And so almost got me wanting to take a vacation to Switzerland. When I met my wife, she always said I wanted to go to the Alps. And she said that was her dream vacation, to go to the Alps. Who knows? But my book that I chose was the New Super Spirituality. It's an expose of the mysticism that's slithered into the church and You have some false teachers you have some Good intent Christians that have slipped over into following some of these false teachers But it's I want to take care of this It is an emotionalism, and it's lacking substantial biblically-based content. It seems to have a phobia of the mind and of academia of any sort. And I'll probably allude to this several times during this presentation, but we have this heart and mind dichotomy with this. Some have called it the new Gnosticism reasons that we might hit on here tonight, but there's almost an aversion to what they call head knowledge. And if you employ any type of scholarly approach to anything, you'll be chastised and say, that's just head knowledge. That's not heart knowledge. That's not where faith comes from. But Schaefer pinpoints intellectualism well in this little book. It is a pamphlet, I will say that. It's not really a book. It's only like 27 pages long. But anyways, this divorce of heart and mind is outside this flesh to cover the heart of man, what we really are inside. There may be different facets of that inner man, but you're to love the Lord with all your heart, your mind, your soul, your strength, and those are all composite. They're not just three separate parts. And if you love God with your heart, you'll be loving Him with your mind, and if you love God with all your mind, you'll be loving Him with all your heart. And so Schaeffer contends for a balanced spirituality that engages the mind with the thoughts of God and rational, logical thinking that adorns the Word of God. It doesn't take anything away from it. So we have to take the initiative to stress that the mind belongs to Christ. That's in this overview that we have, how to respond to this kind of teaching. We have to stress that the mind, too, belongs to Christ, that we serve God with our minds. And the whole man is to come to Christ. Of course, that is the very logic and expression of Dr. Schaefer in many ways. Now, what is Platonism? You're only going to get the 10 cent definition. I'm sorry, I don't have time to go into Platonism. Obviously, this teaching is not like Platonism in every aspect. There's no possible way. There's some very erudite things that Plato said that this teaching wouldn't even be worthy of. But in a particular aspect, we'll see how it correlates with Platonism. But in its fundamentals, in Platonism, specifically, affirms that the existence of abstract objects which are asserted to exist in a third realm that's distinct from our realms, our both the sensible world and from the internal world of consciousness. So we have that, and so we have these forms that exist that what we have in this world relate to those forms. Those forms are actually the real. And we get this aspect of a form, and we get the universal, and we get the particulars also. So really, Platonism would cover any philosophy that embodies some major idea of Plato, especially in the taking of abstract forms as metaphysically more basic than material things. So, I want to add and slip in here that this particular teaching he's talking about, or teachings, are an unwarranted de-emphasis. This is not Schaefer, this is me, believe it or not. An unwarranted de-emphasis on the created order that God made for us to use enjoyably to His glory. and an imagined merit received from denying oneself of legitimate pleasure derived from enjoyment of the creation as purposed by God." And so this is where it falls in line with the Platonism, more with, I would say, a honed-in definition of the Asceticism. We talk about those elements that might correspond with Platonism. But then actually, is Platonism all bad? And do we say that Platonism in every aspect wouldn't correspond with real and true Christianity? And I have an article here by Hans Bosom. that we become more God-like through this. We don't become God in any sense or divine in any way. The view of salvation, he says, hinges on the incarnation. And the early church believed that the second person of the Trinity took on a human nature such that his divine person assumed a universal human nature. And it said, had the person of the Son assumed an individual human nature only, It would have been impossible for other human beings to be united to the humanity of Christ. There's a lot more in that than just that surface statement. And then he adds also in another area that Christian Platonism helps us to read Scripture as Scripture. Those that reject Christian Platonism may think that they simply are left with the pure gold of Scripture. But in actual fact, and I'm going to deviate from the rest of his dissertation here, and I'm going to say, look at the book of Hebrews and see how the book of Hebrews talks about the heavenly things. You know, the earthly things are patterned after the image of the heavenly things. And I mean, you can feel that tune to Platonism when you read the book of Hebrews. And so, I don't really want this to be a teaching on Platonism, but I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater either. There are some corresponding elements. Of course, we know that Christianity and Platonism on every point do not correspond. There's a lot of things that Christianity is definitely averse to. And I want to bring up that when we are talking about our subject, how this form of asceticism and denying the beauty of God's creation kind of try to overthrow those virtuous things that God gave us. OK, so the pathway to where Schaeffer was in 1972, we had a situation in our country in the 60s and 70s. And if you've lived through the 60s and 70s and you remember, there's one word that is the chant word or that set the tone for the whole 60s and early 70s. That's the word revolution. I mean, there were countries revolting, trying to break free of colonialism. Vietnam, for one, was going on in Angola. It was going on in other countries. I'm not saying that they were pure in their essence, but there were definitely people struggling to be free. And of course, there was communist agitation of all sorts, too, going on. But anyways, back to our society. The youth saw plastic lives, in that people had opt for this passive existence of what we've already heard, of personal peace and affluence. However, as it happens so often, the things that are hated, the people that hate them so much, fight to stamp them out. Kind of like what happened in the colonies. Well, when the Puritans came, the Puritans wanted to be free from the regulations of the English church and the king. And they came over here and they set up rules. And they became austere and strict. And they had people rebel from them. some people to death themselves. And they became sort of like the people that they were trying not to be like. So hard to be not like. And so here we have what Schaefer called the new bourgeoisie. In the same vein as the property owners and landowners and preservers of capital as the old. As contrasted to the lower class peasantry and the proletariat, they ran and railed and rebelled in their youth against the old bourgeoisie, only to find out that what life offered them in turn. They opted for the plastic lives, as we've talked about. And they kind of became what they despised. And that subtle and peaceful life of affluence and personal peace And so it's kind of circular. You see, we have this thing where if you propagate generational shallowness, it'll cause a reciprocation of mistrust. And the youth will look elsewhere for answers to the big question. I like the way Schaefer put this. Maybe you deviate a little bit from it. The dad is asking his son, or telling his son, you need to go to college. And the son says, why dad? And the father says, so you can get a degree. And the son says, what for? And the father says, so you can make money. And the son says, why do I need to do that? And the father says, so you can have enough money to send your kids to college. In this endless cycle of rebirth here, And yet, where do we make any sense out of this? Where do our children make any sense? Where are we going with this? And it should be that we know what the Scripture said. If we based it on the Scripture, we'd know from Deuteronomy that chapter 8, it's God that gives us power to get wealth so that He can establish His covenant with us. And so that we might establish that covenant in others' lives, that we can give the gospel out. That's the purpose of prosperity. And Ephesians said, let him steal no more than he might have to give to him that needs. And so, the purpose of money, see, we stop basing things on Scripture. And so, in this pathway to where we are, think about it. Music got stranger. A man's hair got longer. The women's skirts got shorter. There were protests from every direction, and against the war. The women, the black community, the students, everyone was protesting. And the slogans of the 60s, think about them. They reflected an atmosphere of revolution and distrust. Down with the establishment. Free love. You know, no more trusting the reality of the generation before them. Hey, wait till you're married. You know, homosexuality's wrong. It's deviant. Instead, it was like, turn on, tune in, and drop out. Or you can't trust anyone over 30. And all of a sudden, police that we respected became known as pigs. The advocates of the New Left, some of the chief speakers of the New Left, Allen Ginsberg. He was a writer and a poet. He pushed the envelope of free speech to the limit, speaking of his personal sex campaigns with teen boys. And he was a card-carrying member of NAMLA, the National Association of Man-Boy Love. And of course, his writings were X-rated. There's his picture upper left-hand corner. Back again, Alan Watts was known for interpreting and popularizing Japanese, Chinese, and Indian traditions of Buddhism and Taoism, Hindu philosophy. Lower left-hand corner. And Gary Snyder, a winner of a Pulitzer Prize for Poetry of All Things. and the American Book Award. But he was a Buddhist, and he promoted his Buddhism. And he was for wild and crazy communal living and communal marriage. And last but not least, Mr. Father LSD himself, the lower right-hand corner. That's Timothy Leary, excuse me. And so what all these men became very famous, or not famous, excuse me, what marks they left on this country, should I say, what scars, what scorched earth they left on this country is better stated, much better stated, is that they inculturated Buddhism and transcendental mysticism into the youth of this country. In fact, they even sponsored a concert in San Francisco in that near the Haight-Ashbury district, where they had all the young hippies and dropouts come in. And they had the concert, and they spoke to them about their Buddhism, and their Taoist philosophy, and their Transcendental Mysticism. They were very big in that time, and they had a lot of influence. And they used it for deceiving people. And of course, there was the violent side of this new left. The days of rage and the criminality. The revolution got absolutely dangerous. New era, new tactics. You had the Weathermen. And they were a radical group that came out of the student I don't believe I have that acronym exactly right. But they planned over 25, and they executed over 25 bombings. And of those bombings, they bombed the Pentagon. They bombed the State Department. And I'm trying to think of the third place that they bombed. But of the other daring stunt they pulled, Timothy Leary was serving 10 years in Folsom Prison on drug charges, and they sprung him from prison and got him to Algeria in asylum. Then over the Berkeley riots, they got quite violent. Ronald Reagan called in state troopers to quell the violence. The chancellor was, I believe, fired for letting the students get away with too much. You have the Chicago 7, at the same time they had the Day of Rage or whatever, or the Scheduled Night of Violence, where the Weathermen planned a riot, where they physically attacked the police. Chicago 7, I'm sorry, the Chicago 7 actually at that time planned a riot at the Democratic National Convention. Of those people, of the Chicago Seven, one of those people, Tom Hayden, became, I don't know what number husband of Jane Bondas, but became Jane Bondas' husband. Also became one of our assemblymen here in California. It's amazing how some of these men became respected people in society. And if Randall was here, we'd get him a little space for his namesake there that he gave us a very good presentation on, and that's Mark Hughes, because he was sort of like the father of the New Left. He was called the father of the New Left by the press. He didn't really like that title. He said, I'm more like grandfather of the New Left, which is quite a bit older. Of course, here you have some more of the faces. Over here on the right, You have Bill Ayers. Bill Ayers is an interesting person because he was kind of like the secretary general of the Leathermen, that violent wing of the New Left. And he ended up becoming a visiting professor at Michigan State University, I believe, a public university. And I think he's still there. I think they have him on a stipend. I don't think they've disclosed how much they're paying him. But, you know, he was a radical person. He helped plan the bombings of public buildings and government buildings. I mean, he was really a bad actor. And yet he actually was termed by our 44th president as his mentor. And he actually ran One of his agencies, our 44th president, ran one of his agencies for several years. And so, I mean, what an influence on our country, you know, that this man had. He influenced one of our presidents. And so, I mean, this stuff wasn't done in a corner, and it was actually, you know, it had quite a bit of a far-reaching influence upon our society. So, now we want to talk about The Mead generation, they really want to show that we are good. The Mead generation, the love, love, love, the flowers in your hair generation. We want to really show that we can do it. That we can take the con of the world from the previous generation and show we can do a better job, right? So we have Woodstock. We have 400,000 people converging on Yasker's Farm in New York. What was that song about Woodstock? We are in the song, the theme song of Woodstock. We are stars. We are golden. We are million-year-old carbon. And we've got to get ourselves back to the garden. But here's 400,000 people converging in my little numerology here, 666.666. Well, out of 400,000 people, they only gave them 600 toilets. And so that figures out to be 666.666 toilets. So that's how that works out for all of those people. That's 666 people per toilet. And what did Woodstock become? Woodstock actually became, you know, a target for Madison Square Garden. The tie dyes, the bracelets, the jewelry, the hippie culture garb, you know, all the things that, the moos, the things that people wear, it became all, you know, items to make money on. And the rock stars that, you know, they were simple, It was all about non-materialism, you know. We're hippies. We're not materialistic. But after Woodstock, man, some of these artists of the 30 artists that played there became super rock stars. And, you know, their career propelled the stardom. And so it kind of ended up a contradiction of itself, you know. We're going to be the The new non-material generation, love, love, love. You know, if you're going to San Francisco, make sure you put some flowers in your hair, because you're going to meet a lot of nice people there, you know? But, you know, that's not true. Because, you know, the Rolling Stones weren't invited to this Woodstock. They were invited, but they refused. But what happened here at Altamont, at the Speedway in Tracy, You know, 300,000 people came out, and they decided to hire the Hells Angels Motorcycle Gang to do security for beer. You know, we'll give you all the beer you want if you just take care of the security. And what happened was, a man tried to come up on the stage, and they threw him off, and he came back up with a gun, and so he got stabbed, and he ended up dying. So, you know, here it is, the youth that are supposed to take the baton from the previous generation. they're kind of falling down. They're showing that, you know, hey, you know, we're broken too, just like you. You know, we, we, we, we, why are, you know, I'm giving these a question, why, why did you think you were better? Why did you think you could do it better? And why did you break away from our wisdom? And why did you throw out our morals, you know? And of course, of course, maybe your morals were plastic. Maybe you were the old bourgeoisie, you know, but nonetheless, still, You know, it just proves how broken all mankind is, and this false utopianism never works. Okay? So here we are with some bullet points here. Schaeffer calls this new platonic spirituality a titanic struggle. It really must have been. Maybe for the Reformed churches, maybe. I don't know how the times were shifting at that time. I'm not sure if a lot of people were leaving and joining charismatic churches then. He indicates these neo-Pentecostals are part of that and Signs are a focus on them on that on that side of the fence the Holy Spirit You know that evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit here is that you have to have signs and namely my experience with Pentecostals is that you have to speak in tongues and If you don't speak in tongues, you're lacking of the spirituality that's needed to run with the pack there. So, you know, they'll rub the hair off of your head, laying hands on you, trying to get you to, you know, even if they have to say, don't hit on my Honda, you know, fast, ten times, or whatever, you know. Or re-tie my bow tie, or something like that. I don't know, but they'll try to prime the pump on you, just to make sure you get saved again. So the new Pentecostal seemed to be, according to Schaeffer, less concerned with the content than the old were. And again, there's that heart-head-knowledge dichotomy. And they think highly of the heart, because they think, hey, if the Bible just speaks to my heart, it doesn't speak to my mind. But that's not true, because Paul said, be renewed in the spirit of your mind. Shavers very kind he gives credit to the old Pentecostalism and for the evangelistic successes in the South Americans and he tells some of the Buddhist and the Universalist miracles in passing I could not I could not locate any miracles in the Universalist Church I searched for it. I did find a lot of puffery type of miracles that occurred around the Buddha, and I did read of Buddhist monks who seem to be able to, who they say they can, when they reach a certain level in their meditation, they can levitate, which we know that's usually associated with being demonized, and they can disappear, things like that. But tales of healing and things like that, that have to do with compassion, and have to do with salvation. There's nothing like that in Buddhism that I can really see. Then you do have Mormon tales of charismata. They speak in tongues also. They definitely have the wrong Jesus, so they have to have the wrong spirit. So speaking in tongues does not mean that you have the Holy Spirit. Speaking in tongues could well be the wrong spirit. And of course, so it's a problem with this latitudinarian confraternity. Learn a couple of new words, hey. You know, it really gets under my craw when I see Kenneth Copeland going to Pope Francis and begging his forgiveness for the, and says that we should have never had the Protestant Reformation. Of course, he's a false prophet. Both of them are false prophets, but anyways. That's what kind of thing you have in this new charismatic movement. So Fram makes mention of the young people that leave the church in search of escaping legalism and end up in the worst form of legalism. Now he mentions the Church of God, excuse me, sorry, take that back, the Children of God in 1972. I don't think he had an idea when he wrote that what they were about to become. Because the children of God, David Berg was associated with some of Fred Jordan's early work. And if you know anything about Fred Jordan, Fred Jordan started a mission here. It's still running today. And I'm not sure if his wife is still healthy and well enough. But she was running it for a while after he passed away. And it is a right on mission that teaches people the word and helps people. But David Berg, separated from that, started a coffee shop in Huntington Beach. And then further went down the path of starting a commune, and wanted that commune to grow. But then all kinds of weird, freaky, kinky of God. And he started a practice with his many paramours here. And he basically had a practice called flirty fishing, where he would try to influence men of influence into the cult by means of having these women prostitute themselves to these men. And of course, that's ugly. not of God. And of course, that is rank. And I think the cult is still in existence. I don't think they still practice that anymore because of the AIDS virus. But amazing, who is in that cult that's very, very famous? Oh, Joaquin Phoenix and Rose McGowan were born into this cult. And there were thousands of illegitimate children born of this flirty fishing of the children of God. So you can see the culture is in quite a mess. So let's leave. We can see what a mess the 60s and 70s are. And I'm sure if you really want to compare it, I mean, we're pretty much a mess too. You know, it's a sinful world. And we all sin and come short of the glory of God. Sin abounds, you know. We pray that God's grace would also abound. He promised it would. But how is this spirituality like Platonism? Well, here we want to focus specifically on the fact that it denies the creation that God made. God made the whole man. God wants to save the whole man. Bible says that as Paul was talking in Romans chapter 1. I'm not ashamed of Christ For it is the power of God unto salvation Okay, it's the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believes and It's talking about in the Greek is the word sozo and that word is You know, it applies to physical, it applies to spiritual. That word is used across the board in the Bible in many different applications. And I know primarily Paul's talking about a spiritual salvation. But the Bible says godliness is profitable for the life that now is. And it's profitable in all things, not just for the life to come, but for the life that now is. And so this super spiritualism likes to deny that. And I really believe that in Schaeffer's time, like Moses Bird prior to his sexual downfall and all of these sexual things that came into his cult, I really think there was a lot of that going on where people were moving away and trying to be anti-material and everything. And that is good and in respect because we don't want to make Christianity a religion of gain. Godliness is not gain. But we don't want to lose the balance that God gives us this creation to enjoy. And God gives us the harvest. And God gives us work. And God gives us marriage. These gifts to enjoy and to glorify Him back with again. And I think that's what struck a chord with Schaefer. and taught that. And when he saw that, when he saw people returning to this monastical asceticism, he really stood against it. And the book points that out. And let me say, you can spot this because it's an improper exegesis of 1 Corinthians chapter 1 and 2. And he talks about the salvation being more than just for the physical. I'm running close on my time, so I'm just going to say, there's no talk of apologetics, no talk of anything academic that could stand up for the faith. They say, just stick with the Bible. Well, yes, we should stick with the Bible, but we should also be able to defend physical body and creation. And there's a lack of inquiry. When you stop asking questions, you stop getting answers. And no one has all the answers. And there's an emphasis again on the spectacular and the ordinary. And when you emphasize only that, Satan can do that too. In fact, he's more than willing to accommodate you with false signs and false miracles. Want to really be careful with that now? I don't believe that God doesn't do miracles anymore I just got I just I have to say that and just because there's some counterfeit $100 bills out there doesn't mean I'm gonna throw mine away So he gives us I'm gonna have to sum it up because of time but he gives us a way to really recognize that, and now he shows us a way to stand up against it. We do have to recognize who our brothers are, because some of them are caught up in this. And so we have to state our position, but we don't have to be grisly like porcupines about it, and divisive and ugly. And Schaefer emphasizes content. We have to have content. We have to be students of the Word. We have to learn how to rightly divide it. We have to look at those who've gone before us and taught us many great things. There's a whole lot to learn in the Christian faith that's not in the Bible. The Bible should be part of our devotional life. And we should stick to a devotional life. And it should be part of how we hear God and how we seek God for His voice in our life. There's plenty more to study that will take us a lifetime, and we won't get to it all. So, you know, Christianity is given in propositions, propositional form. The Holy Spirit doesn't lead us beyond these forms. The basis of our faith is neither experience or emotion, but the truth is God-given, and it's verbalized in propositional form, as Shaker says. And we have to resist the trend of the new spirituality, which gives no place to the Lordship of Christ in relationship to mind and culture. So, if you want to be a Christian physicist, you know, you'd be a Christian physicist. If you want to be a Christian poet, be a Christian poet, Christian teacher. And if you just want to be a Christian salesman or a Christian janitor, that's fine too. But, you know, praise God for what he gives us under the sun to busy our hands with for His glory. So sometimes you're practicing a containment in the church of this, because it could break out in any church, and rehabilitation is necessary. Other times, you have to expel some people, because they're going to make other people stumble when they get people going this direction. And nowadays, I have to bring this out, it's not so much the ascetic aspect of it, But it's more now the health and wealth aspect of the New Charismatic, unfortunately. They do have this pie-in-the-sky, mix-on-the-line type of approach to things, but for the most part, it's health and wealth that is leading people astray of what I can get out of Jesus, rather than what I can give up, even if it means giving up my wife, my family, and moving to a a monastery. It's not like that so much. So, Shaker tells us, last point, don't need to overreact, don't overstress the intellect of the people, and don't even overstress the cultural dominion of Christ or the Treating of Christianity is like merely a mechanistic system. Maintain the balance. He talks about the 1-100 principle. You've got to cover all 100. Don't just cover 40-50 when it comes to the teaching of Christ. Cover everything. And so we don't stop teaching on the Holy Spirit and His gifts just because someone has money to water about the subject. We strive for balance. And with that I'll conclude. If you'd like to discontinue your slide share, then we'll be able to see you face to face for the Q&A. Yes, I would. OK. And I'm about doing that. I just don't know. I want to make sure that I don't fumble here and just disconnect myself. All right. Yeah, I think in. There it is. There it is. Should go away, right? In Zoom, I think you have to say end. Okay, there we go. Okay. Very good. Got it. So my generic question for each of you is, what was it about this particular book that really drew your interest to want to cover this as your book report? For me? Is that to everyone or is that to me? So you're bouncing it off of them back to me? Because I came out of the charismatic movement and I was there for a good 10 years. I saw some things that I can't refute. But I saw some things that I don't want any more of it. I don't want any part of it. I worked with a church that came out of the Hayden and Frederick K. Price people. I don't know if you've ever heard of Frederick K. Price. He's passed away. He's an African-American. He bought the old Pepperdine campus, built this church on it. But he was for the positive confession that you can have whatever you say. if you believe it in your heart. Pop Prosperity included. Of course he had a home in Ladera Heights with an elevator in it. He drove a Rolls Royce. His wife drove a Rolls Royce. The Prosperity Gospel always works best for the preacher from what I can see. Did I answer that question enough? Yeah, thanks. Eli, got something? Just to help me understand, when you were talking about plastic lives, I wasn't quite sure what you meant by that. Do you mean, like, not very genuine? Or do you mean, what do you mean by plastic? Well, so, and this concept filters into his other writings, too. That what happens is you secede, or you, excuse me, I would say fade back into a life of, you know, just give me peace and affluence. You know, not in my backyard. You know, I'll pay a little extra if you'll keep these thugs at bay and keep my neighborhood nice. I don't really care what happens outside of it. It's just, I want I want my peace and my affluence, known for me and mine and mine. It's kind of like that. I think I read that he said that personal peace and affluence was the end of activism, because it took them out of that revolutionary mindset. And once they got comfortable with having a nice house and a nice car and a steady job, the appeal of activism kind of was gone at that point. Well, yeah, I think that's the point, isn't it? Did you hear what Kate said? Yes, because they didn't want to lose it. Well, let's see. The Weathermen of Underground, some of those people went to prison. Bodine, the one that had the love child with Gilbert. Gilbert and Bodine both went to prison. One of them is still there, I think. And their child, their love child, Bodine, So Bill Harris raised him. He became the DA of San Francisco. And he made a lot of things legal that were illegal before, like public urination, things like that. So you can see what a class act that is. But yeah, when you do some time in prison, and some of the people at the Weatherman Underground, of course, blew themselves up making bombs. Oops. You know, you see, you know, if you only get to say that once. Yeah, you gotta look at how the violence are treated, you know. Okay. Do you have a question, Randy? A comment first. I think that things like Bill Ayers and Tom Hayden and folks like that, culture with their revolution, but they were able to do it silently and without as much attention, but still get the job done. to slide in and subvert like termites in a sense. My question is if you would expand a little bit on what you had in mind when you said on your four points the proper exegesis of 1st and 2nd Corinthians, I'm sorry, 1st Corinthians 1 and 2. I wasn't quite clear on what you were going after with that. OK, so he appeals to Macaulay on that for a thorough explanation. And Macaulay says that he refers to one called the folly of what we preach, in which he feels a proper exposition of the passage. The text must not be interpreted to conflict with either 1 Corinthians as a whole, or Romans 1.18. In both passages, Paul asserts the principle of, here it is, rationality. His big point at the beginning of Romans is that human beings are guilty before God, not first and foremost because of their wrongdoing, but because their thoughts are wrong and their heart is wrong. In essence, they have a fallen nature. Worshipping a creature like a bird or a reptile is intellectually ridiculous, he goes on to say. Second, Paul's expression, the cross of Christ, ought not to be read narrowly. Frequently one hears evangelicals say, what was sufficient for Paul is sufficient for me. whereupon they refer to the sentence, I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. In other words, stick with the cross. Don't go into apologetics. Don't go into defending the faith. Don't go into proving that Christ is risen and the necessary proofs and evidences. But just stick to the Word. And the Word has to be a primary part of it. But he's going on to defend, defending. Okay. Is that sufficient? That helps, yes. Okay. I'm going to use your last 30 seconds here to quote from the book. He says that some incorrectly read these chapters in 1 Corinthians as though they attack the use of the intellect and reason. as though Paul despised the mind. So that's, I think, maybe a little more concise answer to what that's referring to, is trying to diminish the effect of the mind. Well, both of those responses help. OK. All right. Don't forget to go and look at Reynold Macaulay's pamphlet on the foolishness or whatever what we preach or whatever, that'll help you too. Can I just ask a quick question? Okay. Who is the one who went to the Pope to ask forgiveness for the Reformation? Okay, so Kenneth Copeland. He's a prosperity preacher. He's been around a long time. He has his own private jet. Gosh, I don't know what else. He's got quite a spread out there in Texas that he owns. out again, got killed by the Pope and some of the Cardinals, you know, said that the Protestant Reformation was a mistake and all of that. I know who he is, I just didn't remember who you said. Yeah, you know, it's on YouTube, shows them, they're doing everything that just popped this ring. All righty, thank you, and we'll take our short break and Eli will be up next.