Speaker 1: Welcome to the Kinds I View Podcast. That intro music
Speaker 1: was terrible. I'm sorry, I don't know what happened to
Speaker 1: our old I've lost our original intrum music. We'll fix it.
Speaker 1: This is one of the endearing aspects of the show
Speaker 1: is its utter lack of professionality. Anyway, we're going to
Speaker 1: be wading into some treacherous waters today. We're gonna be
Speaker 1: talking theology christology, and I'm an amateur. So I want
Speaker 1: to make a vow to you up front. If you
Speaker 1: feel like I got something wrong, listen, don't. I don't
Speaker 1: want like I'm not soliciting, like I think you're wrong
Speaker 1: about this. Like I get it. We all have different opinions.
Speaker 1: But if you can like teach me something, you know,
Speaker 1: like hey, actually you know this person did some work
Speaker 1: and shows this, or actually you know you said this
Speaker 1: religion thinks that, but actually, you know, look here's the Catechism,
Speaker 1: page two hundred. They actually think this, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean? Like, I love learning. So if I get
Speaker 1: something wrong, please tell me, and I promise to correct
Speaker 1: it publicly on the show. That is my commitment to you.
Speaker 1: But you know, please do a little bit of work
Speaker 1: and just actually teach me something. Don't don't just say well,
Speaker 1: I believe you know. This is a real problem, not
Speaker 1: from you guys. You guys are great, especially my Core
Speaker 1: one hundred. I need a better name my mythical my
Speaker 1: mystical century, and I'm the Centurion. That's kind of a larp.
Speaker 1: Let's just stick with my Core one hundred, the Core
Speaker 1: one hundred. You guys provide me great feedback, Thank you,
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. But just in general, there is like
Speaker 1: this are humentation style where you just state your opinion
Speaker 1: as like evidence and it's not evidence, you know. And
Speaker 1: I'm not saying listen, I don't need a bibliography. I
Speaker 1: get it. I make claims all the time. But usually
Speaker 1: when I say something, it's like it's it is based
Speaker 1: on something I've heard or read. You know, I could
Speaker 1: be incorrect, the source could be wrong. But I generally
Speaker 1: don't just like say I think this. Maybe I do.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but hey, listen, it's my show. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna keep doing whatever I do. But I guess what
Speaker 1: I'm saying is I would I really welcome feedback because
Speaker 1: we're gonna be getting into some treacherous waters. I just
Speaker 1: want it to be informative feedback. I want to learn
Speaker 1: something from your feedback, and I will correct myself publicly.
Speaker 1: And so we're gonna be talking about did Jesus claim
Speaker 1: to be God? And we're gonna be listening to the
Speaker 1: two most informed people on this topic who have polarized
Speaker 1: completely opposite perspectives. So I think the first thing to
Speaker 1: acknowledge is that there are brilliant people who think that
Speaker 1: Jesus never claimed to be God, and there are brilliant
Speaker 1: people who think that there is plenty of evidence that
Speaker 1: Jesus claimed to be God. So right there, like hopefully
Speaker 1: we can sort of like exhale, take the temperature down,
Speaker 1: and automatically understand that we're not really going to answer
Speaker 1: the question today. This is about learning, informing, and you know,
Speaker 1: maybe sharing some opinion on my part for sure, But
Speaker 1: mostly I think I just want this to be educational
Speaker 1: and no matter what you believe, I want you to feel. Hmm,
Speaker 1: what do I want you to feel? I mean, I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, My bias is that I kind of want
Speaker 1: you to feel that Jesus did claim to be God.
Speaker 1: But maybe that doesn't mean exactly what most people think
Speaker 1: that means. I guess I think that's gonna be my stance.
Speaker 1: We'll see, we'll see. But anyway, before we get into
Speaker 1: the heavy stuff, I had a weird experience today, and
Speaker 1: I want you to let me know if you think
Speaker 1: I'm a horrible father or a good father, I'm on
Speaker 1: the fence. There was a moment where I felt like,
Speaker 1: so I'm so creative, you know, And then there was
Speaker 1: a moment where like, oh my god, I've ruined my son.
Speaker 1: So as you might know, as you might remember, my
Speaker 1: wife's out of town. She gets back tomorrow, and it's
Speaker 1: been you know, I've got brilliant, creative kids. They aren't brilliant.
Speaker 1: They're kind, they're empathetic, but you know, with all of
Speaker 1: that comes some stubbornness, you know, just like I was,
Speaker 1: just like I was. And so my daughter's four years
Speaker 1: older than my son, and so she's kind of like
Speaker 1: because of us, you know, not not of her own will.
Speaker 1: She's kind of had to adopt, like become like a
Speaker 1: backup parent. I think this is a very common eldest
Speaker 1: child trait. You know, you've been around longer, ye're more
Speaker 1: with it, and like you can sort of help your parents.
Speaker 1: I was an oldest child. My I had two half sisters.
Speaker 1: One is seven years younger than me and one is
Speaker 1: fourteen young years younger than me. Now, I only really
Speaker 1: ever lived with one of my sisters, and only for
Speaker 1: a few years before I moved across the country to
Speaker 1: my dad's house at twelve. But even for those few years,
Speaker 1: like you, yeah, you're the back, you're like helping, like, hey,
Speaker 1: tell your sister to sit down, you know. And so
Speaker 1: my daughter's constantly am especially with my wife's out of town.
Speaker 1: I'm like, please, can you just help me get your
Speaker 1: brother to buckle his seat belt. It's the things he chooses,
Speaker 1: Like he just determines, like no, I'm going to get
Speaker 1: a sprite, and I will make a scene in the
Speaker 1: coffee shop if I don't get a sprite. And so
Speaker 1: it's like I'm like to my daughter, like, can you
Speaker 1: just take your brother and sit outside for second on
Speaker 1: that table right there and just let me finish this transaction,
Speaker 1: you know. Anyway, So today we got in one of
Speaker 1: those situations and I had had to put the hammer down,
Speaker 1: I had to take the iPads away because I was
Speaker 1: asking them to clean up the house and my daughter
Speaker 1: was doing all the cleaning. My son was refusing to clean,
Speaker 1: so I was like, okay, iPads away, and I sent
Speaker 1: my son to his room, and then my daughter kept
Speaker 1: cleaning up. But there was this moment where like my
Speaker 1: daughter was like coaching my son, like why don't you
Speaker 1: just clean up? Like then you won't be in trouble,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean? And uh, this is like
Speaker 1: a recurring pattern. And I'm realizing, like you know it
Speaker 1: is it is an eldest child trait, but also like
Speaker 1: you want your kids to be like buddies, right like
Speaker 1: you don't you don't want one of your kids to
Speaker 1: look at their sibling as like just another parent, like
Speaker 1: a narc you know, like whose team are you on?
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know. Maybe that's the wrong way
Speaker 1: of thinking about it. So I I when my son
Speaker 1: was in his room, I pulled my daughter aside and
Speaker 1: I said, Hey, here's what we're gonna do. I want
Speaker 1: you And I'm realizing this, I'm admitting something that's a
Speaker 1: little embarrassing, but it's like I want you here here
Speaker 1: the iPads. I want you to go in the room
Speaker 1: and pretend like you stole these, like you've got them
Speaker 1: out of hiding and that you've snuck them, You've snuck
Speaker 1: the contraband into the room, you know, because I because
Speaker 1: I can. There's like there's like animosity growing between my kids,
Speaker 1: you know. My my son feels like everybody is his parents,
Speaker 1: you know. And so I was like, I just want
Speaker 1: you guys to be buds. Just go back there, just play,
Speaker 1: you know, I'll collaid and uh. And they did. And
Speaker 1: I told my daughter like, if I come back there,
Speaker 1: like hide the iPads, you know. And so I went.
Speaker 1: I went back there to let him know, like, hey,
Speaker 1: I got to get on a zoom call. And my
Speaker 1: son's just looking like kind of guilty. You know, he's
Speaker 1: clearly put his iPad under the blanket and they're pretending
Speaker 1: to read books together. And it's like, what have I done?
Speaker 1: Have I just am my coaching my son that he
Speaker 1: should lie? But I don't know, I felt like it
Speaker 1: was important. I felt like it was a canon moment
Speaker 1: for them, you know, just just get in one over
Speaker 1: on dad. But yeah, I've probably you know, you know,
Speaker 1: the butterfly effects, like I've probably created this is like
Speaker 1: a trajectory of the timeline that I've just initiated and
Speaker 1: now or you know, this cascade of dominoes leading to
Speaker 1: a life of crime. You know, I just I just started.
Speaker 1: Hopefully not. My goal is just for my son and
Speaker 1: my daughter to be friends. So we'll see. I'll give
Speaker 1: you an update in ten years. Hopefully you're still listening.
Speaker 1: So anyway, email me God's I view book at gmail
Speaker 1: dot com. Let me know, you know, am I doing
Speaker 1: it all wrong? I should probably, I should probably admit,
Speaker 1: because then there's like a lesson, right I should be like, Okay, listen, Son,
Speaker 1: I actually knew you were on the iPad today, you know,
Speaker 1: And I'm not mad at you from from keeping it
Speaker 1: from I don't know. I'm not sure. Maybe I just
Speaker 1: never say anything. Let me know what you think. Okay, huge,
Speaker 1: Now we're doing a huge pivot. Did Jesus claim to
Speaker 1: be God? What do you guys think? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't really know who's listening to the show. I
Speaker 1: would say most of the core one hundred are probably Christians,
Speaker 1: but actually a pretty big chunk of the Core one
Speaker 1: hundred are like agnostics. You know, they're open to stuff,
Speaker 1: but they don't really know. And my sense is most Christians,
Speaker 1: if you ask them, did Jesus claim to be God
Speaker 1: would say yes, and listen to what I'm saying. Specifically,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying is Jesus God, That's a different question.
Speaker 1: I'm saying, did Jesus himself claim he was in the scriptures?
Speaker 1: That's a different question, and it should be an easy
Speaker 1: to answer question. But the truth is it really isn't.
Speaker 1: And you might, if you are Christian, you might already
Speaker 1: be thinking about certain passages that we will get to.
Speaker 1: But I think even you would admit that it's it's
Speaker 1: not direct, Like, you know, Jesus never says I am God,
Speaker 1: bow down and worship me. Now, he alludes to that
Speaker 1: are close to that. He alludes to a lot of
Speaker 1: Jewish tradition. He does a lot of things that only
Speaker 1: God does, like walks on water, which is a reference
Speaker 1: to job, forgive sins, comes back from the dead, but
Speaker 1: others technically did that too, right Lazarus under Jesus' power though,
Speaker 1: So it's you know, and so I think there's lots
Speaker 1: of reasons to believe that he is God. By the
Speaker 1: question is did he claim to be? And so that's
Speaker 1: what we're going to be taking on. This is a
Speaker 1: pretty long interview. We're going to break it up into
Speaker 1: several parts. This is Alex O'Connor. He's interviewing an author
Speaker 1: of the book we'll learn his name in the book,
Speaker 1: the name shortly and Alex and preparing for a debate.
Speaker 1: And he was the atheist in the debate, arguing that
Speaker 1: Jesus never claimed to be God, like any smart person
Speaker 1: should do, but rarely does he read all the best
Speaker 1: books against him, like what are the best cases against
Speaker 1: my argument? And so this book he felt was the
Speaker 1: very best book claiming that Jesus did claim to be God.
Speaker 1: So he's now interviewing the author. So I don't know,
Speaker 1: I think you got to respect that whenever you think
Speaker 1: about the guy. And we'll get into it, but first
Speaker 1: let me I kind of want to lay out the
Speaker 1: spectrum of beliefs about Jesus. Now shifting gears to is
Speaker 1: Jesus God? So the spectrum of beliefs would be just
Speaker 1: on Jesus in general. Would be the most extreme, probably
Speaker 1: smallest group believes that Jesus as a human being never
Speaker 1: even existed. These would be called mythesists. This is like
Speaker 1: very this is a very extreme position. Most New Testament
Speaker 1: scholars are atheists, and most of them the vast majority
Speaker 1: of them would not go that far. It just seems
Speaker 1: like there is just too much, you know, for a
Speaker 1: guy who never existed, There just seems to be too
Speaker 1: much literature. You know. People will say things like there
Speaker 1: are no extra biblical sources for Jesus. That's not true.
Speaker 1: There are some, and there are some critical sources people
Speaker 1: that don't like him, you know, the Babylonian tel Mood,
Speaker 1: for example, there's very early graffiti in Rome mockinging people
Speaker 1: who believed in Jesus. And of course there's the Bible.
Speaker 1: You know, there's there's many books, and I don't think
Speaker 1: you can, like even as an atheist, discredit the Bible
Speaker 1: as a historical source.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Clearly, maybe there's parts of it that are intended to
Speaker 1: be like poetic or mythical, but certainly the account of
Speaker 1: jesus life is not one of those accounts. It's very
Speaker 1: clearly meant to be biographical. And it seems very unlikely
Speaker 1: that you would make this figure up, especially since there
Speaker 1: are official government actions related to him, like his crucifixion.
Speaker 1: It just seems like it's the story just want to
Speaker 1: catch on if it were completely invented. Certainly not locally anyway.
Speaker 1: So that's the most extreme group the group I guess,
Speaker 1: you know, if we're starting, if we're saying the far left,
Speaker 1: I don't mean politically, but you know, the far left
Speaker 1: side of the spectrum is mythicism. In the far right
Speaker 1: side is Jesus is God, is indistinguishable from God. The
Speaker 1: next wrong, moving from left to right, would probably be
Speaker 1: that Jesus was a historical figure. He was a real person.
Speaker 1: He was a rabbi who had an earthly ministry, but
Speaker 1: was very clearly not divine. So this would be the
Speaker 1: eighth most atheists would feel this way. Now there's sort
Speaker 1: of a version of that, maybe just slightly to the
Speaker 1: right of that, which believes all of the same stuff,
Speaker 1: but believes that Jesus was probably, you know, a blasphemer
Speaker 1: and was executed by the Romans for starting trouble in
Speaker 1: the Jewish community, And this would sort of be the
Speaker 1: Jewish position. Now there is argument about this. This is
Speaker 1: a very controversial thing because there are a lot of people,
Speaker 1: I would assume Jewish people who would argue that the
Speaker 1: Jews of Jesus's day never claimed that he was a blasphemer,
Speaker 1: and that this is a later a later invention by
Speaker 1: the Church to sort of like an anti Semitic invention.
Speaker 1: But I will say the argument I find that's technically
Speaker 1: usually not from Jewish people. It's more from atheists and
Speaker 1: sort of anti Christian or anti Catholic in particular, people
Speaker 1: who have sort of like a Dan Brown version understanding
Speaker 1: of the Church, like the Roman Inquisition version of the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church, who who I don't know, like to think that,
Speaker 1: like a lot of the things in the Bible where
Speaker 1: you know, like the Pharisees pick up stones to stone
Speaker 1: Jesus for blasphemy, that these were like invented hundreds of
Speaker 1: years later to make a divine claim. And I just
Speaker 1: don't think the historical evidence supports that. You know, we
Speaker 1: have copies of these manuscripts going back to maybe fifty
Speaker 1: years after the Crucifixion, so it just seems unlikely. Now
Speaker 1: that said, the Jewish Christian situation was an issue from
Speaker 1: the very beginning. You have what are called the Judaizers
Speaker 1: in the Bible, which my understanding is that these are Christians,
Speaker 1: but they they are you know, Jewish ethnicity, like all
Speaker 1: of the disciples who are still wanting to practice Jewish
Speaker 1: customs like circumcision and things, and to honor certain aspects
Speaker 1: of the rules around the Sabbath and that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: And this is very much discouraged and in Paul's letters
Speaker 1: and so yeah, so you know, right off the bat,
Speaker 1: this is a sensitive issue anyway. So I'm just pointing
Speaker 1: out that's like the next rung on the ladder, above that,
Speaker 1: or don't. I don't mean to say above like better,
Speaker 1: you know, so I'll say right of that would be
Speaker 1: that Jewish is a divine figure, but he's divine in
Speaker 1: the way like a prophet is divine. And in fact,
Speaker 1: maybe that's what he is. He's a prophet. Maybe he's
Speaker 1: a special prophet, but he is ultimately a prophet, but
Speaker 1: he is not God. And so this would be the
Speaker 1: Islamic interpretation that you know, he is to be honored,
Speaker 1: he is a prophet, but that he was not crucified,
Speaker 1: and he did not resurrect, he was taken directly into heaven.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, again this is the Islamic tradition. Now
Speaker 1: I think some people are surprised to hear that. Listen,
Speaker 1: this is not to say also when I say, you know,
Speaker 1: the Jewish tradition thinks this the Catholic tradition thinks this.
Speaker 1: The Muslim tradition thinks this. I'm not talking about like
Speaker 1: any random member of that group that you interview on
Speaker 1: the street. Well, think that that's not what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying it's at least it's, if not the
Speaker 1: official teaching, it's one of the official teachings from that group.
Speaker 1: So basically my understanding is kind of the majority Muslim
Speaker 1: interpretation is that the Bible is, or at least was,
Speaker 1: the authentic word of God, but that aspects of it
Speaker 1: have been corrupted over time, particularly the crucifiit and the
Speaker 1: and any like divine claims made by Jesus if they exist,
Speaker 1: which I think they would say they don't exist. And
Speaker 1: this is because they view God as is one and
Speaker 1: is not a man, and not a and certainly not
Speaker 1: able to be killed. So that would be the next
Speaker 1: roung And then right of that you have like a
Speaker 1: whole panacea of Christian and like Christian adjacent views, which is,
Speaker 1: you know, Jesus either is God or he is the
Speaker 1: Son of God or both, you know. And then really
Speaker 1: I would say the most traditional Christian view being the Trinity,
Speaker 1: that there are three eternal pre existing beings, the Father,
Speaker 1: the Son, the Holy Spirit, and these are all different
Speaker 1: aspects maybe of God, or I think what is typically
Speaker 1: said is, you know, God is one has one nature,
Speaker 1: but three persons, the Father, of the Son, and the
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit. So that would sort of be the far
Speaker 1: not the ft I almost said far right. I don't
Speaker 1: mean that politically like this, This would be the other
Speaker 1: end of the spectrum from mythicism. Who we're weighted in
Speaker 1: treacherous waters. Okay, so we're going to jump into the
Speaker 1: clip this is broken into. It looks like about nine
Speaker 1: or ten main arguments. We'll probably just do one today,
Speaker 1: and the first one is Mark two where Jesus forgives
Speaker 1: since now this shows up in multiple gospels, so we
Speaker 1: might also play the second argument, which is Matthew tells
Speaker 1: the same story but slightly differently in a way that
Speaker 1: Alex will argue undermines the idea that he claimed to
Speaker 1: be God. So we'll probably just listen to those two clips.
Speaker 1: It goes from about see thirteen minutes to it's about
Speaker 1: twenty minutes, so yeah, we won't do more than that.
Speaker 2: Here we go is the healing of the paralytic He
Speaker 2: brought it up already, right where Jesus says in Mark
Speaker 2: two to the paralyse man, my son, your sins are forgiven.
Speaker 2: Right now, you can make the case, a reasonable case,
Speaker 2: that Jesus is just taking a priestly prerogative upon himself,
Speaker 2: because it is true that in the temple, Jewish priests
Speaker 2: would bring sacrifices, they'd offer them to the God of Israel,
Speaker 2: and they would sacrifice those in order a tone for
Speaker 2: the sins of the people on their behalf. And so
Speaker 2: you could make the case that that kind of divine passive,
Speaker 2: your sense of forgiven, is just Jesus making or taking
Speaker 2: a priestly prerogative as his own.
Speaker 3: Right. Jesus doesn't say five of you, He just says passively,
Speaker 3: your sins forgiven.
Speaker 2: That's exactly right. So I do agree with you that
Speaker 2: that's not an unreasonable interpretation of that passage. Now, I
Speaker 2: don't think that does full justice to the passage. I
Speaker 2: think more is going on than just to priestly prerogative.
Speaker 2: I think Jesus is laying claim to a divine prerogative,
Speaker 2: and I think the text itself supports that both because
Speaker 2: even within a Jewish context, the priests would not declare
Speaker 2: your sins forgiven? He would be the mediation of forgiveness.
Speaker 2: But even more it is because of Jesus' response, because
Speaker 2: when they respond by saying, who can forgive sins but
Speaker 2: God alone? You'll notice that your response is not who
Speaker 2: can forgive sins but priests alone? But they actually make
Speaker 2: it exclusively divine. The Jewish interlocketers. And then Jesus responds
Speaker 2: by saying, so that you may know that the son
Speaker 2: of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins, I
Speaker 2: say to you rise. So I think the fuller context
Speaker 2: of the passage makes that reasonable interpretation not the best
Speaker 2: interpretation of the overall content.
Speaker 1: So yeah, okay, So we have a situation where there's
Speaker 1: a crowd around Jesus, a house that Jesus is in,
Speaker 1: and there's there's a I don't know all the details,
Speaker 1: but there's a man and his family or friends again
Speaker 1: I don't know the details exactly want to get him
Speaker 1: in to see Jesus because they know he's working miracles
Speaker 1: and and and they have faith that he can't heal
Speaker 1: this paralyzed man. Sorry, I'm in the dog routine where
Speaker 1: he wants to go in and out one hundred times
Speaker 1: an episode. And so they can't get him in because
Speaker 1: there's this crowd around the front of the house. But
Speaker 1: they're able to this. It's kind of a weird story,
Speaker 1: I'll give you that. But they managed to get sort
Speaker 1: of like around the back of the house or get
Speaker 1: on the roof of an adjacent house and sort of
Speaker 1: get over to the roof of this home that Jesus
Speaker 1: is in. It's weird because it's like such a weird story.
Speaker 1: Almost not make it up this way, you know, like
Speaker 1: why would you add this sort of strange detail that
Speaker 1: they enter the home from the roof, you know, they
Speaker 1: lower the paralyzed man into his midst in this house,
Speaker 1: and they are and Jesus is pleased, right that they
Speaker 1: have such faith that they would basically do anything to
Speaker 1: get to him, and he forgives the paralyzed man sins,
Speaker 1: and he says this out loud. After he says that,
Speaker 1: he hears the thoughts of the onlookers in the crowd.
Speaker 1: And some of these onlookers are the Pharisees, you know,
Speaker 1: one of the groups of Jews. You know, you have
Speaker 1: the statuses of Pharisees in the scene, and the Pharisees
Speaker 1: are a religious authority, and he hears their thoughts, and
Speaker 1: their thoughts are sort of they're angry, you know, they're saying, wait,
Speaker 1: this man is forgiving sins. Who can forgive sins? But
Speaker 1: God alone? And Jesus says, you know, why are you
Speaker 1: thinking this? So he reads their minds and so he says,
Speaker 1: you know, a string of things that will rehash here
Speaker 1: multiple times into the conversation, but you know, basically like, hey,
Speaker 1: what's easier for giving sins or telling a man to
Speaker 1: get up and walk who's paralyzed. And so he does,
Speaker 1: he says, stand up and walk, and he does the
Speaker 1: paralyzed man, and he says something like, so that you know,
Speaker 1: the Son of Man has the power to forgive sin
Speaker 1: on earth, I will heal this man's ailment. And so
Speaker 1: we've talked about this name before, the Son of Man.
Speaker 1: This is a title. Son of Man can just mean human,
Speaker 1: you know, Bene, I think it's ben a Adam is
Speaker 1: son of Man. And that's using the Old Testament to
Speaker 1: just refer to humans like Bene. Eloheim is used to
Speaker 1: refer to the sons of God, which are presumed to
Speaker 1: be like angels or something however, and I think it's Daniel.
Speaker 1: There is a figure, a divine figure, a pre existent figure,
Speaker 1: named the Son of Man, and that's important that he's
Speaker 1: pre existent, because you know, Christians believe there are three
Speaker 1: pre existent entities, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Speaker 1: So just the claim son of Man has divine implications.
Speaker 1: And it's clear that the Pharisees feel that way too,
Speaker 1: because there's multiple times where they get mad at him
Speaker 1: for using that term. So I think you could just
Speaker 1: argue right there that he is claiming to be something
Speaker 1: akin to God, like one of the aspects of God.
Speaker 1: But you know, it's confusing to say Jesus is God
Speaker 1: because now you're like making a synonym. You know, you're
Speaker 1: saying that these two words are equivalent. And I don't
Speaker 1: really know if that's true, at least not in the
Speaker 1: sense that most people mean. Like I think when most
Speaker 1: people say God, they're referring to the Father in heaven.
Speaker 1: But you know, I think the position the Trinity is
Speaker 1: that no God refers to all three of these pre
Speaker 1: existent beings. It's one nature, three person. So listen is complicated.
Speaker 1: I don't think we should presume that the the creator
Speaker 1: these beings that were here from the beginning or eternally
Speaker 1: before the beginning would be easy to comprehend. But here
Speaker 1: we are.
Speaker 2: So I do think that those are reasonable positions from
Speaker 2: the synoptics, precisely because these are complex matters, and it
Speaker 2: is His identity in the Gospels is a mystery. It's
Speaker 2: not just unifical. It's not just laid out there for
Speaker 2: all to see. There is an element of mystery here
Speaker 2: which the Gospels themselves testify to, like in Matthew sixteen,
Speaker 2: when Jesus flesh and blood has not revealed this to you.
Speaker 2: Apocalypsis is the apocalypto is the term. But my father
Speaker 2: in heaven. So I think that that's those are fair
Speaker 2: to walk away with different interpretations of what are really
Speaker 2: mysterious capacities.
Speaker 3: We'll get back to the show in just a moment,
Speaker 3: but first, do you struggle to focus? I know I
Speaker 3: do sometimes, and especially given my line of work, it
Speaker 3: can be incredibly frustrating when my brain is just not
Speaker 3: able to do whatever. Examples I mean, we were just
Speaker 3: talking about the forgiving of sins, and that's often where
Speaker 3: people start because it's so early in Mark's Gospel, and
Speaker 3: Mark is as far as we think our earliest gospel,
Speaker 3: it's seems to be a source for Matthew and Luke,
Speaker 3: who take almost all of Mark's Gospel and then add
Speaker 3: a few few bits. More So, Mark's gospel has Jesus
Speaker 3: sort of surrounded by crowds, and there's this famous story
Speaker 3: where there's a paralytic man who cannot get to Jesus,
Speaker 3: so they climb up on the roof and they lower
Speaker 3: him through the roof onto the ground, and Jesus tells
Speaker 3: this man, your sins are forgiven. And it's for.
Speaker 1: The record, this is the same story they're just rehashing,
Speaker 1: and again.
Speaker 3: That describes who are nearby who The first weird thing
Speaker 3: is that they're thinking, this man is blaspheming, who can
Speaker 3: forgive sins? But God alone and Jesus hears their thoughts. Now,
Speaker 3: some people like to point to that. Immediately, I look
Speaker 3: at that and say, look, if Jesus were just a
Speaker 3: miracle working prophet, he could probably do something like that.
Speaker 3: But it's interesting, and they say, why you know this
Speaker 3: man is blaspheming, which is interesting because blasphemy seems to
Speaker 3: be taking on godly prerogatives. Who can forgive sins? But
Speaker 3: God alone, And like you say, Jesus doesn't say, well,
Speaker 3: I am God. Jesus says, why are you thinking these things?
Speaker 3: He says, as you say, so you know that the
Speaker 3: son of Man has the authority to forgive sins on earth.
Speaker 3: And he makes the man walk because he says, which
Speaker 3: is easier to say your sins are forgiven? Or take
Speaker 3: up your But so you know the son of Man
Speaker 3: has the authority to forgive sins. I tell him, take
Speaker 3: up your matt and walk, and he gets up and
Speaker 3: he goes away, and everyone's kind of amazed by this. Now,
Speaker 3: the orthodox Christian reading of this is that the scries
Speaker 3: were correct. Yes, only God can forgive sins, and Jesus
Speaker 3: proved to them that the son of Man is God.
Speaker 3: My reading of this story is different for a few reasons,
Speaker 3: and I will know what you think of this. The
Speaker 3: first is that the whole motif of Jesus's Jewish opponents
Speaker 3: in the Gospel seems to be that they're constantly misunderstanding him.
Speaker 3: They're constantly getting things wrong. I'm not sure if there
Speaker 3: is a good biblical foundation for the idea that only
Speaker 3: God can forgive sins. God does forgive sins, but this
Speaker 3: kind of rule that exists that only God can forgive sins,
Speaker 3: I'm unclear about what the sort of biblical basis is
Speaker 3: for this, and at any rate, Jesus then says, you know,
Speaker 3: so you know that the son of Man the authority
Speaker 3: to give sins on us.
Speaker 1: I will just kind of just a brief thing here
Speaker 1: that is not necessarily super important to me or like
Speaker 1: what I believe. But I think one thing you could
Speaker 1: say to this is, you know, there doesn't necessarily need
Speaker 1: to be a biblical basis for only God being able
Speaker 1: to forgive sins, because that's the only you know, when
Speaker 1: in regards to sin, there's really only one person's who
Speaker 1: you know, who's forgiveness that matters, or two Actually, you know,
Speaker 1: if you directly hurt or harm someone in the process
Speaker 1: of committing that sin, you would want that person's forgiveness,
Speaker 1: but beyond that, you really only want or need God's forgiveness.
Speaker 1: And so I think the issue, I think it's kind
Speaker 1: of a moot point. Like like now, of course, this
Speaker 1: is somewhat controversial in the Catholic and Orthodox complex or context,
Speaker 1: because you are asking priests to forgive your sins. But
Speaker 1: I believe the interpretation is that your sins are being
Speaker 1: forgiven on behalf of God, you know, because the Bible
Speaker 1: is constantly instructing us to discuss confess your sins. And
Speaker 1: I think this is true. I mean, you know, just
Speaker 1: from a psychological perspective, confessing transgressions I think is good
Speaker 1: for the soul, you know, because if you're not confessing
Speaker 1: and asking for forgiveness, you're unrepentant. And I don't just
Speaker 1: mean that in a religious way. I just mean, you know,
Speaker 1: there's nothing worse than just an unrepentant repeat offender. Like
Speaker 1: this is the most unforgivable thing you can be in society,
Speaker 1: almost regardless of the crime. Now, of course, like it's
Speaker 1: worse the more offensive the crime. But you know, even
Speaker 1: if someone doesn't pick up their dog poop and they're
Speaker 1: just completely unrepentant, you know, you're like, hey, buddy, what's
Speaker 1: going on?
Speaker 2: Is my friend?
Speaker 1: You are like, yeah, pick it up yourself, you know,
Speaker 1: and then he does it the next day. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's just nothing, there's just nothing worse, Like it's just
Speaker 1: like this unbelievable arrogance and pride, you know. And so
Speaker 1: I kind of got off track there, but so psychologically,
Speaker 1: I think confession of sins is good for the soul,
Speaker 1: you know. But so I guess it's not totally unreasonable.
Speaker 1: Alex's point here is not totally unreasonable, you know, except
Speaker 1: I think the response would be, well, you know, you
Speaker 1: can confess your sins to others and you can get
Speaker 1: their forgiveness. But ultimately this is more like a platitude,
Speaker 1: like like it's nice to be forgiven by your brother. However,
Speaker 1: you know you need God to forgive you. But there
Speaker 1: are some passages in the Bible where kind of it
Speaker 1: kind of makes it sound like the same thing. Anyway,
Speaker 1: So let's keep listening.
Speaker 3: I'm going to do this, which doesn't immediately say I'm God.
Speaker 3: It says, well, now I have this authority as well.
Speaker 3: Jesus also throughout the Gospels, talks a lot about how
Speaker 3: he's been given certain authorities and prerogatives by the Father.
Speaker 3: If he's given the power to judge mankind by the Father,
Speaker 3: that kind of stuff. And so even if this is
Speaker 3: a godly prerogative, it may be something that God has
Speaker 3: simply given to Jesus. But the real nail in the
Speaker 3: coffin here for me is at the end of John's Gospel,
Speaker 3: Jesus sends out his disciples, right, and he says to
Speaker 3: his disciples, as the Father has sent me, now I
Speaker 3: am sending you. If you forgive people's sins, their sins
Speaker 3: are forgiven. If you do not forgive their sins, their
Speaker 3: sins are retained. So he seems to give the disciples
Speaker 3: the ability to forgive sins. And if only God can
Speaker 3: forgive sins, then you know, lucky disciples, I suppose. And
Speaker 3: some Christians say, yeah, but you know, those disciples went
Speaker 3: out and they forgive, They forgave people in the name
Speaker 3: of Jesus. Right, they did it on Jesus' authority. Okay,
Speaker 3: but what does Jesus say to them, as the Father
Speaker 3: has said, knee, now I'm sending you. So in the
Speaker 3: same way that they're forgiving in the name of Jesus,
Speaker 3: Jesus is forgiving in the name of God. That's that's
Speaker 3: a lot to starli. I'm gonna throw that at you.
Speaker 3: Er takes Yeah, you think, okay, yeah, this is a
Speaker 3: great question. So let's I'll make a couple of points. First,
Speaker 3: you're right that there's no explicit rule in Hebrew scripture
Speaker 3: that says only God can forgive sins full stop. Okay,
Speaker 3: however it is it's not a minority interpreted position. For for example,
Speaker 3: in Leviticus chapter four, the early chapters of Leviticus which
Speaker 3: are describing atoning sacrifices, the kind of sin offerings as
Speaker 3: to call. You'll see this over and over against refrain.
Speaker 3: The priest will offer the sacrifice, and his sin shall
Speaker 3: be forgiven, shall be forgiven, shall be forgiven. A great
Speaker 3: the world expert on Leviticus, Jacob Milgram, great Jewish scholar,
Speaker 3: wrote a three thousand page commentary on Leviticus.
Speaker 2: I've got it up to here. He actually points out
Speaker 2: that that use the divine past of in the he
Speaker 2: as well as the whole sacrificial system within Judaism, actually does.
Speaker 2: He takes the position that it is implying that the
Speaker 2: act of forgiving sin precisely because sin is not just
Speaker 2: an offense against other humans, but above all always an
Speaker 2: offense against the Lord, against God of Israel, is in
Speaker 2: fact an exclusively divine prerogative. And that's why the divine
Speaker 2: passive is used over and over as a refrain in
Speaker 2: those Levitical descriptions of priestly activity. It's never the priest
Speaker 2: who has described as forgiving but always the divine passive.
Speaker 2: Another passage would be Isaiah forty three, which is one
Speaker 2: of the really high monotheistic passages in the Old Testament,
Speaker 2: where you see the Lord saying I am, I am
Speaker 2: He using that biblical language echoing the Exodus passage, and
Speaker 2: he says, he who forgives your sins right. So there's
Speaker 2: an affirmation of God's ability to forgive sin in the
Speaker 2: context of emphasizing his exclusivity as the one God and
Speaker 2: as the God who is the creator, the one Creator,
Speaker 2: there's no other God beside me. It's a whole monotheistic passage.
Speaker 2: So when you take those two passages together, I actually
Speaker 2: do think there is some scriptural foundation for the inference.
Speaker 2: It's an inference, it's not a text scripture that in
Speaker 2: a Jewish context it was understood that the positive act
Speaker 2: of forgiving sin was something that could only be done
Speaker 2: by God alone. So I actually don't think that the
Speaker 2: scribes in this case are misinterpreting the implication of Jesus's action.
Speaker 2: In fact, I think the whole point of him responding
Speaker 2: so that you may know the son of Man has
Speaker 2: authority on earth is to affirm what they're saying, but
Speaker 2: describing himself as having that divine authority. Now, so I
Speaker 2: do think in his context, in that Jewish context, they're
Speaker 2: not wrong about that. Now, can God delegate divine power
Speaker 2: or divine authority? And the answer is yes, yes, yes,
Speaker 2: and yes right, So I do think it would be
Speaker 2: wrong to then argue that that can't ever be delegated
Speaker 2: to a human being. And you're absolutely right. We're going
Speaker 2: to see Jesus delegate that authority to the apostles in
Speaker 2: John chapter twenty. So it's a nuanced position. I'm not
Speaker 2: arguing that divine power can't be delegated. I am arguing
Speaker 2: with that in this context describes a right to perceive
Speaker 2: Jesus as doing something which here too four at least,
Speaker 2: is something only the God of Israel can do. And
Speaker 2: you can see that confirmed by the way the crowds
Speaker 2: react too, when they say we've never seen anything like this, right,
Speaker 2: so that implies that something unprecedented has just happened.
Speaker 3: But when they say we've never seen anything like this,
Speaker 3: just not to derail, but do you think they're referring
Speaker 3: there to Jesus's forgiving of sain The fact that they've
Speaker 3: just seen a paralyzed man get up.
Speaker 2: I think I would I would say it's both, although
Speaker 2: you're absolutely right that the paralyzed man is going to
Speaker 2: is going to be striking, because I'm not minimizing that.
Speaker 2: I would say it would be a both and rather
Speaker 2: than an either or. That would be my sis right now,
Speaker 2: real quick, though, I don't want to evade the John
Speaker 2: twenty point, because that's a really important. Yeah. I do
Speaker 2: think it's crucial to emphasize here that, and I do
Speaker 2: think Christians nowadays to underehasize that, although it's growing in
Speaker 2: awareness that if you look at early Christians Soteriology for example,
Speaker 2: and Second Peter, there is an understanding I'm sorry, stereology
Speaker 2: is the the the the theology or the rational analysis
Speaker 2: of sulteria means salvation or to be saved or to
Speaker 2: be healed. So it's the theology of how we are saved,
Speaker 2: all right. And if you look at soteriology, for example
Speaker 2: of Second Peter, it talks about becoming partakers of the
Speaker 2: divine nature.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's this notion of theosis in the early Church
Speaker 2: that I actually think goes a long way toward explaining
Speaker 2: how a divine Messiah like Jesus can then also delegate
Speaker 2: divine powers and divine in this case, even divine nature
Speaker 2: to merely human beings. I mean, at least in Second
Speaker 2: Peter one, that's what he's saying. Through baptism, you actually die,
Speaker 2: not only did this world all that, but you actually
Speaker 2: become a partaker of divinity. And this is gonna be
Speaker 2: an important theme, as I'm sure you know if you
Speaker 2: look at patristic pristology, patristic soteriology in the Early Church,
Speaker 2: that's there. So again, I'm not denying that there is
Speaker 2: a very high soteriology on the other side of the
Speaker 2: resurrection in both the Gospel John and in the early
Speaker 2: New Testament epistles. However, I also think that what you're
Speaker 2: seeing in the Gospel narrative here is.
Speaker 1: A he's using the word patriistic. I just want to
Speaker 1: point out because a lot of people wouldn't aren't going
Speaker 1: to know what that means. This is in reference to
Speaker 1: like Early Church father teachings, which by the way, is
Speaker 1: shocking to me how few Christians read Early Church Fathers.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think, I think it's a pretty big
Speaker 1: deal in Orthodox and Orthodoxy, but why would you not
Speaker 1: want to know what the first Christians thought, And did
Speaker 1: you know the people some of these people knew disciples,
Speaker 1: They knew apostles briefly, Disciples an apostle. They're kind of
Speaker 1: used interchangeably because they essentially mean the same thing. But
Speaker 1: apostle specifically means like that they went out into the
Speaker 1: world to spread the Gospel, whereas disciple just means that
Speaker 1: you're a student. So you could be a disciple without
Speaker 1: being an apostle technically, although I assume all the disciples
Speaker 1: except for Judas did go out, although I'm not sure
Speaker 1: about that. But you can't really be an apostle without
Speaker 1: being a part of like a chain of succession like
Speaker 1: some other apostle or Jesus, you know, or the Holy
Speaker 1: Spirit would have needed to like ordain you as an apostle.
Speaker 1: And so, you know, the Orthodox and the Catholics are
Speaker 1: pretty big on this apostolic chain that goes back to Jesus.
Speaker 1: This is sort of where they feel their authority comes
Speaker 1: from to make the claims, you know, that they make
Speaker 1: that they are the Church set up on earth by Jesus,
Speaker 1: that he references in the Bible, that he says the
Speaker 1: gates of Hell won't prevail against Now, you know, the
Speaker 1: Protestants have a different view, which is that they are
Speaker 1: also a part of that although but you know, Apostolic
Speaker 1: secession is not as big of a deal for them.
Speaker 1: I don't think anyway. Why did I tell the song story? Oh, Patristic? This,
Speaker 1: this whole intermission here is just to tell you what
Speaker 1: Patristic meant.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry. He is a super human claim being made
Speaker 2: by Jesus when he uses first of all the son
Speaker 2: of man to refer to himself and makes the claim
Speaker 2: to be able to do something. At least what you
Speaker 2: to four has been viewed as a divine progative, namely,
Speaker 2: not to ask God to forgive their sins, not to
Speaker 2: offer a sacrifice on behalf, but simply to declare the
Speaker 2: man's sins forgiven, and not just the man. Notice what
Speaker 2: he says, Tom.
Speaker 1: I just want to interrupt. I agree with this. I
Speaker 1: think this is a great response to Alex's objection and
Speaker 1: to a pretty common objection, which is that this is
Speaker 1: just a priestly progative, which is that a religious figure
Speaker 1: in a religious community can offer forgiveness on behalf of God.
Speaker 1: I don't, I mean, I get it, it's reasonable. I
Speaker 1: just I don't think it really stands up.
Speaker 3: My son.
Speaker 2: That's a weird way to address presumably another another adult
Speaker 2: male who is not actually your son. That's a strange
Speaker 2: He'll do this throughout the gospels, my daughter, my son.
Speaker 2: Now these are not as students. These are just bystanders, strangers,
Speaker 2: sick people. It doesn't make a lot of sense if
Speaker 2: he's merely human. But if he's implying that he's more
Speaker 2: than just an ordinary rabbi, ordinary teacher, then there are
Speaker 2: these various hints and clues that build together toward making
Speaker 2: the claim here in this case, for sure, of not
Speaker 2: just being a son of man, like a human being
Speaker 2: like a Psalm eight, but the son of man, meaning
Speaker 2: the heavenly figure that you see in the Book of Daniel,
Speaker 2: who's described as we're singing, receiving glory, honor, power, kingdom,
Speaker 2: and who comes on the clouds right something.
Speaker 1: That Now this is pretty subtle, though, you know, I
Speaker 1: think I think this is not really what most Christians
Speaker 1: mean when they say Jesus is God. Now this is
Speaker 1: different than saying something like Christ is king, you know,
Speaker 1: because we're very we know Jesus claimed to be the Messiah,
Speaker 1: which is the king of Israel, Israel, meaning, you know,
Speaker 1: God's people, those who strive with God. Some people say
Speaker 1: those who wrestle with God, but I don't actually think
Speaker 1: that's correct. I think it's those who strive with God,
Speaker 1: God's people. So christis King is less controversial, right, because
Speaker 1: Jesus did claim to be the king the Messiah. But
Speaker 1: Jesus is God is a little bit different. And so
Speaker 1: I'm actually going to read Daniel seven thirteen, which is
Speaker 1: the reference to the divine, pre existent figure called the
Speaker 1: Son of Man. So he says, this is Daniel seven thirteen.
Speaker 1: In my vision at night, I looked, and there before
Speaker 1: me was one like a son of Man, one like
Speaker 1: a human. Right, So basically what he's saying is, there's
Speaker 1: a man in the sky. There's a human being in
Speaker 1: the sky, and there before me was one like a
Speaker 1: son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He
Speaker 1: approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.
Speaker 1: Ancient of Days is a title for God. And so
Speaker 1: you know, it is in this context that they are
Speaker 1: separate beings. And I just think it's important to mention
Speaker 1: that this is the traditional Christian understanding. You know, when
Speaker 1: Catholics are Orthodox say, you know, Jesus Christ is God,
Speaker 1: they don't mean like he's literally the same being as God.
Speaker 1: It's it's very it's a nuance. I understand, it's a nuance.
Speaker 1: So so he approached the Ancient of days and was
Speaker 1: led into his presence. He was given authority, glory, and
Speaker 1: sovereign power. All nations and peoples of every language worshiped him.
Speaker 1: His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away,
Speaker 1: and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Speaker 1: So the the way I interpret this is that Jesus
Speaker 1: is claiming basically to be an extension of what is
Speaker 1: often called the God Head right the Trinity, into this realm.
Speaker 1: It's you know, it's it's God entered his creation in
Speaker 1: the form of a man. But that spirit that animates
Speaker 1: that flesh right existed before Jesus' conception. And so this
Speaker 1: is again why I love the video game metaphor. You know,
Speaker 1: if you were going to step into a video game
Speaker 1: that you made, you would create an avatar that is
Speaker 1: of the substance of the game. You know, it is
Speaker 1: of the whatever the matter is in that virtual world,
Speaker 1: whether it's information, which is kind of what we think
Speaker 1: it as in this universe. You know, you were going
Speaker 1: to embody a physical form, and so what this is
Speaker 1: saying is that again the son of Man, a human form,
Speaker 1: is has authority, glory, and sovereign power. He's a divine
Speaker 1: figure in all nations, and peoples of every language will
Speaker 1: worship him, and his dominion on earth is everlasting and
Speaker 1: will not pass away, so it's eternal and his kingdom
Speaker 1: will never be destroyed. This is what I think Jesus
Speaker 1: is claiming to be, and it's kind of obvious because
Speaker 1: he calls himself the Son of Man and the Messiah
Speaker 1: over and over and over again. It's just I think,
Speaker 1: so if this is what you mean when you say
Speaker 1: Jesus is God, then absolutely I agree. So anyway, I
Speaker 1: think that's the traditional understanding. I don't know someone who is,
Speaker 1: you know, is a part of a church that has
Speaker 1: like a strong basis and the theology of the Trinity.
Speaker 1: Let me know if I'm wrong.
Speaker 2: God does in Theophanes in the Old Testament. So I
Speaker 2: think this is a good example of how just on
Speaker 2: the surface, there are lots of different possible interpretations of
Speaker 2: so you may know, the Son of Man has authority
Speaker 2: earth on earth to forgive sense, But if you look
Speaker 2: at it elusively, like what Jewish text from the Old
Speaker 2: Testament is he alluding to? And what does that Old
Speaker 2: Testament text in context reveal about the implication of who
Speaker 2: he's claiming to be. I definitely think that in this
Speaker 2: case he is making the implicit claim to be a
Speaker 2: heavenly messiah, like the Son of Man, who has divine
Speaker 2: power to forgive sins directly. And that's why I think
Speaker 2: the describes in this case do not misinterpret the implications
Speaker 2: of his actions. And in fact, the whole point of
Speaker 2: the miracle is so that you may know that I
Speaker 2: have the power to perform the invisibly divine act of
Speaker 2: forgiving his sins. I'll I'll perform the visible miracle, so
Speaker 2: to speak, of healing his body and healing his paralysis
Speaker 2: by saying, rise, take up your palate. So that's my
Speaker 2: reading of the text.
Speaker 3: That there's a lot to be said, right, And I
Speaker 3: hope people can realize that. Some people ask me like, yeah, yeah, Alex,
Speaker 3: why are you, as an agnostic atheist guy so interested
Speaker 3: in Christology And it's like just listening to you speak.
Speaker 3: You can imagine you're on the Wikipedia page trying to read,
Speaker 3: and it's like all the hyperlinks that you're clicking, all
Speaker 3: the tabs that are slowly opening, the tyology Son of
Speaker 3: man Son, It's absolutely fascinating, all of it.
Speaker 2: I've two in a Jewish studying. By the time you
Speaker 2: get to first century, the dan Yellick Son of Man
Speaker 2: figure is in early Jewish apocalyptic texts, depicted in forth
Speaker 2: asra or for these ancient writings as a pre existent
Speaker 2: superhuman heavenly being. So there's also a resonance within Jewish
Speaker 2: circles here. When Jesus alludes to famous these are not
Speaker 2: obscure passages in the Old Testament. These are famous passages,
Speaker 2: highly debated passages. And just like you and I might
Speaker 2: allude to a famous movie or a famous song and
Speaker 2: we can expect the audience to pick up on it,
Speaker 2: in this case, I think that's how he's operating with
Speaker 2: his audience in market.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it will have to talk about the Son of
Speaker 3: man of course, I mean that that is the greatest mystery.
Speaker 3: But just before that, I've only got maybe a couple
Speaker 3: of things to say about this. Please forgiving sins business
Speaker 3: and part of the interesting.
Speaker 1: Uh okay, So we're shifting gears now to Matthew. So
Speaker 1: Matthew retells his story, but he retells it differently. And
Speaker 1: this is a really common criticism, and it's a good criticism,
Speaker 1: and that is that Jesus seems to get more divine
Speaker 1: as you move from the oldest sources to the youngest sources. So,
Speaker 1: like Mark, our earliest source other than Paul's letters, doesn't
Speaker 1: really make a super strong theological claim that Jesus is
Speaker 1: is God, certainly, but John does. John is where we
Speaker 1: get a lot of this stuff. Like before Abraham was
Speaker 1: I am. These are like sort of famously cited passages
Speaker 1: that support Jesus' divine claim. And so the atheist perspective
Speaker 1: is like, well, isn't that a coincidence? You know, this
Speaker 1: is basically the perspective now. I think this is I
Speaker 1: don't know, it's in argument. It's not to me, it's
Speaker 1: not super compelling. We also don't really know when the
Speaker 1: Gospels were written. I mean we when we say John
Speaker 1: is the newest, it's it's we have older versions of
Speaker 1: Mark than we do of John. We don't necessarily know
Speaker 1: that that is the first version of John. You know,
Speaker 1: so I kind of am hesitant to say that John
Speaker 1: is just a much richer writer. And each of these
Speaker 1: gospels are written to different audiences, so I think that's
Speaker 1: kind of a stretch. But you know, you're going to
Speaker 1: see this on display right now. Matthew, which is believed
Speaker 1: to be slightly more recent, maybe not by much, maybe
Speaker 1: by only a decade, tones some of the divine claims back.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, am I saying that correctly?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 1: He tones it back. So this is a oh so
Speaker 1: this is kind of the actually the opposite. Sorry, I'm
Speaker 1: kind of telling the story. I'm kind of conflating two
Speaker 1: different arguments. So the first thing I said that is true.
Speaker 1: That is a common atheistic argument, but I think Matthew
Speaker 1: might be an exception. I think the point here is
Speaker 1: that he's always how about we just listen.
Speaker 3: So it's part of the fun of doing this is
Speaker 3: that a lot of the time you have multiple versions
Speaker 3: of a story. Right You've got multiple gospel telling the
Speaker 3: same story, which gives us a really good insight into
Speaker 3: what was definitely sort of believed as to have happened,
Speaker 3: what might be embellishments of an author, And there are
Speaker 3: a few things to say. Firstly, on this son and
Speaker 3: daughter business, I do think that is kind of interesting.
Speaker 3: But that's a question that I will be hopeless to
Speaker 3: answer unless I understand, you know, like colloquial galilee and
Speaker 3: ways of speaking. I mean, you know, I could walk
Speaker 3: down the street and a police officer might come up
Speaker 3: to me and say, hey, son, you know, don't.
Speaker 2: Quest you If you're in the South in the United States,
Speaker 2: that would be there.
Speaker 3: So it's kind of difficult to know, but it is interesting,
Speaker 3: right that. The only other things that I that I'd
Speaker 3: want to point out is is firstly, well, it's all
Speaker 3: to do with the fact that this is in Mark's Gospel.
Speaker 3: That Matthew's gospel has this story as well, of course,
Speaker 3: and in Matthew is a little bit later, it's in
Speaker 3: chapter nine, and I want to emphasize that Matthew takes
Speaker 3: I think it's something like ninety five percent of Mark's
Speaker 3: Gospel is just copied the beatam in Matthew's Gospel. Like
Speaker 3: it's it's like basically the entire of myn.
Speaker 1: This is a good point.
Speaker 2: Here's my deal.
Speaker 1: I think you got to take it head on, right,
Speaker 1: like if you want to know the truth. You need
Speaker 1: to hear the best arguments on both said, So this
Speaker 1: is a good point. Matthew is very close to Mark,
Speaker 1: and that makes the distinctions more important because it's sort
Speaker 1: of implies, Now this is an assumption, but it sort
Speaker 1: of implies that he changed things for a reason. Now,
Speaker 1: we also don't think Matthew literally copied Mark. So some
Speaker 1: people will say that most New Testament scholars, atheist New
Speaker 1: Testament scholars, thinks that there is an older source for
Speaker 1: Matthew Mark in maybe Luke called Q and so that
Speaker 1: would put that original source. That would put that even
Speaker 1: closer to the resurrection, which I think is cool, you know,
Speaker 1: because people kind of like to say, like, oh, all
Speaker 1: this time went by between the resurrection and the written
Speaker 1: accounts of Jesus' life. That's probably not true.
Speaker 3: So we continue Scoppel, He's reproduced with extra material. But
Speaker 3: that's just these few passages for whatever reason, Matthew doesn't
Speaker 3: copy from Mark. Just a handful of them, sure, and
Speaker 3: one of them occurs in this story. When this story
Speaker 3: is told, Matthew removed moves a line. And what's the
Speaker 3: line he removes? He removes the line where the scribes
Speaker 3: say who can forgive sins but God alone. That's not
Speaker 3: in Matthew's version, which given that he doesn't seem so.
Speaker 1: Just another just to flush this out a little bit
Speaker 1: more in market excuse me, the Pharisees or someone in
Speaker 1: the crowd yells he's blaspheming. So this is like a
Speaker 1: crucial point because blasphemy is, you know, claiming to be
Speaker 1: God in ancient Jewish, in this setting, in this context,
Speaker 1: and so this is like what they're saying is he's
Speaker 1: claiming to be God, which would sort of answer the
Speaker 1: question about our debate, right, And the next line is
Speaker 1: who can forgive sins? But God alone? God alone? And
Speaker 1: Matthew takes that out. So that is an interesting point
Speaker 1: to bring.
Speaker 3: Up to remove things like willy nilly. There seems to
Speaker 3: be an intentionality behind removing this reference to only God
Speaker 3: can forgive sins, and I wonder if that's got something
Speaker 3: to do with the developing understanding that actually that's not true,
Speaker 3: or maybe that's another explanation, maybe it's a coincidence. The
Speaker 3: only other thing I'll say, and I'll let you respond
Speaker 3: to this, because it's the same the same story is
Speaker 3: after this in Matthew's version, as you say.
Speaker 2: The crowd reacts.
Speaker 3: In Matthew's version, what is it that they say? Then
Speaker 3: the man got up and went home. When the crowd
Speaker 3: saw this, they were filled with awe, and they praised
Speaker 3: God who had given such authority to a man.
Speaker 1: Man exactly, yes, to man technically, but it's uh, how
Speaker 1: do you contend with that? I mean, this is we'll
Speaker 1: find out. I don't actually remember his answer, but this
Speaker 1: is now to me, it doesn't really change my like
Speaker 1: my belief system. Like to me, these are like nuances,
Speaker 1: and I don't like, I don't actually think Jesus is
Speaker 1: equivalent to like the Father or to Yahweh, because he
Speaker 1: makes it very very clear that he's not so like
Speaker 1: To me, that's fine. I believe he's the son of
Speaker 1: Man because that's what he claims to be. He is
Speaker 1: a eternal divine figure. And you know, we think there
Speaker 1: are three of these eternal divine figures, and collectively we
Speaker 1: call them God. So to me, it's straightforward. Now, I
Speaker 1: know that Trinity is not directly mentioned in the Bible.
Speaker 1: This is like a theological invention, but it is based
Speaker 1: you know, it's based on the Bible, like the Father
Speaker 1: the Son in the Holy Spirit are consistently referred to
Speaker 1: as eternal divine beings. So I don't know, it's kind
Speaker 1: of a nuance. But you know, obviously, people, we've been
Speaker 1: debating this stuff for two thousand years, so it's not unimportant.
Speaker 3: Okay, so you can see how I'm going to read this, right, like, well,
Speaker 3: Matthew's taking out this forgiveness of sins. They recognize that
Speaker 3: God has given this authority to a man.
Speaker 2: What was happen on that? Okay, so this is great.
Speaker 2: I'm so glad you brought up because this is an
Speaker 2: important point. You'll notice one of the title I organize
Speaker 2: about the title for a long time. The title of
Speaker 2: the book is Divine Christology. And there's a reason for that.
Speaker 2: It wasn't just Jesus and his divinity, because the thesis
Speaker 2: of the book, although there's a lot of emphasis on divinity,
Speaker 2: is not just that Jesus is divine simplicitate, right like,
Speaker 2: just in its simplest form. It's that he's a divine Christ,
Speaker 2: a divine Messiah. So there's divine Messianism. So there's both
Speaker 2: human and divine. And one of the challenges I've found
Speaker 2: with this is that very frequently sometimes people will assume, well,
Speaker 2: if I'm saying he's divine, I'm some way saying he's
Speaker 2: not human. And that's obviously it's not the Catho classic
Speaker 2: Catholic Christology, which always of both and on this point,
Speaker 2: but it is understandable. So I agree with Matthew Surprise
Speaker 2: Chrise that it is fascinating that God has given this
Speaker 2: authority to a man, because I am not saying that
Speaker 2: in Mark two or in Matthew's version, he's not a man.
Speaker 2: What I am saying is he's not merely a man,
Speaker 2: and then he has divine power and divine prerogatives that
Speaker 2: exceed that of a normal human being. So both respond, and.
Speaker 1: I would say, this is what this is the natural reading.
Speaker 1: You know, if you read, if you read Matthew, Mark, Luke,
Speaker 1: and John, this is how you feel, you know, Okay,
Speaker 1: Jesus is a man, yes, but he's not just a man.
Speaker 1: He's the son of man. He is an eternal divine
Speaker 1: figure sent by the Father. And this is what he says,
Speaker 1: you know, this is what he says. So I don't know.
Speaker 1: Sometimes I do wonder, like do we kind of take
Speaker 1: it too far when we say Jesus is God, but
Speaker 1: again within the within the orthodox understanding of what it
Speaker 1: means to say Jesus is God. I think it's fine
Speaker 1: because he is a aspect of what we call God.
Speaker 1: So anyway, I'll stop, I'll shut.
Speaker 2: Up, as we never seen anything like this, mark and wow,
Speaker 2: how has God given such authority to a man? Our
Speaker 2: reasonable responses because I'm arguing that Jesus is revealing through
Speaker 2: his words and actions the mystery of his not just
Speaker 2: his divinity, as if he's a divine being who's pretending
Speaker 2: to be human or appearing as human might make some
Speaker 2: angelic beings in ill Testament, but actually divine, a divine
Speaker 2: man or a divine Messiah. So I agree with with
Speaker 2: your emphasis there on humanity, but I don't think it
Speaker 2: takes away from the superhuman or exalted status to which
Speaker 2: he is also laying claim implicitly.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's that's a key point, is that, like if
Speaker 3: they was saying something like that, the reactions of the
Speaker 3: crowd is like, that's weird that a that a man
Speaker 3: can do that. Yeah, just because you know he's not
Speaker 3: just a man, you know, but you do you have
Speaker 3: a view on why Matthew removes this reference.
Speaker 1: To the man.
Speaker 2: Okay, So I'll be honest with you. I spent a
Speaker 2: lot of years, uh studying the synoptic problem, studying Q
Speaker 2: at a Q library. I get more and more cautious
Speaker 2: and more and more agnostic about my ability to get
Speaker 2: inside the head of why an author took this out
Speaker 2: or whether they even did or not. It's extremely complex question.
Speaker 2: The synoptic problem is a you know, the question of
Speaker 2: which author wrote first, who copied from whom, and then
Speaker 2: why did they make the changes, omissions, additions, reactions that
Speaker 2: they did. I think a lot of that is honestly
Speaker 2: beyond the limits of our ability to really know. We
Speaker 2: could guess, we can speculate. There are certain tendencies that
Speaker 2: you can definitely see if you're right about the relationship
Speaker 2: of which author is copying from which? But I'm gonna
Speaker 2: pull Is it okay? If I can be agnostic on
Speaker 2: that point, I don't. Of course, I don't know. I
Speaker 2: like I I I'm not sure, and I will tell it.
Speaker 3: I mean, it is worth pointing out that the Matthew
Speaker 3: does remove that phrase who can be give s but
Speaker 3: God alone? He does still have the scribe say this
Speaker 3: man is blaspheming absolutely, so it's difficult to know how
Speaker 3: he'd be blaspheming if not on the same grounds.
Speaker 2: And as an author too, the one reasons I've edited
Speaker 2: now I guess I've written published now almost ten books.
Speaker 2: Sometimes I don't even know why I'll miss something, or
Speaker 2: it is a very complex process, so I'm always a
Speaker 2: little hesitant to guess, yeah, there, and that they could.
Speaker 3: Be all kinds of It could literally be that Matthew
Speaker 3: had a version of Mark's Gospel and his eyes skipped
Speaker 3: over the verse, and it could be it could be anything.
Speaker 2: And also too, when we say Matthew has ninety five
Speaker 2: percent of Mark in it or ninety more than that,
Speaker 2: it's true, but it's actually you gotta be careful because
Speaker 2: a lot of the episodes that are that is true
Speaker 2: with regard to the episodes in Matthew, but it's not
Speaker 2: actually true with regard to a lot of the material. Oftentimes,
Speaker 2: the episode in Matthew is shorter even so you have
Speaker 2: the same perickopee, but it's actually longer in Mark. Like
Speaker 2: with the healing of the Garrisine daemoniac, it's same episode
Speaker 2: much longer in Mark than it is in Matthew. So
Speaker 2: Matthew actually has a content. If you're taking the hypothesis
Speaker 2: the two sores that Marks first and Matthew and the
Speaker 2: copy Matthew actually has a habit of shortening market episodes.
Speaker 2: He wants to preserve them all, but his tendency is
Speaker 2: to make them more brief, so you get more detail,
Speaker 2: more elaboration Mark, with fewer episodes. So again it's it's
Speaker 2: it's a complicated question.
Speaker 3: So I'm not sure I'll tell you what I should do,
Speaker 3: maybe at this junction, because they're paths exploding in front
Speaker 3: of me where we could go.
Speaker 2: I want to.
Speaker 1: So the next section we'll do next time. It's called
Speaker 1: was Jesus a disciple of John the Baptist? So I
Speaker 1: you know, I think this guest to me is incredibly compelling,
Speaker 1: Like his argument supports my view. You know, I don't know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how that applies to like the traditional
Speaker 1: Christian view, but totally makes sense to me. And the
Speaker 1: last point that Matthew is just a more concern ice
Speaker 1: telling of the same story kind of makes sense. And
Speaker 1: it could be that he is not copying Mark. You know,
Speaker 1: four people are retelling the same straight now it is
Speaker 1: true though they probably are copying some source because you
Speaker 1: know it, the over the episodes are just too similar.
Speaker 1: You know, you would expect there to be like more
Speaker 1: stories or episodes in one versus the other, but they
Speaker 1: are ninety five percent similar. So but within those episodes,
Speaker 1: the length and the detail varies quite a bit. So anyway,
Speaker 1: kind of an interesting problem that's called the synoptic problem.
Speaker 1: As you mentioned, I think we'll wrap up. I just
Speaker 1: didn't want to read. Oh, I just want to say
Speaker 1: something that gives me a little bit of hope for society,
Speaker 1: you know, because they see things on YouTube and Instagram
Speaker 1: and it's like, man, everybody's into the dumbest stuff, Like
Speaker 1: everybody's into like the Battle of the Sex is, you know,
Speaker 1: these weird little political fleeting issues. Now, there are some
Speaker 1: big political issues that matter, don't get me wrong, but
Speaker 1: it just people are not deep. You know. This is
Speaker 1: like my perspective, it's mean, it's cruel. It's like, you
Speaker 1: don't want to feel that way about your fellow man. Well,
Speaker 1: something that does give me a little bit of hope
Speaker 1: is that this video has a million views. A million views,
Speaker 1: that's pretty nuts, and the channel has two million subscribers.
Speaker 1: That's pretty crazy. Now, again, this is a channel that's atheist,
Speaker 1: but I think you have to agree, like these conversations
Speaker 1: are enriching, you know, even for Christians, like that they're having.
Speaker 1: It's very polite, very respectful, and you know, in this case,
Speaker 1: it's the best going against the best. It's not a
Speaker 1: straw man argument. It's not a super intelligent atheist debating
Speaker 1: like some random person on the street. You know, because
Speaker 1: because there are videos like that, and they people do,
Speaker 1: I think, lose faith in things that maybe they shouldn't.
Speaker 1: You know that maybe there are good arguments for So
Speaker 1: I actually kind of personally I appreciate this, but I
Speaker 1: kinda I got a nice email today. I got a
Speaker 1: few nice emails today, but this one is the nicest
Speaker 1: someone to read it. I just think this is cool.
Speaker 1: So so bear with me. Uh. I listened to quite
Speaker 1: a few podcasts. I keep coming back to yours. I
Speaker 1: especially enjoyed the personal anecdotes. Well, hey, I didn't let
Speaker 1: you down today? Am I a horrible father? Have I
Speaker 1: created a serial liar? Now? I kind of feel bad
Speaker 1: about telling that story. I don't know, I gotta understand.
Speaker 2: It was like.
Speaker 1: I want my son to feel like he can trust
Speaker 1: his sister, you know that there that he's not enough.
Speaker 1: She's not another parent. And I don't my daughter to
Speaker 1: feel like she has to be a parent. You know,
Speaker 1: She's just a kid. So I just want them to
Speaker 1: be friends, you know, because when I'm gone, I need
Speaker 1: them to have each other, you know. So anyway, those
Speaker 1: moments make everything feel grounded and genuine. I also appreciate
Speaker 1: the discussions that bridge science, philosophy and a spiritual dimension.
Speaker 1: Can't always follow every technical detail me either, but the
Speaker 1: ideas themselves fascinate me. And this is cool because this
Speaker 1: guy's a Christian missionary, So like, I think this is
Speaker 1: how you build community and attract people. Because I've said
Speaker 1: a lot of things on the show that are probably wrong,
Speaker 1: you know, and I've probably said things that you know,
Speaker 1: maybe the typical Christian probably maybe doesn't like. And so
Speaker 1: one reaction you can have is like animosity. But you know,
Speaker 1: when you kind of extend an alive branch and say like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm interested, then like me, I'm like, okay, if this
Speaker 1: person corrects me on something I said that was incorrect,
Speaker 1: I'm going to listen, you know, because this is not
Speaker 1: someone acting out of like just intense ideology. This is
Speaker 1: a real human being, and therefore I'm gonna, you know,
Speaker 1: treat them as such. Right. So anyway, So one particular
Speaker 1: episode that stood out to me was a discussion on
Speaker 1: Genesis where one guest was presenting a Christian take and
Speaker 1: another was respectfully questioning that, Hey, that's who we were
Speaker 1: listening to today. That was Alex. I thought it was
Speaker 1: an excellent conversation and I'd love to hear more exchanges
Speaker 1: like that. Boom Wish. Granted, many of the topics you
Speaker 1: explore sit on the fringe. Aliens, disclosures, consciousness, gnosticism, CE five,
Speaker 1: near death experiences, simulation theory, and a growing movement towards
Speaker 1: humanity seeking contact with non human intelligence. It seems that
Speaker 1: these these ideas are becoming increasingly mainstream, and I find
Speaker 1: that fascinating. I agree, I agree the simulation hypothesis is
Speaker 1: especially intriguing. Digital reality, quantization, plank scale, whether reality has
Speaker 1: an informational structure intellectually stimulating. And now I should point
Speaker 1: out that I think these ideas actually support a supernatural worldview,
Speaker 1: So I don't think these things are exclusive, and I
Speaker 1: assume he probably feels the same way otherwise, even listen
Speaker 1: to the show right. Part of that comes from my
Speaker 1: background before becoming a missionary, I spent around thirty years
Speaker 1: as a sculptor, creating large, interactive sculptures that people could
Speaker 1: actually walk inside and experience. That sounds cool. I'm going
Speaker 1: to google this. I would share it publicly, but he
Speaker 1: didn't give me permission. So, but that sounds exciting from
Speaker 1: my own Christian perspecse, though, I find myself interpreting these
Speaker 1: developments through a different lens. Whether it's the idea that
Speaker 1: we're star seeds, that our creators are extraterrestrial intelligences, or
Speaker 1: that salvation somehow comes through advanced beings or expanded consciousness.
Speaker 1: I can't help but seeing echoes of what the Bibles
Speaker 1: describe as spiritual deception. I completely agree with this completely,
Speaker 1: and I just see I mean, I remember there was
Speaker 1: this debate between Billy Carson and West Huff. I know
Speaker 1: there's people who don't like me bringing this up, but
Speaker 1: he had just went on this tour about like the
Speaker 1: collective unconscious and even saying even using words like christ consciousness,
Speaker 1: and so he kind of has the like, if you're
Speaker 1: a raised Christian you're kind of like, Okay, this is interesting, right,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm interested. It was very new agy you know,
Speaker 1: but he was sneaking into the conversations like very anti
Speaker 1: Christian ideas like that the crucifixion ever happened, and that
Speaker 1: the earliest biblical manuscripts didn't include it. And he said
Speaker 1: these things with authority, and so he did debate wes
Speaker 1: Huff and it turns out he just basically just made
Speaker 1: it all up. Then he was a liar, and he
Speaker 1: had an unhinged six hour YouTube response and he just
Speaker 1: like just his mannerisms and the way he looked and
Speaker 1: the things he was saying, and he was seething, seething
Speaker 1: talking about referring to like Christianity as a cult and stuff,
Speaker 1: which is fine, but it's like, don't pretend to be
Speaker 1: like quasi Christian, you know, and say, well, but of
Speaker 1: course I'm not actually Christian because you know, the crucifixion
Speaker 1: and actually happened. But you know, the teachings that Jesus
Speaker 1: said like these are that's really about elevating your consciousness
Speaker 1: and blah blah blah blah blah. It's you know, you're
Speaker 1: being intentionally deceptive that's the part that bothers me. I
Speaker 1: would be open minded to this stuff if I just
Speaker 1: hadn't seen so many people be revealed in real time
Speaker 1: to be intentionally deceptive. So so this writer says, my
Speaker 1: own conviction is that scripture provides a better framework for
Speaker 1: understanding these experiences. For example, one he you know, he
Speaker 1: quotes two Corinthians eleven fourteen that Satan himself is transformed
Speaker 1: into an angel of light. I actually had a conversation
Speaker 1: about this with my kids in the car today. I
Speaker 1: love having conversations with my kids in the car. I
Speaker 1: haven't talked much to them about the Bible, but they
Speaker 1: know enough. And my son likes this book, this TV
Speaker 1: show called Superbook. In the beginning is the battle between
Speaker 1: Michael and Lucifer, right which and Lucifer is not even
Speaker 1: really you know, we don't have to go there. But
Speaker 1: this premise, this is not really described much in the Bible,
Speaker 1: this angelic rebellion, but you know, we do. Jesus says
Speaker 1: that he saw, you know, loose Satan fall from heaven
Speaker 1: like lightning and stuff. So there's a bit of this.
Speaker 1: But one thing that is clear is that you know,
Speaker 1: Satan is a deceiver, and uh, why did I bring
Speaker 1: up my kids? Oh? Anyway, we just we just talked
Speaker 1: a bit about this because oh that's right, Okay, I've
Speaker 1: got one more story. I haven't even told my wife
Speaker 1: yet this yet. She's on FaceTime with my son right now.
Speaker 1: My son has been subscribing to these like kind of
Speaker 1: weird YouTube channels, and I'm like why, And so finally
Speaker 1: he said to me, well, because because they say, if
Speaker 1: you love Jesus, subscribe. And I was like, first of all,
Speaker 1: it's kind of a proud father moment because I we've
Speaker 1: never been to a church, like, I've never really talked
Speaker 1: much about this, and he's like, well, I love Jesus,
Speaker 1: you know, so he subscribes. It's like it's like, oh
Speaker 1: my god.
Speaker 3: That.
Speaker 1: First of all, it's so cute, you know, I love that.
Speaker 1: But also I had to explain to him, like this
Speaker 1: is not a good thing for them to be doing.
Speaker 1: You know, it's not and they're not even particularly they're
Speaker 1: not like Christian channels. This is like roadblocks, you know stuff.
Speaker 1: So so I was like, this is a manipulation tactic,
Speaker 1: Like this is this is deception. You know, it's unsubscribed
Speaker 1: to all this stuff like this is not this is
Speaker 1: not the way you do it. You know. It reminds
Speaker 1: me of like old email threads, like if you don't
Speaker 1: send this email to ten other people, like your best
Speaker 1: friend is going to die kind of a thing, and
Speaker 1: you're like, oh, I better do it. You know, it's
Speaker 1: kind of superstitious. So we had this long conversation about
Speaker 1: like just deception and and how to me this was
Speaker 1: almost kind of an example as like presenting yourself as
Speaker 1: like an angel of light, you know, like, hey, if
Speaker 1: you love Jesus, you need to subscribe to my content
Speaker 1: so I can make money online. It's like, well that's
Speaker 1: probably not, probably not the way to go. Anyway, this
Speaker 1: verse has become something of an anchor for me when
Speaker 1: these subjects come up at the same time. I genuinely
Speaker 1: enjoy hearing different viewpoints and appreciate the respectful way your
Speaker 1: podcast allows ideas to be explored. Thank you, man. I
Speaker 1: do I do like I do dwell on this. Sometimes
Speaker 1: I've prayed about it. It's just like what am I
Speaker 1: doing here? You know? What I don't want to be
Speaker 1: is I don't want to be performative in my belief
Speaker 1: you know, I want to like actually explore these questions.
Speaker 1: And sometimes that's only scientific.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: We've had many episodes where we never bring up anything
Speaker 1: approaching religion, but every once in a while, I do
Speaker 1: like to explore. As for me, I'm a Christian missionary
Speaker 1: serving in Pakistan. Man, how cool that we have people
Speaker 1: like this listening to the show. If I'm not in
Speaker 1: the local gym, striking up conversations and sharing the gospel,
Speaker 1: I'm usually out in brick killed communities helping to free
Speaker 1: families from decades of bonded slavery by raising funds to
Speaker 1: pay off their debts. Hallelujah. Man, If you I mean listen,
Speaker 1: we won't raise any because only two of you have
Speaker 1: even bought the book and that only costs, you know,
Speaker 1: eighteen bucks. But if you have, like a GoFundMe or something,
Speaker 1: I'm happy to share it. At other times, we're taking
Speaker 1: medical teams into unreached areas, or preaching and teaching in
Speaker 1: the churches, or ministry is planted. It's a very different
Speaker 1: world from discussing simulation theory a UAPs. Yes it is,
Speaker 1: and perhaps that's one reason I enjoy returning to your podcast.
Speaker 1: It exercises a different part of my mind. It keeps
Speaker 1: me thinking. Man, so cool. Yeah, please share. If there's
Speaker 1: a way people can send you money, please do I
Speaker 1: you know, I think I mentioned I spent three weeks
Speaker 1: in Haiti. Now it was a Christian mission trip, but
Speaker 1: I was just on it because I wasn't a Christian.
Speaker 1: The school I went to the first time I went
Speaker 1: to grad school was a Christian school, and they had
Speaker 1: this opportunity to go. My dad was involved with like
Speaker 1: setting up the not the trip, but there was a
Speaker 1: university there and there was a lot of amputees after
Speaker 1: the earthquake, so they were trying to get like a
Speaker 1: prosthetics program running at the university, and so he was
Speaker 1: involved with that, and so he was going to go.
Speaker 1: So I was like, I'll go. He actually went a
Speaker 1: bunch of times, and they're it, dude, you feel something.
Speaker 1: It changes you, like being engaged in like purposeful work,
Speaker 1: like spending the day, like gathering supplies to build, you know,
Speaker 1: repair a school that collapsed. It's just I think it's
Speaker 1: how people feel after returning from the military, like just
Speaker 1: the sense of just you all. There's there's never like, hey,
Speaker 1: what should I be doing? Like purpose is just manifest
Speaker 1: at all times, and it's manifest to your group. So
Speaker 1: there's like a sort of brotherhood. I mean it's men
Speaker 1: and women, but you know what I mean, there's like
Speaker 1: this this like you're all in it together, working towards
Speaker 1: a common goal. And I honestly, for a moment, I
Speaker 1: was like, I'm gonna change my whole life. I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna do this forever. And I remember I got back
Speaker 1: to the Newark, New Jersey, was my connecting flight, got McDonald's,
Speaker 1: and I was like, this is depressing, Like this is disgusting,
Speaker 1: you know, like a few hours ago, I was in
Speaker 1: hell on Earth, you know, and now I'm just in access,
Speaker 1: like just the excess, the stress. But it fades, you know,
Speaker 1: you kind of sink back into your routines and you
Speaker 1: just sort of forget about it. You forget that there's
Speaker 1: like suffering, but also there's also beauty, a ton of
Speaker 1: beauty and purpose, just like amazing amounts of purpose. And
Speaker 1: I can't help but think Jesus was onto something when
Speaker 1: he said, like this is how your life should be directed.
Speaker 1: Your life should be directed towards like helping people, because
Speaker 1: it totally changes the way you do everything. But hey,
Speaker 1: it fades here. I am here. I am in my
Speaker 1: life of relative excess compared to them. You know. I
Speaker 1: remember my buddy was there, My buddy that I got
Speaker 1: in the theological argument with yesterday or yeah, yesterday that
Speaker 1: I told you about. We were there together and he
Speaker 1: came up to me and he's like, dude, dude, come here,
Speaker 1: I gotta talk to you. And my friend and I
Speaker 1: were like not good people, you know, like listen, I
Speaker 1: think deep down I'm a good person, but we were
Speaker 1: like we we were like class clowns, you know. And
Speaker 1: he's like, man, come here, I gotta talk to you.
Speaker 1: I'm like, yeah, what's up? And he goes, I feel
Speaker 1: so bad for these kids. They're cooking. I'm watching them
Speaker 1: cook and there's like flies and the food and like
Speaker 1: maggots and the rice and nothing's refrigerated. And he's like,
Speaker 1: what are we going to do? Like we're out and
Speaker 1: we spend our money for the day, Like what if
Speaker 1: we were like talking about going to get a bunch
Speaker 1: of mangoes or something for a few bucks and the
Speaker 1: lady comes out and serves us the food that he
Speaker 1: was just telling me he was so disgusting. And our
Speaker 1: guide guy, you know, the guy who lives there permanently
Speaker 1: was like, you'd need to eat this, it would be disrespectful,
Speaker 1: like they just it's they don't have much and they're
Speaker 1: choosing to share it with you, and so he just
Speaker 1: sat there and ate it. It's like, bro, I wish
Speaker 1: you wouldn't have told me that ten percent of these
Speaker 1: little rice grains or maggots, But I ate it like
Speaker 1: a champ. And honestly, I didn't get sick the whole
Speaker 1: time I was there. The first time I got sick,
Speaker 1: I ate McDonald's in Newark, New Jersey. I grew up.
Speaker 1: So anyway, thanks for listening to everybody. Please email me
Speaker 1: at God's I Viewbook at gmail dot com let me
Speaker 1: know what you think of this style of episode. We're
Speaker 1: gonna do probably two or three more of these to
Speaker 1: finish this particular interview. So stay safe out there, everybody,
Speaker 1: and God bless