Rhythms of Grace
S10E16 - Laying Out The Variables
This week, Sung, Nate, and Christine dive deep into the conversation around sexuality. They lay out all the variables on the table and examine their own biases and questions. If you haven't been listening along this season, you'll want to go back and check out earlier episodes before listening to this week's Rhythms of Grace!
- Duration:
- 39m
- Broadcast on:
- 13 Aug 2024
- Audio Format:
- mp3
- Well, hello and welcome to Rhythms of Grace. I'm Christine and I'm your name. - I'm on pins and needles. - I'm on a chair. - Christine ended with a cliffhanger last week. - She did. - She said I have so much more to say, but we've been talking too long. - Well, yeah, so last week you're talking about kind of some cultural realities and specifically we were ending with the double standard and the hypocrisy that's found in the church around the issue of homosexuality specifically. And it brought to mind this, like all of a sudden I had this picture of this exercise we did in youth group one time where at my church growing up. - So this isn't something you let our youth through? - No, no, no, I did not, sorry, yes, I was growing up. - Okay, got it, got it, got it, got it, got it. - Yeah, I mentioned like, I went to a church where homosexuality was like the unforgivable sin, like you couldn't be in the kingdom, you couldn't be a gay Christian. That was not on the team. - Not possible. - And one day in youth group our youth leader listed out all these different sins. So it was like murder and theft and lying and adultery and all these different sins. And we were supposed to rank them. Like which one was worst in God's eyes? So we, you know, you rank them, murder's obviously the worst, all that. - Sure, sure. - And then at the end, the twist was, oh, actually, lying is just as bad as murder and God's eyes. Like all these sins are equal and they can all be forgiven. And I had never really looked at or thought about like the contradiction there, right? We're like, homosexuality was not even on that list because it's in its own separate category. - And I mean, in the Bible, it's when it's listed and we're gonna get into the hermeneutic. So I wanna be, again, really clear that we're talking from sort of a specific framework that we haven't yet looked into in this conversation. But if you're gonna call it a sin, it is always put in a list of sins with all those other things that you just mentioned. - Yeah, alongside greed or gluttony or those things that, yeah, no one's gonna be like, "Oh, this one's unforgivable." - Right, right. - So anyway, just looking at that dual standard that again, sometimes we don't even see the water we're swimming in. - I mean, it's helpful to, we talked a lot last time about the culture that we swim in. But it's also helpful to remember that there is a Christian subculture that we also have, and that there are people who grow up in environments like that and seriously never ask, or because it's been so like unquestioned, they don't ever think to ask like, "Wait a minute, why are we putting this in a separate place?" Or why do we call this here? Those cultural realities exist as well. - Yeah. So we kinda wanna ask like, as it relates to scripture, how are we supposed to approach scripture? Because I will say both sides will use different, the same passage and interpret them differently or use different passages to kind of buttress their side. - Yeah. - And so, on one side, it's, on one side, and I'll say there are times when both sides are right about certain issues or certain cases that they make. - And when you say both sides you're talking about perhaps like a conservative reading of scripture versus like a more progressive reading of scripture. - Yes, yeah, got it, yeah. - So sometimes people on the progressive side will say, "Well, homosexuality is only mentioned "in like six or seven passages. "How can you make something universal "that is just mentioned just a half dozen times?" Not only that, but when you look at the oppression as discrimination against people in the LGBT community, aren't we supposed to love our neighbors, express, have compassion and love? And if anything, the prophets and Jesus talks way more about injustice than on homosexuality. And Jesus doesn't even talk about it. - Yeah. - And so, that's one hermeneutic. The other side will say, "Well, yeah, "even though six passages are pretty clear "and it's prohibition." So that's, I think, really, it comes down to that issue, more so than like your position. And again, maybe to kind of break this down a little bit on the conservative side, sometimes we talked about this last time, you could come down on a position based on your reading of scripture, but oftentimes the way your posture towards people is so disconnected that I would say, that's actually sin, right? Or, what was I gonna say on the other side? I just had a brain fart. - Maybe like you can have the right posture, even if your position is wrong, question mark? Is that possible? - Oh, I think you may have mentioned this, were you gonna say something about how sometimes we will interpret scripture wrongly, like you were saying, in order to land at a position of-- - Yeah, yeah, we definitely do that, right? But, yeah, I don't know. Well, and just to maybe highlight something we've been talking about is the real mark of Christian maturity is how you treat somebody who is very different than you. Love God, love your neighbor. Those are the two commands. They're actually one, Jesus links 'em together, right? And so, again, that's something for us to kinda just hold in place. - There isn't like a third, hate the sin command. - Hate the sin, right? - Love God, love your neighbor, hate the sin. - For me, what's most fascinating about the concept of loving your neighbor is found in the parable of the Good Samaritan, where the, because the question that the guy that actually asks, he says to Jesus, what spurs that story is, who is my neighbor? Like, okay, so you tell me to love my neighbor, who's my neighbor? Jesus tells us a long story about a person who needs help and is not given that help by people who should know better, priests, Levites, et cetera. And then a Samaritan who is considered a second-class citizen comes along and provides the help that's required. And then his answer, he says, who treated this person like a neighbor? He sort of, he puts it instead of saying like, he sort of says, everyone is your neighbor if you choose to treat them as your neighbor, instead of saying like, oh, there's neighbors and there's non-neighbors, you treat neighbors one way, you treat non-neighbors the other way. He sort of says, no, no, no, you are the one that is deciding who is your neighbor. He puts it back on us. So when he's saying, love your neighbor, he's saying, love everyone, really. Everyone that you choose to love is your neighbor. So I just think that's a really interesting, because people often feel justified in sort of saying like, no, no, no, I love my neighbor, but like the LGBTQ community is not my neighbor. They stand against me. And Jesus would say, guess what? They are your neighbor if you choose to treat them in a neighborly way. - Yeah, yeah. So here's a question. To what extent then does scripture relate to in terms of its sexual ethics to our modern day context? - Wait, can you repeat that question? - To what extent does scripture speak to our modern context when it comes to sexuality or sexual ethics? Because, and we've talked about this with other issues, right? Because you could have one of two stances. Like really just ignore certain passages that just seem like don't make sense. Or you could just say, well, that part isn't really relevant. And I don't think either of those to lead to fruitful kind of reading and engagement of scripture, right? So some conservatives, and this is why we're tackling some of these hard issues. It's like, well, I don't really get this, but the Bible says it, and so that's it. You know, there's no argument, no debate, that's it. And you're wrong. The other side is like, well, obviously, this is so backwards. Of course, this was written for an ancient time. And of course, it can't mean that today. And therefore, we're not gonna apply that today. - Yeah. - And I would say there are, there's both sides lead to kind of a hollow. (laughs) Just a hollow place. - Yeah. - So, I'm gonna go ahead, Christine, 'cause I'm still gathering my thoughts. - I was just gonna say, I guess backing up to like, yeah, sexuality, high level. I think I struggled with this a lot growing up, because a lot of times, I think the passages of scripture itself, it'll be like, you know, do not commit adultery. And I was like, well, I'm not married. Can I commit adultery? Or, you know, like all these, like, do not prostitute yourselves, blah, blah, blah. And I'm like, well, I mean, what does that mean? Question mark. And it like meant something different in Old Testament than it does now. And I guess there are a lot of those things. And so, for me, it's helpful, the XYZ principle that we've been talking about throughout these episodes, looking at scripture as an unfolding story, where we're not at Z, and scripture points to Z, but is written looking backwards. So anyway, I don't know if that answered your question, but those are my thoughts. - I'm glad that that's where you landed, because that's sort of what's been spinning in my mind as well, which is that the way that we have applied, the hermeneutic, to use a big word for you M-divs, that we've applied has been this XYZ principle, which is that the scripture itself is in some ways static to a time and a people, and that our perspective on it sort of needs to include that as the way that we're reading it, that it is a point on an arc towards the final realization of what God wants for sexuality. But if we were to apply these principles, the way we've applied everything else so far, we would say, but this is a point on that arc, not necessarily the destination itself. So that tends to be how I look at it, that we're trying to use it to establish a trajectory, not necessarily say this is the destination. So we're gonna have to flesh that out because I can already create arguments in my own mind against what I just said. But that's how we've looked at everything else. Yeah, which again, if you've listened to those episodes, I think will help bring some, maybe not complete, but a significant resolution to sometimes what feels like backwards commands, right? Like, well, okay, don't lie with another man, like you would a woman, but don't cook a young goat in its mother's milk, how the heck, what the heck, right? And either you wholesale reject it, or you just focus on that one part, right? Yeah, so that is a larger question. So let's explore that, X, Y, Z. And again, we're not gonna rehash that, go back and listen. I would say, listen from the very first episode. This is such an unrolling of just thoughts and discussion. Yeah, a lot of the things that we're saying now are built on a foundation that we've established over several episodes and several topics of discussion. So we're trying to give some like, what are those called, like Cliffs Notes? Yeah, yeah. To sort of help people catch up, but we talked about it a lot. Yeah. Yeah, and I think with the X, Y, Z principle, something I've appreciated so far is it's never, like with the issue of women in the church, it's not been like, oh, well, here's the trajectory. So we're gonna like just ignore the fact that there are these other verses in there, or like, you know, therefore gender doesn't exist, or just those things that like, we aren't ignoring passages of scripture. It's more so, okay, let's look at all of these kind of different spots in scripture and see, is there context that clarifies this? And what is the greater trajectory, and how do those fit together? And are these pointing us in a direction that clarifies sort of how we should be in the moment? Yeah. Yeah. So what are your thoughts on that? Of which one? What? On the X, Y, Z, and as it relates to this issue of homosexuality. Ooh, that's a big question. Yeah, I think it's interesting, I guess, when it comes to the, like, you know, the love everyone, sort of 80s, like, love is love. And for my generation, I think walking away from marriage as kind of like a construct, I think the trajectory of scripture is toward like a greater emphasis around marriage. And, you know, Jesus is like, you know, Moses gave you divorce, but I say, you know, and just that, like, greater emphasis toward, I guess, I'm trying to think of what, like, a phrase, but, the, like, the leave and cleave. Yeah, leave and cleave, yes, that's exactly it. Yeah, that's a scripture reference, by the way. Yeah. (laughs) So, if I'm hearing you correctly, maybe I would offer a rebuttal. I would say the Western Church has elevated marriage to the point where we have diminished the nobility of singleness. Oh, yeah. Right, and the Western Church has made marriage almost a sign. I mean, okay, even the political debate now, right? Like what fans saying, like, oh, not having kids, you know, being, I mean, just that whole, it's the idolization of the nuclear family. Yeah, yeah. That's, yeah, that's, I think, a helpful clarification. 'Cause I think, I guess what I'm trying to say is sexual stewardship, I think, I don't think that Jesus diminished that, like from the Old Testament to the New Testament, Jesus didn't say, therefore, marriage was just a temporary, I mean, it is a new Testament, he did say that. But it's to show things that were to come, and he didn't say, because it was a temporary sign, it's now abolished. Singleness means have sex with whoever. Right, right. You weren't contrasting singleness versus marriage as institutions. You were contrasting sort of the place that sex holds or sexual relationships hold is, it continues to be elevated as Jesus speaks of it. Within, I think, a narrow construct, right? Like sexuality, yeah, the governance of your own sexuality becomes more elevated, not less. That's good, it's good. Yeah. All right, you ready for this? Yeah, you started, you started its song. I did. (laughing) Well, you know, so like I said, this has been a significant last week, this has been a significant part of sort of my spiritual and relational journey, both sort of at a broad level, leading a church in a place where LGBTQ issues were always forefront. And then as you said at the beginning song, having family members and friends that are LGBTQ, someone I've thought about a lot, and so I've done a lot of reading. I don't do a ton of reading on a lot of subjects, this one I've read quite a few books on. And actually a local pastor in Ann Arbor, Ken Wilson wrote a book about this issue and sort of his developing understanding. And one of the things that he lays out very compellingly is to simply say that in the same way that references to slavery in the Old and New Testament speak to a very specific type of institution that is in many ways unrelated to what we would understand as slavery as Americans. He would say that homosexuality also meant something very, very different when Paul referenced it as we would understand it. And that most, if not all, or the extreme majority of same-sex relationships, you mentioned pedestrian, there was temple prostitution and there was people using their slaves for same-sex relationships. All of those carried with them an extreme, extreme power inequality dynamic. And that that was the only way that they understood same-sex relationships to work. So when he looks at those verses in the New Testament, he says you can't separate that from the fact that this is what same-sex relationships looked like to Paul. And when he said don't do that, it was every bit as much about the power dynamics and the coercive nature of same-sex relationships as it was, if at all, about the actual act itself. So that, he creates a very, very compelling argument for looking at it that way if we're talking about a hermeneutic. He sort of applies the same thing we applied to women and divorce and slavery. He applies the same thing and it's like, oh, that's what that meant then. So that's part of where I land. - Okay, yeah, and I would say, were you gonna say something? - No, you can go ahead. - I'm gonna lay, yeah, basically, again, I've read a lot about this too. And I'll say I'm both sides. And not just the popular books, 'cause, you know, Matthew Vines and they're really popular. They kind of derive themselves from a lot of other scholarly works and a lot of the arguments on both sides. Sometimes I find not necessarily always compelling. And because I'm reading on both sides and kind of listening to both sides of this debate, I will start off with the work Ken Wilson, usually where he lands, which is, yeah, like the Bible condemns exploitive, heteristic forms of homosexuality. - And just so we can define pedestrian. - Oh, yeah. - It was generally, you can correct me if I'm wrong, 'cause you'd know more about history than I do. But my understanding is that it was essentially a young man that would have some sort of like a mentor or an older male figure in a position of sort of influence that would take this person under their wing in an exchange for sexual favors would sort of give them access to their circles of influence. Is that accurate? - Yeah, yeah, yeah. - Okay, yeah. Also, the argument on that side with that would be that homosexuality, it's condemned because it's a threat to male dominance and power, right? Like we were talking about. And the Bible has no category for homosexuality in the same way that we do. Like the whole orientation versus action, like they weren't even aware of that. And so it's more about kind of over-sexed, power-driven sexuality than it is, let's say monogamous relationships. - Right, mutual respect in a human. - Also, homosexuality has a genetic component to it, which the writers of the Bible didn't realize. Like it's not just nurture, there's nature. And again, there's only a few texts that speak directly to homosexuality. And then there are other sexual commands or things that we don't necessarily follow that aren't binding. And so why should we follow the ones on homosexuality? And then we're all sinners, so why single out homosexuality? - Right. - So basically, I've made up the argument for the progressive side. - Sure, sure. - And I do that again, because we're always a proponent of, if you can't articulate either side, you don't do your homework. - Yeah. And I think like a lot of those things are true, right? Like, I mean, yes. Like we do, again, we've talked about like that double standard of like, yeah, different actions or activities. And then, yeah, I think it's important to look at like, you're saying like, oh, you're setting up this like progressive argument, but you're setting it up with like, yeah, that was the only framework that they had in those New Testament texts. And so just acknowledging like, you're not just setting it up, like those are true statements that you're making. - Yeah, you know, you're right. On the flip side, you know, one argument that's said on the progressive side is Jesus never talks about it. So on the flip side, they would say, well, no, Jesus may not have talked about it directly, but he does talk about it. When, for example, he talks about pornaya, sexual immorality, you can't not include, not only homosexual activity, but premarital sexual activity or sexual activity outside of marriage. You can't not include that. And just because Jesus doesn't address homosexuality, doesn't mean he hasn't talked about it. And even in Genesis, I mean, the biggest contrast to even Genesis talking about homeless, like, you know, the Bible, well, let's go to the six passages that talk about homosexuality. On the other hand, there are only eight occurrences of the Bible talking about love your neighbor. You would never dismiss those eight passages. And so again, that argument of like, oh, there's only six passages. Well, there, yeah, we have to read them in context and we're going to do that next episode. But again, I want to compare in contrast, when Genesis one talks about marriage, it's talking about what is good. It doesn't talk about homosexuality, but it is outlining a certain kind of design. They would also say, well, there's no instance in the Bible of homosexual marriage, homosexual, sanctified homosexual activity, et cetera, et cetera. And while Jesus may not have talked about homosexuality, well, there's a lot of things he hasn't talked about. And that's again, argument from silence, which is the lowest level of influence and persuasion. He does say a lot about lust and sexual immorality. And I'll, let's even go outside of homosexuality. Because again, I will have young people say, Jesus never talks like you can't have sex outside of marriage. He doesn't say that. Okay, yeah, if you're skipping over certain things, you can say that. 'Cause does he directly say that? No, but when he says like and to honor your bodies as a temple of the Holy Spirit, there's a lot of implications and applications there that you can't really get away from unless you're not very literate with scripture. And then I guess the final one I could think of is while, and this is the go kind of contrary to Ken's argument, is while there is a progressive liberation and loosening and unbinding of slavery and its understanding and even women, even from Old Testament to New Testament, there is no similar unbinding when it comes to the sexual ethic of God's people. Sure, so just to play devil's advocate a little bit because unfortunately, there's a bit of a circular argument that I think becomes an issue, which is that you say like Jesus, when Jesus talked about pornia, like putting homosexuality in there is sort of like assuming that that was one of the things that Jesus was referencing, which we don't like that starts to be like, well, so then you have to look at these other passages and was his understanding of those passages the way that we want to interpret them now so that we can include them in what Jesus was saying. You sort of have to run in a little bit of a circle that takes us back to the initial scriptures to sort of understand what we think Jesus was talking about and so like we're sort of back to where we started which is like, well, Jesus did say that but was he including these things? Well, that depends on his understanding of what these verses meant. And so now we have to talk about those again. Yeah, and I would say too that when we, especially when we get to the different texts, when Jesus talks about sexual immorality, he is referencing back to some of the holiness codes in the Old Testament, which includes not only again, this is a surface level of reading, homosexuality, but also includes adultery, bestiality, all sorts of things and again, so you, because the argument would be, and again, this is if you say, yeah, was Jesus thinking about that in particular? Who knows, right? But if you don't include that, like there's a lot of things you could say like, well, Jesus never talked about bestiality. What's wrong with me having sex with my dog? Like to most of us, that would seem reprehensible. But again, we're gonna both do kind of exegetical, kind of look and break down some of the scriptures, but also there's a lot of correlation that we need to make between scriptures like we did with slavery, with women. And so these are just broad statements on both sides, right? I'm trying to represent both sides and you know, hopefully you hear each side and you go, yep, that's where I stand, right? Because what, 'cause as we dive into the scriptures and things that there's going, oh, and this the other thing on the conservative side too. Yes, power dominated homosexuality activity was very predominate in the ancient culture. However, that wasn't the only form of homosexuality. - Sure. - You know, Alexander the Great, Hephaestion were lovers. There was no sense of power and domination, right? And so, again, there are snippets that both sides will use that I think, man, let's kind of expose the fullness of all of these arguments on both sides because there are things that are on both sides that are true, but maybe is there something that's not being looked at as well as well? So, and yeah, that's the way we'll just frame it up for kind of diving into the next time. When we look at the passages in particular, because like, and this is just a snippet, right? Like some conservatives are like Sodom and Gomorrah and that was because of homosexuality. Actually, it wasn't, right? So, again, like, and there are times when the progressives rightly rebut that. And so, again, there's a lot of misunderstandings and then even I'll even say interpretation of the Greek words of homosexuals and this and that and boy, man, whenever you take one argument, whether it's anthropology or morality, and that becomes the only kind of your only tool, there are, let's say it this way, rational loopholes on both sides, if you don't consider and listen to things that are said on the other side. - Sure, like here's an example, which I think is helpful, and I think it's definitely you have to take this into account that like you said, in an issue around slavery, you have this sort of, you called it increasing-- - Loosening or-- - Loosening, you know. If you look at an issue like divorce, the opposite happens. Like Moses allowed these things and then you get to Jesus, he says, look, Moses just did that because you guys were super screwed up and he should not allow it except for your inability. There was a tightening, which again, if you're looking at points on a trajectory, we should be landing on a far, far more conservative or anti-perspective on divorce than we have. And actually, we've done the opposite. More and more is divorce considered something that it has sort of no bearing on your spiritual condition. So there's just these things where when you start to look at them, you realize that whether you'd like it or not, we're creating loopholes for our own convenience at every turn and in all of these issues. And it's, again, and I said this at the very beginning, it requires so much humility to engage with this issue because some of you just laid out like 47 variables that need to be considered to come to a, and it's like, man, we see and we are seeing through a glass darkly, very, very darkly, and that requires a ton, a ton, a ton of patience and humility. - Yeah, and we've been laying a lot of things on the table and like not touching them yet. So if you're listening and you're feeling uncomfortable, it's like, yeah. - And just, I'm uncomfortable too. - Yeah. (laughing) - And, you know, to what maybe what you're saying, Nate, I'll throw this out. And again, I say this broadly, not just over this issue of LGBTQ, but I speak this broadly in terms of just our witness and mission, our witnesses as Christians and our mission as the people of God, right? That we, when we so acrimoniously denigrate the other side, to the neglect of our witness, that doesn't bring honor to God. And I want us to think, is it at least possible that you are misunderstanding and misrepresenting the other side as badly as they are misunderstanding and misrepresenting you? - Yeah. - I know that's true in politics, right? How many of us, wherever you land, you think the other side totally misunderstands and misrepresents you? But is it possible that you are just as much as them, misunderstanding, misrepresenting them? Oh, straw, man, straw, whatever. Like, that happens all the time, right? And so again, if you feel uncomfortable, it is not, I would say with this issue, it is not, and this is true in the life of our church. It is not so much disagreement itself that leaves us divided. It is failing to disagree constructively because people disagree with each other in this church, on this issue, all over the place. And if you cut yourself off or feel outraged because somebody disagrees, that is not the source of division. The source of division is your inability to engage constructively with your brother or sister on this issue. So... - That's a good word. I mean, it's a good word and one that I have seen both sides of a deeply, deeply personal and often painful way. - Yeah. - The inability to constructively disagree is actually the problem, not the individual position. - Yeah, because it is possible to be Christian and be very unlike Christ. So again, coming back to this over and over again, because some of you, I know, will hear this and go, I can't believe that they're saying this, that they're supporting the progressive agenda, or I can't believe they're taking the conservative side. I know you're feeling outraged or anger or uncomfortableness. Just continue to walk with us in this messy middle. - Yeah. - Because that doesn't mean you shouldn't have a position, but also, let's also, and I hope we can agree on this. We have our experiences and then we have scripture. We have to allow scripture rightly interpreted, shape our, or not shape our experience. We can't let our experience, and this is the cultural reality too, our experience trumps everything else right now. So I feel this, I experienced this, and so therefore that is ultimate truth. And that's fine if you're not a Christian. You're not bound to God's word. And as a Christian, I get the complexity because you feel like, man, okay, I don't know, I don't know to what extent God's word is truth, because I can't make sense of certain things. So again, I'm just kind of laying out the complexity. - Yes. I mean, I also think it's helpful to remember that we all use our experience as the lens through which we see and interpret everything. If you read the Bible and you are dead sure that a verse says something, I'm just here to tell you, like your personal experience is a strong part of shaping that. And that isn't to say that we will never be free of that. We will never be free of that. But understanding that that is in the mix is so critical to having productive conversations. Because if you are unwilling to acknowledge your own bias, if you are unwilling to acknowledge your own tendencies to lean in a direction, you will never be able to gracefully engage in a conversation with someone who is doing the same thing in a different direction. - Yeah, and I think part of like, I mean, the three of us in this room probably disagree on an untold number of things when it comes to scripture or life. And one of the things I found that has been helpful to me as I'm engaging in conversations around issues that are close to my heart that I have strong opinions about that I feel like the Bible is really clear on is going into conversations with other believers with the assumption that they are doing their best to interpret scripture. They are not just going in with the assumption that they're not throwing. Because sometimes I think I grew up assuming that, oh, if you believe X, Y, and Z, it is because you have thrown away your Bible and you don't care what God has to say about it. And for me, even if I'm wrong sometimes, going and assuming this other person cares about scripture just as much as I do. And we are both struggling to come to the Z, which we cannot see. - I mean, there's a sociological principle that we all exist in, which is that we apply the best possible motivations to ourselves for our actions and apply the worst possible motivations to others. Imagine you're in traffic. If someone cuts you off, what do you think? That person is a jerk. They are, man, what an idiot. They must get home and kick their dog and scream at their kids and leave their dirty dishes in the sink, right? And if you cut someone off, I'm in a hurry. I'm not this way, but there was no other, I didn't have another choice. I'm going to be late, blah, blah, blah. We do the same thing when we're engaging with scripture and especially on issues that we disagree with other people. Our assumption is they must be just like selfish and stupid and more concerned about their own comfort than living a life of righteousness. Whereas I am none of those things. And therefore, if I, whatever, do something offensive or if that's because I have the right motivation and they have the wrong motivation, right? That's the sociological reality of every human experience. And if you ignore that, we're not getting anywhere, folks. Yeah. Well, gosh, next episode, we're going to dive into what's often called the clobber passages. Clobber passages. So bring your sledgehammers and your shields and no, actually don't. I'm sweating it. I'm not going to lie, but it needs to be done. Oh, we'll see you next time. [BLANK_AUDIO]