Wednesday, August 7th | Traveling Through England

This episode of Clearview Today is brought to you by Le Bleu Ultra Pure Water.

David, how many bottles of water do you think you drink a day? Well, actually, I only drink Flamin' Hot Mountain Dew, Strawberry Yoo-Hoo, and the occasional Pepto Bismol. Flamin' Hot Mountain Dew? Do they even make that anymore?

Fun fact, no. I have to make my own with McDonald's Sprite, and you guessed it, Texas Pete. I am genuinely horrified to hear that.

Me too. You know, unlike other bottled waters, Le Bleu water only has two ingredients, hydrogen and oxygen. Nothing more, nothing less. Le Bleu's award-winning Ultra Pure Water is the result of their patent-pending Five Steps Beyond Mother Nature process, which eliminates the inorganic materials and creates uniquely pure water, free of contaminants and perfectly balanced and fresh tasting. And Le Bleu produces only the highest quality ultra pure bottled water on the market. You can get them in 1 liter, 1.5 liters, 12 ounces, 20 ounces, or even in the 3 to 5 gallon water coolers. And best of all, Le Bleu Central conveniently delivers this pure refreshment right to your home or office.

That's right. Le Bleu delivers our water coolers right here to Clearview Church every single month like clockwork. And it's not just water. Le Bleu supplies the finest gourmet coffees, teas, and hot chocolates to accommodate every preference in your office. I'm talking Green Mountain, Starbucks, Krispy Kreme Donut Shop. So whether you're looking for the perfect brew for yourself or for your workplace, Le Bleu has got you covered. You can visit their website today at MyLeBleu, that's M-Y-L-E-B-L-E-U.com, and use promo code today, that's T-O-D-A-Y, for a 10% discount at checkout. Every single purchase you make using that promo code helps us here at The Clearview Today Show and gets you one step closer to the purest, most refreshing water you've ever tasted. Thank you to Le Bleu for sponsoring this episode. Now let's start the show.

Where's my Mountain Dew? You're listening to Clear View Today with Dr. Abaddon Shah, the daily show that engages mind and heart for the gospel of Jesus Christ. I'm Ryan Hill. I'm John Galantis. You can find us online by visiting ClearViewTodayShow.com. Or if you have any questions for Dr. Shah or suggestions for new topics, send us a text to 252-58-25028, or you can email us at contact at ClearViewTodayShow.com.

That's right. You guys can help us keep the conversation going by supporting the show. You can share it online with your friends and family. Leave us a good five star view on iTunes or Spotify.

Absolutely nothing less than five stars. We're going to leave a link in the description so you can do just that. The verse of the day today is coming to you from 2 Corinthians 8 verse 7. But as you abound in everything, in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all diligence, and in your love for us, see that you abound in this grace also.

That's right. Paul is asking the Corinthians to follow through on a commitment that they had made to him. The Corinthian church, they agreed to gather all this money that was to be given to suffering Christians in Jerusalem. But since they made that and Paul went away, their relationship kind of got strained.

Things became really complicated with the Corinthians. There was a lot of him having to correct them and rebuke them. So here in this letter, he's praising them for all of these specific areas of excellence that he sees.

He's saying, as you abound in your faith, in your speech, in your knowledge, in your diligence, all your enthusiasm, all these things, he's saying, just like you're doing that, I want you to, regardless of how you feel about me, I want you to do that and show excellence in your act of giving as well. Yeah, yeah. It's important for us to be responsible with the resources that God has entrusted to us. And that includes and especially refers to our finances. That's right. I mean, the things that we have, all of the money that we have, all of the resources that we have, they're all God's. That's right. He's just entrusted us with them to be good stewards.

And it is a time-tested, time-proven principle that the more generous you are with what you have, the more God can bless you so that you can be a blessing to others. 100%. And before we move on, we do want to remind you guys that this episode is sponsored by the Date the Word app.

We're going to leave some information right in the description so you can download that on your phone. But before we do anything else, Ryan, you know what time it is. I do. It's mail time, brother. We got some mail. Oh, we gonna sing this song.

This is from the 90s right here. Here's the mail. It never fails. It makes me want to wag my tail. When it comes, I want to mail.

Mail. Mike asks from North Carolina, a long time listener of the show, what is one of Dr. Question's top guilty pleasure songs?

I think this is going to apply to us as well. Guilty pleasure songs. In parentheses, this question may or may not have spawned from finishing a lightning round questions episode on Spotify, and then Spotify randomly jumping to Mariah Carey's fantasy on my guilty pleasure road trip playlist. This guy, I can tell you, by the way, this guy's a sheriff? Sheriff's deputy? Police officer? Police? Police. Yeah.

Police officer. But you can listen to Mariah Carey if you want to. I wouldn't tell the other guys on the force. But I guess that's why it's in your guilty fantasy. What is it? Guilty pleasure road trip playlist. Guilty pleasure song? Top guilty pleasure song?

Hmm. Oh, man. Um, for me, top guilty pleasure song. Gosh, there's there's two that I'm thinking of, and I'm not sure which one I want to divulge.

Um, I think probably top guilty pleasure song would be That's the Way It Is by Celine Dion. What is that? I don't even know. When you want it the most, there's no easy way out. What?

When you're ready to go and your heart's lifting down. Don't give up on your faith. Love comes to life. So believe it.

And that's the way it is. Never heard Celine Dion, the Titanic lady? Yeah.

Wow. The one that threw the she's the one that threw the necklace in the water. No, no, that's she's an actress in the movie.

Celine Dion was not in the movie. Oh, she's the one that sang the song. Of course.

Of course. I think my guilty pleasure song. I don't know if there's a one song, but anything by Sugar Land. Like if someone asked me, like, hey, do you like Sugar Land? I'd be like, no.

Stuck like Lou. Yeah, that one. But I would be like, ew, no, I don't listen to that. But then when it's just me and Ellie in the car, what's the one? Oh, my goodness. Oh, I got another one. We can settle a dream. We can make our own. We can make our own. The whole world could change in a minute. Just one kiss could stop it spinning.

We could make it through. I like that one a lot. I don't want to.

If you don't want to. I got another one. It's No Air with Jordan Sparks. And I've never heard. What's his name?

I've never heard of any of yours. Why can't I think of his name? Hold on.

I'll look it up. Sing it. I'm supposed to breathe with no air. No air. Can't live.

Can't breathe. Is it Chris Brown? I don't know. I've never heard of this. It just says Jordan Sparks. Oh, yeah.

Featuring Chris Brown. Yeah. Yeah. That's a good one.

That looks like a... I'm not even gonna say it. I'm not even gonna say it. How I feel whenever you ain't there.

There's no air, no air. 14 years ago. Golly. What's another one? Oh, it's not Sugarland. Whose bed have your boots been?

I'm a shoe. All of ours are women. What if you had the girl country songs? I don't know.

But that's what I'm saying. Like, if someone asked me, I'd be like, No, I don't listen to that. I don't listen. I listen to cool stuff. I listen to Binkle 182 and Green Day and stuff like that. But then Sugarland. Yeah. They're all women, though. All of our guilty pleasure songs.

That's the case for a lot of guys. I'm going to ask Dr. Shah. I want to ask Dr. Shah when he comes in with his guilty pleasure, because that is what Mike. Thank you for writing in, my friend. That's that's our answers. We're gonna ask Dr. Shah as soon as he comes in. And if you're brave, write in and let us know your guilty pleasure song. We will play them on the radio. 100%.

2525825028. Or you can visit us online at ClearViewTodayShow.com. Stay tuned. We'll be back after this. Hey, Ryan. Hey, John. Hey, man. I'm having an awesome time doing the Clear View Today Show with you.

Thanks, man. I hope people are having an awesome time listening to it. Well, listen, I think our listeners would actually be interested to know that Clear View Today is not the only podcast we produce. Oh, do go on.

Oh, well, go ahead and stop what you're doing right now. Mosey on over to your podcast app and subscribe to Sermons by Abaddon Shah, Ph.D. As many of you know, Dr. Shah is our lead pastor here at Clear View Church. And every single week he preaches expository messages that challenge and inspire us to live godly lives. One of our core values at Clear View Church is that we're a Bible believing church, which means that every single sermon is coming directly from the text. And it's great because whether you're driving, cleaning the house, working out, whatever you're doing, you're listening and receiving timeless biblical truths. And God works through every sermon differently, which means you're always going to get something new. Sometimes it'll be conviction.

Sometimes it'll be encouragement. That's right. And you guys can check out Sermons by Abaddon Shah, Ph.D. on the Apple podcast app. You can find it on our website as well. That's ClearViewBC.org. You can even read the transcripts of every message on Dr. Shah's website. That's AbaddonShah.com.

Love it. John, you ready to hop back in? Let's do it. Welcome back to Clear View Today with Dr. Abaddon Shah, the daily show that engages mind and heart for the gospel of Jesus Christ. You can visit us online at ClearViewTodayShow.com.

Or if you have any questions or suggestions for new topics, send us a text to 252-582-5028. That's right. And we're here once again in the Clear View Today studio with Dr. Abaddon Shah, who's a Ph.D. in New Testament textual criticism. Dr. Shah, very, very happy Wednesday. Good to see you, my friend. Yes.

Good to hear. That's a lot. Loud applause.

That's a loud applause. Listen, Mike S., longtime listener of the show. OK. He wants to know, what's your favorite guilty pleasure song? The song that if someone caught you listening to it, you'd be like, oh, I wouldn't listen to that. It was your song.

But in your heart of hearts, you really like it. I don't have one, but I remember the girls used to listen to Girls Just Want to Have Fun. Yeah. Cyndi Lauper?

Cyndi Lauper. Was that the girls or was that more Nicole? No, girls. Oh, really? OK. Yeah. She would listen to that and the girls would listen to that. And that was like our our song.

Was that one that you'd be like if they played it again, you'd be like, I wouldn't argue that. Yeah. Yeah. Because it was like all like fun and fun.

Yeah, it's fine. I like that little run she does at the end. They're all women. I don't know what it is, but all the guilty pleasure songs, they're all by women. I feel like I don't know what it is for guys. Usually guilty pleasure songs are either women or boy bands. Yeah, it could be like I feel like it's going to fall into one of those categories.

I don't know. I don't know of any boy bands that I would say is a guilty pleasure. Oh, oh, I don't remember who sang it.

Bye Bye Bye. Not a guilty pleasure song. No, I'm OK liking that one. I'm OK liking that one. What's the one? Oh, my goodness. New kids on the block.

Got a bunch of hits. Chinese food makes me sick. I can't remember what the. Who is that? It makes me sick.

And I think it's fly when the girls stop by for the summer. LFO? LFO? Was it LFO? I might be wrong.

I don't know if I'm right or not. It's LFO. I'm like 65% sure it's LFO.

I hadn't heard that name in like 15 years. Dung-Shan, have you ever heard of LFO? No. No.

I'm laughing my face off. Nobody in this generation has. They were more like punk or alternative, though. They weren't really boy band. They were a boy band. Boy band is like headset mics, choreography on the stage.

I don't think you boys, you're in sync. Those are the boy bands. I think they were all vocal, though. I don't know. I could be wrong.

I could be wrong. I hadn't even thought about a boy band. I hadn't even thought about LFO in in like 15 something years. You know, one thing about LFO that people don't realize they're all British.

They're all actually didn't know that. Really? I'm lying. No, I'm lying. But I needed a segue. I don't think so. I don't know what they are.

I'm lying, but it makes sense for the segue. The Beatles were English. That's I know.

That's for sure. The Jonas Brothers. They're not English. Not English. No.

Oh, what's the one direction? They're English. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, they are. Yeah. Why are we talking about that?

Because today we're talking about Dr. Shah's recent trip to England. That was a rough segue. That's why I usually leave it to you. Man. Wow.

I usually leave it to you. We want to talk today, Dr. Shah. Of course, you just recently got back from across the pond. Welcome back, by the way.

Yes. Welcome back. Welcome back.

Good to be home. We talked about that right at the beginning of yesterday's episode. But, um, or maybe it was Monday's episode. I can't remember. But we want to talk today about what your trip entailed, why you went over to England, what all was involved and the cool things you got to see while you were there.

So this was a couple of years ago. I heard there was going to be a conference outside of Oxford, England, or as you can say, in Oxford, England. Okay. And it was in my field of textual criticism. It was on the importance or the relevance of text types. If people know what text types are, great. If you don't, text types are how manuscripts sort of bunch together. Okay.

Based on variant readings, certain manuscripts have the same mistakes. Right. And it's not just like same mistakes by coincidence. It's like there's a pattern going on. Based on that, you group them.

Okay. This is a very simplistic explanation. That's how the whole idea of text types came about. And it's been around for like two, 300 years. And now this conference actually was to do away with text types.

Like the day of text types is over. For real? Wow. I didn't know that. I didn't know that's what the conference was on. But I know several people who spoke at the conference actually supported the idea or the validity of text types. So a lot of people were for keeping them?

No, actually were against it. Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. But there were two people who were for keeping it.

I got you. So was this a conference on like, this is the trend that's happening or was it kind of a debate? It was kind of a debate. Okay.

Yeah. So there was somebody coming from an Alexandrian text point of view, somebody coming from a Western text point of view, somebody, of course, Maurice Robinson coming from a Byzantine text type point of view. There was a person representing CBGM, Moonster, INTF. They had their point of view and they're definitely against text type because the whole CBGM, at least how they claim it is, you know, to do away with text types. They don't. They start with text types and they are doing away with text. It doesn't make sense.

But that's the whole idea behind it. What was your, I guess two questions. What is your position on the matter? I know because you didn't speak at the conference, but I responded, I reacted, interacted, not reacted, interacted with the speakers. Nice. Nice. What was, what is your position on whether or not to keep them and which position do you feel like kind of won the day? I don't know if any position really won the day because it was kind of like divided with the majority of people saying text types are done. But two people saying text types are still valid. For example, for example, I mean, I can, there's only two who were on the side of text types are still valid.

One was Peter Head. Peter Head is at Wickliffe Hall, Oxford University, and he came from the Alexandrian perspective. Like is there an Alexandrian text type? And his response was, the whole paper, was that yeah, you may want to, you may want to do away with the idea of text types, but there is something called text type there.

You may want to find another name for it if you want to, but you cannot do away with that concept. Because it exists. It exists. It's a reality.

Maurice Robinson, on the other hand, on the same side, took the same view, but he was more adamant. He said, no, text types are here to stay. This is what it is. Manuscripts do group together. You cannot deny that. Right.

But then there were others on Western side or CBGM or a couple other papers who presented who were like, oh no, it's done. It's done. Wow. Do you, do you think it's done or do you feel like there's still some validity in text types? Oh, definitely. I think there's validity to it. Okay. Yeah. So you would not be for doing away with text, the practice of grouping text together by text types?

No, no, I would say, I would say it's still there. And one big reason is, let's just talk about CBGM, which is coherence based genealogical method. That's what being used behind the new NA28, NA29, that's still coming.

NA28 is our current critical Greek text. They say CBGM is behind it. But the CBGM methodology, and that was one of the questions I asked one of the presenters who was there. And I asked him the question, I said, so am I right in saying that you do begin with text types, even in your computer program, you do begin with the text types, but then your goal is to do away with the text type, correct? He said, absolutely.

He thought I was supporting him. That's right. That's right. So we're starting there, but our goal is to get away from it.

So I'm like, well, I hope everybody else heard that. Yeah. I mean, is there, if that's the foundation you're building on and you're trying to do away with foundation, I don't really know how that works. We're going to build a house and this is our foundation, but our ultimate goal is to do away with the foundation. So is there any actual valid reason to do away with text types?

Like, do we gain anything by getting rid of them? Well, the whole point is how can we be very objective? How can we do away with an archaic concept? They think that text type was done at a time where we did not have computers because now we have computers and we can see the genealogical relationship between manuscripts. So we can see how they all kind of come together in this pattern where this one gave us this one, or maybe even there are gaps between predecessor forms, but still we can kind of lay them out.

It may not work humanly, but with a computer, you can lay them out. Unfortunately, it's not that simple because there are times where there are genealogical descent, which is what text type is all about. But then there are times it makes no sense and a computer cannot detect that. The computer says, oh, yeah, this one came from here because same mistakes. But then when you see a pattern between this manuscript with tons of them over here and this manuscript with tons of them over there and you're going, wait, you're trying to draw a conclusion because these two have the same mistake when actually they both are grouping over there. So this group may be a coincidence.

Maybe fake. So do you end up mis-categorizing it? Yeah, I'm being very simplistic. Yeah, of course.

Of course. You end up mis-categorizing them and creating links that don't exist, that never existed. Is there any sort of fallacy around scholarship?

I know that it's out there like on the Internet and it's out there among like, I don't want to say pastors, but like lay people, lay theologians. But is there any sort of fallacy in the scholarly realm that says, hey, text types, you know, if you if you lean too far to text types, you can get into stuff like King James onlyism, like where like stuff like that, where a lot of people will mistake Byzantine priority for being King James only. Yeah. Is that in the scholarly field as well? Yeah, they can do they do.

They'll do the same thing. They would say that text types can be dangerous. Yeah, text types will promote the superiority of one group of manuscripts when that group doesn't even exist. You used to say, well, you still do. But I remember always catching all the time where you would specify to people, I'm not King James only. And you would say it from the pulpit and you would say, you know, I use the new King James, but I'm not King James only.

And I never really caught on to why you would say that until I realized the danger, not the danger, but the almost social risk in saying that you're Byzantine priority, because people will be like, oh, you must be King James only because that's where they all camp. Yeah. And that's that's what you still have to struggle with. And then people who know the discipline really well and are mature enough to tell the difference are the ones who will be like, yeah, I can see the difference. I don't know why you're saying that. And it's not the same thing.

But majority of the people will quickly categorize you. Gotcha. But all in all, good conference, good, solid, good, solid.

Yeah. Everyone on the paper, even the ones I disagreed with, the papers were solid. Research was well done. I disagreed with their propositions or the hypothesis or the conclusion. I disagree with them. You know, like I said, one or two of them were like Peter Head's paper and Maurice Robinson's, even though there is disagreement with them over certain assumptions or propositions.

Overall, they were on the same side. I don't know if you want to maybe we don't have to say any names or anything, but it was kind of funny because we were in communication while you were in England. We were like talking back and forth about work stuff and writing scripts and stuff like that with the building. I was watching an episode of the Big Bang Theory and it was the one where Sheldon puts out a paper and then it gets disproven. So he has to recant. He has to like put out a retraction and everybody's like making fun of him at the university. And so I asked, I said, you know, does that happen?

Does that happen in like biblical scholarship? And he said, I saw what happened today. I saw someone had to recant today. I didn't know who it was. I think that actually happened.

He had to get up and like, Hey, look, I put out a paper. I was wrong. It was wrong. Yeah. I didn't think so. I was like, oh yeah.

That's kind of crazy. I mean, he has a whole dictionary out or encyclopedia, I think it is. And, uh, he got up and said, it's like, yeah, I mean, and hey, this is on discount, by the way, you can buy that. And then he's like, well, I don't know how long that concept, we can really say that. Wow. Like, well, should we buy it or not?

It's like, look, I'd appreciate it if you buy it personally. But then again, the changes will not come from another 30 40 years, you know? So the whole conference was on text types. That was the focus of the whole thing. It was put out by the text and Canon Institute where, uh, in Phoenix, Arizona, and it's, uh, it's led by Peter Gurry and John Mead. Peter Gurry is a new Testament scholar. John Mead is old Testament.

So this was not really John Mead's field, but it's the whole conference comes from their Institute. I mean, we were there 12 days. You want to hear about each day? Uh, if we can. Yeah. Let's do it. Let's at least start.

Maybe a couple of shows. All right. So day one, we landed. I was supposed to leave here. We were supposed to leave here on Monday, arrived there on Tuesday and then go straight to Oxford. Oh, that's right.

I forgot about that. So I changed it. I was like, I need one more day. If I can get one more day, I can then see the British library and I can see the British museum, which were huge on my list. We stayed in your office for like a couple hours one day, trying to work it all out to where you can see it. I get this time and leave it this time. And then it was like, we're just going to have to have another day. Yeah. I remember that. And I changed the plane ticket like about a couple of weeks ago and it was a best decision I made because if I hadn't done that, there's no way British library, British museum would have been in my schedule. Wow.

And so we arrived in London six 20, six 50 in the morning. And then we got to the Europe car, which is like an enterprise or a budget, you know, same, same concept. And I'm like, I'm renting a car and I am not sure if I want to drive. True.

I'm renting a car, but driving is on the left side with the steering wheel being on the right side in the car. Right. I don't know. I don't know what's going to happen. I'm going to have a wreck or I'm going to, you know, just be driving at a snail's pace.

Right. So picked up the car. Now we have to go to the hotel, which was very near the, I picked up all, I picked all these things very strategically, so I won't have to drive too far. And I was going to park at the hotel and get a taxi into London. I was like, all this is planned out.

And then I got in the car, started driving. I'm like, Oh my word. So did it feel weird at first? Oh yes. Really?

Yes. I was, I was expecting it to be like, Oh, once you do it, it's no big deal. But it's like, no, it's pretty weird.

Initially it was kind of a little weird. And plus the signs are different. Really? Yeah. The road signs are different. The road traffic lines on the roads are different. Oh wow. So I'm like, am I in the, which lane is it turning late?

Is it not? Nicole's like, I don't know. I'm like, I need you to know.

I need you to look. It's weird. So you grew up in India, but at the same time you weren't driving around in cars and stuff. You drove like a bike.

Yeah. I did drive dad's car a few times because I was 17 getting ready to leave. And dad was like, you need to learn how to drive because over there you're going to have to drive. So I learned how to drive stick. Oh yeah. But the stick was not like here. Right.

The stick was in the column. Really? Yeah. It was like up here.

So you're driving sticks like up here on the other side. Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Wow.

That's insane. Yeah. So you moved to America and then everything's on the opposite side.

Yeah. So we got to the hotel. I was like, made it parked it. And then I'm like, Hey, we need to get a taxi and be checked in early at the hotel too. So I had to wait for that.

I'm like, pins and needles. Cause I mean, I got to get to London. I got to get to London because we have an appointment at the British library to see the treasures of the library. We, we saw so many things, but my favorite was their, their main exhibit where they have Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus.

Wow. These are the originals, the original manuscripts. Now this is Codex Aleph and Codex A. Wow. So you just got done going to a conference on manuscripts and then you were able to go and see the original Codex. Well, I saw the original before you went to the conference. This is right when you're there and then we're, we're booking it to the museum. Three hours later, I'm looking at the, wow, that's insane.

Tired. But I'm like, honey, we got to do this. And we have a facsimile of Codex Sinaiticus. Yes, we do. And Vaticanus. Vaticanus is at the Vatican as you can imagine.

So this is only Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus. Do you think we, do you think we'll have a codex facsimile of alexandrinus one day? If they make it. No, they don't make, they haven't made one? No. Oh wow. No, they don't make one for everything. Oh really?

Okay. It's only certain things. Only certain ones. Only Sinaiticus and Vaticanus is out there.

I don't even know if Bizet is out. If there was one, I'd buy it. But we've got, we do have Sinaiticus and Vaticanus here at the church. Yeah, yes we do. And Vaticanus is like really authentic.

Oh yeah. As close to the original as possible. Like it's got holes in the pages.

Yeah, the pages look weathered. I mean, they've done an incredible job with replicating it. It's beautiful.

That's incredible. So you saw Sinaiticus, I guess you saw. We saw the Lindisfarne Gospels. We saw the Harley Golden Gospels. Saw the 42 line Gutenberg Bible.

Nice. Saw Wycliffe Bible, Tyndale Bible. First edition, first folio of the King James Bible.

Wow. First folio. By the way, later on I also held the first folio.

You did? Not there, but at Lambeth Palace. Oh, I didn't know that. Yeah, I'll talk about that. Yeah, that's insane.

And then could not see the copy of the Magna Carta. We had some problem there with the environmentalists or something and so they had to like shut down that exhibit. Like protesters and stuff? Yeah.

Gotcha. That's annoying. So did all of that at the British Library and then we had to book it because now we have to get to another part of the central London or north central to the British Museum. So we're like, we gotta go. She's like, ah, where are we going? I was like, British Museum.

We're like walking fast, walking fast, walking fast. And there's a line at the gate and I'm like, oh, well. I'm like, ah. Did you have an appointment?

Yes. That's what you have to do. In both these places, like the library, you can go in and see the exhibit, by the way. I took the tour and then I also spend time with the exhibit. But a British Museum, you have to register beforehand. You have to pay for the exhibit beforehand.

So you get to jump ahead of the line. By the way, what they have in display is only maybe 10%. Some people say only 1%.

I don't know. Only 10% of what they have underground. Wow.

Only 10%. Do they change things out, like change exhibits in and out? So they just hoard them underground?

Yep. They just hoard them underground? They're just sitting under there.

You know when you go to historical sites and you don't see things there, you say like, well, there's nothing but a wall. No, there were things there. Oh yeah, Britain took them all. They got them. You can't even go see them. They just keep them in the warehouse underground. They were there. They're no longer there. To their credit, I will say this, if they had not picked them up and put them in the museum, they would have been sold or melted down or something would have happened.

So I am a little sympathetic to that. But at the same time, they're all sitting in London. Someone else's national history. And not even on display. No, they're sitting in a vault in London. And the reason I know they're sitting underneath and not getting changed out, by the way, it's common knowledge that 10% is out in the rest of them. So there are places we went through. I mean, so I had a plan. Maybe we can talk about it in the next show. Yeah, let's do it. I had a plan on what will I see in the British Museum?

What is a must? Because to see the whole thing, forget about the 90% under the ground, just a display would take you good. Like if you stop and read everything, a week. Geez Louise. Oh yeah, if you read everything a week.

If you just stop and look at each thing, at least two days. Wow. Wow.

So do they, do you think they put the best of the best? Isn't that 10%? Or do you think some of those treasures? Wow. I don't know.

I would love to answer that, but I don't know. Yeah, I have to go in there with a plan. Yeah.

Yeah. And I had a plan and I will gladly tell you next time how was my plan and what I got to see. Let's do it. Awesome.

I can't wait to hear it. If you guys enjoyed today's episode, write in and let us know, 252-582-5028. Or you can visit us online at cleerviewtodayshow.com. Don't forget, you can partner with us financially on that same website. Scroll to the bottom, click that donate button and let us know it's coming from our Clearview Today Show family. Make sure you guys join us for tomorrow's episode. We love you guys. We'll see you tomorrow on Clearview Today.