's just dive right into this and figure out what is the best way to articulate what the Bible teaches on creation. Yeah. And I mean, we even have, I want to read for you kind of what we sent. We sent this to Dr. Hovind and Pastor Anderson as well. But we said we were going to talk about the age of the earth, proof for a young earth from a scientific perspective. Are there components of the planet and or universe that look older than 6,300 years, quote, apparent age doctrine. We said that we're going to talk about craters on the moon, best explanation from a creationist perspective, how Christians should respond to public schools teaching science from a secular evolutionary worldview. And then the geologic column, whether it's best explained by apparent age or the flood. And that was pretty much what we covered. I mean, what did we cover on the show that's not articulated in that? I mean, there were some audience questions. We had questions from the chat room. We had people call in. But in general, we stuck to that. There was starlight distance that we talked about as well, how to best solve the supposed starlight distance problem. And really, you know, just giving these two individuals an opportunity, a chance to present the best case for how to correctly teach and articulate the Bible's teaching on creation, the Bible's doctrine on creation. And I think that, you know, from Pastor Anderson's perspective, Kent Hovind pedals pseudoscience and nonsense. And so he wanted to combat that. And he did. Yeah, it's funny because I made the thumbnail and I did get some help, but I kind of had got all the images and put them together. I didn't mean to necessarily put a picture of Pastor Anderson where he's all like, he's just like looking real angrily or like kind of real stoic looking. But boy, was that like prophetic. What do you think about that? It definitely turned out to be an appropriate thumbnail for the live stream. Yeah, I had no intention. The game face was on. I probably would have gotten he usually is smiling. So it's kind of crazy that I didn't find I don't even know where that picture came from. I just looked at pictures online and it just kind of worked for the particular thumbnail. And I think we ended up having someone help us make a poster of it, too. And then we were sitting it out there having people kind of advertise the show. And boy, it was it was it was kind of funny how just like right off the bat, it was awkward. And I didn't I did not anticipate that entirely. I didn't know what to think. My wife, in fact, was sending me memes while the show was going on. I don't know. Is it possible for us to put some of these memes up on the screen? So it was kind of funny. I didn't I wasn't checking my phone because I was really trying to pay attention to the show. Yeah, I was looking at the live stream and stuff. Let's see if we could put up some of these memes, though. I wish I had been on the show. Well, one thing I want to say is when that started to happen, when the sparks began to fly, my immediate thought was let him cook. Just let him cook, you know, and let's see where this thing goes and let's roll with it. You know what I mean? And that's live radio for you. Sometimes things happen that are unexpected. Yeah, this is one of although I kind of expected it. But go ahead. And I didn't know how to respond. So this is my wife sending a meme. It's like Pastor Shelley while Dr. Hovind and Pastor Anderson argue on the best bias. This is fine. There was a moment where I pretty much just said, like, there's no problem that we're arguing. Everything's wonderful. I think there was. Let's pull up another meme. Just keep pull up the memes. This was really good. Oh, yeah. So I'm trying to, you know, actually moderate the discussion and try and delete everybody. And Pastor Anderson is just like, well, we're done with this question. I'm just like, go to the moon. So my wife sent the Bernie Sanders. I am once again asking about the moon. Oh, here you go. Go to the other one. This one's pretty funny, too. Pastor Shelley's question. No, I just want to talk about the moon. You can tell that Pastor Anderson was really excited to kind of get to some of the disagreement. Yeah, well, probably in anticipation of smashing that idea of the moon getting pelted during the flood. Yes, there was times where I was uncomfortable in the stream, mostly because I just, you know, I was fine with the controversy. That didn't bother me at all. What I didn't want to do is I just didn't want to kill the stream. I didn't want it to just get so heated that then they weren't willing to talk anymore or like one of them would quit the show or something. And, you know, I just don't know where that's going. I also didn't want it to like get into maybe just like a lot of personal attacks or something. So I was I was trying to kind of calm it down a little bit and try to keep it on the conversation point. But, you know, if I if I knew that those things weren't going to happen, that I probably would have let them just kind of go at it a little bit more. I don't know what your thoughts were. Well, you're trying to strike a delicate balance here because, you know, you're good friends with Pastor Anderson. It could be easy for the perception to be that you brought him on there so that you and him can kind of go two on one against Hovind when that wasn't the case. And also there is the concern that Hovind could quit or just decide to walk off or something like that. And you wanted to prevent that from happening. And I can understand why you would take that approach of just trying to stay balanced and let them cook, like I said. But if the temperature gets to a certain level, try to bring it down just a little bit to keep the podcast going. Yeah, I felt like there was a we kind of got into the heat like right away and we still had a lot of show to go. We had a lot of questions and I didn't want to not get to those questions because, again, the goal of the show was also to have, you know, get people interested in this in this subject. Here's the thing. Disagreement is a good thing. People, they get so used to this idea that every guest we have on, we have to agree with every word that comes out of their mouth. Or if we get two guests on that the two guests we bring on have to agree or even like each other and agree with everything. No, no, it's great. Disagreement is a good thing. If there's a bad idea being perpetuated, then let's call it out. Let's debunk it and let's move forward. We need to adorn our doctrine with wisdom. But how can we do that as Christians if we're not addressing ideas that are bad and replacing them with good ideas? Yeah, and again, I'm not trying to preach a third sermon or fourth sermon. I'm not trying to talk about just the Bible. I'm trying to just go into the world, which is sinful and has problems and issues, and just bring our Baptist bias with us. There's so many podcasts out there, so many shows out there, and their worldview ekes through the show. To me, it was frustrating that all these people are talking about everything, people want to constantly watch stuff, but they don't have a good perspective, a good worldview. At the end of the day, when people follow them to their latter end, they realize this person's a Catholic or a Mormon or an atheist or whatever. I wanted to put a show out there where people could find some entertainment, see world events happening unfolding and being talked about from the Baptist bias, from our perspective. I think we've been pretty clear on the show that that's what our view is. With these two individuals, Pastor Anderson and Dr. Hovind, I'm just saying, here's two giant views that are out there. A lot of people know what's going on. Let's have them butt heads a little bit and have a show. I was trying really hard not to side with anybody entirely or not to espouse my particular view on anything. I don't know what you felt it was like on the show. I thought you were fair. Between the two of us, I was probably the most opinionated, even though I only spoke twice. You're basically like, I love Pastor Anderson. I want Pastor Anderson to be my friend, and everything Pastor Anderson said was right. That's my commentary for the show. That's a good recap. Of course, that's fine. If you agree with him, that's fine. I thought that's why it was good to have the show, because I think when it comes to this specific conversation— Even you and I had some disagreement. I think when it comes to the conversation of creation and when to apply apparent age, I felt like you kind of leaned a little bit more towards Pastor Anderson's view, and that I probably had a little bit more pushback from Pastor Anderson's view. I thought we would be a little bit more balanced in the show. I think we provided that balance. Again, I do plan on making a few videos to talk about my perspective on some of these subjects and some of the arguments that were made. I'd like to talk about the geologic column a little bit. I'd like to talk about the apparent age being applied to heavenly bodies and just kind of put it out there. But during the show, I didn't really want to put my view out there and muddy the waters. Because there was going to be times where I sided with Dr. Hovind's kind of maybe not necessarily exact argument, but kind of viewpoint, and there was going to be times where I definitely sided with Pastor Anderson's viewpoint, and I didn't want either party to feel like I was kind of just on their team or something. But at the same time, I want to put pushback on both. And I think from your perspective, and feel free to interrupt me, correct me if I'm misrepresenting you at all, but it seems like from your perspective that you do think that there is some proof, legitimate proof from the creation science perspective for a 6,300-year Earth. And so if Hovind is going to bring some of those to the limelight and talk about some of those proofs for a young Earth, then you would agree with what he's saying, but then you would disagree with him when he gets into the moon getting pelted during the flood or the canopy. But my point is that there are some of his talking points that you would lean toward. Yeah, I mean, let's kind of recap the show from an outcome perspective. You know, Pastor Anderson did agree that there are arguments that can point to 6,300-year-old creation, considering human population. And I'm sure that there's other things that we can kind of look at and see, you know, there's no way this is fitting their evolutionary narrative. And then on the other side, Dr. Hovind even agreed, yeah, the universe has created mature. So, you know, the sun could be in its mature stage and we don't know what that number is. So I feel like underneath a lot of the controversy, there actually was a lot of agreement too. Then when we kind of get some of the nuance there, you know, why is there craters on the moon? That's where they disagree. But I think that the main animosity, why there's disagreement on that particular subject is not so much the differing aspect of there's craters on the moon or not. It's more about the number game. I think it's more about is this really a billion-year-old process or not? And I think that that's where the young earth creationist at heart wants to eliminate billions of years off the table completely so that evolution falls apart. And I think from Pastor Anderson's perspective, he's saying, no, I have no problem putting billions of years on the table because it just doesn't really challenge my worldview that much. And, you know, when it comes to arguments specifically about billions of years old, I think that the main, you know, argument that's difficult to maybe get to go against would be the starlight distance issue. If for some reason the starlight distance issue could be resolved within a 6,300-year time period, there may not, in my opinion, be any argument needed for a parent age when it comes to heavenly bodies or the earth or any of those things. I think the numbers would just be made up at that point. But I think if the starlight distance problem is the way as presented by modern science, then we have to consider that the age of the universe could have a, quote, apparent age of billions of years. And I really don't have any problem with any life cycle or anything that God created necessitating billions of years. You know, the sun that He created, it makes sense to me that that sun could sustain itself for billions of years, right? That it's not going to just go away willy-nilly, or it's really fragile that the system and the universe that God created could really last for a very long time. Like, that makes sense to me. I mean, what about you? Yeah, obviously I would agree with that. And from my perspective as well, it seems like, just from a layman's perspective, that God created the different elements of the universe with their own apparent age. So I don't think that it all necessarily has the same apparent age or appearance of age, that you could assign the same number to everything. And so for my opinion is that, let's say you find, like they talk about, a lot of creation scientists will talk about spiral galaxies and talk about these different components that seem to point to a younger universe. Well, I would look at that and I would say, all right, well, obviously God assigned a younger apparent age to that element of the universe compared to, for example, the starlight, which points to a universe that looks much older. Well, and I think when we talk about some of the controversy and some of the hostility, Pastor Anderson takes a lot of, he's very angry about the idea of mixing some of the science that young earth creationists espouse with what I would call miracles. And why I'm using this word miracles, not because they would, but this is my viewpoint. Dr. Hovind has his own kind of viewpoint called the Hovind theory. And the Hovind theory has a lot of strange views, such as like the earth is covered in some kind of a glass or ice dome. And specifically, he brought up the idea of boulders being shot off of the earth and hitting the moon and that causing creators. There's a lot of other interesting ideas he has as regards to the Hovind theory. But what I would say is that if we agree that the natural laws that are in existence today and the things that are happening right now, that most of what he's espousing could not happen naturally speaking. And so I would almost put it in a category of a miracle. You know, there's plenty of miracles we believe. We believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We believe in the parting of the Red Sea. And the reason why we believe in miracles is because the Bible says it. The Bible literally says that Jesus rose again from the dead. The Bible literally says that the Red Sea was parted and they walked on dry land. You know, the Bible doesn't say is that rocks shot off from the earth and hit the moon. So I think if Dr. Hovind was going to be intellectually honest and scientific about his theory, he would have to present it as, you know, this is just a miracle. There's no science. Science could never prove that or science would really disagree with so many aspects of that, that the only way that rocks are shooting off of the moon to create all of those craters, it would be basically just a miracle in my opinion. It's not based on science. No. And if we're going to combat evolution, if we're going to combat, you know, these arbitrary claims when it comes to Mac Revolution, Big Bang Theory, things like that. I don't want to present a another fairy tale at them or some kind of a miracle based idea. I would rather just stick to the science. And it seems like Dr. Hovind has a really is really good at poking holes at and and kind of disarming a lot of evolutionary arguments. But it doesn't seem like he applies the same level of criticism to his own theory when it comes to a scientific perspective. And I think when Pastor Anderson was pushing back on him there, that he didn't really know exactly how to articulate maybe some of those points, because in my opinion, it seems more like a miracle or a fantasy than it does a scientific argument. What is your viewpoint, you know, as far as like separating the Hovind theory from some of these younger creationist arguments? I think the Hovind theory is ridiculous. I also think that it's an example of when creation science goes haywire. The reality is religion and science can coexist without there being so much conflict. They just need to stay in their lane when science gets out of its lane. That's where you get macro evolution. That's where you get these God haters who want to tell you about the origins of the universe and say that our biological ancestor is a fish. But then on the other side, I think that creation science begins to get out of its lane when it throws the baby out with the bathwater and begins to embrace pseudoscience and arguments that are foolish, like the moon was pelted by giant rocks during the flood and an ice dome. So these are things that can get us as Christians laughed out of the room. And it's important for us to make our doctrine as palatable as possible for those that are without by appealing to logic, fact and reason and common sense as well. Yeah, again, I agree with you that it comes to if we're going to argue against evolutionists and some of these other individuals and we're going to try and be scientific, then why don't we stay scientific? And if we're going to be religious, then why don't we keep all of our miracles to the miracles found in the Bible? I think we should be almost just staying away from any kind of creative ideas that especially are unscientific when it comes to this particular argument or this particular situation. And that's the thing that I think a lot of people would take controversy with on Dr. Hovind as far as some of his wild eye conspiracies, as far as just like how this Hovind theory explanation of all these different phenomenon that we see in the universe. I think it would be better and safer to just simply acquiesce to the science that we have and we know and then the miracles only that we see in the Bible. So again, I'm not going to say that God couldn't have shot rocks off of the earth and hit the moon, but in my view, that's not scientific. That would be a miracle. If that happened, I believe that would have to be a miracle. I don't think that could scientifically happen. I don't think that can naturally happen. And so I think it's unfair to then present that argument in the same light as other scientific arguments. I would have a strong distinguishment and I would even probably say myself like, this is unscientific what I'm about to say. I just personally believe that God performed a miracle and did this. Well, at least then people would say like, okay, that's a crazy idea. I don't believe in it, but at least he's not saying it's science. If you're going to say it's science, let's actually apply true scientific principles to this and realize that, hey, there's too much against this from a scientific perspective. There's no way that could possibly happen. I mean, the velocity and the trajectory and the distance from the earth to the moon, it's just crazy. I mean, it really just is crazy. But at the same time, I think that if I was going to push back on Pastor Anderson a little bit, I personally don't acquiesce to the age of the earth being 4.5 billion years. I think that the radiometric dating is flawed. And I think that when we compare the geologic column and what ages they assign to a lot of the different layers and we notice the flaws in it, that it really undermines all of their other numbers. And so I feel like maybe he's just not willing to go down that road and just throw all that out, whereas I'm ready to throw it all in the trash. And so I think that there's a little bit of pushback when it comes to my view on some of theirs. And I want to make another video where I kind of explain that in specific detail. And I noticed that in the 2020 live stream I referenced earlier on when we were doing this stream right now, I talked about the podcast that he did with Matt Powell over on the Framing the World platform. And there was some disagreement between them on the application of the appearance of age. And even Rahmat called in, who's a big creation guy, and he started talking about spiral galaxies. And there was just some differing views on how that really fits into the paradigm when it comes to creation. And Matt Powell brought up space dust and kind of using that to point toward a younger universe. So there's differing views, there's nuance, there's different perspectives. And at the end of the day, all of us, we fall under the biblical paradigm rather than the secular paradigm. So we have that commonality. It's just a matter, I think, of refining our paradigm to then come up with the very best argument and weapon that we can use to slay the evolutionary crowd. Absolutely. Figuratively. I'm looking at some of the comments. Someone said, Pastor Anderson didn't say the earth was billions of years old. I don't know if that's exactly what I said that he said, but again, Pastor Anderson does seem to acquiesce to that number as not being problematic much more than I do personally. And so again, in theory and logically, I don't really care if the rock cycle is taking 4.5 billion years or something like that. The numbers upon which we arrive for that particular rock layer or those particular samples of igneous rock, I believe can be truly discarded when we look at other samples from a creationist viewpoint known ages. When we look at the geologic column, we look at, and I use that term loosely, obviously I'm just referring to what the textbooks refer to, but when we look at all the layers where we find the fossils, they're dating that hundreds of millions of years old through radiometric dating techniques, and I believe that's clearly false. I think it's the last 46, 4700 years. And so if that's false, then I would say that all the other things are false as well. And so from Pastor Anderson's perspective, he's using the idea of apparent age when it comes to the earth or the universe or these things, but it's kind of hard for me to put a date on the earth itself. Because when I look at the earth, I don't see a date. I have no idea how or when it would be created. So the age of anything is usually through mathematical calculations that include assumptions. And at the same time, it's hard for me to want to sit here and agree to these assumptions when a lot of the people calculating them have not the Baptist bias, but an evolutionary bias when it comes to their methods of calculation. Yeah, and obviously your opinion is shared by many different young earth creationists out there, including one in particular who comes to mind from the Institute of Creation Research. The geologist there, Tim Carey, has done several podcasts where he talks about the age of rocks and how he doesn't really feel like you can necessarily even attach a number to that, and I know you've talked with me about that in private. I certainly understand the perspective. I think that regardless of the age of some of these different layers and rocks, wow, that was a loud thunder there. Anyway, I don't know if people heard that. There's a big storm outside. It caught me off guard. Here's my point. It doesn't change a thing for me because... God's coming after you, Ben. Apparently. It doesn't change a thing for me. This is the point I'm just trying to make here. It doesn't change a thing for me whether they can 100% prove that the earth is four and a half billion years or not, because... And this is the beauty of the apparent age doctrine. Okay, let's say they 100% prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt, well then God just made it look that way, and we can all move on. Now, when it came to the actual show, is there a winner? You go first. Because Ben has the Pastor Anderson bias. Yeah, I think that obviously it seemed pretty one-sided. It wasn't a formal debate, so it's hard to say who won or lost. It was just kind of a discussion, but from an outcome perspective, do you feel like there were winners and losers from the discussion? Well, I thought Pastor Anderson cooked them. Okay. I do think that in all fairness, Dr. Hovind didn't necessarily anticipate some of the arguments that were made. Again, I would say that he was given the opportunity to know what talking points we were going to bring up. I don't know that he's necessarily heard Pastor Anderson's viewpoint on this or some of the things that he was going to say. Even after hearing Pastor Anderson's viewpoint, it didn't seem like he was affording opportunity to change his mind. It seemed like he was just in solid disagreement, just maybe not necessarily knowing the best way to articulate his viewpoint. I think that he lacked in providing any kind of real scientific argument for the moon issues that were brought up. Specifically, he did challenge Pastor Anderson on a couple things, and Pastor Anderson made a couple follow-up videos. I mirrored them on our channel, but unfortunately, YouTube was nuking all of my channels, so I hid them. Then all of a sudden, they just nuked our channel, so it didn't matter anyways. Specifically, one of those challenges is Dr. Hovind brought up the idea of the moon being 2,000 miles in diameter. He was theorizing or suggesting that the surface area of the moon was not enough to cover 5,000 plus craters that were approximately 12 miles in diameter as well. Pastor Anderson did bring up while on the show that they could be overlapping, and they are overlapping. Pastor Anderson did make a follow-up video where he showed, even if they never overlapped a single time, that there's plenty of square acreage on the moon to have 5,000 plus craters, 12 miles in diameter, and still have plenty of moon to not cover. I think that that challenge, Pastor Anderson definitely won. Did you watch that video? Yes. What did you think about that video? I don't have very much else to add that hasn't already been said, to be honest. I think there was other controversy as far as the children of Israel, how long they were in Egypt. I don't think I've ever heard, I didn't realize, I don't think I've ever heard of Dr. Hovind's position that the children of Israel were starting with Abraham, like the countdown of the 430 years. Have you ever heard that before? I've never heard that at all. I was very confused by the argument he was making. Very, very confused. I've calculated the age of the universe myself, just independently, just made a whole chart. I did not come to that conclusion whatsoever, and then Pastor Anderson made a follow-up video where he kind of showed the few verses that he believes supports his position. And I think the verse that they're pointing to is one in Galatians 3, where it talks about Abraham specifically being given the covenant or giving the promise, and it says the law, which was 430 years after, shall not disannul. But at the same time, the New Testament's just kind of like summarizing and just kind of throwing things out there. I think it would be kind of foolish to take the suggestion in Galatians 3 and just completely rewrite the history of the Old Testament. Especially considering the fact that in other places in the Bible, it literally says that they were evil and treated for 400 years in Egypt. And based on Ken Hovind's chart, I don't see how that's even possible at all. So I would definitely push back. I don't think that that makes sense at all. I think it's about 6,300 years. That's what I said to start the show. Pastor Anderson agreed with me, and then Dr. Hovind brought up, he kind of made a joke. He said it's like 6,000 years, October at 2 p.m., whatever, and it's like, I didn't know if he was just joking, just a joke, or if he really was 6,000. But then, boy, did that get intense. Yeah, he was just trying to make a joke, I think. I think the law was confirmed to Abraham somewhere in Genesis. I believe maybe, I can't remember the chapter specifically, but it's like confirmed to Abraham, and then that doesn't really have anything to do with the children. We don't add that number into the children of Israel's overall sojourning in Egypt. It's kind of a separate issue, the confirmation versus their sojourning. Yeah. I don't know how you could argue that. I think that this is wrong. So I agree with Pastor Anderson. I totally agree with Pastor Anderson on the timeline perspective. That's the timeline that I've made. I would be interested if Dr. Hovind could prove his viewpoint and prove those other versions wrong. I don't think that he can whatsoever. And when it comes to the surface area of the moon, that's something that I had already prepared for, for the show, but because Pastor Anderson and him got so heated, I didn't really want to pour some oil or gas on the fire, so I didn't even show it on the show. But yeah, the surface area of the moon definitely is enough to cover all the craters that exist. I did want to bring up the fact that on the moon, you have the Mare. Genesis 15, 13. Yeah, that's one of the verses. The Mare is kind of what's considered or thought to be seas on the moon at one point. It's the dark spots. I think it'd have been interesting to get their perspectives on, is the Mare day one? Or is the Mare a post-creation thing as well? Because it seemed like Dr. Hovind had this idea like, well, the moon's perfect. But I'm like, what is a perfect moon? Could a perfect moon still have craters on it? Why is that not perfect all of a sudden? Because I'm sure when we look at the topography of the earth, it wasn't a smooth, flat orb or something like that. I mean, I'm sure that there was hills and valleys and rocks. I don't think that the earth was just West Texas. It was the flattest place that you've ever seen in your entire life. I think that there was going to be obviously some geographic features that exist. So I would push back and say, I don't think that a moon with Mare or with impact craters makes it not perfect or something. It just seems like what some people would argue is character. Just like the sun itself. If you look at close-up pictures of the sun, it's not even necessarily always perfect. There's different aspects of the gas that's shooting off and it's a little bit different colors. And it's unique. And even the stars, the stars differ in colors and shapes and brightnesses. Am I really to say that one star is perfect and one's not because of its color or shape or the topographical features, if that's even the right terminology for a star? I don't know. I mean, what's your viewpoint on a perfect moon? Well, it was created mature. I feel like that's a separate category from perfection or imperfection. It was created mature and it was created with impact craters that give it the hypothetical backstory of getting impacted with meteorites and different objects in space that gave it its features. To me, it's very similar to the Adam's belly button question. And I found it weird that Ken Hovind was just so dogmatic that Adam did not have a belly button on the stream. That was kind of like, why are you that sure about that? Well, obviously, it's something he's thought about. When it comes to this, it's literally a navel gazing doctrine. To me, it doesn't matter at all. And at the end of the day, it's unprovable. I could see how people have strong opinions both ways. And I've heard the argument for the belly button, and this is probably the best argument, is that Adam looks like Jesus, Jesus has one, so therefore he has it. He's created in the image of God. Jesus had a belly button, so it wouldn't be a logical leap to say Adam had a belly button. Some people would say, well, Christ hadn't been incarnated yet. I don't know. Some people would push back. I think Pastor Anderson's viewpoint was, well, we all have a belly button, so it's a burden of proof on them to prove that he didn't. At the end of the day, it's like, does that really matter? I don't think that that one really matters. And I think, again, if we were going to be saying, I'm going to prove that Adam had a belly button scientifically, well, now we've crossed, like you said, in the lane where now we're not sticking to science. And we're going back to fantasy or your view of miracles that the Bible doesn't talk about. I'm all for miracles, but let's keep our miracles to things that the text says. I love those kind of miracles, and so I want to make sure that we're sticking in our way. You've just got to stay in the correct lane if you're science or if you're creation, and it angers me when the opposite happens. You know what really angers me is theistic evolution. I know we didn't cover it on the podcast. I just wanted to put it out there. When people twist the scripture to try and make science falsely so-called fit, that pisses me off, and theistic evolution is exhibit A of that. Can you hear the rock music? I don't know if our stream can. I can hear the rock music. I'm not sure if people listening to the stream can hear the rock music. It might be a good idea to ask them in the chat. You know, it's funny because it's like, any obstacle we can have, we will have for this show. But you know what? We're charging on. We're staying steadfast. We're just going to keep the show going. We really need our audience. I'll be honest, I'm a little uplifted in spirit. We have 178 people watching live right now. See? Everything's going to be okay. But at the end of the day, we need our audience to share this show because Pastor Shelley and social media are not friends. Not friends at all. And it's almost like, I have that other meme, the UNO meme. You can bring it up. It's kind of like how Dr. Hovind tried to say hi to Pastor Anderson to start the show. And boy was it spicy. This is how social media treats me. Well, yeah, and I don't think he wanted the illusion to be, oh, I'm this guy's buddy. No, they're not friends. Yeah, talk about another follow-up video. Pastor Anderson made another follow-up video where he put out his viewpoint on why he was so hostile towards Dr. Hovind. Yeah, the announcement. Now here's the thing. I know about all that. It's not that I don't know about all that entirely. But at the same time, I have been trying to give Dr. Hovind the benefit of the doubt on a few of those issues. And I've been trying to reach out to him in a friendly way just to confirm some of those things before I make my own judgment. Because yes, I have seen the video espousing the Joey Fouse thing. Obviously, Joey Fouse is super wicked and is like a false prophet. And the viewpoints that he has is easily proven wrong. Easily proven wrong. I would think any saved person would immediately reject such a thing. And so to me, it's extremely bizarre. It's very confusing why Dr. Hovind, number one, would have him on. Number two, say that he couldn't debunk it. Number three, read the book four times. All of that's super concerning. I do want to say there's some strange things that happen in the Bible. Saved men of God get involved in all kinds of weird stuff. So I don't want to say that it's not possible. I mean, consider Galatians. The whole book of Galatians is talking to a church upon which essentially that church is mixed up on the gospel itself literally. Now of course, the Apostle Paul says, I'm afraid of you. He says, hey, I'm kind of nervous about what's going on here. We see men of God hooking, you know, as far as kings, kings of Judah, yoking up with kings of Israel. Not right whatsoever. But at the same time, didn't make them unsaved. And I have gone to Dr. Hovind's most recent YouTube channel. I think he lost one. But his most recent one, his most popular video, his number one video was a gospel presentation. I watched it and it's pretty much everything that I would say or people that I know would say. So I'm just, I'm not sure. I would think if he was just like a complete unsaved false prophet that, you know, he would probably struggle with the gospel or not be making that his number one video. And, you know, again, I don't know. I could be wrong on this issue. But at the end of the day, like there's other issues too. Obviously, people are concerned that he's not legally married and I would take issue if that's, you know, 100% true. I think that there's a lot of evidence to prove that there might be some issues there. But again, I'm not inviting people to come on my show that would be welcome in my church. Because that's just not the goal of the show. Because then it's only going to be like church members on as guests. The goal of the show is just to bring guests on. And, you know, if Pastor Anderson doesn't like Dr. Hovind or has strong feelings towards him, that doesn't bother me because frankly speaking, I would love to have more shows like that. I would love to bring people like James White on to debate Pastor Anderson on the King James Bible issue. I would love to bring, you know, all these different opposing world views together and have them hash things out. And us included hashing things out. Like I'm not against having people on the show that I totally don't agree with, maybe don't even like. There's in fact a show that I'm anticipating potentially happening in a couple months with someone that I really don't like at all. Me neither. And at the end of the day, the goal isn't necessarily to have them on the show because I like the person, but rather just to have the conversation. I want to have the conversations. I don't want to shy away from conversations. I want to earnestly contend for the faith. I want to put our world view out there. The Jews don't want me to put my world view out there. And so I keep getting, you know, destroyed on every social media platform that exists, except for Rumble. Alright, so we're hoping that Rumble lasts as long as possible and then there's God resource. But we're putting a lot of stuff on Rumble. You need to get on Rumble. If you hadn't been following us already, share, tell people, email, post, clip up our show and put it on YouTube. I don't care. I'm done with YouTube personally. But that doesn't mean that you can't take my clips and these clips from the show and put it up there on YouTube, because I think that that would be great. And, you know, when it comes to the whole Dr. Hovind issue, I have no problem with someone hating him coming on the show. That wasn't entirely my viewpoint. I do have a little bit different viewpoint there. So I wasn't trying to do some gotcha. I saw some people saying like, oh, Pastor Shelley's just trying to get Dr. Hovind or something like that. Not at all. I don't I don't think that at all. And you would basically have to be calling me a liar because on the show multiple times I said, I like Dr. Hovind. I said I liked a lot of the information he had and I still mean those things. Now, obviously, if someone could be proven to me to be a false prophet, then I have to change my opinion. But there's still people that I like, like there's people that are false prophets or people that I think are mixed up on the gospel. And I still kind of like want to like that person. You know, and I'll give another example. I'm going on a rant here for a second, but someone like Pastor Stacey Shiflett, I really liked that guy. It's still hard for me today not to like him. And I even wonder, like, is he still just like really mixed up or is he just an unsaid false teacher? I don't know the question, but I preach the whole sermon on this because he's mixed up enough. I feel like we have to call him out on that specific issue and I have done so. But at the same time, that doesn't change the fact that I kind of like like him. I don't know if you ever feel that way. I definitely understand what you're saying. Like, it's just too bad that they're so mixed up on damnable heresy, because if they weren't, then you could see yourself potentially enjoying their content. Well, like Yung Don. I kind of liked him. I watched some of his show and then all of a sudden he just came up with all this crazy heresy and you're just like, what's wrong with you? You know, or Cassidy's friend, Gideon. I don't have anything against Gideon. I liked I actually liked some of his videos, the one where he was sleeping during the WNBA. That was hilarious. I'm like, this guy's awesome. But then, you know, yokes up with some false teacher, this Josh guy, which I've never liked Josh, but I did like Gideon. And it's just kind of shameful and embarrassing that now he's espousing the same kind of work. If it weren't for the fact that they're teaching damnable heresy, you could see yourself enjoying their content because their personality resonates with you. Well, I mean, think about someone like Saul, the apostle Paul, right? Prior to getting saved, what if someone was like, I kind of like Saul, even though he's hauling us to prison, he's destroying our churches and stuff like that. Just kind of like liking the person and then just, you know, you kind of have to keep your distance. I mean, can't we see the dichotomy a little bit with Jesus? Because he still calls Judas his friend. He still is kind to him. He's still kind of nice to him. He washed his feet. Don't we see a little bit of the, like, Jesus loved Judas and he liked Judas and he was a friend towards Judas? And it's disappointing to him that Judas betrayed him. It's not like, of course you did or something. It's like he's saddened at the reality of Judas being Judas. I mean, don't you see that kind of dichotomy? So like for me, if Ken Hovind was really bad or Judas or something, that would actually make me sad. I would be disappointed because I like him, because I like a lot of the material. Now, Ken, some of the Hovind creation stuff, like his Hovind theory, I've always thought that's bizarre. I've heard him say that Adam and Eve were like 30 foot tall giants who are running around the earth in less than 24 hours. And, you know, like all kinds of bizarre stuff. And I'm just thinking like, well, that's weird. It's kind of like when I see somebody and I like them and I find out they're flat earth. It's like, oh, man, like Stu Peters. Isn't Stu Peters a flat earther? That's what I've heard. Yeah. And I mean, I've liked some of his material. I really liked his documentary. What was the documentary he made? Died Suddenly. Yes, Died Suddenly. Great documentary. Really liked it. But then it's just kind of like a bummer. Why are you a flat earther? Why are you a flat earther? Now you're not going to get in his car ever. It's kind of like reading Stacey Shivet's book Wolves Among Lambs. Love the book. It was a real page turner. But then you get the last page and it's just like repenting of Santa's turners. And you're like, why do you have to do that? You know, it's just it's just kind of like frustrating. And so I get I get your your feeling. I personally have never felt that way toward Kent Hovind. I've never watched much of his content. I didn't watch his creation seminar. I haven't seen anything on the King James Bible that he's put out. I don't have a connection with him at all. So I have a different perspective there. But I feel like, you know, for a lot of people, he is what I guess introduced them to fundamentalism, perhaps. Or maybe they have watched a lot of his seminars. And and so they may have a different view than me because maybe they've just built up. He's he's had more time to build up a rapport with them. I mean, again, I I kind of changed my mind on the King James Bible because of him specifically. He made a few videos about it. He was one of the only people I'd ever heard talk about not drinking alcohol, which I was kind of surprised by. I liked that stance. And then again, I think a lot of the arguments that he has for creation and and explaining creation science, and then kind of pointing the flaws in evolution are still very legitimate arguments. The thing is that this creation argument, it's not like it started with Dr. Hovind. There's people like Dr. Carl Ball and other individuals who really pioneered this movement and really presented a lot of the arguments that are just kind of repackaged and borrowed from people like him and other ministries that Dr. Hovind is using. So it's not like his arguments are bad because he expounded them. You know, anybody can expound good arguments. And so I like a lot of the arguments that he has expounded. I really appreciate a lot of the stances he's taken. And yeah, again, does he have a lot of serious problems? Sure. Am I ready to just give up my life and go move on the compound? No. But at the end of the day, like, maybe he got mixed up in heresy, but he saved. And maybe I don't know what's going on with all the marriages and stuff, but I have a lot of people in my church that have been divorced and remarried and I don't hate them. Now, albeit if anybody doesn't have a legal, legitimate marriage, then I would force them to do so if they want to continue being a part of my church. But again, if this guy was mixed up but saved, and his marriages were legitimate, would that not potentially change your viewpoint on Dr. Hovind? If he's mixed up but saved? Yes. Well, then he wouldn't be a false prophet, so I would have to treat him differently. So yeah, it would change my perspective if there's irrefutable proof or that we know for sure that this guy is saved. He's a brother in Christ. But right now you don't believe that at all. No. Okay. So again, and that's fine. I think that it's good that we had people that have differing viewpoints, different world views. My goal is to try and reach out to people. I mean, think about this. Saul, or at least the Apostle Paul and Barnabas disagreed on John Mark specifically. And Barnabas was kind of the son of consolation. He saw the better in John. And then John Mark kind of gets redeemed in the latter end, right? And I think that sometimes we could be trying too hard to be that, and we reach out to bad people and get burned. And sometimes we maybe burn somebody that, you know, we thought all the facts were clear enough, and it just turns out maybe they were mixed up. Because it's frustrating how confusing things are. And I can see how somebody looking at individuals in the Galatians church, running into them individually, would think like, these people aren't saved, they're a reprobate or something. But the Apostle Paul is kind of like, I'm not sure what category to put you guys in. I'm afraid of you, but if you've been circumcised, you're doomed, you're damned. So again, it's frustrating. But I would say this, I've seen a lot of videos of Dr. Hovind, especially even recently, expounding salvation, and everything was exactly what I would say. So I'm just thinking, if this guy is really unsaved, that's some level of confusion. Well, the thing is, too, though, that the podcast wasn't about whether or not Hovind is saved. No, who cares? Yeah, it certainly didn't cover any of his, you could say, controversies, or just the marriage issue, and some of the other stuff. That wasn't the point. The point was, he has a particular view on creation, Pastor Anderson has a different angle on that, let's bring them both on and talk about it. And perhaps where maybe we could have improved on is highlighting more forcefully that there's going to be disagreement on the show. Perhaps we could have done a little bit more of that at the top, at the beginning, just to prepare the audience so it didn't seem like it came out of nowhere, and maybe providing a little more context there. But at the same time, it was the first time that I believe that we've ever had two guests on with the history that Hovind and Pastor Anderson have. I think this was confusing. They used to be friends at some point, or friendly, and now they're not. It's like, it wouldn't matter if Dr. Hovind, to me, was a Presbyterian, a Catholic, a Mormon, or an atheist. The reason why he was being on the show is because he has a big audience, he has a big reach within this particular viewpoint for this particular discussion, and he's impacting a lot of people. So the reason why he's brought on the show is because of his viewpoint and him being a major leader in this particular arena, regardless of if I think he's... People are like, oh, why would you be nice to somebody at a hair tie? It's like, look, I would bring any of those people, I would bring an unsaved guy on the show and let him expound his particular viewpoint because we're really trying to just get to the heart of the issue, what are the best creation science arguments? If this guy's a Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, whatever, it doesn't matter to me. The point was specifically to really talk about the issues, what are the best arguments for them, where do we align ourselves, and just to get people talking again. Here's a name that I'll bring up. He was on season two of The Baptist Bias, Jeff Riddle. This guy's a Calvinist, right? I don't know. I haven't really looked into his views on salvation. I can't sit here and be positive that he believes right on the gospel necessarily, but we brought him on because of his expertise regarding the area of the received text and what he would say, the way he describes it, confessional bibliology, which is, in my mind, basically King James-onlyism. But we brought him on to talk about that, and here's the thing. There's going to be guys that we bring on who are for sure bad, potentially, for the purpose of having a discussion and an argument, if you want to call it that, about a particular issue. You plan on having that on the King James-only issue in the future. I mean, I invited somebody that I think is a really bad person, that I don't like at all, that I think is probably not even unsafe, to have a discussion, have a literal debate on the show, on the King James issue, and they refused. Now, I like podcasts where we bring our friends on and we're all in agreement. I'm not down on those shows. I think those are great, but I think, you know what else is pretty cool too, though? When there is disagreement, when there is some conflict, where you can see competing worldviews, if you want to call it that, or competing ideas being hashed out in real time for the purpose of determining which one is better. And you know what? The best idea will win. I agree with that. I think when you really put the ideas next to each other, you kind of see which one makes ad hominem attacks, and which one is talking about facts and stats and the Bible and really expounding their view. So, you know, again, I'm glad we did the show. Me too. I thought it was great. It got a lot of people talking. It's exactly what I wanted. It turned out it was spicy. I mean, obviously, I didn't want YouTube to nuke us, but of course, that was inevitable. If it wasn't this show, it was the next show or whatever. I mean, you know, again, you can't predict the future. It wouldn't happen anyway. These things may not even be entirely related because I had suspicion that our channel might get deleted for a completely different reason. So, you know, some people are like, oh, this is the judgment of God. It's like, it's so stupid. You know, those people are just trolls. It's so funny to me. It's like these people couldn't get banned if they wanted. And then they get mad at us for being banned. It's because they're stalkers. It's because they're losers who have nothing going on in their life, so they monitor every single thing we do obsessively because they have nothing better to do. Go out, go outside, get a hobby, collect stamps, do something with your life. Now, I will be honest with the audience. OK, you are the reason why we're doing this show and the reason why I do the show is to reach new people. And, you know, Rumble, it's a great platform. I'm not down on it, but a little bit. It's kind of a black hole to me. I kind of view it as like a live streaming only like that's where it really shines. But in other aspects, it's not as good as other platforms. And so what I need is I need our audience to take clips, take parts of the show we liked and make little snippets and put them out there. Advertise the Baptist bias for us. That's how we can reach new people. I can't really do so much because I'm so limited in what social media will allow me to do. I mean, I can't buy advertising. I can't I can't buy I get shut down on billboards. I get shut down everything on Facebook, everything on YouTube. I've lost my Instagram, Twitter's, virtually everything. Now, I have been trying to recreate some of these accounts. I've recreated account on Twitter. But again, I'm ghost banded instantly. You know, I've created an Instagram, but I'm sure that that'll be deleted pretty soon. So, you know, if I ever get popular, it'll go away. But again, follow us at Band Pastor. I'm trying to stream the show out there. Try sharing, you know, the Rumble link. And then, of course, you know, we're going to try and get God resource up and going a lot better. Where we have counts and people can log in, people can chat features come in. You know, we're just kind of holding on to Rumble while we have it. We never know even I mean, the government could shut it down tomorrow because they hate the fact that I'm still allowed to talk. They're mad that people like us get to talk. They hate the Baptist bias and they're literally trying to shut down. I know our binologue is funny, but it's true. It's real. And often there's a lot of satire in there and I'm being sarcastic, but it is a reflection of the ideology we're combating. And one thing I want to say, Pastor Shelley, is every single time they silence you, every single time you're banned off of a different platform and they remove your ability to speak, it's an admission that they can't refute what you have to say. Of course. And the reason why we were banned from YouTube is because the establishment, the Jews, whatever you want to call them, they cannot debunk our ideas. They cannot refute our worldview. The only option they have is to silence and deplatform us, but don't let them. And this is one thing I want to say to the audience. Don't let them win. They can try and silence us, but they could also fail at silencing us and it all depends on your response to it. So if you take our podcast, you download it and you re-upload it to YouTube by chopping it up into little segments, sharing clips of our show on YouTube, sharing clips of our show on Facebook, then what happens is when people search for The Baptist Bias, they'll see the clip that you uploaded and they'll know exactly where to find us on Rumble. Yeah, and again, we have an email group. Sign up, email us at steadfastbadness.com. Get your friends to sign up on our email list. And we're going to keep this thing going for the season. We have a great show on Tuesday. We have Cassidy Campbell in studio. We have Alex Rosen, who's really big. He actually has a pretty big platform, Predator Catcher, which I don't even know if the guy saved. I would love to either get him saved or share the gospel with him, but even if he's not, you know, here's a guy doing a lot of great stuff. And I hope that our audience can try their best to give people the benefit of the doubt as much as you can. Again, if you have strong opinions about someone, I'm not against you. Please share them. I'm not trying to silence anybody on anything. But I think it's best if we can try to give people as much grace as we can and try to win people over with charity and grace. And again, the goal of this show is to reach new people, to really talk about current events, bring in new guests. Obviously, when we keep getting silenced and lose all of our subscribers and stuff, it's harder to get guests because we've had opportunity to get some big guests and they just say like, yeah, you guys don't seem big enough for us right now. And so, you know, that's where you guys come in. If you can make us big, if you can help share and get a lot of people on here and we can get a big Rumble channel, then, you know, we probably could get some of the cooler guests, some more interesting conversations. Like Trump. Yeah, we're really close. I think we just need like five more subs and then Donald Trump will definitely be coming on the show. But is that who you want the most? Well, you talk about Hovind, I have a soft spot for Donald Trump. I'll just admit it right now. Some people would say he's a reprobate. I don't agree with that at all. What about Tucker Carlson? About him being a reprobate? Would you want him to be on the show? Oh, of course. He seems like, to me, he'd be like one of the coolest people to have on the show. Yeah, I'd love to have Tucker Carlson on. That'd be awesome. Yeah, obviously these things will probably not happen, but, you know, ever. Hey, you know, a man can dream, right? Yeah. Yeah, of course. But at the end of the day, you know, you guys are why we have the show. Thanks for tuning in. I mean, we didn't even give you any notice and we got 170 plus people in our live stream and on Rumble, an alternative platform. But you know what? I hate YouTube. I don't know if you could tell from the sign or not, but we have a sign. Ladies and gentlemen, I hate YouTube. I never even I didn't even make this. Who is running it? It just manifests. Susan, is it a Jew, Susan? Jew something? Jujinske. Jujinske. Jujinske. Jujitsu. It's always the Jews, man. Every single time. Did she quit? I don't know. I need to look these things up. Maybe she's busy digging tunnels or something. It could be. It could be. Well, at least this. You know, with no YouTube, the show is going to be as spicy as it could possibly be. Say what we want. I'm not even thinking about censoring myself. I hate faggots. I hate all Jews and fags and YouTube, which is basically the same group of people. Pretty much. There's somebody that's working for YouTube that's just got to be a sodomite that just watches all of our stuff and then just like... They have the angriest job. I mean, how many channels have they deleted, do you think, YouTube? I don't know. Dozens and dozens. Millions? You look at Faithful Word Baptist Church, they have to get a new channel every hour or something. YouTube might have had to delete a million just Faithful Word Baptist Church channels. Well, and you look at some of the verbiage that's not allowed. It's like, you can't say this group of people are dogs or you can't say this group of people have, you know, or you're happy that they got murdered or something like that or killed or whatever. Like, you can't be happy about a particular event or whatever. It's like clearly new IFB talking points. All right. Well, we've talked a long time. I really enjoy this recap. I want to comment on a few other things. Someone put in the comments, are you going to the Stronghold Baptist camping trip? Unfortunately, I can't make it this year just because I've had to get another job and it's taking up a lot of my time. So... But I am going to be going out to Chicago May 24th and 25th and we're going to have a soul wanting event. I'm going to be preaching that Friday night. It's going to be at First Baptist Church in Indiana is allowing us to use some of their facility. So, we want to pack this place out. Show up to the Chicago event, May 24th, 25th. Pastor Thompson is going to be preaching. I'm going to be preaching. Soul wanting on Friday. Soul wanting on Saturday. Their whole church plant is trying to have the service over there and traveling over there. Also, we have the Daniel series is going to be coming out pretty soon. As soon as we're done with the Baptist Bias Season 3. We're going to be putting it though on their other channel, the Steadfast Baptist Church channel. We're going to have our Daniel series. And so, really there's a lot of stuff coming up. You want to check out next Tuesday 8pm. You want to make sure you're following our Steadfast Rumble channel for the Daniel series. You want to join us for all kinds of different souling events. Steadfast Baptist Church is even having a soul wanting event. I want to make sure I get the date right. In Shreveport, Louisiana. It's coming up pretty soon. It's going to be... Let's see... April 13th. April 13th. April 30th we're having a soul wanting marathon here in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. April 13th we're having a Shreveport, Louisiana soul wanting marathon. So we got the Chicago event in May. And then we have all kinds of other soul wanting events. Of course, we love the Baptist Bias. You want to check it out. But it's more important to get into church. Make sure you're getting plugged in. Doing soul wanting. Share the show. Clip it up. Share it everywhere. Make funny clips out of it. Share the memes. I really appreciate my wife making memes for me. They're some of the best memes that I've ever seen. She's pretty good with the memes. Yeah. She's pretty spicy. Yeah. I don't really want to have women on the show necessarily. But if I did, she would be pretty spicy. I think so. So that's pretty much all I have as far as plugs. Did you have any other plugs real quick before we go? No, I would just say make sure you follow our Rumble page. And at the end of the day, don't let the Jews win. Make sure you share our content. Make sure you clip it up. Put it on YouTube. Put it on Facebook. Put it on Twitter. Put it everywhere you possibly can. And let's draw people over to the Baptist Bias. Don't let the Jew win. Share the truth. And make sure you have the Baptist Bias. That's going to do it for us today. Thanks for tuning in. I'm going to make some follow up videos. God bless. Have a great day. God bless. God bless. God bless. God bless. God bless.