Speaker 1: And Washington, a bunch of dipshits have gathered to rededicate
themselves to a two hundred and fifty year experiment. Well,
they call it reddicating it to God, you know, but
we've never been dedicated to God. The original Constitution counted
enslaved people as three fifths of a person. It protected
the slave trade for two decades while tolerating it for
an additional eighty years. It returned escaped human beings to bondage.
It granted women no vote and no equal standing. Every
one of those clauses sits comfortably beside a Bible that
orders slaves to obey their masters, permits buying them from
neighboring nations, and tells wives to submit in women to
be silent. Is that what they mean by rededicating Alabama
senators want to revoke black Americans black American citizenship by
repealing the fourteenth Amendment, and others are actively seeking to
reverse women's suffrage while attempting to put them back in
the kitchen. So maybe that's what they mean by rededicating
to God. The Constitution is antithetical to every supposed progressive
ideal Christians hold today. Every step towards justice came by
amending that document away from most of those original values.
The thirteenth, fourteenth, and nineteenth Amendments are in direct opposition
to Biblical ethics and morality. The Constitution itself names no God,
no Bible, and no Christ. Article six bars religious tests
for office, while the God of the Bible kills entire
cities for worshiping anything else. The First Amendment protects worship
of any God, all gods, or no Gods, breaking the
very first Commandment and shielding speech the Bible calls blasphemy.
In seventeen ninety seven, the Senate unanimously declared that government
is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.
Commandments are pressed into classrooms and service of a Christian nation,
the founders refuse to build, and the Amendments dismantled piece
by piece. If you disagree with this sentiment, then I
urge you to call in now because the show is
starting right now.
Speaker 2: Welcome everybody. Today is May seventeen, twenty twenty six. We
want to welcome you all to the last leg of
our second annual We are here twenty four hour live
stream and fundraiser. Some of you might notice that we're
streaming in multilocations. If you're watching this on my channels,
you can use the QR code on the screen or
a link in the description of the video to donate
towards the fundraiser. We are inching closer and closer to
our goal, where I think we're at a little over
twelve thousand now, but we got a long way to
meet the goal.
Speaker 3: So if in fact, do.
Speaker 2: You have anything you can use to help the ACA,
we would love anything. Five dollars, ten dollars, two dollars.
No one ever has to be a hero. The way
these fundraisers work is that everybody pitches in, and we
have a lot of people that watch the channel, and
so a lot of people doing a little accomplishes a
lot of good. Nevertheless, our goal, as far as I'm aware,
is twenty five thousand dollars, and we're going strong. We
have plenty of time to reach it, but we're going
to need your help to do it. If you can,
you can also just type in the link in the
browser tiny dot CC we are here twenty twenty six.
If in fact you don't want to click on the
link in the description, and if you don't donate, my
baby bird's going to keep biting my ears, so it's
really important. Also, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 3: We really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Goddess Engineer will be back if if not, you'll at
least be able to hear his voice. The Atheist Experience
is a product of the Atheist Community of Austin, a
five h one c three nonprofit organization dedicated to the
promotion of atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism, and separation of
religion and government. This means you can give us a
tax free domation as long as you want, as many
as you want. In fact, I know that is only
going to a good cause, but that it also helps
you too. We are trying, actually I think we're We're
like quadruple sextuple at streaming tonight, So a big shout
out to everybody watching on all the different channels. I
don't believe we're gonna be on TikTok tonight, but we
do appreciate you being here, and we're gonna be having
some callers call in soon. In fact, if you want
to call in, the number is five to one to
two nine nine two four to two, and you can
neither see nor hear at the moment, but Kelly is
joining us as well.
Speaker 3: Do we know if do you have John's okay, did
the lord take on?
Speaker 1: I'm I'm I'm good.
Speaker 2: Can you hear me, Kelly? If you can lose your
lips while John's talking, we can.
Speaker 1: Yeah, my browser crashed as soon as I started talking.
I don't know. I figure on probably just too epic
for the video.
Speaker 2: This is the best argument against fine tuning, that a
creator would put the windpipe and the food and drink
pipe literally right next to each other. We'll constantly end
people's lives over and over again for millenniums. Here we
got there, he is, Hey, I'm back, all right, welcome back, hey,
while we're waiting for some opposition to load up. By
the way, this is a fundraiser, but we are going
to be taking phone calls from opposition, and if you
if you're an atheist, remember we do take atheist phone
calls as well or agnostic phone calls. We just prioritize
the theist phone calls first, because I think that's really
where you know, most of the fans get the benefit
of the dialogue.
Speaker 3: Nevertheless, John, you've been doing some.
Speaker 2: Work and you've got some papers that you're ready to
submit to some of the organizations like the sbl I
assume and others. Tell us tell the audience about what
you're working on.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, okay, yeah cool. So here in the past
few weeks I kind of got kind of an engineering
hair up my butt and decided to look into stylometric
analysis of New Testament texts to primarily look at one question,
but I've also probed into multiple other different questions that
are kind of like you know, in the field right now,
Like I've been working really hard to develop a new
algorithm to discern like pauline imitators from authentic pauline, because
there's this current discussion in the scholarship of whether or
not Phi Lehman is actually authentic pauline. And the big
problem with that in like analyzing it stylometrically, is that
it's got a low word count. It's like three hundred
and thirty four words. And for the current tools, the
industry standard tools you need like to get good, clean results,
you need about twenty five hundred words and get some
you know, good results at lower thresholds, like about fifteen
hundred words, but you know, beyond that, it's going to
be more noise than it is any kind of signal
that we can detect. So what I've done is I've
actually developed a Bayesian model that uses Bayesian predictive metrics
in order to predict whether or not a certain piece
of text is the same as you know, a source
piece of text. And so I've had really good results
so far in developing it, and it tests along about
I think currently I'm up to about eight different like
dimensions that I'm testing the text on and developing a
posterior likelihood for, and it so far, you know, it's
doing really good, and it's actually lowered the floor the
minimum amounts of words that you need to analyze to
about two hundred words, which puts it firmly in the
realm of you know, detecting Phi Lehman as well as
other texts. And it's actually in using these stock like
all all of the standard tools. I've ranted against the pastorals,
and it's definitely I know that currently right now, the
consensus follows along with bart Erman that says that you know,
the pastorals are all written by one hand, but it's
definitely not Paul. But stylometrically speaking, the first and second
Timothy group together. But then Titus is different in some
kind of way, and I'm not exactly sure in what
way is it different, but it is definitely being detected differently.
And I'm not just just to let people know I'm
not just spot checking like dendograms, which are like trees
that group text together. I'm not doing that. I'm actually
working off of the raw data on this and actually
being able to draw real conclusions and detect real signal.
And so that's kind of what I've been looking at.
And I'm planning. I've got like a list of about
twelve different papers that I can write, and so I'm
just going to start whittling down the list and start
writing it. Writing that off there. My first paper that
I plan on writing and submitting to a journal is
going to be on on determining whether Marcian originated the
New Testament in the second century as opposed to the
traditional view, and my analysis says that he did not.
In fact, I can actually show directionally that it was
actually Marcian that redacted a prior the version of Luke,
the core of Luke. So that's really nerdy Bible shit
there mixed with some engineering shit. So I'm going to
let justin, you know, be more interesting.
Speaker 2: It thinks. No, it's very interesting to me. Remember, I'm
a bubble nerd from way back, so I'm I'm always
excited to hear by new developments in new ways. Obviously,
you know, you and I both are background in engineering,
so I love to hear when we actually be able
to mix the sciences in and like figure stuff out
using hard science rather than I don't know. There's a
church father who said something once, did manuscript variants play
a role in the end of this?
Speaker 1: I didn't use variants. What I did was I pulled
from the current, like scholarly critical audition. Yeah, critical editions
like for the Greek I did, I believe NA twenty
eight as well as a couple of other versions. And
for the I've got the Hebrew, and I can't remember
what version the Hebrew is because I haven't done a
lot of analysis like on the either the Hebrew Bible
or the septuagen I've done a little bit, but not much.
The Septuagent I also pulled whatever the scholarly edition of
that is.
Speaker 2: It'd be interesting to determine. Sorry for the you know,
now we're get deep into some fun stuff. I'd be
interesting to determine on the Greek septuagen if you could
identify authors it. I mean, even if they're nameless. And
they've done this with the Dead Sea Scrolls, where they've
actually been able to do styllometric analysis prior to computerized DILO.
They used you know, hand hand masked stylo analysis to
determine that there are a couple quite a few documents
that were actually seemed to be authored by a single
individual or another individual. But I suspect we could do
that with a septuagen at least we come close to
getting something like that.
Speaker 3: I think be really interesting.
Speaker 2: Say, hey, look, actually the reason why the translation of
Isaiah is so errand is also the reason why the
translation say of Job is so errant, right because oh,
well the same guy was translating it, right.
Speaker 1: No, yeah, and you could definitely do that. I'm I'm
also working on a good method for determining directionality, like
as far as like, did did source A use source
B or did source B you source A like in
their construction? And so I'm trying to figure out a
good method for making that determination. But that's I've kind
of only just blunked into.
Speaker 2: That right now exciting. Do you think maybe, and listen,
this is this is just me saying words. Do you
think maybe when rock and City reason rules around, you
might maybe have a workshop on something like this I'd attend.
Speaker 1: I mean, maybe I am running you know, I'm speaking
multiple times and running one workshop this year on something
adjacent to it. Just you know, about being you know,
being able to educate yourself in a certain area because
like I definitely didn't have I don't have stylometric analysis
like in my educational background, but you know, I'm very
adept at software engineering, so like I could figure it out,
and it just took a little bit of math, math
refresher on statistics and everything like that in order to
really kind of get up to speed on it. So,
you know, I think that, you know, people needing to
educate themselves. I find that a lot of atheists and
uh just non religious people in general find themselves lacking
in the in the realm of education whenever they actually
leave the religion, and that that, you know, sometimes can
cause them to be very angry about it, like why
why was I robbed of an education? Young? In in
my life? And everything and you know, they have to
then figure out their way around you know, the information.
And uh, I'm gonna be talking about that, and I've
got a whole bunch of other other talks this year
that I'm doing, so I'll definitely think about that, and
definitely we'll put it on in the in the queue
there for developing something like that.
Speaker 2: It's mostly gonna be those like the like the hyper
nerds like myself that would be interested in I don't
know how many people would be there, but if not,
eventually you and I are going to connect on it
so I can get my rig set up to do
some of the same work. Because there's so many cool
applications for this, like it doesn't I mean, what we're
using it for right now doesn't have to be the limit.
I mean, there's so much you can use it for.
I'd love to use it to see if I can
determine even some sources in the historical literature. So, for example,
when one historian quotes another historian and that that quote
doesn't exist right, if it's a long enough quote, can
we determine if it was quoted accurately, or if there's
a bunch of words in there that who knows, maybe
never got used by this author ever.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and you know another thing that I'm trying to Sorry,
I don't have the call list up yet, so you
just let me know if we.
Speaker 2: Don't, well, we're waiting on some callers. We'll say it again.
The numbers on the screen five one two nine nine
one nine two four two. You can call in with
the web caller too at tiny dot cc forge slash
call tw we'd love to talk to you. If you're
an atheist, will bring you in or an agnostic will
bring in. But if if you're a believer, believe, will
get priorities. So we're it's not strictly like my channels.
I almost exclusively do debates unless it's a Q and A,
but we do take calls from from non believers as
well on this channel.
Speaker 1: Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: And there is this one interesting case, which have you
heard of. I forget his first name, but his last
name's at Will. He's got this yeah, yeah, just if
that will. He's got the Roman Christ or the uh,
the idea that like Flavious jose M Yeah, yeah, Roman
invented and so the no, no, not at all. But
but one interesting problem in that is cross uh cross
ancient language detection, like determining whether or not they like
the a Latin a person you know, typically writing in
Latin is trying to imitate Greek and then also the
other way around. And so I've also got it in
my pending list to write up a method for making
that distinction as well.
Speaker 2: Interesting, Okay, I'd love to see that. I do remember
Joseph Atwell's work, of all the mythesist positions, I thought
that one seemed the silliest.
Speaker 3: And it wasn't that the position itself was ridiculous.
Speaker 2: It was that inside of the all of the claims
that were made, I kept finding them, tying them back
to things that were historically inaccurate. And I'm like, oh,
this guy doesn't he's not a professional. He obviously doesn't
know what he's talking about. I specialized in the Old Testament,
but obviously in seminary we had to study the Mediterranean
world in the New Testament as well. But like, I
shouldn't be able to find clear problems in somebody's work
if if they're a real scholar in this area, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1: And that's the thing that everybody pegs at Will with
immediately because I found a lot of his claims being
unjustified and sort of specious, just sort of you know, saying, oh, well,
this makes sense to me. It's like, okay, yeah, sure,
if you're writing a Dan Brown novel, then that makes
total sense. But you know, in reality where everybody else lives,
it's not exactly plausible.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, I agree, I agree, But that is pretty exciting.
I do remember when I was in school, there was
some debate over the Pauline letters, and you know, even
Christian scholars are ready to admit that some of the
Pauline corpus isn't actually Pauline. I'm shocked that the amount
of Christians who don't want to accept it. Like if
all the Christian scholars are in kind of a consensus
about it, I don't know why Christians are so unwilling
to accept it. And like what my professors would have
said is something like, well, listen, even though it didn't
come from paul it was still valuable to the church.
And because it was valuable to the Church, that means
it's still you know, inspired by the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit still used it to esteem and to teach
and to reprove the Church and so it should be
Kennon anyways.
Speaker 3: But that does kind of, you know, bring up some.
Speaker 2: Word questions, which is, does lying about authorship matter when
we're talking about like what is God's word and God
can't lie? Like, is there something in there that we
should find suspicious? You're just accepting works that you clearly
know are fraudulent.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that if you were to go and
look at I believe it's justin Martyr. I want to
say that it's justin Martyr. He actually elaborates on why
he became Christian or what convinced him about the Gospels,
and it was literally nothing but the like the theological
truth that they like discussed. And so I think that
they probably didn't really care about any kind of like
true historical reliability, right. I think that what they cared
about is whether or not it theologically served their needs
or if it theologically sounded good for them. And I
think that if it if it agreed with what they
were wanting or or maybe it agreed with their with
their preconceived notion, then I think that they were just
ready to accept it at face value.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And to be fair, like if you're in the
ancient world, like, what tools do you have, like the
common person, what tools do you have in your tool
belt to say that he didn't write it? It seems like,
but once you get to that point, you have to wonder, like, okay,
well what was God? Because people will say, well, God
inspired the canon? Okay, but if God inspired the cannon,
wouldn't he inspire it so that we knew who the
correct authors were that we could attribute it.
Speaker 3: Just it's such a weird you have to do a.
Speaker 2: Lot of pretzels to get around the forging of Paul's letters.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and you know, I honestly think that that these
these uh well sorry, that's not what I was wanting
to say. What I want to say is I think
that it really kind of goes back to the whole
one Corinthians fifteen, like five hundred witnesses, Right, it's an
unfalsifiable claim that you can't actually go especially in the
ancient world, you can't actually go and verify so like
these even in the second century, Like, how are you
supposed to verify that these things are actually written by
the persons that they're supposedly written by? You know, I mean,
I just don't think that they had the tools.
Speaker 2: I don't think they did, and it's not their fault,
but it is the Holy Spirit's fault if the Holy
Spirit existed.
Speaker 3: Yep, neverus. We do have a Coleraine Q.
Speaker 2: It looks like as Aaron from Texas wants to talk
about John fifteen, I assume we are referring to the
Gospel of John Silt's bring.
Speaker 3: An Aaron, Hey, welcome and aeron your xp with John
and Justin.
Speaker 2: How you doing?
Speaker 3: Hi?
Speaker 4: John, I justin, I'm good.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I wanted to call in and just talk about something
that I don't normally hear about from from my sollow
non believers. I grew up in the Church Christ, and
something that I'm really interested in is going back on
the theology that I grew up with and re reexamining
the things that I believed about my self through what
I believed about God. And I learned that it's part
of my healing and my self care. Is just identifying
what I gave away and and I want to if
it's okay, if you guys are are willing, because I
certainly believe in asking for consent these days now that
I understand that is a value and a virtue could
we look at John fifteen together? Yeah, I'm what I'm
interested in is is digging in on how how has God?
How is Jesus? How do we know that Jesus wants
to encourage you? How does he give encouragement to his followers?
What does he think of his followers? When you get
encouragement from somebody, it's always how about this. I'm gonna
speak for myself. When someone encourages me, it's the best kind.
Is when they're They're trying to reaffirm that I'm I'm
capable and I should lean on my confidence that I've
I've been through a lot. I you know, like we've all.
We all know when somebody he is building this up
and making us feel good about ourselves. And I don't
think there's any there's nothing that I can find in
the Bible that indicates that God wants you to feel
good about yourself. And so that's why I want us
to read John fifteen. I hate to feel like I'm
rambling and running here, but I'm welcome to read it
unless somebody would like to read it for me.
Speaker 1: But I mean is there'll go ahead, I'll go ahead
and take it.
Speaker 4: But I feel like I talked too long.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, is there a specific verse you're wanting to
because I mean it is like yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Here, I'll just let it rip and
then I would love to hear y'alls thoughts on this.
To me, this reads as probably the least encouraging thing
that somebody could could say to another person. John fifteen
starts out that I am the true vine, and my
father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch in
me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does
not bear fruit he prunes. So if you're not it's
if you're not bearing fruit and useful, you can get
cut off and thrown away. But if you are bearing
good news, you will be pruned on so that you
are more fruitful. You are already clean because of the
word I have spoken to you. Remain in me as
I remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself.
You must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear
fruit unless you remain in me. I am the vine
and you are the branches. If you remain in me
and I in you, you will bear much fruit. Apart
from me, you can do nothing. This does not sound
like any person in my life that has ever spoken
to me with effect. This is not someone who is
talking to you trying to help you understand your own
your own words. This is not someone telling you should
accept yourself for yourself. You can accept yourself for me.
That's not love. Yeah, I mean picking with me because
it's just as sicking with me, because people that love
me don't act like this. And that's it.
Speaker 2: I remember that.
Speaker 1: We're all I think that we're all in agreement here
that the God of the Bible is really shit, and
that doesn't change for the New Testament. I mean, Jesus
has a has a few fluffy things that he says
that people can like twist into being good. But I mean,
I think on the whole, like other than a cherry
pick sort of version of it, I think that you know,
the message is, you know, usually pretty bad, like as
far as you know, as far as the believer, because
the entire point at least. Maybe I'm wrong, but I
feel like one of the tactics employed by not only
the New Testament but also the Old Testament is to
make you feel like shit so that you feel like
you need a savior. And I think that the fact
that it makes you feel like shit. It makes you
feel guilty, that compels you to like believe based out
of like guilt or something like that. It makes you
feel like, oh, I'm such a shitty fucking person. I
need you know, I need a savior in my life
to you know, take on my sins and all this.
It basically persuades you through narrative that you need Jesus
as if you know, he's some kind of like drug dealer.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I would agree, justin did you have yeah, please
trust them?
Speaker 2: Yeah. So I don't think that Jesus believes that humans
are innately like smart or valuable or should believe in themselves.
He belittles them at every turn, and then he says
that he specifically needs you to love him, even over
your family members and back.
Speaker 3: When the man with the dead father said, Hey, I'd
like to go.
Speaker 2: Back to bury my father before I follow you, he says,
let the dead bear the dead.
Speaker 3: So this is not a person who really cares about.
Speaker 2: Your value as a human. The value that you have
in the cult of Jesus is to be a slave
your The goal of this religion is to make you
a slave to the leader. That's why it's such a
strong cult.
Speaker 4: Yeah. To me, it all goes back to the real
offense was disobedience of any kind. And you know, for
a God who made something to exist outside of himself,
he got very angry, very quickly for it to not
look like him all of a sudden.
Speaker 5: I just I think that if if you.
Speaker 4: Were a creator of anything, you could find a better
if you were, especially if you're the creator of sentient things,
you could find better reaction than to bring up death.
You know, like, if the author of life could have
could have really structured things the way he wanted it to,
I'm sure it could have gone a little better. And
and then instead of it being why are we constantly
told that the healthiest relationship in our life should function
like the most toxic ones that we find? It's just right, Yeah,
over and over again, I'm seeing that. But thank you
so much for taking that.
Speaker 2: If you look at like the list of what makes
a cult a cult, almost all of it applies directly
to Christianity. In fact, I remember when I was in seminary,
I took some classes on cults, and they have like
how to know if you are in a cult? How
do you know if a friend is in a cult.
Over and over again, Christianity hit every mark. So it
just seems to be that this religion is definitely not
about you. It's about what can you do for Jesus,
And if you can't do nothing for Jesus, he don't
care about you. In fact, in Luke nineteen he talks
about the stewards right that we're given the money. It's
a metaphor about what people are doing while he's gone. Right,
the goal is to get people to be productive and
produce things for the kingdom until he returns, and those
who don't, those who believe in him and care about
him but are cautious, still get slaughtered. At the end
of the parable, he says, when the king returns, he'll say,
bring them before me and slaughter them in my presence,
And in Revelation fourteen that's what happens. So this is
not a person that cares about you intrinsically. This is
a person that cares about what you can do.
Speaker 4: For it, right, And this is made further by the
fact that when he continues on apart from me, you
can do nothing. If you do not remain in me,
you are like a branch that's thrown away. In Withers,
such branches are picked up, thrown to the fire and burned.
But if you remaining me in my words, in you
ask whatever you wish, it'll be done for you. So this,
this is to my father's glory that you bear much
fruit showing yourself to be my disciples. It just sounds
so insidious now that but my orientation to life is
now much more around. Uh. I started with mindfulness meditation,
and I feel like I found my way to self
acceptance through it, just accepting myself without any any I
don't like saying that I'm worthy because I don't like
using the terms of scale, you know. I think acceptance
is just a default position for any person in a
moment that they find themselves. And even if you find
yourself to be to have painous ship, anyone that cares
about you is not going to be telling you to
look to them first. They're going to tell you to
take care of yourself first, and yeah, love yourself first.
Everyone who loves you will agree, And that's that's kind
of what I think. Well, definitely, I love this marathon
and it's it's been so fun. It's been so good
to see everybody, and it's just so encouraging to know
that that we've got we've got friends who share our
values and that we can do work together that's productive
and create community. And that's and I'm just so excited
about that across across the world that we're talking about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, for sure.
Speaker 3: Well, thanks for calling in here. Best luck to your friend.
Speaker 4: Thank you, guys, all right, have a good rest strain.
Speaker 3: We got some donations during that call.
Speaker 2: Friends. I'm going to update our ticker. I think there's
a little bit more on the on the donation amount
than what shows on the ZEFI website. I'm at I'm
looking at eleven three five. What's our official number, Greg.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure what the actual number is,
but you know, I feel like we need to we
need to pump those numbers up. We need to, you know,
see those donations come in. I mean, Acham is standing
there on Justin's shoulders, putting on a great show for y'all.
I think that you know, five five dollars donations in
the chat there for for akham on on for just
being awesome over there. I mean he's not looking at
us right now, but I mean he's showing the backside
of him.
Speaker 2: He's he's literally threatening my ear as we speak, I
can hear him getting ready to bite part of it off.
I might have to get like a special earring to
cover up the bite marks. The XP. For those who
haven't been around, XP has been around for a long time,
I think almost thirty years. And I think it has
been thirty years now somewhere around there. And XP I
don't know, but John was like vital for me in
my deconstruction and learning more about atheism. Oh and I
think I think a comes out. He said, not enough friends,
but we'll bring welcome back later. Nevertheless, friends, let's keep
XP rolling and going for another year so that we
can produce good content. We have a lot of volunteers
that help out with the ACA. None of the hosts
get paid. We all volunteer, and so everyone here is
nearly everybody at the ACA is a volunteer and it's
helping out. But one of the reasons why ACA works
is because we all also have generous donors and volunteers
helping to make the shows possible.
Speaker 3: So we really appreciate everybody.
Speaker 2: The link is on the screen in the bottom right
hand corner. There's QR code and the link is tiny
dot cc forward slash. We are here twenty twenty six
and it would be fantastic to get close to reaching
our goal for the day. That being said, I'm going
to bring in Keith from the call Q. Keith is
calling from Austin, Texas. In fact, Austin, Texas, the home
of the ACA. Wants to ask approximately how many times
has the Bible been edited or revised?
Speaker 3: So this should be a fun question.
Speaker 2: Keith, welcome to XP. You're on with John and Justin.
How are you. I'm great.
Speaker 6: How's it going today?
Speaker 2: Doing well? Thank you? All right?
Speaker 6: Yeah, I was looking back and I know Jesus didn't
speak English, so oh jeezus, the helicopter coming over. So
I was wondering how many times has it been translated
just between languages? I know it started off, I guess
in Hebrew or Aramaic, then Greek and Latin, and finally
maybe or Italian. I'm not sure, just some some that's
both questions.
Speaker 2: Really, it's kind of been a process. So the Hebrew
Bible obviously started in Hebrew. It seems that the earliest
portions were in Palo Hebrew, but we don't know exactly
at what point in the history of paloi Hebrew they
were written in what's actually been preserved and what's been
backwards translated. So, for example, we've got like Palo Hebrew
texts that contains words from the Arameic period, so we're like, okay,
well that was backwards translated into Palo Hebrew, right, So
it's hard to tell sometimes just by saying, oh, this
language was developed at this time period, we also have
to look at, oh, well, here are words that were
only used during the Arameic period or during the period
of Polomyia, you know, different time periods, right. And so
when it comes to giving the original date of the
Old test of manuscripts, there's not really an original date
for any of them. We've got like original date guesses,
and we would say that most of it is exilic
and post exilic, with some sections definitely coming in as
pre exilic in the way they're written. Now, that doesn't
mean that the stories didn't already exist out there in
a different form, or that they didn't have oral tradition.
It just happens to be that the manuscripts we possess
have a resemblance of mostly exilic writing. And also they're
written mostly an aramic blockscript. So the Hebrew script that
you guys are used to seeing, you might be able
to see some of them. On the wall behind me
over here, that Hebrew script is actually a Hebrew blockscript.
Sorry he can't see. The chart at the top of
it tell you which line to look over Hebrew. But
that's actually adopted from the Airmians Paleo Hebrew, doesn't. We
don't have a whole lot in Pelio Hebrew. Nevertheless, between
the original manuscripts and the manuscripts we have, there were
obviously lots of changes. We just don't know what was
changed because we lack the manuscripts. After we get Hebrew manuscripts,
we can track the chain from some of the earliest
ones to later ones. So, for example, if you look
at the lists of tribes in the Book of Judges
and in the rest of the Torah, the list of
the twelve tribes don't always match. Sometimes the twelve tribes
are s put up differently because they came from different
time periods obviously, or you know, different things like that.
So you can see the text is there's like original
forms or you know, old forms that eventually new forms
get added to them, or parallel traditions get added to
them to get mixed in, and it's hard to know
where one starts and one begins because somebody came along
later and started stitching them together. This idea is typically
referred to as the documentary hypothesis or JEDP for short.
That those are the names of the four schools of
authors that redacted and collated the various manuscripts into what
we might consider an actual book. And the earliest is typically,
at least traditionally was classified as the Yahwist. The next
is the Elohist, and then the Deuteronomist, and.
Speaker 3: Then after that you've got a priestly source.
Speaker 2: So but that is changing a little bit. Modern scholars
are starting to suspect and like Israel Finkelstein and some
others like Jacob Wright, actually a bunch of us beyond that,
are starting to suggest that the the oldest strain of
manuscripts are the Elohist sourced. Those come from the northern
tribes and they worshiped basically the Canaanite pantheon. That's why
the texts that come from that are clearly have elist
language in it. It seems like they're like a lot
of these people are. They stole all their religion in
a language from the Canaanite religion and language. And if
you look at the towns in northern Israel, a lot
of them are named after gods and goddesses from the
Canaanite pantheon.
Speaker 3: So that's that's the eloist source.
Speaker 2: That's probably the oldest, to be fair, because we know
that the Northern Kingdom existed prior to the Southern Kingdom,
the Yahwist it belongs to the Southern Kingdom of Judah
and the tiny kingdom next to it called Benjamin. And
then the Deuteronomist comes from a later time period, around
the time of Josiah.
Speaker 3: Most people think.
Speaker 2: That it was there was a group of priests, perhaps Jeremiah,
Jeremiah's father, maybe some others, that found this book of
Law and pretended that it was missing. So the parts
of the Old Testament that fall into the Deuteronomistic history
probably stems from roughly the time of Josiah. But we
know for sure that only the first third of Jeremiah,
which is very similar to the Deuteronomistic history. Only the
first third appears to be original to Jeremiah the next
two thirds of Jeremiah were added later, as were the.
Speaker 3: Last two thirds of Isaiah. So even a lot of
prophets from Yeah.
Speaker 6: That's kind of my point about the Bible in general,
is that none of not none of it, but even
especially the New Testament. All this people say, Jesus says, sir,
this is the word of God. It's it's not it's
the word, it's the edited word of God or the
translated words. Well, so, yeah, and every translator wanted to
put their own agenda on it and use it and
manipulate other people.
Speaker 1: Uhm, I can you hear me?
Speaker 2: Oh yes, I can.
Speaker 1: Keith, Yeah, Keith, Okay. I just wanted to stop you
real quick because, like Justin was, I believe, primarily talking
about Old Testament stuff, which he's fantastic on and and
I really I agree with everything he said, obviously, because
I'm not an expert in that particular field. Uh and
I'm not an expert in New Testament studies. But what
I can tell you is that the changes to the
New Testament are kind of locked at about the third century,
because we have full manuscripts starting at the third century.
We have some like uh like pieces of manuscripts and
partial manuscripts and everything like that prior to that, or
even not even manuscripts, like just pieces of like p.
Fifty two, which is just like a small piece of something.
And so we've got we've got those, and we don't
know how much the Bible was changed in that first
like couple hundred years. We only know how much it
was changed after the third century onward. And what we
can tell you is that there was significant variance in
in in the New Testament manuscripts like after the third century,
and it only starts to like, really, I guess, taper
down and stabilize once you know, once literacy, you know,
started to spread more and once printing, like the printing
press was developed, Bibles were more readily available. So once
all those things happened, you know, you started getting a
more stable corpus. But modern translations now, like if you're
using NRSVUE or any of the more scholarly editions of
the Bible, what they're going to be doing is using
the scholarly like Greek versions or you know, in the
Hebrew Bible's version case, the scholarly reconstruction of the Hebrew Bible.
And so what you're getting is a translation from the
originals into what they think the authors were trying to
convey with those ancient languages. And so just for the
New Testament, at least, we don't know how much it
was changed from its original source. We have better information
for the Old Testament because we do have like the
Dead Sea scrolls as well as other things that show
stability across the years. But for the New Testament, we're
kind of locked out of about two hundred years of
changes that we can't actually discern, like what is a change,
what isn't a change? And you know, we like, for instance,
with the long ending of Mark, we were only able to
figure that out because we actually found some earlier manuscripts
that had different endings to Mark, and so we know
that these changes happened. We just don't know what was
changed before the first full manuscripts that we have exist.
Speaker 6: Well, thank you so much.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, there are some if you're interested in New
Testament changes, there are some notable ones.
Speaker 3: So one that's popular first John five to seven.
Speaker 2: That's the classic Trinitarian model. That's not in any early manuscripts.
In fact, we don't even get an early Church quote
of it. We get a church quote of that, I
think around the tenth century, and then it doesn't even
show up. It's not even exact, and it doesn't show
up in any manuscript at all until like a couple
hundred years after that. So that one we know was added,
as was the Gospel of John in chapter eight. The
woman that's called an adultry that is a much later edition,
fifth and sixth century. And then one that we don't
hear about often. And there's a lot of these that
are like this. I'm only going to list one of them.
This type of change is super common. If you go
to Mark chapter one, you'll see that there is a
clear contradiction does in the beginning of the Good News
of Jesus Christ, as it is written in the prophet Isaiah,
the I'm sending my messenger ahead of you, who will
prepare your away, the voice of the one crying out
in the wilderness, prepare the way the Lord makes straight
his past. Now that's not all from Isaiah. That's a
composite quote partially from Alachi, partially from Isaiah. So as
Malachi three in Isaiah forty. The problem that we have
is like, Okay, somebody at some point noticed the problem,
and about the sixth century we get a manuscript pop
up that rather than saying the prophet Isaiah, it just
says the prophets, Like wait, what the prophets?
Speaker 3: You wanted to correct that? Someone noticed it.
Speaker 2: So we have a lot of minor corrections to the
manuscripts from hundreds of years after our first manuscript that's
literally just out there trying to correct it.
Speaker 6: So it's been pretty heavily edited. And I know that
during eighteen fifties and before that in the United States
they were just out edit out whole sections of the
Bible to help keep the slaves I guess, relaxed and
then more attuned to view the white manager as a master.
I'm wondering if there's any other really good examples of
how the Bible has been used wholesale like that.
Speaker 2: I'll give you. I'll give you one example. So John's
been talking a bit about the authentic Pauline letters because
he's working on some stylometric analysis, and one good topic
on here is what we First of all, we know
that New Testament books in wholesale were added and later
and attributed to Paul. But even Paul's authentic or seemingly
authentic epistles were edited later as well. So if you
go to First Corinthians fourteen, you're going to find something
in there that is very uncharacteristic of Paul. In the
fake letters of Paul, you'll find the but in the
authentic letters of Paul, he seems very egalitarian. So you'd
be like wondering, well, why does First Corinthians fourteen have
a strong reprimand for the women of corinth Oh is
because that was added. That's not in the early documents.
That shows up later, and it shows up originally as
a footnote, and then sometime later that gets integrated into
chapter fourteen. But it's moving around in different locations for
a little while before it finds a stable home as
a very good sign that somebody was like, hey, listen,
we have to keep women down by using this book,
and Paul's not doing it enough. We need to make
sure Paul is telling these women to sit down and
shut up. And so we do have you know, some
stuff like that that we're we've known for a long time.
We're interpolations.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much. That's exactly what I was looking for.
Speaker 3: Perfect by we go all right, yeah, love life John when.
Speaker 2: You were a believer. Well, let me let me do
some announcements real quick, and then we'll do some chitchi.
Hey friends, some announcements for those who are here, and
we're at the beginning of the show. We are also
at the Free Thought Library in Austin, Texas, where we're
raising money for the atheist community of Austin, the ACA
and also for the Society of Free Thinkers in Canada.
We have not that much time left in the fundraiser
and we won't be able to meet your goal unless
we can fill out this this less hour or two
with some donations one dollar, five dollars, one hundred dollars,
five hundred dollars, anything you have that can help. Everything
that is going to help us get closer to this goal,
helps to keep the ACA alive and bringing content to
the world for free. So again, nobody at the ACA,
all of the hosts, we're all volunteers, numbers are making
money here. This is a service for the community and
just you know, like MPR, sometimes you have to do fundraisers,
and this is our annual fundraiser. That being said, we
also speak of volunteers. We'll reiterate. Actually it's not in
the notes for tonight, but we were. They crossed them
out reiterate. We are also usually looking for volunteers at
the ACA. You can do volunteer at Atheist dash community
dot org if you're interested in volunteering. Not everybody always
have money to give. Some people do have time and
skills to give, and we greatly appreciate anyone who could
help keep the ACA being the ACA. The ACAA played
a huge role in my deconversion from Christianity and then
ultimately out of like weird theistic middle ground to just
accepting the fact, oh yeah, I'm an atheist. This is
something that I own now. So the sea has been
around for a long time and help a lot of people.
Speaker 3: So anything you can give is greatly appreciated.
Speaker 2: The link is on the screen at tiny dot c
c forward slash we are here twenty twenty six. You
can also do a screenshot or take a screen shot
with your phone of the QR code and every donation
is greatly appreciate. Your friend John, I'm curious when when
you were still in the faith, did you run up
on some biblical problems that were like, ah, this doesn't
this doesn't make sense, like and did you find that
there were sometimes good apologetics for it, or were the
apologetics typically kind of like weeks week sounding, you know.
Speaker 1: To be quite honest, I never really thought too heavily
when I was like a believer, like before I started questioning,
you know, I was very much in the mindset of like, oh, okay,
well that that's fine, Like when I thought about how
because I remember as a kid thinking about how, oh,
you know, if if Adam and Eve were the first
two humans and that means everybody's related to one another,
and me and my Alabama brain was like, that's fine,
that's perfectly okay, we're all related. Like as a kid,
it didn't clock like, hey, fucking your sister's not right
kind of thing. And uh but I think that that
was that was due to uh, you know, the problems
with the religion and and you know, the that whole
situation like the incests not being an issue until later,
like it was until later it was an issue. And
so for for me, it was more about like the
the authorities just basically just saying stuff and that, you know,
as an excuse for things, as opposed to actually critically
thinking them out. And you know, I would like the one.
I remember one of the questions as a kid was like, well,
I prayed for this thing to happen and God didn't
make it happen. Why is that? And so but and
this was like when I was in elementary school. I
went to a Catholic private school, and uh, I remember
one of the teachers. They're just like, Oh, that's that's
not That's not how God works you. What you pray
for is God giving you the like confidence or the
ability or the inner strength to do something, not to
to like literally do stuff. And like me as a kid,
I was like, oh, I was just like, oh, I
misunderstood the assignment here kind of thing. And so you know,
I was like, okay, well I'll start praying for the
inner strength and everything. And so like as a kid,
I just implicitly trusted people. And I think that that's
the one thing that kind of guided me in my
deconstruction is that, like, once I started critically thinking about it,
I'm like, what the fuck? Okay, I just I need
to like actually understand things before I believe them from
now on, and like that's just a hord line that
I have to draw.
Speaker 2: And I think a lot of young people have good
questions that get kind of pushed down by say like
Sunday school teachers or pastors and even teachers. I remember
in the first grade asking about why God created the
dinosaurs because we were learning about the mass extinction of
the dinosaurs in the first grade, which I'm grateful for,
but like I was baffled, like, well, why would God
make the dinosaurs just to kill him? Why would he?
What's the point here? And so was he just tinkering around?
Speaker 3: Like I didn't get it?
Speaker 2: Also, Ellie, thank you for the one hundred dollars donation,
big w. I just couldn't grasp it like it did. Oh,
and Andrea, hey, thank you for the twenty five dollars donation.
Speaker 3: I've seen on the screen popping up. Now here's w Andrea.
So like, you know, you have to wrestle with that.
Speaker 2: And I've got a friend and who won't go name
because they're a dear friend of mine and I love them,
but they don't believe that dinosaurs ever existed and is
partially driven by the tie to the religion. And you know,
we'll obviously dinosaur bones are fake. Scientists are faking them
little what So it's just weird that you have to
bite so many bullets with their religion.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, And you know, for me, honestly not really
critically thinking about it because like I love dinosaurs when
I was a kid, I love Jurassic Park and all that,
and just learning about dinosaurs in science in general and
so like it. I really never I was never taught
to engage my critical thinking skills when it comes to,
you know, critically analyzing like my belief in God, because
like I totally believed in Jesus and everything like that.
I've spent nearly no time in the Old Testament whatsoever,
like actually analyzing it. But I think that's by design,
you know, these these religious denominations, that Christian denominations out there,
I think that by design they have to stay away
from certain passages. They can't illuminate those because then people
are gonna be like wait, wait, wait a second. So
like God told them to stab babies in the face,
like what what did the babies do? And it causes uncomfortable,
like you know, questions to be asked, and I totally
understand why pastors wouldn't want to do it. And the
real disgusting thing though, is when they go to something
like William Lane Craig, because on a few occasions, like professionally,
William Lane Craig has been like it was actually a
good thing for the Israelites to unlive or could kill
the baby, the babies of Midian and the Amalekate babies
and everything. And it's like he says this, like, oh,
it's a good thing because you know that that means
they didn't grow up in this culture. And like, you know, me,
as a kid, I would have been like, oh, yeah, totally,
it's better to go to heaven than not. And but
now I'm like, wait a second, you're telling me that
this omniscient god couldn't come up with a better fucking
plan than stab babies in the face, Like he can't
like sure, you know, assimilate that that culture into yours,
but like take care of them, like that would have
been the loving thing to do if he's a loving god.
And that's how I think now. It's just such a
vast difference from how I was deep in the religion
versus how I am now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you know what he could This goes to
your point. Listen, if you're omniscient and omnipotent, you have
an endless mortgage board of solutions to problems. He could
have just closed the wombs of the of the women
of the time period. In fact, he does it on
multiple occasions. Maybe the most famous is Abymelek in Genesis,
Like what if God knows that these babies are gonna
be offt just close the womb, don't let them get pregnant,
and it's a done deal.
Speaker 3: No baby has to get murdered.
Speaker 2: Misha, thank you for the fifty dollars donation, and also
previous to that logan, thank you for your fifty dollar donation,
super super appreciated.
Speaker 3: But yeah, like it, why does God have to use
the most violent option?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know. But also that particular part of
the Old Testament, when I first read that, I laughed
out loud because like, in my head, the way that
it went down is like, you know, a Bimelek takes
in one of the you know, I forget whose whose
wife it was, takes him in, and like God's like
and God, God not sewed up, but closed up all
the wombs in the house. And I'm just sitting here like,
wait a second, what he just he just went zip.
Speaker 2: Closed all up.
Speaker 1: He just flipped us rich and it's like, no, say,
you're fucked.
Speaker 2: God can do that, bro, Like, well, if God can
do that, why not do it for good? Right? I
didn't mean to cut you off there, but like it's
just a weird dichotomy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is. And you know, like there's just so
many things once you go back and you reread the
Old Testament especially, there's just so many things that you know,
stick out to you that like make you wonder. It's like,
you know, did did did God hardening Pharaoh's heart so
many times? Didn't that? Like I mean, didn't that mean
that he basically plotted an entire thing so that he
could torture the Egyptians and then kill all their first
firstborn children. Like it makes it seem like that's what God,
God was like, you know what, I really feel like
killing some fucking kids, but not before I torture people first. Oh,
today is going to be a good day.
Speaker 2: It's it's just it's a hard it's a hard build
to swallow. And like again, it gets into interesting things
with the with the sources too, And some people have
noticed that in English, the Bible will typically when it
talks about the hardening of Pharaoh's heart every time his
hard is hardened, it just uses the phrase that his
heart was hardened, whether by him or by God. The
interesting thing is when you read it in Hebrew, there's
actually three different words they use for his heart being hardened.
And it's not that they are implying something different happened.
It actually is just because they're coming from different authors,
which we can clearly identify, and they had different vocabulary,
and so it's really interesting every time you read, the
more you look at the Bible and we're like this,
this is a nonsensical book.
Speaker 1: Yeah now, And you know, speaking speaking of that, like
diving deep into the original languages and how it was
actually originally rendered. I've been so I on on my streams,
over on my channels and everything. I've got this tool
that I built where I can actually show on screen
an intertextual thing where I can click on the actual
like original Hebrew word or Greek word and you know,
really drilled down into like, well, what what did they
mean by this word. One of the things that I
think is really incredibly incredible is when you look at
the I think it's second Kings where the bears come
and and uh, you know, kill the boys. At a
lot of you know a lot of times it's like, oh,
they mauled the boys, and and everybody thinks of like
maybe the remnants or something along those lines, right when
in actuality, if you actually drill down into the Hebrew there,
it literally means the bears came out of the woods
and like rip them into, like tore them in Twain, right,
I mean, like the most this is the most savage,
Like it's even more savage than most people think it
is because you think about these bears coming out. These
bears are coming out and they just rip these boys
into and it's just it's so crazy to think about.
Speaker 2: It's weird too, and people will say, well, you know,
did God do it or did Ali should do it? Okay, Well,
like it was a curse, and curses only worked when
God makes it happen, So I get it.
Speaker 3: I see why you might say that.
Speaker 2: But if you just think for two seconds, curses only
work because somebody uttering the curse is invoking the name
of that god, and that God's like, h yeah, I'm
gonna do that. Wouldn't make that happen. Elisha didn't have
magic powers, all the miracles, all the healings, all the
stuff that these prophets did was using God's power. They
were just given authority to beseech the Lord to ask
for these things to happen, and God granted them to happen, right,
And so obviously it just means that God caused this
particular curse to come true. So I and it's it's
baffling too, because think about this. If God really wanted
to show these young puck punk what's up, why not
just have Elishah's hair immediately grow in thick and beautiful.
They would shut up real fast. Nobody had to die
at all, I know.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't that be crazy? Like think about it. You got
the forty two kids, right or however many I think
it's forty two, but you got the kids. They're yelling,
go up, baldy, go on up, bald head, and he
just turns around, looks him dead in the face and
like immediately grows like a fabio sort of esque, like
long flowing hair, and he's just like.
Speaker 2: What now now?
Speaker 1: And yeah exactly, And then they would go away stunned
or whatever and maybe believe in Yahweh and sacrifice their
first borns to him who knows.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's bappling. Sabrina, thank you for the twenty five
or twenty.
Speaker 2: Five dollars donation, and Sheila, thank you for the ten
dollar donation.
Speaker 3: Also, one just came.
Speaker 2: In for one hundred dollars from anonymous, So whoever the
anonymous donor was, thank you very much.
Speaker 3: It's super appreciated. But the Bible.
Speaker 2: Stories, they get weirder and weirder if you believe that
God is like good. So I remember, do you do
you know much about if I use the phrase blood feud,
how what that means in tribal warfare?
Speaker 5: Uh?
Speaker 1: Sorry to repeat that.
Speaker 2: There's a there's a phrase that shows up an idea
that shows up in the Bible a lot. But if
you don't know much about nomadic culture, it might it
might get missed.
Speaker 3: Is basically referring to blood feuds.
Speaker 2: Where blood feud when somebody in your clan gets murdered,
So then you're justified to go murder somebody in their clan.
And so we would expect that God isn't really interested
in that, but he is interested in that. Then there's
blood feud number two, which is one person in your
clan gets killed, though multiple people in the other clan
gets murdered as retribution, and you think, well, that wouldn't
work because you know the guilty person and then some
non guilty people would die. God is in favor of
that as well. In fact, in Second Samuel twenty one,
God causes a drought to come on David in Israel.
Speaker 3: For three years.
Speaker 2: David is imploring before Yahweh for three years why the dwought,
why the drought, and God doesn't give him an answer,
And then after three years of all of his people
suffering for things that they didn't do, he finally answers that, Ah,
it's because of what Saul did in attacking the Gibbe Knights,
even though they had a pact with the Gibea Knights
to let them live. So they're like, okay, what do
we do about this? So that's why God's mad. God's
mad that Paul. You know, Saul did something bad against
the Gibba Knights.
Speaker 3: So the solution that they come up with that God
is pleased.
Speaker 2: With is to take seven random household members left over
from King Saul he's dead now deven random household members
and have them impaled on the mountain of the Lord
before the Lord to solve the blood feud that Yahweh
was mad about. It's the craziest thing. Yeah, we do.
We have one person in the screening room. I don't
know if they're going to be opposition or not, but
it looks like they're going to be bringing it looks
like they're atheist is going to be bringing in some
questions at least and friends. You know, if you do
have questions about the Bible, now is probably the best
time to do it because we don't have any opposition
in the queue. Once we get opposition in the queue,
then we kind of take the opposition. But I really
enjoyed taking questions about the Bible. John, what kind of
questions do you typically get interested in?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I mean totally the like Bible specific questions,
especially New Testament questions because you know, I mean I've
done my fair share of research into the Hebrew Bible.
Not to the link that you have. I am trying
to learn Hebrew. I know, I've told you that before.
I am trying to learn Hebrew, but also like the
New Testament, I've done like extensive like reading in that
as far as like the scholarship goes. So like I
like taking any questions about that or any of the
philosophical questions surrounding, like whether or not the Christian God
can exist or the Abrahamic God. I guess in particular,
the one thing that I'm actually starting to dive more
into now is actually looking at good arguments against the
Islamic God.
Speaker 3: Oh that's a lot of fun.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure you've You've ran into and maybe even
gotten some assistance from ms. Oh.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's come up. Whenever I have somebody, he's come up.
Speaker 2: Good.
Speaker 3: Good Aaron, thank you for the fifteen dollar donation.
Speaker 2: Really appreciate that. We also got I think a seven
dollar donation from Michael Probert. Super appreciate that. And we
do have one Collery and Q Camilo from Florida wants
to ask about the Book of Wisdom in Siria specifically,
So well, this should be an interesting one book. And Camillo,
you're on XP with John and Justin. How are you
very good?
Speaker 5: Thank you for taking my call. Uh so, No, my
show was about the Book of Wisdom and the Book Syriac.
Speaker 2: Oh, right, gotcha, the Book of Wisdom in the syrac language.
Speaker 5: No, no, no, the the other one that's called Syriac
right after the book.
Speaker 3: I mean, I mean Siracra.
Speaker 5: Sorry my pronunciation. Never, I just read it, I never
said it. All right, what's the question. So my question
is this, so, uh, in all the Hell Bible, I
never really seen much about like a reward after life,
you know, a heaven or hell really you know, it's
always like shield. But I see like a hint of that,
and I was in short minds for is correct in
the book with them and also like Sarah, I kind
of see like this, uh yeah, it's like tendency of
them kind of saying that they you know, the just
will be rewarded some like you know, reward and again
like they they they unjust will be like you know,
in hell or something like that.
Speaker 2: Is actually that one.
Speaker 5: Correct?
Speaker 2: Yeah? So the the development of hell essentially happened in
the Intertestamental period. So if you look at the apocrypha,
if you have a Catholic Bible, so I've got a
Catholic Bible, it doesn't include all of the apocrypha because
not all of the apocrypha got canonized. So for example,
it's missing third and fourth Maccabee's So you're not going
to find that in a Catholic study Bible. But you
will find let's see, let me grab the listing. So
for this Catholic Bible, which is typical, it's got Tobit
Judases first and second, Maccabee's Ben Sira also known as
Sirac Wisdom of.
Speaker 3: Solomon, and there should be one more.
Speaker 2: It should have the addition to should have the addition
to Jeremiah Baruk. Yeah, Barok's going to be in here,
and it has some additions to the Book of Daniel.
Now what you'll discover is that these were written after
the last book of the Hebrew Bible. So there's some
developments in the culture that get adopted from the from
the the Aramians or the the ara.
Speaker 3: Make speaking people.
Speaker 2: They bring in some zero Astrianism, and then you get
run ins with the Greeks, and the Greeks bring their
own religion. And every time these cultures come to dominate
the region, some of their belief systems get adopted because
they will say.
Speaker 3: They complement what they already believed.
Speaker 2: Some so they already believed in like an underworld where
people would go.
Speaker 3: They already believed that there.
Speaker 2: Was a sky above you, or the gods war not
a realm far away, but like in the sky above you,
you just can't. You can't always see it, right. It's magical,
it's hidden, but it's in the sky. So this type
of thought just got further developed over and over again.
And there's a couple of books in the apocrypha that
you might want to check in order to better understand
what they thought. So I would say for the judgment scene,
the most developed is tewod.
Speaker 3: Esdras chapter seven.
Speaker 2: That chapter has a very intricate judgment scene. Now that
one was written super late. In fact, it might have
even been partially written after Jesus already was on the earth.
Some of it seems to have been written prior and
some of it after. Also Judith chapter sixteen, fourth, mccabee's
chapter nine, fourth, mccabee's chapter twelve, Tobit chapter three, Tobit
chapter four, Tobit thirteen, Wisdom of Solomon Chapter one, Wisdom
of Solomon chapter two, and Wisdom of Solomon chapter sixteen nine,
Serrac fourteen, Serirac seventeen, Eric twenty one, Serc forty one,
Zerrec forty eight, Direct fifty one, Baruk two, The Prayer
of Azarayah chapter one, second mccabees six, third Maccabees five,
third Macabees five again, third Maccabees six. Second as just
chapter four, second as just chapter eight. I got a
couple more second as chapter four versus five, and then
first Enoch chapter is twenty one in twenty two. All
of these intertestamental writings talk about the essentially either Hades
or Hell or Gehenna or some version of the afterlife punishment.
And I know you probably didn't write all those down,
but you can go back and rewatch this.
Speaker 3: You'll be able to catch them. And so you'll.
Speaker 2: See a vast array of references in the intertestamental mostly
canonical literature about Hell. And then the other thing I
would recommend is looking at like some of the stuff
before Jesus, like the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Dead
Sea Scrolls, we find a lot of references to punishment
of Hell, like even in the Community Scroll. So in
the Community Scroll it says that you're going to be
sentenced to everlasting fire. Elsewhere it talks about different punishments
in darkness and suffering. The Damascus Document, the mot of
the Deck Scroll, the War Scroll, and then see the
apocryphal Psalms, and then Kumram him number one, and actually
most of the Kumran and hymn have some sort of
afterlife punishment, almost all of them. Actually now I'm looking
at them, and there's probably some more, but neveralize. I
have on my cheat sheet. I don't know if you
have it. I have a tab for.
Speaker 5: Next question to say, that's where you're getting out read
all those lissons.
Speaker 2: I have on my cheat sheet of tabs specifically for
after life punishment. Hell hades type of mentions in all
of the ancient literature. So I've got the Dead Sea Scrolls.
I personally went through the Dead Sea Scrolls. I personally
went through the Talmud. I personally went through all the
writings of Josephus and the Jewish Sudepigrafa and the Apocrypha
and the Bible, and I made a master list of
every reference about Hell and the after the negative afterlife,
not about heaven. And I think you'll find it quite interesting.
There's like a hundred different references. Hold on, I got
one hundred and fifty something references from the literature that
would give you a pretty exhaustive idea of what they
thought about Hell. And you'll be shocked to find out
that none of it exists in the standard Old Testament canon.
Speaker 5: Awesome, awesome, that was.
Speaker 1: So yeah, go ahead, Well I was just going to
throw this in there. See what Justin thinks about this.
There's some scholarly literature are out there examining like the
transition between the Hebrew Bible, Judaism and Christianity, and they
identify it's split in the field admittedly, but they do
identify Zoroastrianism as having an effect direct effect on some
of the theology and the Hebrew Bible, well not the
Hebrew Bible, but in that transition from Judaism to Christianity,
in that Zoroastrianism does have like a burning hell and
like a celestial adversary that's juxtaposed against their savior figure,
and so like that's one of the areas that syncretism
could have occurred between Judaism and between the transition between
Judaism and Christianity. And so I'm just wondering what Justin
thinks about that.
Speaker 2: This is, as far as I was always taught, kind
of the mainstream view unless you're like a super conservative scholar.
So when I was in Samria, my my old Testament professor,
which is one of the reasons why I went to
the seminary. I went to because I was going to
study the Old Testament, and he was very well respected
in the academic community, and he just blanketly said that, yeah,
this is the case. This is the accepted view that
the developments of Hell were influenced during the period of
interaction with Zoroastrianism. And it's pretty easy to see, like
if you just look at what they believed in the
zeros Asterian religion and look at the new stuff that
gets added to the old stuff, the new stuff just
parallels what they believed in Zoroastrianism. That's one of the
reasons why Satan got developed into this malevolent almost you know,
a counterpart to God, even though beforehand he was kind
of like almost like a henchman of God. But they
needed a way to explain things, and they found that
the Zoroastrian belief system was relatively capacity with their belief
system with some slight modification, So why not adopt it?
Speaker 1: Yeah and correct me if I'm wrong there, justin But
the adversary in the Old Testament that's normally translated to
be like Satan is never just one particular being like
celestial being, like it was more of like a position
in like God's court or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so there is some debate about whether or not
the adversary is one or multiple individuals. I think, you know,
I've always fell on the position that it could be
multiple individuals. Originally, because these are in the Divine Council
of God the original Canaanite religion, people could change roles like.
Speaker 3: It wasn't like you had one particular role.
Speaker 2: So, for example, in the early period of the Bail cycle,
Bail wasn't on the heights of the phone in his
own temple ruling over the other seventy children of Vel.
He had to rise to that level of leadership. And
there's even sometimes there's like battles to see who's going
to be in what position inside of these pantheons. And
so if you've got somebody who's on the Divine Council
as the accuser, there's no reason why they couldn't be
deposed and replaced with somebody else, or even have multiples
filling in that role.
Speaker 3: So the problem is in later biblical literature, they started
to associate the role with a single character, and it
probably wasn't on purpose. It seemed to be a has seton.
It means the adversary.
Speaker 2: It's easy to read a story about the adversary and
then start thinking, oh, there's only one of them. It's
the adversary, right, And so in later Biblical literature it
seems like they start to conflate, like in the Book
of Job and Zachariah, they start to conflate this idea
of an adversary to being the adversary. And you'll this
best example in Zachariah. In fact, Zachariah was written so
late that by the time Zachary or whoever wrote it
was writing, this thematic change had already taken place. It
was basically already done. Which is why Yahweh and the
Angel of the Lord and Satan are all like individual
developed characters that like have their own function, Whereas in
the earliest parts of the Bible, the Satan, or rather
just a Satan, seemed to be kind of ubiquitous, like
we have one adversary that shows up in numbers twenty
one and twenty two, and when Balim's on his donkey,
we don't believe it. Satan's no good reason to believe
that it is and you know it just these are
motif changes that happen over time. We've Elaine Pegels wrote
a really good book on.
Speaker 3: The development and origin of Satan.
Speaker 2: I apologize I haven't actually read the book, so I
also I can tell you is that she wrote on it.
But she's a wonderful scholar. I'd be intrigued to see
if she traced a timeline of the development.
Speaker 5: Spin Just to clarify. So, I'm reading they and are
as the U or EU or you know, the one
you guys recommend usually like you know, the Bible app
or something like that. But so like I see that
that one includes you know, the Macivis and whatnot. So
are the wisdom and the syrac that's not in the
like stand their Hebrew Bible like what you know, like
the Jews actually read that's that's not part of their books.
Speaker 2: So it's complicated. So the Jewish canon wasn't closed until
around the enclosed is loose. Around the turn of the
first century, there was a school in Jamnia where they
started discussing canonical matters. Some people will say there was
a council. It doesn't appear Jamnia. It's northern Palestine. Okay, anyways,
it was it was kind of a you'll find it
referenced under the Council of Jamnia. But most of the
scholars I've talk to you don't believe it was just
like a council. Believes this was actually like an actual school,
like an influential school of Jewish rabbis that would get
together and discuss things.
Speaker 3: Nevertheless, it wasn't.
Speaker 2: Until around the turn of the first century that they
were motivated to say, hey, we have to close our
canon off. And one of the reasons is because the
early Christian movement was so heavily based on what would
probably be considered less reliable, less credible Jewish texts. So
like the Book of Enoch was huge. In fact, Jude
and Second Peter both quote from Enoch. Jude, especially in
Jude chapter one, verse fourteen, explicitly quotes first Enoch chapter one,
verse nine and calls it prophecy. And so this but
this book, while it was influential, was not accepted by
mainstream like rabbinic Judaism, as being authoritative. And so one
of the reasons why they're like, hey, actually we need
to kind of tighten things up was because by reading
these pseudographic texts and reading these texts that were like
outside of the purview of official Judaism.
Speaker 3: They kept having these cults pop up.
Speaker 2: And these messianic movements pop up that needed to be
put down by the Romans, and they're like, listen, this
is actually kind of troublesome. And so that's kind of
when they started closing the canon. Prior to that, what
was the canon is really difficult to pin down. It
seems like everybody has a different opinion. There's stories about, oh,
there was you know, twenty two books for the same
number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. That's a nonsensical argument,
even if you read through the Talmid.
Speaker 3: Sometimes though, quote from texts.
Speaker 2: That aren't always from the official canon. But nevertheless, the
early Christians, for a fact, for a fact, based their
theology on at least the apocrypha that you'll find in
the standard Catholic Bible. Inside of my cheat sheet, I
have a tab for the Apocrypha, and inside of that tab,
I have a link to a word document that I
put together a long time ago showing every quote from
or about the Apocrypha in the first four hundred years
of the Church. And there is no doubt whatsoever if
you go through that document that you will find that
every church father that talks about the Apocrypha or quotes
from the Apocrypha is going to call it a scripture.
They're going to call it inspired, they're going to call
it prophetic. And even Justin Martyr argued that the Jews
tried to remove the apocalyph from the canon because it
spoke so clearly and prophetically about Jesus. And so that's
one of the reasons why they had the close the
Old Testament canon is just because the Christian movement made
it so utterly difficult to rein in like what what
is official Judaism? What do we really believe and hold
fast to is a core set of books and doctrines,
And so that's kind of how that played out.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yes, so that makes a lot of sense. It
says that, you know, I'm reading the Bible right and
I'm trying to read it and start to finish. Uh.
You know, it's really hard to see where that theology
like emerged up to this point. I'm like, Aha, this
is the first time that I'm like, oh, I can
kind of see where somebody might have you know, got
in it, like, but before this book, I just they
didn't really see that. The only thing I saw was
shield And actually on that same uh the topic, one
thing I found, I think is in the Book of
Sounds that I that also like blew my mind and
I asked other people about it. I think it's very
little known. It's this realm call like I think like Abbodos,
which is kind of like almost like a tartist to
like Haites like, it's like a deeper like she like like.
Speaker 3: This, Yeah, if you're in Tartars, you're not having a
good time.
Speaker 2: You're in a lot of trouble.
Speaker 5: I thought it was interesting that I went to a
Jewish friend that I have a colleague, and I asked this, like,
have you ever heard of this Abbodos? And she's like,
I have no idea.
Speaker 2: That you know.
Speaker 5: But anyways, if you guys have somebody else, you can
kick me out. But I didn't have another question. If
you allow men.
Speaker 2: Well, we don't have anyone else in queue, and you've
got a couple of remains in the stream, so before
you ask your last question. Thank you Ley for the
five dollars donation and Teresa for the twenty five dollars donation,
and I did Cherry and Anonymous for the six sixty
six Top appreciate that also. I think we got sixty
six from Jacob Hell. Yeah, well, oh, I'm sorry, what's
your question?
Speaker 3: Friend?
Speaker 5: Yes? So another question I've been wondering, like I read
like the profits, the major profits and whatnot, is, you know,
they have all the warnings for foreign nations and like
you know, they talk about this supremity of their God
in like the context of even nations that they were
like you know, inhabited, like Babylon and Persia and whatnot.
I just always wonder were this prophets or the movements
or the schools or they probably you know, like evangelizing
you know, Judaism at the time, like you know, like
repentanl like the Emperor king or of that time. Is
just like who are they writing this warnings to, you know?
Or is it just like you know, just to themselves,
I guess, just making themselves feel good about how good
their God is, you know, Like I just I don't know,
it's like what are they yelling this warnings too? Because
they just have such specific warnings for every single nation
and I don't know, you know, so.
Speaker 2: One of the things that that prophets had to do
in the ancient world, one of the main things that
they did was informed the king. Yes, there were profits
that were just out there in the citizenship doing doing
stuff that were respected, but in the ancient earis mostly
prophets were in the court with the king. In fact,
that's why when Jeremiah and Isaiah when they go and
deliver their prophecies, a lot of times they're going to
the king's court to deliver the prophecy in front of
all the people. And so.
Speaker 3: What you would expect is.
Speaker 2: A lot of the prophecies are geopolitical in nature because
they're advising the king. You would think, if if the
Messiah was so important, why do we waste all this
time in the Bible having like ninety percent of the
prophecies just geopolitical predictions for the future. Oh, it's because
that's what prophecy was about. Prophecy was about informing the
king and informing the leadership of what to do so
that God won't mess them up. Or you know what
you're doing that God likes, so you'll keep doing it right.
And so in the Bible you've got all these warning
against other nations, not because it made them feel good,
but just because when people are doing these prophecies. I
went to a church that used to engage in prophecies
for a long time. Honestly, it's just people getting a
feel and then blurting that feeling out as though they
think it is from God. I've had people speak prophecies
over me that were the most absurd, nonsensical stuff ever.
It's just because you get a feeling, you get an unction,
and you think, oh, well, it must be from God.
It certainly can't just be my brain doing weird things.
And so I think the same thing was happening in
the ancient world. They were getting worked up into a frenzy.
Even Paul, sorry Saul king Saul, when he receives the
Holy Spirit, he in First Emuel chapter ten, six through nine,
he receives a new heart in a new spirit, and
he becomes prophetic, and he breaks out in a prophetic
frenzy and strips down naked and rolls around on the
ground in a prophetic frenzy. You see the same thing
with Isaiah. Isaiah walks around naked for like three years
for part of a prophecy. So it was one of
those things where the prophecies were a bunch of people
trying to inform the king by going into these weird
prophetic emotional frenzies and just blurting stuff out and unlike,
you know, Israel probably did kill a number of prophecies
of prophets that got stuff wrong. They were actually more
lenient towards their profits Babylon. In Egypt, oh, they would
straight up murder hordes of profits. If they gave you
a geopolitical prediction that didn't come true, You're done, son, You're.
Speaker 3: Not going to see the light of day.
Speaker 5: So like, so my point is, though I see what
you're saying, like when it comes to like obviously saw
like Samuel when they had kings, but presumably, or at
least I was, I understand a lot of these prophecies
were done when they're in exile. They don't have a king,
Like who are they profits? Science, Like who is their
audience other than themselves in in in exile like in Babylon.
Or maybe maybe I'm wrong or like when like the
later Isaiah, you know I is ridden and stuff like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so Later Isaiah is supposed to be written primarily
to those who are in exile. So you think like
Isaiah sixty one, Isaiah sixty one sets it up. We're
essentially the prophet is depicting his ministry. Sorry about that,
depicting his ministry as delivering the profit of the prophecy
to those that are in exile and returning. Right. So,
latter Isaiah is clearly to the people, whereas primary Isaiah
first Isaiah is mostly to the.
Speaker 3: Leadership, the model change. Once Israel had no leadership.
Speaker 2: What are you doing? Are you going to go up
to the palace and deliver the prophecy to the king? No,
they're all gone, they're dead. You've been exiled, right, So
the exilic prophets had a much more broad spectrum of who.
Speaker 3: They were talking to and writing to.
Speaker 5: Well, thank you justin Thank you guy Thiss engineering. You
guys are awesome.
Speaker 1: Thanks for calling in man. We appreciate it.
Speaker 5: Keep bring somebody readers, reader questions. I'll call another time.
I've been reading the Bible. I love you guys. Thank you,
sure thing.
Speaker 2: Friend. That's a fun question. That's actually a very valid
point for people who want to read about the transition
in the profits in theme and function and audience.
Speaker 3: Uh, there's a scholar Samuel P.
Speaker 2: Meyer from Ohio State University I think he's retired now,
wrote a book on this.
Speaker 3: It's actually a really good book.
Speaker 2: Just look up the works of Samuel P.
Speaker 5: Meyer.
Speaker 2: If you want to trace the development through the profits
over time period, you'll see some really fun patterns emerging.
But friends, we're listen, we're at like the last minute
or two of the live stream, and we had some
donations come in and we really appreciate it. But let's
let's have a let's have a hoorah at the end.
Let's let's see if we can do at least one minute,
let's get some donations. Can we get like another two
hundred hours in the last two minutes, That would be fantastic.
Last year, if I remember correctly, last year, we did
about twelve thousand dollars or so. Is that about right? Gray?
Can you let me know what we did last year.
I'm hoping we could at least beat last year's annual fundraiser.
Last year was the first one.
Speaker 1: Actually, yeah, you know, it's been so long. I actually
can't remember last year's fundraiser. I know that I helped
with it because Bercifas I had to get Barcifas out
of the back room to come up here and do
his appearance. So, like, I know, so I don't know
how it all ended up last year, but yeah, I
mean I think that, you know, we can definitely get
in a few more of those those donos. Let's get
some five or ten dollars donos or you know, anything
really helps, I mean, to help us keep it keep
it going here at the ACA.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I see Fox twenty Just send in Fox money,
just send in Sorry, is that Fox honey? Fox honey
to send in twenty huge? W Fox really appreciate that.
I hope I'm saying that name right. It's pH x honey,
which is I'm assuming supposed to be sounded out as fox.
Speaker 3: I could be wrong. I could be wrong. Also about foxes.
I bet foxes love honey.
Speaker 2: They're kind of like, well they eat like chickens and
spin animals, but they kind of forge too, don't they.
Speaker 1: I think so, I'm not sure. I just know what
the fox says.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, that's a classic. That is a I think
we brought in a little over ten thousand last year,
so that means we at least surpassed last year's donation amount. Huge.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Also, thank you mal.
Speaker 2: Gorezada for sending in the thirty dollars a donation. Really
appreciate that, and Diane for the fifty dollars and Anonymous
for the ten dollars.
Speaker 3: We really do appreciate that.
Speaker 2: Friends.
Speaker 3: The ACA is volunteer rand.
Speaker 2: We have I think maybe two or three people on
staff that keep everything on the rails and then everything
else is just volunteer ran. So it does take, you know,
a community to keep the ACA alive doing what the
ACA does.
Speaker 3: Also, we've got our backup with us tonight.
Speaker 2: Kelly. How you doing, Bud?
Speaker 4: Jill?
Speaker 2: How are you?
Speaker 1: Hey, Kelly, It's always great to be here with you.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 7: I was just amazed at how like I because I
backed up talk or truth winded just before this, and
like we got like five calls of all nice people,
and it was amazing to me.
Speaker 2: It doesn't happen all that often usually get uh So,
apparently the spirit of the Lord was was not out tonight.
Usually the spirit of the Lord causes people to crash out.
Speaker 1: Yep. Yeah, really to spirit of the lord's such a
son of a bitch.
Speaker 2: Actually, no, think about it. He's generated by the son
of the bitch. I don't know. It's very complex. It's
trinitarian model. Have you heard that that Jesus and the
Spirit are generated by the Father and heard that language?
Speaker 1: No, No, it's a wild one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm like, I don't understand how the Father generates
the son. If the son is co equal and co eternal,
he can't be co equal if it's dependent on the
Father for him to be generated.
Speaker 3: What are we doing here?
Speaker 1: Good point.
Speaker 7: It doesn't make yet, it doesn't make any sense at all.
Speaker 2: Yeah, any any thoughts on the show or any callers
previous today from me?
Speaker 5: Yeah?
Speaker 7: H no, Like I said, I was really surprised we
had such, you know, such nice callers today, and I
think it's awesome that we had a really successful fundraiser.
Speaker 2: That was incredible.
Speaker 7: Honestly, my brain is a little bit slow. I've been
up for the whole thing for the whole twenty four hours.
Speaker 2: So oh dang, yeah, that's you. Yeah, that's huge. That
worked as well as it used to.
Speaker 3: Well, it doesn't usually work that good anyway, So.
Speaker 2: I think we know to god, I see Luke Higgins
just sending one hundred hours as well. I'm looking at
our final number because we've got more that are off
of the ZEFI website. Our final number tonight so far
looks like sixteen, four hundred and eighty five, so we
we got about six thousand dollars more than last year's
annual Fundrais are a huge w to everyone donated. Super
appreciated friends, And before we sign off, it's seven o four.
It's time to sign off. But we will be here
again next week, so make sure you come back for
the regular XP showing airing next week and we'll probably
get some anger if I had to guess, probably gonna
get some angry THEIS callers.
Speaker 3: But John, it was great to be on screen with
you again, friend.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, it's always great being on a stream with
you there, Justin and I yeah, I feel like we
definitely need to do something during the week, like you
know sometime. I know that you've been doing more of
those kinds of shows, So I mean, I'm always down
for it, just saying.
Speaker 2: Let's make it happen, make it app but I'll contact
you after the show.
Speaker 7: I was an honor to be here with both of
you guys.
Speaker 2: So Kelly, it's always a pleasure and we're glad that
you're here and feeling.
Speaker 7: Better, don't thank you, thank you much, appreciate that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I had a little bit of panic earlier when
I saw the news, like, oh no, not Kelly.
Speaker 3: So we're glad that you're doing well.
Speaker 2: Friend, Thank you, thank you so much. All right, friends,
signing off for the week. Thank you so much. Make
sure you watch the other shows throughout the week. The
Sunday show is not the only show that's produced by
the ACA.
Speaker 3: Make sure you're catching the other ones.
Speaker 7: Oh, don't forget that next Sunday that Truth Wanted will
be broadcast from now on before a Atheist Experience. So
every Sunday from now on if you've wanted between Takezan
and atheist Experience.
Speaker 2: Fantastic.
Speaker 1: I didn't even get paid to say that.
Speaker 2: Not at all. Not a time. All right, friends, have
a great week.
Speaker 3: Was see you again next week?
Speaker 2: Right way.
Speaker 1: To start, alpeny y, stop questioning the bullshit everyone around you.
Speaker 2: Your bike, they shit setting up your biness, walkles down.
It's way fast.
Speaker 1: Diet Ellen doing it all.
Speaker 2: M David of.
Speaker 4: Yall watch Talking and Live Sundays at one pm Central.
Visit tiny dot c c slash y T t H
and call into the show at five one two nine
nine two four two, or connect to the show online
at tiny dot c c slash call th H