Pt 2 - Skeptic DEBATE! Scripture / Tradition? Resource Control, Byzantium & History, Generational Legacy

Summary

---

Jay'sAnalysis – "Skeptic DEBATE! Scripture/Tradition, Resource Control, Byzantium & History, Generational Legacy" (Pt 2)

Host: Jay Dyer
Date: June 29, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This interactive Q&A–debate episode dives into core topics in Christian apologetics, with a special focus on the historic debates between scripture, tradition, apostolic succession, resource control, the significance of Byzantium, and approaches to building generational legacy amidst political and cultural turmoil. Jay Dyer fields a rapid series of caller questions and debates, bringing in historical, theological, and philosophical analysis while weaving in timely examples and experiences.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Scripture, Tradition, and Apostolic Succession

(00:30–02:57, 21:44, 61:14)

• Jay emphasizes the early Church's threefold authority: Scripture, Tradition, and Apostolic Succession, referencing St. Irenaeus’ work Against Heresies as pre-dating Roman Catholic dogma.

  “The three-tiered stool of Bible, Tradition, and apostolic succession isn’t just some idea that Roman Catholics came up with. It’s actually right here in Irenaeus in book three, chapters one, two, three and four.” – Jay (01:41)

• The authority to interpret and define dogma lies within the structure of the Church, not solely in written texts or individual interpretation.

2. Canon, Tradition, and the Epistle to the Hebrews

(02:57)

• Discussion around the canonicity of Hebrews highlights the importance of tradition for validating scripture, as its apostolic authorship is debated.

  "Seems sacred tradition is the necessary prerequisite to even look at it from a, a historical perspective and not a dogmatic perspective." – Moderator (03:31)

3. Debates & Polemics in the Orthodox World

(04:01–05:20)

• Jay and others discuss the role of public, formal debates in clarifying and defending theological positions, referencing recent and upcoming debates, including topics with high-profile Catholic and Protestant apologists.

4. Heterodoxy, Divisions & Charismatic Christianity

(06:31, 07:13)

• Jay critiques charismatic/Pentecostal theology from an Orthodox perspective, describing it as heterodox but refrains from absolute judgments about personal salvation.

  “The beliefs of those are not Christian at all. For us, we would consider them heterodox.” – Jay (06:43)

5. Diversity in Pre-Christian Judaism

(07:16–09:42)

• Callers and Jay discuss various Jewish sects (Pharisees/Sadducees) and the doctrine of the resurrection, clarifying Orthodox readings of Old Testament resurrection passages and their precedence over Persian influence.

6. Ecclesial Authority: Patriarchs and Infallibility

(12:18–13:47)

• Jay affirms that patriarchs are not infallible in Orthodoxy, countering callers’ confusion about statements by contemporary church leaders, e.g., the Russian Orthodox stance on war.

7. Discerning Dogma & Church Disputes

(14:54–19:39, 61:09)

• Orthodox understanding of dogma is not strictly codified; the faithful are to immerse themselves in the Church’s life and teaching, looking to the cumulative witness of councils, saints, and tradition.

  “You spend your time in the Church, and the Holy Spirit teaches you through the lives of the saints, the Church fathers, the councils, all of that.” – Jay (15:41)

8. The Book of Job: Interpretation

(19:39–21:32)

• Jay shares a nuanced interpretation: Elihu, the young man, is actually correct in the narrative, supported by God’s final response.

  “The whole point of the book is that it’s Job and the friends that end up in error. Elihu corrects Job, and that’s an exercise in humility…” – Jay (20:35)

9. Tradition vs. Dispensationalism & End Times

(36:42–38:24)

• Jay traces dispensationalist theology’s roots to John Nelson Darby, with some influence from Puritanism, but distinguishes it from classic Reformation/Orthodox doctrines.

10. Political "Blackpills," Cultural Warfare, and Generational Legacy

(24:41–33:28)

• Jay and callers (notably Rachel) express skepticism about short-term political solutions, arguing for a generational approach—drawing lessons from families like the Rothschilds—to build enduring cultural and spiritual legacies.

  “The Rothschilds are so successful because they thought generationally.” – Jay (25:48) “That’s how you avoid the black pill, is to realize that you’re part of a really, really huge multi-generational project.” – Rachel (33:09)

11. Byzantium & Resource Control

(49:23–53:38)

• Jay recommends a specific documentary about Byzantium, exploring its gold-based economy, the symphony of church and state, and its ultimate fall due to the same woes that topple all empires.

  “Byzantium was the most successful empire in history. Its early monetary policy was a solid gold standard. It had Christian symphonia...A Christian empire.” – Jay (53:20)

12. Skepticism, Certitude, and Epistemology

(80:20–95:31)

• Callers challenge Jay on whether epistemic certainty can be attained (see Kant/Deduction/Induction arguments). Jay contends that while absolute Cartesian certainty may be impossible, transcendental categories offer the strongest form of human certainty. He critiques skepticism as self-defeating.

  “If skepticism is true, then the negation is also possibly true as well, and there’s no way to delineate between them.” – Jay (92:32)

13. Practical Parish Advice & Orthodoxy for Seekers

(57:33–74:21)

• Newcomers to Orthodoxy (especially in Houston, TX) receive practical advice on finding vibrant parishes and an inclusive approach to different jurisdictions.

14. The Eucharist in Patristic Sources

(68:48–71:22)

• Jay advises a Catholic caller on researching Eucharistic doctrine: look to scattered patristic references rather than a single treatise.

  “There’s not like one patristic writing just on the Eucharist… it’s just sort of sprinkled around.” – Jay (69:06)

15. Historical Geopolitics: Resource Control Post-WWI

(76:03–79:34)

• Jay discusses the Dawes Plan, German debt, and the industrial/banking forces that built up Germany’s war machine—referencing both classic and newer research (Anthony Sutton, "Two World Wars" by McGregor & O’Dowd).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Tradition, Scripture, Apostolic Continuity:
  “We don't tell them to just go to the scriptures. We say, you go to the apostolic succession... the churches that have apostolic succession can be identified as the ones that are the true churches.” (Jay, 00:53)

• On Politics vs. Generational Strategy:
  “I just think that a lot of people have expectations about politics that many years eventually teaches them that, okay, I'm not able really to affect as much change as I thought...” (Jay, 28:07)
  “That's how you avoid the black pill, is to realize you're part of a really, really huge multi-generational project.” (Rachel, 33:09)

• On Debater Flash-in-the-Pan Culture:
  “There’s an infinite supply of retards that will fund forever whatever the...the grift is. It's like a hydra's head...” (Jay, 45:40)

• On Interpreting Job:
  “Elihu is the young guy, and it’s the young guy that actually is correct in that case...God basically comes in and says, yes, Elihu is essentially correct.” (Jay, 20:43)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Segment | Timestamp | |----------------------------------------------|-------------------| | Scripture, Tradition & Apostolic Succession | 00:30–02:57 | | Hebrews & Canonicity | 02:57 | | Public Debates in Orthodoxy | 04:01–05:20 | | Charismatic Christianity & Heterodoxy | 06:31, 07:13 | | Diversity in Pre-Christian Judaism | 07:16–09:42 | | Ecclesial Authority: Patriarchs | 12:18–13:47 | | Discerning Dogma in Orthodoxy | 14:54–19:39 | | Interpreting the Book of Job | 19:39–21:32 | | Dispensationalism’s Roots | 36:42–38:24 | | Politics, Generational Legacy | 24:41–33:28 | | Byzantium & Resource Control | 49:23–53:38 | | Epistemology & Skepticism Debate | 80:20–95:31 | | Eucharist in Patristics | 68:48–71:22 | | Finding Parishes/Orthodoxy for Seekers | 57:33–74:21 | | Historical Geopolitics: Post-WWI Germany | 76:03–79:34 |

---

Callers’ Frequent Questions

• How to discern authentic Church dogma?
• What is the Orthodox view on other Christian traditions/sects?
• How to bridge skepticism and faith, both philosophically and practically?
• How to navigate inter-jurisdictional issues in the Church?
• Where to begin serious study in Orthodoxy (Eucharist, papacy, etc)?
• Recommendations for books and documentaries on Church history, Byzantium, resource control.

---

Tone & Engagement

Jay maintains a direct, practical, occasionally humorous and sometimes caustic tone, especially when confronting what he perceives as bad faith or confused callers ("I'm just gonna start trolling the callers..."). His language is frank, often peppered with self-deprecation (“I'm not trying to be self-righteous...We all have passions”), and realistic about the limits of quick answers to deep questions.

---

Summary for Newcomers

If you didn’t catch the episode, the main takeaway is that Orthodox Christianity rests on a firm triad: scripture, tradition, and apostolic succession, rather than “solo” approaches to faith. In today’s turbulent world, Jay urges a focus on long-term, multi-generational culture-building within families and communities rather than expecting political deliverance in the short term. The episode mixes deep theology, apologetics, historical analysis, and practical guidance for those exploring or deepening their commitment to Orthodox Christianity—all delivered in Jay's trademark witty, sometimes combative, but always deeply engaged style.

---

Recommended further exploration:

• Irenaeus “Against Heresies”
• St. John of Damascus “On the Orthodox Faith”
• Anthony Sutton, "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler"
• Documentary: "Christian Orthodox, Eastern Roman Empire Wrecked by the West"
• Jay’s “Live Streams” archive for debates and thematic deep-dives

---

Transcript

[Caller A]

We the ones still showing up holding

[Advertisement Voice]

hands when time to die Anyone can make an impact. Get inspired to show up for your community by listening to the full Gotta Be a Song and Be the People Share playlist. Share your own version of Gotta Be Us with the hashtag BeThePeopleOpenCall before July 12th for a chance to record it in a studio and be heard by music execs. No purchase necessary. Open June 18 through July 12, 2026 to legal residents of the U.S. 16/ minors require parental consent. Seebethepleopencall.com for details. Sponsored by Bigger Picture U.S. all the

[Jay]

heretics and the Gnostics. They're going to use the scriptures and they're going to have perhaps their competing list of scriptures. As you're pointing out, there's already a proliferation of pseudepographa and you know, just straight up fake, you know, Gnostic gospels. So Irenaeus says, look, it's very simple how we go about this. When they are refuted from the scriptures, the heretics will actually turn around and say, well, these same scriptures are not correct and they don't have the any authority upon me. And they assert that the scriptures are unclear. They will then allege that they were extracted from a secret tradition. He's talking about the Gnostics, and he says that they allege that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but a secret teaching that they have according to Paul. So this is some of the Gnostics. And as he mentions, he says, valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, these are the Gnostics of that day. Then he says, but when we refer them to the tradition of the apostles, which is preserved by the means of the succession of the priests in the churches and the tradition, they object to that tradition. They say we are wiser than that tradition and even wiser than the apostles. For they maintain that the apostles intermingled these things with the laws of the words of the Savior, some of the Gnostic teachings. But he says we don't tell them to just go to the scriptures. We say, you go to the apostolic succession, that the churches that have apostolic succession can be identified as the ones that are the true churches. And then he lists as a key example the Church of Rome. He says, let's just take the most preeminent church, which is the church at Rome. And it's preeminent by the way, not because of the the papacy, but because of Peter and Paul, according to St. Irenaeus in, in book three here. And he says the Churches that come from the apostles are the sole inheritors of the apostolic deposit. And he uses Rome as just simply the example. He says Rome, because of its preeminence due to Peter and Paul, they have that deposit, they have that totality which is not just the written texts, but also the apostolic succession and the tradition. So the three tiered stool of Bible tradition and episode of succession isn't just some idea that Roman Catholics came up with. It's actually right here in Irenaeus in book three, chapters one, two, three and four.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

That's, that's very, very intriguing. I mean the traditional component, even for something like Hebrews, that doesn't meet the, I guess canonicity requirements for apostolicity obviously being a prerequisite within, I mean normative means when it comes to how people actually format what is canon. Let's go back to an apostolic author. But Hebrews doesn't meet that requirement, which is quite interesting. So it's only the tradition that actually could validate it somewhat. So that makes it, that makes. Seems sacred tradition is the necessary prerequisite to even look at it from a, a historical perspective and not a dogmatic perspective. You know, you just got to look at the evidence when they keep speaking about it and meeting those requirements. So. Okay, well, co, I'll, I'll, I'll leave you be. Hope all as well. Appreciate it. And yeah, just for everyone listening, you know, Jay did significantly help me on this journey towards Eastern Orthodoxy. So appreciate all the work you're doing man, and keep at it.

[Jay]

And uh, when do you, you're wanting me to debate a Protestant friend of yours again? Is that still on?

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Yeah, so.

[Caller A]

Okay.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Yeah, so I, um, I was going to message you about that. It seems like he's booked out to the end of the year. They ain't gonna happen this year. But he was, he was keen, but he's actually good, sort of. Gavin Ortland. Where's half these guys? I mean, I'm, I'm relatively friendly with Wes and that and I've been planting seeds to try and tee up a, a debate.

[Caller E]

Good.

[Jay]

Well, I'm always down, so I've been,

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

I've been trying to work behind the scenes on that.

[Caller F]

Okay.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Because I think there's obviously a misconception of everyone forgetting all the formal debates that you've done.

[Caller E]

So like.

[Jay]

Yeah, conveniently, conveniently forgetting and all those

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

things and, and you know, get to the, to the right. I think there's lot of recent open discussion debates and obviously they're very, very hard to regulate and Sometimes it. It falls into a different category of debating, of course, but I think.

[Caller E]

I think.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Yeah, I think.

[Jay]

Yeah. I don't understand why they could, though, right?

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Was that a formal one or open discussion?

[Jay]

Trent and I had a formal debate, and we're gonna have two new formal debates later this year.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Oh, man, that's exciting. It's gonna be good.

[Jay]

And then I have two.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

I'm working behind the scenes on that one, so I've been touching. I'm gonna be touch basing with Wes in the next couple weeks, so I'll.

[Caller E]

I'll keep you posted.

[Jay]

All right, man, appreciate that, and glad to see that you are continuing to move in that direction. That's good news. But again, you notice right here, you guys in the second century, Irena says right here in against heresies, this is 180ad. The heretics don't have Apisol succession and they don't follow the tradition of the apostles. Intro to the Furnace. What's up? Intro to the furnace. What's up, man? I'm.

[Caller E]

You.

[Jay]

Are you gonna talk or no?

[Caller E]

All right,

[Caller G]

Steve.

[Jay]

What's up, Steve Steef. What's up, Steve? Oh, thanks so much again, Jay. By the way, thanks so much for making yourself available to answer these questions. And I love your music.

[Caller E]

I think it sounds really interesting and

[Jay]

the lyrics are hilarious.

[Advertisement Voice]

Thank you.

[Jay]

But my question is, you know, kind

[Caller H]

of growing up in as.

[Jay]

As a. I'm not sure all the names are. But as a kind of a charismatic. What's the Orthodox view of charismatic Christians and whether they're saved and going to heaven?

[Caller G]

Yeah.

[Jay]

I've got several videos you could check out on the critique of. Of that. Just type in J. Dire, Charismatic Pentecostal. You'll get all those videos. I mean, again, we don't say necessarily anybody's personal, independent or individual destiny. We don't know. But the beliefs of those are not Christian at all. For us, we would consider them heterodox. Ram Dejan, what's up, man? Ram Dejin, what's up?

[Caller E]

Hey, Jay.

[Caller F]

How you doing?

[Caller G]

Good.

[Jay]

What's up?

[Caller E]

Fan of your work?

[Caller H]

So I was inquiring about the Eastern. I mean, not inquiring as informally, but, you know, being curious about the Eastern Orthodox position. And I wonder, like, from your paradigm, how do you explain why the Sadducees did not believe in the Day of Resurrection or like those. Because, you know, you mentioned how Judaism was not monolithic. And so how do. How does the church kind of view these differences before the. Before the Incarnation or these logical.

[Jay]

I don't understand the question. Why would I need to justify the fact that the Sadducees were sort of the liberals of their day and didn't believe in miracles? I mean, that's just, that's kind of a fact of history. I didn't even think that was controversial. So what, what do you mean to justify the. That I don't understand.

[Caller H]

Well, the idea being, like, if there was a sect of Judaism that did not hold to the specific doctrine of the Day of Resurrection, and the other sect, the Pharisees, that trace their lineage to the writings of the prophets, some of them that were exiled in Babylon.

[Jay]

Right.

[Caller H]

I mean, isn't. Can we not say there's evidence that the Day of Resurrection is not inherently a Jewish belief? You know, like, considering we have evidence it does exist in the indigenous religion in Persia or Zurab Zora?

[Jay]

Well, I mean, Jesus says in the Gospels that the Pharisees were correct and the Sadducees were wrong, so.

[Caller H]

Well, the Pharisees weren't correct either with the denying the divinity which also exists.

[Jay]

No, but Jesus says the Pharisees were correct about resurrection and the soul and angels.

[Caller H]

No, I, I agree.

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Jay]

I just, I still don't understand what the argument here, here is. I'm not trying to be rude to you. I just don't understand the line of thinking. What's the question? What, what's your, what's the struggle here?

[Caller H]

So is it not fair to say the Day of Resurrection is not inherently a Jewish belief if we can justify it comes from elsewhere? Not saying it has any bearing on.

[Jay]

No, it's. It exists prior to Persian ideas of those Persian ideas because it's in the Book of Genesis. Jesus argues the resurrection for the Book of Genesis. So I don't understand.

[Caller E]

Okay.

[Jay]

I mean, maybe you're confusing like the Rabbinic teachings of the Talmud with what the Old Testament teaches. We don't have that perspective. We think orthodox Christianity has an interpretation of the Old Testament that we think is correct, which is in line with what's in the Gospels. When Jesus talks about to the Pharisees, Abraham is not dead, he's alive to God. Right. And Jesus to the Pharisees argues. Or actually I think it's to the Sadducees. Jesus argues to the Sadducees that the Book of Genesis teaches the bodily resurrection. That's why they were preserving, at the end of Genesis the body of. Well, they preserve the body of Moses and then they preserve the body of Joseph as well. So why would there be bodily preservation at the end of Genesis if there wasn't a belief in the resurrection. Jess, what's up? What's up, dog? Hello? Jess, you want to talk or not? I guess not. Stefan. What's up, dude?

[Caller E]

Hello?

[Jay]

Hey.

[Caller E]

Yeah. Can you hear me? Huh? Oh, yeah.

[Advertisement Voice]

Anyone can make an impact. Get inspired to show up for your community by listening to the full Gotta Be Us song and Be the People share playlist. Share your own version of Gotta Be Us with the hashtag BeThePeopleOpenCall before July 12th for a chance to record it in a studio and be heard by music execs. No purchase necessary. Open June 18 through July 12, 2026 to legal residents of the U.S. minors require parental consent. See Be the PeopleOpenCall.com for details. Sponsored by Bigger Picture US.

[Caller E]

So I just wanted to ask because I did a little research into this, because with the whole. Sorry. With the whole Russia situation going on right now. Huh? Of the Russian church. Actually did say that he was. That this situation with Ukraine is a holy war and. But I know this is not the position of the Orthodox Church in Russia, so, I mean, is there, like an issue?

[Jay]

I mean, what. What do you want me to say? Do you want me to say that the patriarchs are infallible?

[Caller E]

No. Yeah, that. That's my point. So if the patriarch of a certain church has an opinion, does that reflect the church in general?

[Jay]

No. I mean, we're not pap.

[Caller I]

But.

[Caller E]

But is he not like the patriarch of the church? No.

[Jay]

Yes, he's the patriarch. So what does that have to do with what you just asked? Nikki? What's up? So you notice here at the end of Genesis, they are taking care to the very verse, very last verse. So Joseph died being 110. They bombed him and put him in a coffin in Egypt. Why would you do that if you don't believe in the resurrection? That's one of the arguments of the New Testament. What's up? Nikki? I'm you. I mean, they're saying pagans don't believe in resurrection, so. Pagans. Hold on.

[Caller E]

Dude, I'm back. It's been a while.

[Jay]

I don't know who you are.

[Caller J]

I don't know.

[Caller E]

Maybe with this name. So I'm good. I'm.

[Jay]

Well, I don't know who you are. Dude, can you not hear me? I don't know who you are.

[Caller E]

Can you hear me? As the audio quality bad.

[Jay]

I don't know who you are.

[Caller E]

Who.

[Jay]

Who are you?

[Caller E]

I. I. The artist formerly known as Nikki D.

[Jay]

I don't know what that means.

[Caller E]

I've been on your show in the past.

[Jay]

Okay, so what's your question?

[Caller E]

Or maybe, yeah, like N, I, C, K, Y.

[Jay]

Okay, dude, what's your question?

[Caller E]

I have a substack page. I was trying to support comedy with my audio blog journals, but my written word sometimes.

[Jay]

Do you have a question? We're not here to. This is not for you to promote your sub site. What's your question?

[Caller E]

When you said you don't know who I am.

[Jay]

All right, thank you for wasting our time. Practice. What's up? I'm just gonna start trolling the callers. Like, what is he, the patro? Yes. So the patriarch is infallible. Yes. You must agree with everything. The patriarch never says he's infallible. What's up, man? Practice. Last question. It's. Must be getting late at night. We're getting crazy people. Camden, what's up?

[Caller E]

Hey, Jay.

[Caller A]

Hey.

[Caller G]

Hey.

[Caller F]

Was wondering. Okay, so it's kind of like a multifaceted question. Trying to understand. If you Would you please kind of help me understand, how the orthodox paradigm allows for there not to be, like, a list of dogma,

[Jay]

how it allows for there not to be a list. I mean, in a sense, there is a list. It's called the Niceno cosmopolitan creed. But also, no church gives you the infallible list of dogma, so that's a fool's venture. Rome doesn't have that. Okay, so does Rome.

[Caller F]

Does Rome claim to have that?

[Jay]

No.

[Caller F]

So, like, from. Okay, so from the orthodox paradigm, how does the layman. How does. How can, like, a layman know what's dogmatic?

[Jay]

You spend your time in the Church, and the Holy Spirit teaches you through the lives of the saints, the Church fathers, the councils, all of that.

[Caller F]

Okay, I guess I. I got to that. That end part in the Pelican Book that talks about what Augustine and Vincent of Lorenz talks about what's dogmatic, and it just kind of seems broad.

[Jay]

Exactly. But everybody's categories are broad. So, I mean, even Rome, when they try to give you the universal ordinary magisterium, they just say, yeah, well, it's what was believed everywhere at all times that the Papacy says, well, that's super broad. That doesn't really help me.

[Caller G]

So.

[Caller F]

Okay, so, like, practically speaking, I just. I spend time in the Church. It's revealed to me.

[Jay]

Yep.

[Caller F]

And like, so at the. At the point of there being a disagreement, it. It goes up in the ladder of authority to, you know, a priest, bishop.

[Jay]

Well, I. What. What do you mean by disagreement? You disagreeing with the Church or Like you saying what, what's the, like within. You think there's a contradiction between one council to another. What do you mean, disagreement?

[Caller F]

Yeah, just like, however hypothetically it respond. Just. But, you know, whether it's, you know. Yeah. Between priests, between bishops, whatever. The question climbs the ladder of authority and then it gets.

[Jay]

Well, I mean, it just depends on the type of question. I mean, it depends on if you mean like a personal issue between one you and one priest, or like, you think you, you have a problem with the doctrine of the Trinity at some point. I mean, it just depends on what, what type of a question we're talking about, because most problems like that are so solved at the local level.

[Caller F]

Okay, sure. So I guess, like, maybe like a, A way that we could tie this to like, a historical thing, like the, the, the split in the Church

[Caller E]

when

[Caller F]

it comes to the Orientals. So the, the way that this would apply, like, would you say that the, the main way that one would be able to know dogmatic at that point, it's just being in the Church? And then at, like, at a certain

[Jay]

point, are you asking, like, how does an Orthodox person know what the dogma is, or how does the person know whether the Orientals or the Orthodox are right.

[Caller F]

Two different questions is encapsulating both of them. Maybe, like, putting myself into a, like into the shoes of somebody during that time, like, how, how, how am I able to determine what the dogma is at that point in order to, like, categorize myself with the.

[Jay]

Or, you know, at that time. But I mean, but you're not in the 5th century, so I don't.

[Caller F]

Yeah, no, I'm just saying, hypothetically, like, if this were to be a. If, you know, if something like that would happen today, like, where, where would I look to. To know that I'm, I'm a part of the, The Church?

[Jay]

I mean, you have to know and be in the existing canonical Church to know what the Church is. There is no public. Perfect. Oh, you just put in this formula, and it will tell you whether Rome or the Orientals. Are Orthodox.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Caller F]

So if something like that were to happen today, like, is it, is it just a means of, like.

[Jay]

I mean, it's my own legwork. Yeah. There's no way, there's no way to bypass having to look into the issues. If you, if you want to know for yourself, there's no, like, magic formula of, oh, well, you just follow the Pope because the Pope's telling you that it doesn't matter. So the Pope's an ecumenist Then Pope's basically saying, well, you don't actually have to be Roman Catholic, so you have to enter to the Church and it. And you learn it. So you can't shut your mind off and just ask for, you know, the immediate Internet easy solution, because nobody has that. Jess, what's up, man?

[Caller E]

Hey, Jay. Thanks for taking this. I was just curious. I heard you mention the Kat Von D interview, which was really good about no one talking about the Book of Job. And I've kind of been obsessed with the Book of Job for, I don't know, like, six, seven years. I wonder if, like, I liked your Christological explanation. But I was just curious. As a debate guy. I'm not a debate guy. What do you think about the conversation or the. The back and forth between Job and his friends?

[Jay]

I believe I've always thought it, that Job is actually in error and it's actually Elihu. That's correct. That's how I've always read it.

[Caller E]

Oh, really?

[Caller K]

How.

[Caller E]

How so? Could you explain or.

[Jay]

Because God's answer seems to align with elu's rebuke to Job and the friends.

[Caller G]

So what.

[Jay]

What, like the.

[Caller E]

The friends seem to be arguing in terms of analogy,

[Jay]

but the whole point of the book is that. The whole point of the book is that it's Job and the friends that end up in error. Elihu corrects Job, and that's an exercise in humility because Elihu is the young guy, and it's the young guy that actually is correct in that case versus the older guys. And then God basically comes in and says, yes, Elihu is essentially correct. You don't know. You're not in a position to make these kinds of judgments. So, again, I mean, my interpretation is not infallible. I don't know. I'm just. That's just how the text always.

[Caller E]

I didn't. I. I was looking up, see if you had talked about the Book of Job at any point, and I could.

[Caller K]

Not really.

[Jay]

I probably should. I just haven't thought about it in a while.

[Caller E]

Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you.

[Jay]

Yeah, good questions. And, yeah, I think she.

[Caller L]

She.

[Jay]

She definitely resonated with the. With the Book of Job. Elijah, what's up, dude? Elijah, what's up, yo?

[Caller E]

So I had a. This might be a little bit of an odd question, but I. I really enjoyed a long time ago when you did it. Do you remember when you did that Bishop of Rome expose, that. That new document that the Vatican released?

[Jay]

I mean, we've done a few of those over the, over the years. You're talking about Fratelli Tutti, or are you talking about. I mean, there's a bunch of these.

[Caller E]

The one that's all Bishop of Rome. Like the newest one that came out, like, right before Francis died.

[Jay]

Is that the. The long sort of theology paper that was supposed to be a reassessment of the place of the Bishop of Rome. Yes, I remember that.

[Caller E]

Yeah. Yeah. So at the beginning of that stream, you did some. You did some clarifications about the stream that you did prior to that, where the stream. I did prior to that, it was a. It was a half stream because the other half is behind a paywall. Okay, but it was the half stream about you going through the entire Torah, going through all of the times that the Trinity shows up in. In the first five books.

[Jay]

Right.

[Caller E]

So it. Is there a way that I can purchase just that one specific video behind your paywall, which is the second half, without subscribing to the rest of it?

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

You should.

[Caller E]

Don't have to subscribe to.

[Jay]

Well, I mean, you could. I mean, it's only five bucks. You could subscribe and then unsubscribe.

[Caller E]

Oh, it's only five bucks. Oh, I thought it was like 20

[Jay]

or 30 or something. No, it's just $5 at the website. Well, I mean, I'm.

[Caller I]

I'm a mega.

[Caller E]

So.

[Caller K]

Okay.

[Jay]

Yeah, I mean, I mean, it's been five. I'm not fussing at you. It's been five bucks for 10 years. I mean, I kind of feel like I should raise it given the fact that $5 is worth nothing now. But I know. I feel like if I raise it, everybody get pissed off. So there's. I feel, what's the point of raising it?

[Caller E]

So.

[Jay]

But yeah, you can watch the part two. I don't think the part two is on YouTube for members because this was before I got remonetized and I didn't have memberships when I did this stream. But yeah, this is. Here's the stream. Trinity in the Torah. By the way, I think I missed two verses. Ironically, I think I missed Leviticus 9, but maybe not. So there were a couple verses I later found that I missed. But aside from those two, this covers all of them. Lori, what's up, Il Duce? No, we did that one. Ortho fool. Did you watch the Protestant vs. Kathy vs. Orthodox debate with Dr. Daff where they had the girls on? No, I didn't watch that. I'm probably not going to ever watch that, but. What's up, man? I mean, woman.

[Caller A]

Hey, Jay, how are you?

[Jay]

I'm well.

[Caller A]

So I've been just heart crushed since the Charlie Kirk assassination and even more heart crushed at the gaslighting of our, of the Trump administration. I understand, you know, we're living in a uni party world, but from a theological perspective, and I did recently see your debate against the Masons. I thought you were great at exposing the hypocrisy. If we're, if we're supposed to be one nation under God. Right. And America has any hope of fulfilling her destiny as this great country. From a theological point of view, like, how do we get out from under this really horrid system of lies that it feels like they just keep feeding us and expecting us to take? I'm just, I just sort through it.

[Jay]

I mean, I don't think there's any easy solution or answer other than to continue to live and practice orthodoxy. I mean, there's, I mean, you know, I was involved in political activism and stuff like that in the 2000s, and I was into the Ron Paul, you know, Tea Party stuff. And, you know, I just don't see a lot of hope for politics. And people think, oh, you're black pilled. You're black pill. No, I'm just thinking like the Rothschilds do, of like, long term. The Rothschilds are so successful because they thought generationally. So I think all the people that are thinking in that way and they're thinking, all right, we got to have, you know, kids and we got to raise them up the right way and, and, and we spread our worldview. I think that's a much better, you know, 100, 200 year strategy versus this thought process that a lot of people have with America because they think, well, we'll just, you know, have political solutions. I'm not saying you can't be involved in politics. I'm just saying people kind of get their heartbroken because they think politics is gonna, you know, be a solution. And when I was talking to this, this big podcast that drops tomorrow, we actually had a really pretty long talk about this. And this person expressed that they themselves had spent a lot of time in the political sphere and had kind of gotten, again, not black pilled, but just sort of tired of it and that they were much more interested in worldview types of questions than they were in, you know, the, the party politics stuff.

[Advertisement Voice]

So share your own version of Gotta Be Us with the hashtag BeThePeople. Open call before July 12th for a chance to record it in a studio and be heard by music execs. No purchase necessary. Open June 18 through July 12, 2026 to legal residents of the U.S. 16 require parental consent. CB the People. Open Call.com for details. Sponsored by Bigger Picture U.S.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

hands in

[Caller K]

the dirt Hearts in the dust let's be the people yeah we enough to build again from the broken trust we

[Caller A]

the ones still show. You

[Advertisement Voice]

all of us can make an

[Caller G]

impact Impact, yeah Even you listen to the full Gotta be a song and

[Advertisement Voice]

Be the People share playlist to get inspired.

[Jay]

That's a lot of people's progression is to get kind of interested in those things. And I'm not saying that you can't be involved in politics, I'm not saying you can't do culture war or any of that. All that stuff's great, it's useful. People should be involved in all these different arenas. I just think that a lot of people have expectations about politics that many years eventually teaches them that, okay, I'm not able really to affect as much change as I thought maybe I could or maybe that they thought the president could or whatever. So I think the solution there is not to be blackpill, but to think really long term, where are we going to be in 20, 30, 50 years? So you're thinking about your kids, you're thinking about your grandkids, right? And shout out to Rachel in the chat. I remember one of the, the first things that I ever saw a clip of Rachel, she was talking to one of those only fans chicks and she was just reasoning with her in a very practical way of like, well, you understand that if you spend all of your young years doing this, you're probably not going to be able to find a solid pair bonded mate that will give you kids that will take care of you when you're not pretty enough to do only fans, right? Because this is a limited time frame of when you can, you know, be showing your butt. Because most people, unless you're some kind of weirdo, they're not really into granny butts, okay? So you can show your butt, make money on that for a short term period in your boobies. But eventually it's like, okay, what are you going to be doing when you're 50? Who's going to take care of you when you're, you know, do you want to be in the old folks home? You probably don't. Old folks home suck, right? You're gonna have some ass black orderly beating your ass because you white, right? That doesn't sound like a lot of fun. So that thought process, which is super practical, I was like, man, that's a genius line of argumentation. Like we don't have to get into epistemic justification. That's just like. Because only fan chicks don't care about epistemic justification. But she's going to care about whether she's, you know, got children taking care of her when she's 70. So if we start thinking in that way, that's a much better approach to how we're going to fix the country's problems which are so vast that they're not going to be probably fixed in our lifetime. I mean we can maybe make progress. And changing people's thought process is like stage one for sure. So it begins small but then it can grow, you know, into. Just think of the Roman Empire.

[Caller K]

Right.

[Jay]

The Roman Empire wasn't Christianized in one generation. It went from what like it took like 300 years. What's up, Rachel? Did you want to comment on that?

[Caller K]

Yeah.

[Caller A]

Hey Jay, how's it going?

[Jay]

Good, how are you?

[Caller N]

Good. It's so providential that I popped into your space right then when you were talking about this because Andrew talks all the time about how this is a multi generational project. Like Andrew does do more of the politics side of things, but he does it from the perspective of arguing worldviews. That's why he's so effective and that's why he's very tough to beat.

[Jay]

Right.

[Caller N]

In debates is because he approaches it from that long term worldview mindset. And he and I always talk about and think about how what we're doing right now is going to lay the groundwork for like what our grandchildren are going to carry forward.

[Caller I]

Right.

[Caller N]

We're not thinking that we're going to solve things in a four year political cycle.

[Jay]

Exactly.

[Caller N]

A lot of people do. I think our system makes people think.

[Jay]

Yes.

[Caller N]

Oh, in two more years or four more years we'll get the right person in office and everything's going to change. And that is not how it works at all. And so Andrew's mission from the beginning has been to kind of do what the Fabian socialists did and re. Infiltrate and retake the institutions. And that's a long march. That's something that even if we work another 40 years at we're not going to see the completion of it. It's going to be our grandkids who will probably see the completion of it if we can achieve what we want to achieve. So it's about things like building churches and communities. It's about getting the Marxism stuff out of the universities and trying to correct the historical record on things, stuff like that. And that's, those are like huge scary goals. They're very intimidating and they take a lot, you know, they take years and years and years of consistently working at it and building coalitions and working with people to achieve that stuff. So yeah, I think that's how you avoid the black pill, is to realize that you're part of a really, really huge multi generational project. But that's what it, that's what it took for, you know, the subversives to get in and do what they've done. And they've been doing that for centuries upon centuries. So it's like we have to kind of be able to do the same thing and have that same super long term mindset like the, our European ancestors who great built the great cathedrals and the great things that took generations to build, we got to have that same mindset. And that's how you avoid the black pill.

[Jay]

Absolutely.

[Caller A]

Yeah, yeah.

[Jay]

100. Spot on. And in fact, you know, if you guys watched last night's stream when we went very deep into the Rothschild's biography by Morton, we did the first half of the book, I highly recommend it you guys become members and watch this talk here because one of the first things that we noted was that they were, and again, we're not pro Talmud, but we can learn from the people who were successful and who did this correctly. The reason that the Rothschilds understood the long term generational approach was because they were looking to aspects of the Old Testament. I'm not advocating for their usury and all that, but I'm saying when Nathan, when Meyer Mshel Rothschild designed the crest that had the five arrows, the five arrows are his sons that he shoots like arrows into the world to go out and to, to conquer. Okay, he's getting that from David. David in the Psalms calls his sons arrows that he shoots out into the world. And so he's thinking generationally the way that they were successful was to think we're not going to build the Rothschild empire in, you know, 1780, it's going to be built by 1850. Okay, so they're looking generations ahead. And that's the biblical attitude. That's why. And I'm not a fan of Calvinists or traditional Catholics, but the only groups that are going to go into the future are the Calvinists that have kids, the traditional Catholics that have kids, and the Orthodox. That's it all the other group and the Muslims. Right? So that's the future battle is the Muslims who are breeding and then the Catholics and the Orthodox and the Calvinists, that's it. Nobody else is breeding. Everyone else is breeding themselves out. So that's how you conquer the future. And if you guys remember when we read the biography, the. As the Rothschilds gained basically control of France, they had a. A massive competitor. They almost lost two Credit Mobilier, which was our killer, fooled, Achille, fooled. And Perrier. So the. The two opponents of the Rothschilds combined together and they copied all of the Rothschild's tactics and techniques, but they failed. Why did they fail? As Morton says, they didn't have the perception to understand to have offspring who could run what they're doing in the future. So they had all these techniques and, you know, shady tactics and tricks to game the market or to, you know, move money here and there or whatever, but they didn't think about generational offspring that could do the same thing and win 100 years from now. The biography even made that point. They're like, they missed the whole. They missed the big picture, which was having the offspring. Mujatabe, what's up? So if you guys didn't watch this stream, and I thought this one might have been a little bit too spicy for. I saw some people were getting demonetized. So this one is there. So if you want it, I think it's worth it, but you guys need to become members. What's up, man? I'm.

[Caller I]

You.

[Caller E]

Hear me? Huh? Okay, perfect. Hey, I had a quick question. I was doing some research regarding Christian Zionism and

[Caller A]

so.

[Caller E]

And when I was doing my research, I would. I figured that this Irish pastor from the 1800s, Darby, he was the one who introduced dispensationalism into the.

[Jay]

Yes, John Nelson Darby.

[Caller I]

Correct?

[Caller E]

Yeah. And then I watched, I did some research and then I came across some letters from England from the Puritans. So I wanted to ask you, does the. Does the dispensationalism come mainly from the Puritans belief or is that something different technically?

[Jay]

No, really, it is. It is. Darby that's the original originator of the seven dispensations and all that kind of stuff, although there were perhaps some preceding types of ideas like that some of the Puritans, even though they were Calvinists and were not really dispensationalists, some of them did have some imminent end times types of views. Some people even think that perhaps Jonathan Edwards could have been a, you know, an influence in that direction. But strictly speaking, the, the seven dispensations that we know of, like with John Hagee and all that stuff that's strictly Darby, and then it's popularized by C.I. schofield.

[Caller E]

Red. Red.

[Jay]

Nismo. What's up, man? I think there were also perhaps a couple Anglican guys that had some. Some weird speculative view, but they're very obscure and they might have had some influence on. On Darby, but. What's up, man? Radismo. Last chance. Unmute or you're gone.

[Caller E]

All right,

[Jay]

John Merton. By the way, guys, if you did miss the Freemason debate, it is up to almost 200,000 views, which kind of surprised me. I didn't actually think this debate would get that many views, but we did have a few. So when DJ started putting some of these clips on Instagram, they started getting 3, 4. I think one of them has 400, 000 views. So some of these clips got some good traction from Instagram. And if you didn't see it, I mean, I'm not trying to be mean to Chase and his buddy, but it. They did not perform very well, but. John, what's up, man?

[Caller E]

Hey, Jay, can you hear me?

[Jay]

Huh?

[Caller I]

Hey, what's going on?

[Caller E]

Real quick.

[Caller I]

Thanks for everything. All your content, man.

[Jay]

It's.

[Caller I]

It's really helped on my journey, as I'm sure for plenty of people. You guys were talking about politics earlier with Rachel and everything, and it made me think of the other day. I was. As I was consuming your content. I think it was two years ago you talked to Austin Peterson with Jim Bob hosting, and that was probably one of your. He was one of the worst ones.

[Jay]

Oh, I forgot about him. Yes, you're right. He's up there with Misfit Patriot. That is one of the worst debates. I actually forgot him.

[Caller I]

Finished the Misfit Patriot one that I came across that guy six months ago, and I was like, wow, what a.

[Caller L]

What a dork.

[Caller I]

To say the least. But, yeah, hospital is a rough one. And part of that is because, I mean, I think you. You said you.

[Caller E]

You remember it.

[Caller I]

I mean, you're older.

[Jay]

That it's not just a theology, like, libertarian area.

[Caller I]

I got into that for a while because I was. I was disaffected by conservatism because that's how I grew up.

[Jay]

Sure, yeah, we. We all had that phase. Yeah.

[Caller I]

Yeah, for sure.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Caller I]

And just watching that one from two years ago with him just made me realize, which really gets to my main question, which is like, psyops is kind of a strong word, but he doesn't even seem genuine. He seems like maybe. Maybe just a normie.

[Caller E]

I don't know.

[Jay]

It's one of Those things who austin

[Caller I]

what I've seen nowadays that really makes me pause. It's not black pill, but I don't. I'm curious what your thoughts are.

[Caller G]

This July 4th at Lowe's, get up to 45 off select major appliances plus save 80 on a select Charbroil Performance Series gas grill. Now $299. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's Lowes. We help you Save valid through 78 while supplies last selection varies by location. See Lowes.com for more details.

[Caller A]

Visit your nearby Lowes.

[Jay]

You work hard to stay healthy and

[Advertisement Voice]

want the freedom to make the best

[Caller K]

decisions for yourself and your family.

[Advertisement Voice]

So why does healthcare still feel expensive and frustrating? Crowd health is a different approach built for entrepreneurs, families and independent minded people who want a simpler way to pay for healthcare.

[Caller K]

More than 28,000 members have already joined

[Advertisement Voice]

and over 40,000 medical bills have already been funded. No restrictive networks, no corporate middlemen, just real people helping each other.

[Caller K]

Learn [e-mail] that's joincrowdhealth.com.

[Caller I]

maybe it's just my algorithm and Instagram or something, but the popularity now of like the jq, the, the noticing. Right. I see these like people that must be grifters because they, they're now all, they're pious, they're religious, they're Christian, they're super right wing. And maybe like I said, it's just my slice of life.

[Jay]

Well, dude, I mean we've even got, we've even got, we've got Nala Ray over here trying to exercise demons and talking tongues and so yeah, of course there's, of course there's. Look, anytime there's a wave or a trend, I mean just think, take Sneako as an example, right?

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Jay]

Sneako was originally a maga kid. So the original early clips of Sneako, he's like just this Trump goober MAGA guy. Then Sneako was red pill. I'm against women. Whatever he was. And then he, because I don't, I'm not sure he actually likes women. And then, and then he, then he was Muslim. So I'm just saying Sneako is an example of a person who rode three different waves of trends to build the audience that he has.

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Jay]

And I mean he's just a complete goober.

[Caller I]

Yeah. And there's a few of those and a lot of them are just flashes in the pan. Sure. I think there's a lot of staying power in the ones that are genuine. You said it recently. It might have been an old video. I was watching viewers or recent stream, but that people want the genuine stuff. They always have. But the trends kind of overtake. The reason Trump got popular was because the holdover, the, the thing that fizzled out with the Tea Party, that resurged with him. Like I remember myself kind of young at the time thinking I'm so tired of Olympics. Like Jeb Bush, please clap and all this. And then he goes, I'm sorry if I'm swearing. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to

[Jay]

do that on stream. No, I encourage it.

[Caller I]

There's 16 other Republicans and he says things that everybody wants to hear. And I remember thinking like, why don't more people do this and you kind of do that and very, you're very straightforward. So I think that' why you're popular. I think that's why you're, you're gaining popularity. Sneako, whatever. Like the brazen red pill shows like that'll be a flash in the pan. But I'm just worried about the grifters and people getting the wrong idea about, about like right wing stuff or not just right wing, but obviously Christianity because I see a lot of that more than even right wing stuff. I didn't know if you've seen a lot of that or if it's just me is really my question.

[Jay]

No, I mean it's, I, again, I don't know what the solution is. There is, there's no easy solutions because there's really no way to, to not have, you know, grifters and people just sort of flash in the pan doing this because there's no way to, there's not much you can do. I mean, I think the only way really to, to sift that stuff out is just to give it time because eventually a lot of these people kind of undo themselves. So if somebody is a bad act, and not always, but again, there's no perfect silver bullet solution. But if somebody's a bad actor or they're a grifter or they're a fed or whatever, like usually over time they get the best of themselves. And so people that are bad actors usually are in the orthodox perspective. They're dominated by the passions. So whatever passions are dominating them, they're probably eventually going to cave to that. And I'm not trying to be self righteous. Like we all have passions, we all have vices.

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Jay]

But I'm saying like people that are like, you know, if they're just there to make money or they're just there to, you know, be narcissistic, social media, weirdos or if they're feds, like, you know, there's gonna be a period of time where they just kind of fizzle out, you know, so Ruslan comes to mind.

[Caller I]

But you're very right about that. I agree.

[Jay]

Yeah. I mean, but the other thing, too, is there's an infinite. What is it? P.T. barnum is. It's either P.T. barnum or Aleister Crowley said that, like, there's a soccer barn every minute. And, like, there's a. There's an infinite supply of retards that will fund forever whatever the.

[Caller N]

The.

[Jay]

The grift is. And so you'll just get. It's like a hydra's head. Like, they'll just. Another grifter will pop up or another lunatic will pop up. But I'm not. Yeah, there's not much. You can't really do anything because you can't, like, stop people from. From doing it. But I think in the long term, authenticity wins out because, you know, you can't stop every phony. But phonies eventually again end up being their own worst enemies in many cases. If not, you know, obviously it's not gonna be every case, but in many cases, eclectic profit. What's up? I mean, we've gotten. The tables have turned so much that, like, the leftists are now speaking the same way that we speak. That's how crazy it is. Megan Kelly speaks the way we speak. I don't agree with everything she says, but Anna Kasparian is having to say, like, stuff like that we say. I mean, it's. The tables have turned vastly, at least in terms of what's popular. The establishment is still not on board. Totally. But anyway, what's up, man? Eclectic. You want to talk?

[Caller K]

Yeah.

[Jay]

I had a question for you, Jay.

[Caller E]

When you talk about the.

[Jay]

The Eastern Orthodox and the. The versus the Oriental Orthodox and the whole issue of. Of the word homeosius or homo, do you break it down for me like

[Caller L]

I. I was listening to some Oriental.

[Jay]

That term is not a. That term. That term's not a problem between Orthodox and Orientals.

[Caller E]

Right. That's what I'm trying to. That's what I'm trying to figure out.

[Jay]

It seems like we are so close.

[Caller E]

What am I missing between the two groups?

[Jay]

Okay, now you're thinking of the term.

[Caller E]

Don't understand it.

[Jay]

Okay, you're thinking of the term meophysis or myophysite. That's the term. Not homoicius. Homoecus is out of nicaea. And that's just referring to the fact that Christ is fully divine, has divinity equally as the Father has divinity. So he's not a lesser deity. Miaphysis is the term that St. Cyril used and that becomes a very contentious term between orthodox and Orientals because it's a split at the time of Chalcedon. So there's no quick, simple answer to this one. And that's why on my channel we've been doing a a long lecture series together with Kai and David Irhan. So I'm just going to say if you come over to my channel and you click over here on the live streams, you can also use the little search function up there if you type in oriental refuted. We are on our fifth installment of this, so part five is right here and you should be able to find the rest of them through searching there. But there's no, I can't answer that question in one simple answer. It's a long one. Jg, what's up?

[Advertisement Voice 2]

The Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again. $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship round, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale now and they will go fast. Visit farm citypro rodeo.com for tickets and more information. Experience the action, Feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo August 12th through the 15th.

[Advertisement Voice]

With the American Express Platinum card, you can access over 3, $500 in annual value with benefits and eligible purchases across travel, entertainment and more. There's nothing like platinum. Learn more at american express.com explore-platinum enrollment requirements monthly and other limits in terms of play.

[Jay]

Jg, you want to talk?

[Caller E]

Yo, what's up, Jay?

[Jay]

What's on your mind?

[Caller E]

So I was checking out a clip of like an old live stream of yours and you recommended like a documentary about Byzantium.

[Jay]

Yeah, I mentioned it earlier.

[Caller E]

Yeah, yeah, I really liked it.

[Jay]

And did you find it?

[Caller E]

Where?

[Jay]

Where is it at? Because it got pulled down.

[Caller E]

It got pulled down? The documentary?

[Jay]

Yeah, a long time ago. I mean, it might exist somewhere, but maybe bit shoot or something crazy like that.

[Caller E]

That. Oh yeah, because I remember I found it.

[Jay]

Where'd you find it?

[Caller E]

I think I found it on YouTube. I mean, I watched it a while ago, but I remember.

[Jay]

Well, like how long a while ago? Because maybe it came back with the recent lax.

[Caller E]

Yeah, I think it was like maybe a month ago.

[Jay]

Oh, okay. Well then it's back on.

[Caller G]

I Didn't know that.

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Caller J]

Nice.

[Caller E]

Well, I was wondering what's like your favorite aspect about Byzantium and like, it's like government, like operating society, like how it operated civilization and where you think is like a good source to find out about Byzantium without, like, you know, any historian biases on the Roman Empire, things like that.

[Jay]

Do you remember the name of that documentary? Because I'm trying to find it and it's not coming up right away. I don't think it's that one. I think I had like a Russian priest that was doing it.

[Caller E]

Christian churches stand.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

But is these great classical cities where a thousand.

[Jay]

No, this is some British dude. The one I'm thinking of. It has like a Russian, like an Orthodox priest narrating it or being interviewed. Let's try. Let's try over here. Does anybody remember that documentary? I want to say it's about hour and a half, two hours. Might be this one. Let's try this one. If you're over 60 with money in an IRA or 401k, that's me.

[Caller I]

Its rollout is.

[Jay]

Is the single biggest threat to your retirement you've never heard of. You dismiss the warnings. Hey, whatever, dude. In the most dramatic rival to the Bronze Age city states of. That's not a documentary. That's not it. Does anybody remember the name of that? Yeah, is that it? Eastern Roman Empire Wrecked by the West. That sounds like what it was. That sounds familiar. That's it. You said. I've watched it 10 times. Well, where is it at? Because it went away. That's it though. You're right. Thank you to Jesse that found that in the chat. Let's see if that's. Let's see if it's over here. I knew it had a yellow. It's like a. It doesn't say Byzantium in the title. That's why I couldn't find it.

[Caller E]

All right.

[Jay]

I don't think it's over here. Yeah, they pulled that back when they were kicking off the Russia hoax stuff. This is it. Yeah, I think this is it.

[Caller K]

This city was once called.

[Jay]

Yeah, that's it. So here is this documentary. I didn't know it was back up. It was pulled down for forever. So I'll give it to you guys in the chat. It's called Christian Orthodox, Eastern Roman Empire Wrecked by the West. That's a really good documentary. Favorite aspects. I mean, Byzantium was the most successful empire in history. So it's early monetary policy was a solid gold standard. It had Christian symphonia. I mean, that's the. That's the best aspect right there. A Christian empire.

[Caller I]

There we go.

[Jay]

They did fall prey though, to rabid nationalism, usury, coin clipping, all of those things that are the standard, you know, reasons that empires fall. Happen to characterize the fall. Byzantium.

[Caller E]

So.

[Jay]

Andy, what's up, man? Andy, what's up? I'm you last chance, Andy.

[Caller I]

All right.

[Jay]

Can y' all not hear me? We've had this happen all night tonight where people don't unmute. Marsh.

[Caller L]

What?

[Jay]

Marshall, what's up? Marshall, you there? People did say that spaces have been janky lately. All right, Jordan, what's up? Jordan? What I'm you.

[Caller E]

AJ Had a couple of questions for you.

[Caller G]

Okay.

[Caller E]

Do you. Would you happen to know about. What is this? Hold on one second. It's called the James Webb Space Telescope.

[Jay]

I mean, I've. I've heard of the James Webb telescope, but I don't know much about it.

[Caller E]

No. Okay. I was just talking. I was talking with a friend of mine. He was telling me how it's supposed to. They. They like send it out into space and they're like, supposed to see 13 billion years in the past.

[Caller F]

Like.

[Jay]

Okay, I'm already. I'm already skeptical already.

[Caller E]

Yeah, it was. I already knew it was bs But I just wanted to know if you heard anything about it so you could, like, tell me anything further.

[Jay]

Oh, I don't. I don't know much about that. I've been focusing, honestly, guys, on so much like, espionage type stuff. In fact, I'm gonna have to kind of break myself from these books because I'm loving these books. Like this book, Vatican Spies has been awesome. I was loving the Rothschild's biography. It was way more exciting and full of intrigue than I expected. It was basically like reading Game of Thrones, but real. So I'm gonna have to break myself from these to get back into preparing for the David Wood debate, the Trent Horn debate. So I'm gonna have to make myself kind of get back into some of the. Of the theological stuff to do those debates. But we. I think we're going to have a good time debating Jake on, you know, civilizational comparisons. So if you guys remember Andrew's masterfully done debate with Daniel Hikachu where he just really made Daniel look ridiculous with, you know, the defending the inbreeding and whatnot, this will be a similar topic of debate, you know, whether Islam or Christianity is better for civilization. So that's going to be fun. And that will be at the debate con. That I have the tickets here for.

[Caller E]

Right here.

[Jay]

If you guys want to get your tickets for that Again, that is July 25th in Dallas. So use the promo code 20 from Jay right there to get. I think you guys get 20 off at debatecon. So we'll be debating that. So I'm about to make myself get back into some of the. Some of these other topics that I've been kind of not focusing on lately. You know, we went and did this big podcast and as I told you guys, I thought for sure we were going to talk about Christian Zionism, espionage, geopolitics. So I was like super cramming, like final exams because I wanted to do well. And that's not at all what we talked about, which is fine because you know if you're going on a show like that, you're not gonna tell them. I will not speak on this. You know, you're gonna talk about whatever they want to talk about.

[Caller E]

So.

[Jay]

It was not what I expected. And I think you guys are also gonna enjoy that discussion because it wasn't what you expect. John Cena. We got freaking wrestlers up in here, dude. Wrestling. What's up? You gonna wrestle with us, dude? Yo, yo, what's up, man?

[Caller E]

What's good, man? I appreciate everything you do for the Orthodox community. Thank you. Thank you for your patience. I know there's a lot of slow boys out here tonight, but you know how it be.

[Jay]

Is that it? What's on your mind? Is that.

[Caller E]

All right, so it's gonna be. I'm very blessed and I happen to come from a very loving, supportive family.

[Caller K]

Good.

[Caller E]

Unfortunately non denominational. Okay. But I'm going to be visiting a. An Orthodox parish pretty here. Here pretty soon. Okay. And, and I've seen the. I've gotten some advice from your channel and Father Moses on like choosing between a Greek Orthodox and. Or a Russian Orthodox type church. And so obviously I want to be part of the, this Russian church that's very close to this other Greek church, though. Okay. And it's the. It's the largest Greek church in Houston, Texas. And since I'm. I'm a very young guy, I don't. I just got my license. I don't have a. A car yet. So my, my family, they're very loving. They're gonna visit with me to this church and I'm just wondering. Awesome. If. If I should take them to this larger church just to like, have a better effect on them or if that's like in. In bad faith.

[Caller L]

I suggest.

[Jay]

Oh, no, no, I wouldn't worry about it.

[Caller E]

Smaller Russian church.

[Jay]

Take him to either one. I don't think it'll matter. Yeah, or try them both. Get them to go to both of them and then you guys can as a family, decide like which one is good. And if you want to maybe get them all all to come back with you again, I would try both. Ethan, what's up? Because you never really know what more so the church itself matters over the jurisdiction because there's, there's problem churches everywhere. There's problem road core churches, but it really just depends. You just got to check them all out. Ethan, what's up?

[Caller L]

Hey, what's up man? How you doing?

[Jay]

Good.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

The Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again. $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship round, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale now and they will go fast. Visit farmcitypro rodeo. For tickets and more information. Experience the action. Feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo August 12th through the 15th.

[Caller G]

From taco night in Tulum to sushi in Tokyo, every bite is rewarding and Pulse worthy with MX Gold's 4 times membership rewards points at restaurants worldwide. Wherever you dine, points are piling up. So bring your friends along for your next course. Because it's not all about the posts, it's about the company and the memories. How can gold from Amex sweeten your next food moment? Learn [e-mail] Explore Gold terms and points

[Caller L]

cap apply so I've been going to an Orthodox church for a couple years and I just had a question about apostolic succession. I just wanted to figure out. I've heard you talk previously on Debates about how the Apostles teaching was essentially inerrant. Obviously. Sure, there's a difference between moral inerrancy and inerrancy in teaching.

[Jay]

Well, usually. Usually that's called impeccability. Right. So in other words, sinlessness.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Jay]

Only Christ is impeccable or sinless in the Lord and the Theotokos. But. So we don't think that Paul or Peter were impeccable. They weren't sinless, but their oral teaching and their written teachings are without error.

[Caller L]

Okay, yeah, well that makes sense I suppose. Like as far as apostolic succession goes, like people sit in their seats, right? And they. And they fill that sort of ecclesial role. But you wouldn't say that Their teachings are inerrant. Like, does that just end after the apostles or.

[Jay]

Well, no, it's. It's inerrant and binding if it's an ecumenical council. And so, for example, Saint Athanasius says, like, the teaching of Nicaea is the voice of the Holy Spirit.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Jay]

So. So no, only. Only when the church speaks universally in that way would we say that it's a continuation of that sort of apostolic spirit of inerrancy.

[Caller I]

But.

[Jay]

But it's not. Having authority isn't the same thing as being infallible. Right. Because local bishops and local synods have authority even though they're not infallible.

[Caller L]

Yeah. So the synod itself has a sense of inerrancy, but like the apostles.

[Jay]

No, I wouldn't say a local apostle

[Caller L]

had an inherent teaching.

[Jay]

Like, I wouldn't say a local synod is an air is inerrant. I think there have been plenty of local synods and bishops who made all kinds of things. Okay.

[Caller L]

I'm just getting used to it. So I, I meant to say. I meant to say a, A, like a, A council. Right. But I was, I'm just asking, like, if an individual apostle is in there in their teaching, and then that transitions right. Into the people sitting in the apostle seats through apostolic success.

[Jay]

Right. No, I see what you're saying. This is more of a. Yeah.

[Caller L]

Like, the role changes. I'm just trying.

[Jay]

Yeah, yeah. So, like, like there's no more new public divine revelations. So there's no. Once John the Apostle, who was the last one died, there's no new public. Like, you know, oh, I have a new revelation. The Holy Spirit told me that there will be a new book added to the Bible. It will be the next Epistle. Like, there's no new public divine revelations because it's a fixed body of doctrines. That's the deposit of faith. So the successors to the apostles have authority. They have normative authority. And only when there's an ecumenical synod would we say that it's without error. So they have authority. But no, they're not apostles, like, in the sense of, like, ongoing public divine revelation. And that's one of the things that sets, I think, our position off from Mormons or like Islam.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Jay]

If there's no new prophets and apostles, then those cults are immediately done. Like, they don't. They're canceled out. That's also why in the second century, Montanus was condemned. Right. Montanus taught that he was a new prophet who spoke by the Holy Spirit and could give new divine revelations to, to the church and he was condemned. So, no, apostolic succession doesn't mean continuing. Ongoing. Ongoing public divine revelation.

[Caller L]

Okay. So the. The individuals, apostle, the individual apostles that had a sort of inerrancy in their teaching, that that is part of them sort of participating in the. In divine revelation.

[Jay]

Yeah. They had a unique office in the church to be the foundation stones of the church. Right. So like in the Book of Revelation, you see that each of the foundation, the 12 foundation stones are the apostles. So they were a unique. In a unique role such that even though there are apostolic successors, there are no apostles in the church after John died.

[Caller E]

Okay.

[Caller L]

And then the councils sort of, in a way mimic the role of the apostles, but it's. That's different.

[Jay]

Yeah. Because it's not a new public revelation. It's solidifying and explaining what the revelation is that's already been handed down. So we're basically saying this is what the apostolic deposit meant. So there's a good analogy that people make to this where they say, you know, if you think about a mine with, like, jewels and diamonds in it, what the ecumenical councils are doing is like going in and pulling out the jewels that are already there in the mine. But they're just sort of arranging and explaining, so to speak, the jewels. They're not creating new jewels or getting another mine involved. There's one mine with the jewels, and then we're just sort of mining out the jewels at the ecumenical council.

[Caller L]

Okay.

[Caller G]

Yeah.

[Caller L]

Thank you. I think that definitely answers my question. I thought it might have something to do with the public revelation.

[Caller E]

Yeah.

[Caller L]

And so, yeah, that definitely ties some things together. So I appreciate it.

[Jay]

Yeah, it's a great question. And it's a. It's a natural question. I think a lot of us have had that same type of question. Roxanne, put on the red light. Roxanne.

[Caller E]

I don't have to put on the red light.

[Jay]

I'm just joking. Don't put on the red light district. We're not in the red light district right now.

[Caller E]

I'm not sure if this fits in the parameters of this discussion. So sorry, I'm a late joiner to the discussions.

[Jay]

It's pretty open. So we've talked about everything.

[Caller E]

Okay. So somebody had mentioned jurisdictions in one of their questions. So I, A lot of my evangelical friends and Catholic friends kind of take this stance against orthodoxy because of, you know, the North American and European cross jurisdictional mess that's going on. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

[Jay]

Well, again, like, there have been many people, periods in church history where there were jurisdiction. Jurisdictional squabbles and messes. So I don't understand how that would be in any way like an argument for Protestantism or Catholicism. In fact, Roman Catholicism itself. If you. If you think that the church of the first thousand years was Roman Catholic, well, guess what? It's full of examples of the same types of jurisdictional squabbles. So if jurisdictional squabbles themselves are a defeater, that would defeat Roman Catholicism being the true church in the first millennium. If you're a Protestant. I mean, the Protestant church is nothing but jurisdictional squabbles with all the thousands of sects. So I don't see how the problem of jurisdictional squabbles and Orthodoxy is in any way something that tells us that Protestantism is right. In fact, the ecumenical councils, a lot of the canons and decrees and whatnot and. And squabbles in the can, in the councils are over things like jurisdictional disputes.

[Caller E]

I appreciate that you're reiterating a lot of my thoughts, but you can put it a lot more eloquently than I can, apparently.

[Jay]

Well, thank you, Ad. Perhaps I'm eloquent. I don't know, maybe sometimes I'm a little bit eloquent, but usually I feel like I'm not being as clear and well spoken as I should be. So. But thank you, Roxanne. Put off the red light, Roxanne. Boycott. What's up, dude? Are we gonna get down to the last couple questions here, guys? Thank you for being generous tonight. I do have a lot of super chats to get to, get through. So if you want to get your super jets in, last questions, last comments, feel free to do so, but go ahead and do it now because we're gonna start with super chats here in a moment. What's up, Boycott?

[Caller E]

What up, bro?

[Jay]

What's on your mind?

[Caller E]

I'm.

[Jay]

I'm Catholic, but I've been wanting to research a lot more on the Eucharist. Could you recommend me any books or early church fathers to read on the.

[Caller E]

On the Eucharist?

[Jay]

I mean, most of the first several centuries, you don't have, like a treatise just on the Eucharist. You usually have, you know, it being mentioned in passing. Or maybe the first sort of apologetic usage of it is Saint Cyril, you know, when he's arguing against Nestorius. The Council of Ephesus utilizes the real presence as a way to argue against Nestorianism. So you'll find that in the anathemas of Ephesus, you'll find that in kind of scattered around in St. Cyril's writings, like on the unity of Christ or the two letters to six Census. But I mean, you've got references to the Eucharist in St. Justin Martyr's writings. You've got it in most of the Church fathers. At some point they'll reference it. So. So there's that sort of apologetic aspect of it, approving the real presence. You've got St. John Damascus, you know, in the first sort of systematic theology on the Orthodox faith in the 700s, you know, he writes about all the aspects of the Christian faith, including baptism and the real presence in the Eucharist. So that might be the. The most substantial first millennium references. I mean, you'll find it in the catechesis, the catechism, catechism, Catechetical lectures of Saint Cyril, Jerusalem, Saint Cyprian, you know, references the Eucharist in quite a few places on the unity of the Church, I think references it. So, I mean, there's not like one patristic writing just on the Eucharist because those tend to be later disputes that occur. So it's just sort of sprinkled around. But, you know, the Orthodox conception of the Eucharist, it ends up being a little bit different than the Roman Catholic one, because, you know, for example, we have the normative practice of pedo communion, and the west did the same thing up until the Carolinian period, where that changes. So the west, through the influence of the court theologians of Charlemagne, begins to not give infants communion in the seven hundreds. So. So there is a bit of divergence between Orthodox and the west on the Eucharist. Octavia, what's up? But thank you for that question.

[Caller E]

No, you can't mute those.

[Jay]

What's up, dude? Unmute. Talking to you, dude. Octavia, do you want to talk or not?

[Caller A]

Yes, I do. Hello, can you hear me?

[Jay]

Yes, ma', am.

[Caller A]

I did have the mute on. Apologize.

[Jay]

It's okay.

[Caller A]

So my husband and I were listening in from the Houston area. We live in Richmond, Rosenberg.

[Caller E]

Okay.

[Caller A]

And we heard your caller that's interested in visiting a parish in the Houston area.

[Jay]

Okay.

[Caller A]

And I would say we would. My husband and I both think that the Antiochian churches in the Houston area seem to be very seeker friendly, bursting at the seams.

[Jay]

I do know that. I know that there's a great one, Father Julian, who's a good friend of ours, and he's.

[Caller A]

Oh, Father Julian.

[Jay]

Yeah, he's great.

[Caller A]

Yes. So he's the Romanian priest, Holy protection,

[Jay]

but he's at an Antiochian church.

[Caller A]

Right now?

[Jay]

Well, I mean, unless he's moved in the last year or two, he's. His church is. He's a Romanian priest, but he's at an Antiochian church.

[Caller E]

Oh, okay.

[Caller A]

Because I figured he was at Holy Protection, which is. Anyway, so. But I would.

[Jay]

I mean, we can look and see.

[Caller E]

We.

[Jay]

Go ahead.

[Caller A]

Saint. Either Saint George or Saint Joseph would be the most highly recommended in the Houston area, I think.

[Jay]

Beautiful liturgies, like, otherworldly. That's probably why I would say that,

[Caller I]

because the liturgy just blow your mind.

[Caller A]

They're beautiful and very welcoming. I worked at St. George for, like, seven years.

[Jay]

Okay, appreciate that. Thank you so much, you guys. So if that guy's still listening, there's some Texas recommendations there. Let me see where the Father Yulian I know is. And he's a very humble, sweet man. This is him here. Yes. So Holy Protection. This is it. And this is Antiochian, as far as I know, because I've been here many times. Oh, Father, here's this here. Oh, maybe they're not under the Antiochian anymore. Maybe I got it wrong. Maybe they were always Romanian. I thought they were Antiochian this whole time. In 2003, they reorganized. They organized the Romanian Orthodox community community in Austin. Then they moved to Houston. Okay, I'm. I'm just wrong. It was always, I guess, Romanian. But this is also a great church that I've been to many times, and I didn't know Father here's was there, but this is where he is now. Confused.

[Caller L]

What's up?

[Jay]

Yeah, I went to the Sophia conference at this church twice, so. But you can. I would just say check them all out, dude. Check all these out and find the one that you like the best. Confused. What's up?

[Caller E]

What's up?

[Caller F]

What's up?

[Caller E]

I had one que. Well, I guess two questions. So I don't know how familiar you are, and this may be a question better for the Church of the Eternal

[Caller K]

Logos, but do you know if there's

[Caller E]

any prophecies from saints about AI, like, any or any kind of. I don't know anything like that.

[Jay]

I don't. That is a good. That would be a good question for the. For the. The Prophecy bros. Yeah, you would have to ask them. That's an issue. It's a good question, but I do not know if there is. Okay. Last one is Athanasius. What's up, man?

[Advertisement Voice 2]

The Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again, $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship round, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale and they will go fast. Visit farmcityprodeo.com for tickets and more information. Experience the action, feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo August 12th through the 15th.

[Caller G]

From taco night in Tulum to sushi in Tokyo, every bite is rewarding and Pulse worthy with MX Gold's 4 times membership rewards points at restaurants worldwide. Wherever you dine, points are piling up. So bring your friends along for your next course. Because it's not all about the posts, it's about the company and the memories. How can gold from Amex sweeten your next food moment? Learn more at americanexpress.com Explore-Gold terms and points cap apply.

[Caller E]

Hey Jay, how you doing?

[Caller F]

I'm great.

[Jay]

How are you?

[Caller E]

I just had a question on geopolitics. I was wondering if you're willing to take that.

[Caller G]

Sure.

[Caller E]

So I was on reading up on post World War I Germany and I was reading up on the Dawes plan and the.

[Jay]

Their plan of keeping Germany in perpetual debt and them. Yes.

[Caller E]

And it seemed like the. That a lot of the bankers and industrialists went in after that and started buying up the capital of the German industry and using that. And they would. They went in and funded the Tiny Mustache man and his party. And that's why I'm sort of getting lost and I was wondering where to go from there.

[Jay]

All right, so let's. I got distracted by the chat. So Dawes plan and they're keeping Germany in debt slavery. And then what was the next part you said?

[Caller E]

And during that debt slavery. A bunch of industrial like venture capitalists.

[Jay]

Yeah.

[Caller E]

Industrialist went in, started buying up and funding the Tiny Mustache man party.

[Jay]

Yes.

[Caller E]

And was promoting him to basically be their puppet.

[Jay]

Yeah. They're building them up. Yeah. And there's, there's several, They're called cartels that were involved in doing that. I forget the name of all the different ones. But the, the book that's probably the best for what you're looking for that's out right now is, is the one and I've only read like three chapters of it, but it's pretty good so far. And this is kind of an updated version of Anthony Sutton's books about the funding. It's called Two World Wars. Are you familiar with the book I'm talking about?

[Caller E]

I think I've heard you mention it a couple times and this whole book

[Jay]

is on that specific question that you're asking right there. So basically the whole book is on the period that you're asking about. And I've. I've only read three chapters of it, so I can't say that the. I mean, I've read the whole book yet, but it's like 800 pages, so it's called Two World wars and Tiny Mustache man by Jim McGregor and John O'. Dowd.

[Caller E]

So.

[Jay]

And then let me think for a second, because something I was reading not too long ago. Oh, the old boys book had two or three chapters that talked about the. The industrialists that were building up the German war machine. I just can't remember all of the names of the. Of the cartels and the corporations, but

[Caller E]

it's like JP Morgan was one of them.

[Jay]

Yeah, well, the Two World wars book has quite a bit about JP Morgan, but the old boys book, okay, there's the Reichsbank, and it's the Reichsbank, that's. That's originally what sets up the bank for national settlement. So McKittrick and Alan Dulles, together with the Reichsbank, set up the bank for National Settlements. And the money that's funding Tiny Mustache man is. Oh, like Feist. Is it like Fritz Thyson? Yes, that's one of the industrialists. I think that's right.

[Caller E]

Yeah. Because I. I had found. I was scrolling on Yandex and I just trying to look up on this, and I had come up on a website that did a. That I thought did a pretty good breakdown of what their plan was.

[Jay]

Yep, this is it. So one of the key industrialists was Fritz Thyssen. T H Y S S E N But there's also these other cartels like. Like German steel, coal, these kinds of things that were IG Farben or, you know, that. That's probably people. Everybody probably knows of that one. But it's not just bankers. It's also the industrialists. But that's where you want to look for those questions. But also, I think Sutton does address that, too, in his book. I'm just not remembering all the industries off top of my head. Readout. What's up? I'm sure plenty of people in my. My chat will remember all that stuff. What's up, man? I'm you.

[Caller K]

Hey, can you hear me?

[Caller A]

Okay.

[Caller K]

Hey, Jay, I just got an epistemic question for you. I've heard you say before that you. That you do believe certitude, but I'm just trying to understand, I guess, how that's possible.

[Jay]

Why would it, why would that seem strange to say it's possible to have certitude?

[Caller K]

Well, how do you know that you know anything with certainty?

[Jay]

I mean, I think that the strongest level of certitude that could be had would be something like a transcendental category because they're necessary to have knowledge at all. So whatever level of certitude we want to ascribe to humans being possible to possibly have, I would say something like a precondition for knowledge, like the laws of logic or something like that would be the highest degree of possible certitude because they underlie any type of knowledge or knowledge claim.

[Caller K]

But don't you have to rely on kind of your experience and your usage of things like logic to have that level of certitude?

[Jay]

Like, I. Yeah, but that's a category error. But that's a category error because just because I'm using it, it doesn't mean that it's this, that. In other words, I have to use word. This is where circularity or recursion comes in. Like I have to use words to define words. Right. So I have to.

[Caller K]

You're making my point, though. Like, it seems like you have to resort to those sorts of things. That's why we think that logic, you know, we feel.

[Jay]

Yeah, but just because we feel certain

[Caller K]

that logic is a valid.

[Jay]

I know where you're going with this because I've, I've had this, this, had this discussion with fda like a year ago. We had a long, long, like a. One whole night where we talked about this. And the fact that I'm using the laws of logic throughout, like my life or whatever, it doesn't follow from the fact that I'm using it that it can't also be a precondition or a transcendental category. So it's a, it's a, it's a category error to think that because I'm using the thing that it's not also a precondition.

[Caller E]

No, I'm.

[Caller K]

I guess I don't see them as being mutually exclusive either. I'm still just trying to understand how you bridge the epistemic gap. Right. Just because something can be true objectively doesn't mean that you can know that it's true objectively and that it seems like there's always going to be that gap between the epistemology and the ontology.

[Jay]

Boy. Well, if you mean it in the sense of like, if you did, like. So if you read the,

[Caller I]

if you

[Jay]

read the Russ Manion paper He makes this point about how you can't be a strict Kantian and like get away with thinking that the transcendental categories that are in your mind are necessarily also in the world because you don't know if the things that logically make sense also necessarily ontologically make sense. So if that's the challenge that you're making, I would actually agree with that. And that's precisely why I don't make like secular versions of the argument or Kant's argument, because I'm saying that the Christian worldview is actually the presupposition that undergirds transcendental categories. So I would affirm that that's a good critique of a Kantian type of position. But I'm actually arguing that, well, to have knowledge at all would require first God's existence, which grounds transcendental categories and then those grounds the normal sort of first order knowledge that you have. So I would agree with that. But, but the op. But that's, but if, if the, if the alternative is skepticism, then I think we're at a dead end. So if you want to say, well, how do you get out of the skeptical dilemma? And I would just say, well, if the option is Christianity or the skeptical dilemma, then I don't really have to do anything. Because if you're a skeptic, then you're, you basically conceded that there's no argument against Christianity.

[Caller K]

Right. Can we come back to skepticism in just a second? So going back to the, the Kantian gap, I, I get that that is an issue for secular approaches to tag. But if you. I guess I'm still not seeing how the God presupposition fixes that. It still seems like there's a question of how do you know? Like I, I agree with you that God is the best explanation for these things. Things. I'm just struggling to see how you can have epistemic certitude in that fact.

[Caller E]

And I don't know.

[Jay]

Well, again, like that helps you more. If by, yeah, if, if by absolute certitude we mean something like what Descartes was after, then I think most people and most philosophers would just simply say that's really not even attainable because the way cart Descartes like structures that level of certitude is almost like you'd have to be God to have that level of certitude. So that's why I say it.

[Caller K]

Agreement there, then.

[Jay]

Well, the way I say it is like, well, look, whatever the highest degree of certitude is for humans to possibly have. To me, it seems like the most convincing thing would be transcendental categories. It wouldn't be obviously empirical knowledge, because empirical knowledge relies on the categories to be the case to even have that. So beyond that, I don't know what to say. I mean, I would say also, you take that question to fda because he's probably a lot better at answering that question than me.

[Caller K]

Well, I think what you said makes a lot more sense than some of what I kind of the impression I'd gotten from what you'd said before, so that I think that we're probably more aligned there than I had previously thought. Can I just ask you about the skepticism thing? If it's okay, you want to pick your brain on that a little bit more.

[Jay]

Well, I'm really tired, but go ahead.

[Advertisement Voice]

I'm drinking.

[Jay]

Let me drink some more coffee.

[Caller E]

Hold on, sorry.

[Caller K]

I'll let you get super chats here real quick. I've heard you run the skepticism to self refuting argument a few times and I just, I struggle to see it as being sound.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

So the Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again. $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale now and they will go fast. Visit farmcityprodio.com for tickets and more information. Experience the action, Feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo August 12th

[Advertisement Voice]

through the 15th with the American Express Platinum card, you can access over three $500 in annual value with benefits and eligible purchases across travel, entertainment and more. There's nothing like Platinum. Learn more at american american express.com explore-platinum enrollment requirements monthly and other limits in

[Caller K]

terms of if someone says that they can't do anything, certainly you know with with perfect certainty and you say, well how do you know that? And they say I don't. That doesn't seem to be a contradiction. That seems to be totally consistent. And you can say that they lost the argument at that point, but that seems to require that in order to argue you have to have perfect epistemic certitude, which doesn't seem like a valid claim. It seems like you can argue things. You can still argue even if you're not certain about something.

[Jay]

Well, again, the level of certitude that's needed to say, I mean the problem is that you're making a universal claim. No One can have certitude about anything. So rather.

[Caller K]

I'm not though, know.

[Caller G]

But.

[Jay]

But you are so saying.

[Caller K]

I don't know that. I'm just, I'm just assuming that.

[Jay]

Well, it's not just an assumption though, because it is a knowledge claim. So you're still, you're kind of like trying to skirt the level of. I mean, it has a universal quantifier there. So it's like saying. It's like what happens in the JF debate where he's like, sure, but with

[Caller K]

a, with a, with a non.

[Jay]

Yeah, but that's like. But that's sophistry. It's. Yeah, but you. It's a bit like saying that all xry except in cases where they're not. I mean, it's, it's basically ends up being like a meaningless statement.

[Caller K]

I don't think that.

[Jay]

Well, I mean, do you think that makes sense like all xry except when they're not? Because that's no different than saying that for all knowledge instances, no one has certainty except when they do.

[Caller K]

Well, no, see, I agree that formulation would be what you're saying, but that's not what.

[Jay]

Okay, let me, let me. Okay, let's. Let's put it like this. Let's put it like this. What if I said to you, let's say you make the argument that there's no. How would you phrase it? And then I'm going to give you a, a retort that I think refutes it. Go ahead. How would you phrase it?

[Caller K]

But if I said, let's say I'm a skeptic and I say I can't know anything or I do not know anything with certainty, I'll just say it like that. Not, I can't. But I do not know anything with certainty as far as I know. And even that fact I could be, I guess, uncertain of, but it's still. I don't know.

[Jay]

Okay, so even if you restrict it to you as an individual, I mean, technically speaking, even an individual statement of fact is still. Can still be universally quantified because you could say, well, is it universally the case that you have no knowledge? Like, couldn't I just.

[Caller K]

Couldn't I just run the. It seems to me. And then it always be true, right? Like, it seems to me that I do not know anything.

[Jay]

All right, then. Then I think the best defeater would be that if you're affirming skepticism, then you also have to grant that the negation is just as valid. So I can just negate your statement and it's just as valid as your statement. So at that point I would say it's a defeater.

[Caller K]

Right. This is where I would go as well. The thing there though is that is, if you are purely being syllogistic, then I agree pretty much all properly basic beliefs on if you are limiting yourself to pure logic are going to be arbitrary. But that's where I think that you have to infuse your deductions with induction. That's why I think experience is, while it's not reliable for certitude, it is kind of the best tool that we have to make our properly basic beliefs non arbitrary.

[Jay]

So I think how are you on

[Caller K]

your show, you always kind of.

[Jay]

But how are you push back and

[Caller K]

say to be naively empiricist. But I don't think that. I don't think. I think you're kind of jumping to

[Jay]

the extreme of how are you making

[Caller K]

reference defense data is how are you

[Jay]

making the properly basic beliefs any more certain or probabilistic by that line of argumentation, if you're admitting that the negation is just as valid and just as possible?

[Caller K]

Well, that's where you have to rely on the shared experience to get to the things.

[Jay]

But that's our. Why is that not beliefs? Why is that not arbitrary? But why is that additional idea not also just arbitrary?

[Caller K]

Well, again, it's, it's arbitrary in a non experiential way. But once you include experience.

[Jay]

But that's, you're missing. Why am I supposed to think. Yeah, but you're begging the question. Why am I supposed to think that you tacking on the additional idea of going by experience is any more convincing?

[Caller K]

Well, again, again, real quick, begging the question. Begging the question wouldn't apply here because I'm including induction. Begging the question would only apply.

[Jay]

Why am I supposed to. Why am I supposed to think that including induction gets you in any better position? If I can always question is assuming the conclusion. No, listen, if I can always just equally, in a equally valid way state a negation to any position that you put forward, then we're not getting anywhere and you're, you're surrendering the point. Because if skepticism is true, then the negation is also possibly true as well, and there's no way to delineate between them.

[Caller K]

I, I understand what you're saying, Jay, but that's only true in a, in a non experiential way once you include experience. I, I agree, but why am I

[Jay]

supposed to think why wait? Why am I supposed to Think that common ground. You're missing the point. Why am I supposed to think that I should trust some form of experiential common ground?

[Caller G]

Why?

[Caller K]

Well, let me give you an example.

[Jay]

You're a skeptic.

[Caller G]

Hold on.

[Jay]

You're not being a skeptic consistently. Because if you're a skeptic, this additional idea must also fall under the umbrella skepticism. So why am I supposed to think that this adds anything to the position?

[Caller K]

All right, let me run this by real quick. So if I said that nothing exists, you know, that could be an arbitrary starting point that is just as valid as something exists. But if you and me sat across the table, right, by what you just said, like, the negation could also be just as true if everything's arbitrary, right? So purely deductively, both those statements could be equally valid. But if you and I are sitting across the table, we're going to be able to agree on one of those most likely and not the other, right?

[Jay]

That doesn't matter.

[Caller A]

Matter.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

Why?

[Jay]

Again, it's begging the question. Why am I supposed to think that? Because we agree on something that has any value in regard to making something less skeptical or more properly basic.

[Caller K]

Well, it only doesn't have value if your goal is pure epistemic certitude. In like, a.

[Jay]

Again, like.

[Caller K]

But if, if you're willing to.

[Jay]

Again, but you're missing the point that

[Caller K]

isn't perfect, but it's the best tool that we have.

[Caller L]

Says who?

[Jay]

But again, you're missing the point.

[Caller K]

Case.

[Jay]

You're missing the point because every time you just try to explain and add these new evidences or things that are stacked onto it, it's like, but why am I supposed to think that that actually helps or contributes to this?

[Caller I]

It's.

[Jay]

And then you say because there's nothing else. And as we're just humans, like, those are all. That's why I'm saying it's arbitrage. Like, it's missing the epistemic point of like. But why should I think that that is getting me in a better position? And if every time you answer it's like, like, then you're moving out of the ground of this, of the skepticism. Because now you're starting to do like, well, clearly this is the case, right?

[Caller K]

Yeah, I mean, but clearly is different from, you know, I'm epistemically certain.

[Jay]

Well, I mean, what is it?

[Caller K]

And so it seems clear to me, but, you know, that's the best. That's the best I can do.

[Jay]

Well then, if it's. But then how do you know it's a shared. Then how do you know it's a shared experience?

[Caller K]

Wisdom.

[Jay]

Then how do you know it's a shared experience?

[Caller K]

I don't. Not with epistemic certitude. Yeah, you have to take the leap of faith.

[Jay]

Okay, but then the.

[Caller K]

The.

[Jay]

But the negation is just as valid as the. The affirmation.

[Caller K]

In a purely deductive sense, you're correct.

[Jay]

But that's why you have to take

[Caller K]

the leap of faith to say, okay, one seems more true to me.

[Jay]

But again, I just objectively.

[Caller K]

More true.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Caller K]

The ontology.

[Jay]

I appreciate it.

[Caller K]

The epistemology.

[Jay]

Thank you. Yeah, we're done. I just. That's good enough. I mean, we're just gonna disagree there. You could take that question to fda. I gotta read the super chats. I gotta pee, dude. Like, I can't sit here. I gotta read the super chats and go to the bathroom. But, yeah, I just. I'm not finding that line of reasoning very convincing. So, vp, I would be down for you to do a villain analysis of Dagoth Ur from Elder Scrolls. He's sympathetic and noble at times, I think. I tried starting to play that one time and I realized it was going to take up like 80 hours, 100 hours of my life. I was like, I don't. I'm not gonna do that. Faith can move mountains. $10. What is your favorite. Who's your favorite Bible writer and Old Testament writer? I mean. I mean, I believe that Jesus wrote the whole Bible.

[Caller E]

Right.

[Jay]

It's the spirit of Christ writing it all. So I don't really have, like, favorite Bible writers. I don't know. It's a tough question. Host of Odin. $20. Hey, man, I got more serious questions when you got time than this. X space. I mean, okay, but like, X spaces are really where we do most of the Q A. So try to, you know, call in and ask your question there if you want intel. Wild. Five dollars. Jay, wreck all the. The degenerate worldviews. Okay, I will. Kyle, $5. How do you interpret the exclusive salvation in the orthodox spiritual text? I mean, we always say that the Orthodox church is the one true church. This makes me scared. I feel like I have to be a monk. Well, I mean, there's plenty of monks that aren't saved, so. And many monks will say that there's plenty of laity who live better lives than monastics. So until. $5. Have you heard Tom McDonald's song Remember who you are? Isn't that a white rapper? No, I'm not I'm not listening to a lot of white rappers honestly. I don't really listen to raps rap music at all except for some kind of as a joke but Zayn $20 according to the book called Tesla the spiritual character, he did carry on his faith and considered himself a Christian. Well again, I mean, maybe he fell into Theosophy for a time period and maybe he came back to orthodoxy. I don't know. Know he was very close to many spiritual fathers and participated in the liturgy. That's good. I I want to. I mean, I definitely want to hope for the best. I hope so. ROC $10 J Is there a connection with the term ark and Noah's ark and the Ark of the Covenant? I mean, ark is a box. So in that sense the Ark of the Covenant's a box and the church is the ark of salvation. So I mean loosely speaking, but. But they're different boxes. Ortho the worst debate you had was with Matthew DJB I don't even remember who that is. Ryan $5 don't vouch for other things, but Blk Shp has a good video on job. Okay, I'm not familiar with that rush.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

Zel $20 the Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again. $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship round, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale now and they will go fast. Visit farmcitypro rodeo.com for tickets and more information. Experience the action, Feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo August 12th through the 15th.

[Advertisement Voice]

With the American Express Platinum card, you can access over $3,500 in annual value with and eligible purchases across travel, entertainment and more. There's nothing like Platinum. Learn more@american express.com Explore Platinum enrollment requirements monthly and other limits in terms of

[Jay]

I am new to apologetics. I want to understand the papacy from the Orthodox perspective. What's the well, the best book on this is pretty extensive, but it's the Sashinsky book Orthodoxy and the Papacy. That one's really good and it's very scholarly. And then if you want a more readable Orthodox apologetics book, it would be the Michael Welton book Two Paths. Ryan says for $10. Pol brained Reddit pole brain. People tend to err with a recency bias and thus they get discouraged that the four to eight year cycle isn't achieving Their goals immediately. They cannot think 30, 50, 100 years is called Lindy effect. This is exactly what Rachel was getting at was the, the four year, two year political cycle is actually just a bunch of social engineering to make you think that, oh, we're gonna, the next two years we're gonna get our guy in there, we're gonna throw the rotten apples out. I mean the whole idea of these cycles is kind of stupid, but. But anonymous. $10. All hill with xanthium. Explain why you don't recommend Schmeman. I mean I explained it in multiple live streams in the last couple weeks. So I would just say go check those out. Derek, $10. I was atheist, agnostic. Thank you to online orthodoxy. I was made aware of it and finally went to divine liturgy. I went today. Glory to God. That's great, dude. Glad to hear that, man. Jesse Roberts, market maker, $40. Jay, unblock my channel. I got blocked because I was a slow boy. I didn't know about orthodoxy. I took some time. I'm a subscriber premium. My account, Ways of the Jedi. Okay, are you talking about on YouTube? Are you talking about on. On X? Because we all know that I'm very quick to. To block retards. But I appreciate you repenting from your retardation. We always accept repentance. Slow boys. So what's your channel? Ways of the Jedi. But I see, I don't know if you mean on. You guys got to tell me what you mean. Do you mean. So I guess you don't mean on Twitter. I mean on YouTube. Ways of the jedi. You're not blocked, dude. So I don't know what you're talking about. Greek Bob Wigger, $10. Jay, I was looking at orthodox for last year. I wanted to know what some of the things I should read. How should I balance that with scripture? I mean get orthodox, study Bible, read the notes, get, you know, Pazanski's Orthodox dogmatic theology. Get lost. Mystical theology, church. Those are good places to start. HD digitals, $10. You have to debate Gavin Orland. Guys, it ain't me that's not debating. It's all of them that ran and blocked and won't debate. He is very deceptive. He's hurting people and lies about orthodoxy. I mean I've asked multiple times. So like pap $3. Do you have any thoughts on ketamine therapy? I don't know anything about it. I've never done ketamine. I remember Theo Von talking about doing a ketamine therapy thing and it to me it sounded hellacious. It did not sound like a fun drug experience, so. But maybe it's supposed to be hellacious to.

[Debate Organizer / Moderator]

I don't know.

[Jay]

I. I wouldn't do it, but I don't know anything about it. Pot belly. $10. I'm watching Boomer debate Alex. Are you talking about Kelly? What's his name? Now I see why the divorce rates amongst Protestants are high. They really have no idea about actually submitting to authority. And this then bleeds down into the family. That's interesting. I never thought about that connection, but that makes sense. They only stick around as long as it fits their ideas of Christianity. That makes sense. Il Duce, $5. I saw you with Deacon Seraphim.

[Caller E]

Him.

[Jay]

Did you go to St. Seraphim Cathedral in Dallas? Well, we met him with Rachel and Andrew and Peugeot, and we went to. To dinner, but no, I was not at the Oca Cathedral that time. However, I have been to that Oca Cathedral in the past. I don't. I don't know where I will be going to church when we go to Dallas. I don't know. Junior, $10. Scrubbed away. But you see, Kurt scrubbed away. Did you see Kurt Madser ambushed on Break Rules podcast? Ambushed? I don't know anything about this. What is even break the rules? I don't know what that is. That I can't type with these glasses on, but I can't see if I take them off. It's a catch 22 dog. Break the rules, Kurt. See, I can't even type with this freaking. How is he ambushed? What does that even. How do you get ambushed on a podcast? This.

[Caller J]

If we're talking about somebody like Lex Friedman. Right. He was mentioned the beginning of this episode.

[Caller E]

Episode.

[Caller J]

So our good friend Ben Avery, who I know you know, I know Ben real well. He was at dinner with Lex Friedman and Joe Rogan and Tim.

[Jay]

Oh, I'm sorry. The rest of your question says, if I recall, it was an Atlantic Council guy, and he brings up the Ukraine. They're not dummies. But I actually thought Kurt won it.

[Caller E]

Oh.

[Jay]

So they end up in a debate

[Caller J]

over the Ukraine, and he got to be a witness to Lex Friedman spouting love for Vladimir Putin and all. Yeah. So, but the reason why I'm saying this is because. Well, yeah, when you have people, for example, like Mike David of Red Bar warning Joe, telling Joe that, Joe, you got to be careful of the people that are around you. The guy who sells your bow and arrow.

[Caller G]

Yeah.

[Jay]

Lev Paliakov. Thank you for the 20. Says Kurt Metzger mentioned on my show Ethereum. Oh, this guy, he tried to debate me. I forgot about this guy, this Lev Lev guy. He tried to have me on a long time ago. And he's like any Gnosticism. I want to say that he was a. He follows. He was buddies with Cernovich and he's like in the Gnostic stuff. Is that why Gnostic informant is coming up? Probably. But it, what is it like a pro Ukraine dude anyway? No, I don't, I don't know anything about this.

[Caller J]

I don't think they're even curious about or interested in anything that's being talked about on the other side. Because here's the thing. Imagine if one day, not you, but somebody else were to come up with, you know, some explanation as to why actually we should support Ukraine. They'd lose all their followers, they'd lose all their friends.

[Jay]

Buddy, it still says on my live stream, if I minimize Ukraine, they'll steal my money. Google will steal my money. So no, I'm not the mainstream position. I'm the fringe. So you're acting as if throwing our money down that toilet hole is the fringe?

[Caller J]

No, fringe is very popular. It's extremely popular. You know why Tank Universe? Not to have like some kind of a dog piling effect on, on the guy, but to be able to have Kurt bring up all the extreme out there fringe things that he likes to talk about and be able to properly dissect.

[Jay]

I guess you're not being properly Muslim. So anyway, I was just saying I don't, I don't know anything about this podcast or I think these dudes are Gnostic dudes or something.

[Caller L]

So

[Jay]

the question was from Emilian. Today we celebrate Saints Vidov dawn as Serbs after the battle of Kosovo against the Ottomans. Yep. So. So that's a good thing to remember. We are Not Pro Islam. AJ $5. What's up, blood? What's up, dude? D Jewels. Don't stop. Get it, slow boy. Whiteboard says tell him about the black saints. That's the only way you'll get a black dude to look at orthodoxy. That's funny. Just a $5 will be saved is not past tense. That guy's a slow boy. He's some of the first guy that called in that when we had that debate. Nobody. $5. Would you read about Joseph Smith if I sent you a copy? No, I'm not. I know enough about Joseph Smith that there's not, there's no new facts that you're going to bring into the scenario.

[Advertisement Voice 2]

That's going to like the Farm City Pro Rodeo has raised the bar again, $60,000 in added money per event, solidifying Hermiston's place as a top 15 paying rodeo in the PRCA. New this year, Saturday night's performance will be a true championship round, guaranteeing you get to see the best of the best in one place on one night. Tickets are on sale now and they will go fast. Visit farmcityproadio.com for tickets and more information. Experience the action, Feel the history of the Farm city Pro Rodeo. August 12th through the 15th.

[Caller A]

Shop the Sherwin Williams 4th of July Sale and get 30% off paints and stains. June 26th through July 6th. Whether you're refreshing your interior or exterior, we've got the colors to bring your vision to life. And with delivery, getting everything to your door is easier than ever. Shop online to have it delivered or visit your neighborhood Sherwin Williams store. Click the banner to learn more. Retail sales only some exclusions apply. See store for details. Delivery available on qualifying orders.

[Jay]

Make me rethink anything to do with Joseph Smith. So so But I appreciate your $5 super chat. Send this dude to the PE explosion chamber crown says you talking about the this was the first guy that called in. Let's see if you love your life and you testify before God that you do not love him. Oh, we read that earlier. Excuse.

[Caller A]

Me.

[Jay]

Phantasm Gifted five memberships. Appreciate that man. Thank you very much. Zach says for $30. Jay, I'm excited to see Chris Williamson ask about the Pope of the future's biohacking routine. Is that that transhumanist dude? Who's Chris Williamson? Do what you do and stay on top of the EDA leaderboards when Modern Wisdom Pod drops tomorrow. Oh, you're making the joke that the big podcast I went on was that transhumanist guy. It is not that transhumanist guys podcast, but I gotcha. Isn't that who that is? Is that Chris Williamson's the guy that's gonna live forever or whatever? Trying to find where we Today we sing Gifted five memberships. Appreciate that. Vulpez says let's buy you a new spit dog Spit bottle for science. Well, I ran out of Alps in here, so I want to go get one midnight monastery. Jay, in your studies, what do you think about Rudolph Steiner and Waldorf? I mean, I'm not into anthroposophy or theosophy. Dude, that stuff's all silly. The beginnings of the whole New age movement. Von Wallen $5. Did you ever cross come across the idea that Dr. Stephen Greer is Mossad. I mean I think all the alien channeling alien stuff is. But I don't know about being Assad. I mean that. Why would that be the connection. He was on Danny Jones and they had Museum of Tarot. I mean, what's his. Yuri Geller was in the idf, so that makes sense. But I don't. I don't know what. What about Ste. Stephen Greer just comes off to me as full of. But let's see. Jay Foley, $10. Have you ever been to Greenville, South Carolina? Yes, I have.

[Caller E]

Have.

[Jay]

Converting from Southern Baptist Orthodoxy. Have you been to the churches? I mean I've been to the. I got married in the OCA St. John the Letter Church. So that's one. I got married at Caven R, $5. I don't know about the other Orthodox churches there. It's the only one I've ever been to. Have you read St. Cyril's commentary in the Old Testament? I don't think I have. Seems like there would be good typology there. Yeah, it seems like there would be. I just forgot I had a St. Cyril book, by the way, the other day I found. Totally forgot I even had. I was like, where did I. When did I even get this book? Rockham sock on $20 second attempt. What about the Ark of the Covenant? The Ark of Noah? Yeah, I just referenced it. I actually think Jim Bob is tall. You can look at a picture of me with Jim Bob. He's not taller than me. Like we're sitting at an angle in the whatever podcast studio. I'm six foot two.

[Caller K]

Dude.

[Jay]

Jim Bob is not. I mean, I'm not dissing Jim Bob, but if you go on my Instagram, there's a picture of me standing with Jim Bob. I mean, but Jim Bob's not super short, but I'm pretty sure from memory I'm at least a few inches taller than Jim Bob. Anti $20. Good night Ank. I gotta get up. Appreciate that, dude. Zayn $5. Matt Dill monkey was one of the worst. He wasn't the worst debater though, that I've debated. It's got to be Misfit Patriot has to be the worst. Derek. No, we did that one. All me Pres. P.E. $12 large Hadrian Collider is shutting down. They will reopen it in 2030. Data Center B system. Human emotions. Thoughts as actions as data. Algorithm control. End of free will. Well, that sounds a little out there, but I'm sure that that ultimately that's what they want is to control. Sour fruit. Did you see Andrew Wilson's Legion of Kum? I saw the first one. I didn't see the new one. I saw. He did post a new one, but I've not seen that yet. Zayn. No, we did that. Anti. We did that. Pot belly. Goblin King, $10. I'm watching that Boomer debate. Alex. No, we did that. All right, I think I got all the super chats. That's Discord says in loving memory of Ace. Keep your animals close. They're innocent. So somebody's pet passed away. Sorry to hear that, Ace. Was Ace a dog or was he a slow loris? What kind of paint. What kind of pet was he? Anyway, everybody, thank you so much. A lot of fun tonight.